nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

what constitutes a social justice warrior?

Robsweezie

This term is all over the forums at the moment but I haven't a 100% understanding of what it is to be one. All I know is it comes with negative connotations and seems to be a form of deregotory namecalling. Why is it such a no no to be an avid campaigner for social justice? Is it because they over do it and jump on every bandwagon? What does it mean to you?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

tipparetops

Wibbs wrote: »

Ehhh… I'm not. Can't be around them or listen to the type for very long at all. I wouldn't be alone in that either.

Much of the time I find them to be drama llamas living very sheltered western lives where little of true drama actually happens, so they're busy making up their drama fix by inventing some. Your standard drama llama does this internally with their own lives, ever shifting between and hyping up one non event after another. Your standard SJW just externalises that, looking for outside things that cause them deep pain and "offence". Because feelz basically. There is usually a kernel of truth and a need for focus on the subjects they get revved up about, but again usually they have people ignoring those points and them because of the nonsense they pile on top.

there was a thread started on gentlemens club where you are a mod.
The thread was innocent enough about where to pick up fine women, you shut that thread.
you are a SJW.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

tipparetops wrote: »

there was a thread started on gentlemens club where you are a mod.
The thread was innocent enough about where to pick up fine women, you shut that thread.
you are a SJW.

In other news, a flock of pigs flew into the clock just as it struck thirteen.

Wibbs

tipparetops wrote: »

there was a thread started on gentlemens club where you are a mod.
The thread was innocent enough about where to pick up fine women, you shut that thread.

Because it was a stupid thread and if left open the stupid would continue to pile up. It's like moron magnetism or somesuch going on. Though it was funny in that "jaysis look at the daft over there" kinda way. Nada to do with social justice though.

And seriously, who in god's name even uses the term "fine women" anymore? Has the 1950's fallen through the wormhole again?.

tipparetops

Louise Stale Volley wrote: »

Boards, generally. Everybody has prejudices, but some people have a heck of lot more than others, and people vent them more freely here where it's anonymous and nobody's going to punch you

But people do vent them in real life, coming up to the gay marriage I had work mates telling me why they were voting no. And it was nice to gay men.
Would it not be better if everybody had the right to say what they believe without fear of a punch in the mouth.

jimgoose

tipparetops wrote: »

...you are a SJW.

Erm, you're talking about Wibbs, right? Just a sec... ah, yes now: :pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

tipparetops

Wibbs wrote: »

Because it was a stupid thread and if left open the stupid would continue to pile up. It's like moron magnetism or somesuch going on. Though it was funny in that "jaysis look at the daft over there" kinda way. Nada to do with social justice though.

And seriously, who in god's name even uses the term "fine women" anymore? Has the 1950's fallen through the wormhole again?.

Look you can say what you like, but you shut a thread for no reason.
You posted above you are against SJW's, you cannot listen to them, what you should have said is you do not like listening to other SJW's.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

tipparetops wrote: »

But people do vent them in real life, coming up to the gay marriage I had work mates telling me why they were voting no. And it was nice to gay men.
Would it not be better if everybody had the right to say what they believe without fear of a punch in the mouth.

Absolutely it would, but the kind of things some people come out with here (which is essentially like shouting them in a crowded room, except it's anonymous and nobody will physically confront you) are not things you hear with such frequency in real life.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'it was nice to gay men', but I don't think most people would be so quick to say to people's faces the sorts of things some no voters were saying on here about pedophilia, mental illnesses etc. Both because the repurcussions are likely to be more serious, and because it's a lot more difficult to look a human being in the face and tell them they're scum than it is to type it.

tipparetops

Louise Stale Volley wrote: »

Absolutely it would, but the kind of things some people come out with here (which is essentially like shouting them in a crowded room, except it's anonymous and nobody will physically confront you) are not things you hear with such frequency in real life.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'it was nice to gay men', but I don't think most people would be so quick to say to people's faces the sorts of things some no voters were saying on here about pedophilia, mental illnesses etc. Both because the repurcussions are likely to be more serious, and because it's a lot more difficult to look a human being in the face and tell them they're scum than it is to type it.

Why would there be repercussions in real life to say you believe homosexual men are pedophiles or have a mental illness.
Can you prosecuted?
Are you a SJW too?

Look at bullying in schools - regular put downs are linked to sexuality and ethnicity. is this right, well i would like boards allow us to discuss this.
More conservative mods is what we need to allow more honest debate.

PopePalpatine

tipparetops wrote: »

Look at bullying in schools - regular put downs are linked to sexuality and ethnicity. is this right, well i would like boards allow us to discuss this.
More conservative mods is what we need to allow more honest debate.

No, it's not right to be bullied over something you have no control over. Funnily enough, guess who think that sort of stuff IS right?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

tipparetops wrote: »

Why would there be repercussions in real life to say you believe homosexual men are pedophiles or have a mental illness.
Can you prosecuted?
Are you a SJW too?

Look at bullying in schools - regular put downs are linked to sexuality and ethnicity. is this right, well i would like boards allow us to discuss this.
More conservative mods is what we need to allow more honest debate.

No, but you'd have to deal with real people standing right in front of you, which is more difficult to do than dealing with anonymous posters. People might well (not that I condone it) get aggressive, and possibly physically so. I've read more extreme stuff on here with more frequency than I've heard or overheard in real life, people seem to be an awful lot braver on the internet.

I'm not sure how much of a constructive debate can be entered into with people whose opener is "gay men only want to get their hands on kids so they can fúck them, and disagreeing with this sentiment is censorship", or "travellers should be wiped off the face of the earth, the dirty bastards".

I also think you're doing conservatives a bit of a disservice there. There is a way of going about things, most conservative people IRL and even on here manage to discuss these issues without using that kind of inflammatory language and then holding that up as an issue that relates to freedom of expression. But it's the minority of posters who cannot manage to do that who get the threads shut down.

tipparetops

PopePalpatine wrote: »

No, it's not right to be bullied over something you have no control over. Funnily enough, guess who think that sort of stuff IS right?

you have your views, I understand them.
I have different views to you. I was against gay marriage on moral grounds.
I would never attack you for your views but already you have made 2 posts which are meant to be incendiary.

all mods are silent, even the MOD who said he was not a SJW.

tipparetops

Louise Stale Volley wrote: »

No, but you'd have to deal with real people standing right in front of you, which is more difficult to do than dealing with anonymous posters. People might well (not that I condone it) get aggressive, and possibly physically so. I've read more extreme stuff on here with more frequency than I've heard or overheard in real life, people seem to be an awful lot braver on the internet.

I'm not sure how much of a constructive debate can be entered into with people whose opener is "gay men only want to get their hands on kids so they can fúck them, and disagreeing with this sentiment is censorship", or "travellers should be wiped off the face of the earth, the dirty bastards".

I also think you're doing conservatives a bit of a disservice there. There is a way of going about things, most conservative people IRL and even on here manage to discuss these issues without using that kind of inflammatory language and then holding that up as an issue that relates to freedom of expression. But it's the minority of posters who cannot manage to do that who get the threads shut down.

Excellent post that best describes what I am getting at.
I have not posted anything about gays are pedophiles, gypsies should be wiped out.

You admitted a few posts ago that everyone has some prejudice, i have said one of mine, tell me one of yours.

Samaris

I'm prejudiced against the use of terms like "liberal", "conservative", "SJW", etc when intended to be sly insults.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

tipparetops wrote: »

Excellent post that best describes what I am getting at.
I have not posted anything about gays are pedophiles, gypsies should be wiped out.

You admitted a few posts ago that everyone has some prejudice, i have said one of mine, tell me one of yours.

Oh yeah sorry, didn't mean it to come across like I was accusing you of saying those things.

Hmm, a prejudice, a prejudice. I don't know. Rugby people? :pac:
Actually pro-life people would be a big one for me, but I'm working on that.

porsche959

For those on Twitter, there's an hilarious account spoofing social justice warriors called Godfrey Elfwick.

jimgoose

porsche959 wrote: »

For those on Twitter, there's an hilarious account spoofing social justice warriors called Godfrey Elfwick.

'We prefer the term "differently tarded"'... :pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

[Deleted User]

What I find on boards is the 'left' is very intolerant and hate the contradictions in what they are saying being pointed out... and the 'right' is very nasty with the insults and put downs they don't like being asked for evidence if pushed they sight some lunatic US politician or economist.

So to some up the daft left is intolerant and the extreme right is nasty a lot like they are in real life.

porsche959

jimgoose wrote: »

'We prefer the term "differently tarded"'... :pac::pac::pac::pac::pac::pac:

#wrongskin

Not a NSA agent

porsche959 wrote: »

For those on Twitter, there's an hilarious account spoofing social justice warriors called Godfrey Elfwick.

That account is a joke right? Trying to figure out if I should be laughing or crying.

jimgoose

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

That account is a joke right? Trying to figure out if I should be laughing or crying.

Yes, it is. But as the brother put it, it takes a special kind of rabble-rouser to declare themselves a parody and still have the people they’re parodying not quite believe it. :pac:

OneOfThem

mariaalice wrote: »

What I find on boards is the 'left' is very intolerant and hate the contradictions in what they are saying being pointed out... and the 'right' is very nasty with the insults and put downs they don't like being asked for evidence if pushed they sight some lunatic US politician or economist.

So to some up the daft left is intolerant and the extreme right is nasty a lot like they are in real life.

And then you've the brave, sensible, rational, benevolent, intelligent, and let's face it... downright sexy, centrists like you and I Mariaalice? Isolated pillars of light in the deathly dark of discourse. Shining our glorious and illuminating glare upon both sides so that they can be shown up for the monsters and fools they are. Our fight is long. Our fight is hard. And sometimes it's wet and the wet soaks through our shoes and then we have wet socks and they make a horrible squidgy sound when we take a step. But we strive forward through all adversity. Lighting a path to true pure unadulterated rightness, of both attitude and ideology.

Centrists assemble!

Junkyard Tom

mariaalice wrote: »

So to some up the daft left is intolerant and the extreme right is nasty a lot like they are in real life.

To sum up the daft left are mostly confined to the blogosphere, university campuses and their homes. The nasty right prostitute themselves to established power in various guises such as 'journalists' and politicians.

Wibbs

tipparetops wrote: »

Look you can say what you like, but you shut a thread for no reason.

No I gave a reason. It was a retarded thread.

You posted above you are against SJW's, you cannot listen to them, what you should have said is you do not like listening to other SJW's.

I'm really not sure whether a) you're trolling or b) whether you understand the words you're using.

tipparetops wrote: »

Why would there be repercussions in real life to say you believe homosexual men are pedophiles or have a mental illness.
Can you prosecuted?

Depending on the company you're in it could go all sorts of ways. You could even get a smack in the mouth for your trouble.

Are you a SJW too?

You're like the SJW in one way, you see SJW's everywhere, the way they see offence and oppression. Oh noes it's offence/SJW[delete as applicable]

Look at bullying in schools - regular put downs are linked to sexuality and ethnicity. is this right, well i would like boards allow us to discuss this.

I think you're confusing conservative with fascist. An old stylee conservative would think it not right, if nothing else on the grounds that it's damned impolite and that sorta thing is mostly, but not exclusively found among your gutter snipes*.

tipparetops wrote: »

all mods are silent, even the MOD who said he was not a SJW.

You're not terribly good at this Ted. I'm not a mod of this forum(thank christ). Just another user.

*needs to come back into more usage.

Samaris

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

To sum up the daft left are mostly confined to the blogosphere, university campuses and their homes. The nasty right prostitute themselves to established power in various guises such as 'journalists' and politicians.

Eh, both "sides" have done it. I am a dirty liberal myself, but I reckon we could all stand to lose all of these definitions and get rid of this "us vs them" dichotomy. It just means we generally all don't listen to each other, and in places like the US, where it's very, very clearly demarcated, more time and effort is spent trying to screw over the other "side" rather than get anything sensible done en masse.

[Deleted User]

Another way I see it is,... religious education should be confined to outside the school curriculum seems fair enough to most people, however various religious groups use the school in the afternoon for religious education its all voluntarily seem fair enough to most people after all it is outside the school day/curriculum, however you will get some who foam at the mouth at the though of religious organisation being facilitated in any way after all the state provided and paid for the school how dare any religious organisation come anywhere near a school even after school and how dare they be facilitated in any way thats when people start to get nervous and it is real such people do exist and not just on the internet.

Junkyard Tom

Samaris wrote: »

in places like the US, where it's very, very clearly demarcated

Yep, right and further right.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Yep, right and further right.

I think it's because we're so far to the left in Europe that we think everything in the US is ultra right. For instance the Democrat party would be considered right wing on these shores but they are seen by and large as left leaning in the states.

tipparetops

Louise Stale Volley wrote: »

Oh yeah sorry, didn't mean it to come across like I was accusing you of saying those things.

Hmm, a prejudice, a prejudice. I don't know. Rugby people? :pac:
Actually pro-life people would be a big one for me, but I'm working on that.

Heres my issue with mods:
I was banned off a thread discussing abortion.
I posted something which may some might feel was not nice.
Straight ban.
Another mod posted something not nice on same thread.
Mod who banned me does nothing.
MOD in question boom_bap wont even answer why this is allowed.

Another thread I was posting on a poster called me a TNUC.
nothing happens.
I receive another ban for something trivial.

Why? MODS will not ban what they agree with.

bnt

Cuban Pete wrote: »

It's a big thing on Reddit, which if past threads are any indication of, an increasing number of people are using.

The Reddit "cleanup" seems to be highly selective: there's still a "safe space" for the SJW Hate Reddit ...

Tombi!

tipparetops if you want to continue posting in the thread, drop the discussion of moderation.