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

the evasion_kid

bnt wrote: »

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

:pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXC50BhjV7o

darkpagandeath

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.

You mean like them SJW who are all over Halloween costumes to do with mental patients for example. Or toys aimed at a particular gender.

DEFTLEFTHAND

It's being mentioned many times before on this thread that SJW's don't have a sense of humour. It's partly true but my main thought is that they don't get blue comedy or 'cutting edge', the type of work that the late Joan Rivers practiced. Male examples would be Artie Lange and Jim Norton. People who joke about race gender, sexual orientation and use slurs like queer, ****** and rope ranger.

You see it's not actual sentiment, it's humour. It doesn't reflect the person telling the joke. For instance Rivers was a paid up member of the Democrat Party.

Oftentimes the pure SJW's can't tell the difference, their ears prop up when they hear trigger words.

TheBeardedLady

I live in a neighbourhood where there's genuine SJWs and not just someone like myself who votes for the left. There's a difference. SJWs are people who spray paint and smash up ATM machines and banks making it impossible for normal people to take out money to pay bills, feed their families etc. because whether they like it or not, most companies pay wages directly into banks.

They're the ones you hear about on the news; the ones who've caused trouble being gob****es at protests that otherwise went off peacefully.

The ones who bully and shout at even left-wing voters like myself for not fitting in with their ideaology. I know them well and I can't abide them either (though they don't scare me like the Falangist Fascists you can come across here).

They're not simply left-wing voters who go about their business in peace and some people seem incapable of differentiating between the two labelling anyone with even the most moderate of left-wing as such just because they don't agree with them.

Fact of the matter is, on Boards, both sides will never convince each other of their rightness because both sides truly believe they're right. Both sides are as pig-headed as each other and just as unwilling to listen to each other. I will never, ever be convinced that UKIP are sound underneath it all and have the citizens best interests at heart. I will never be convinced that the TTP agreement is a swell idea or that social services should be privatised. Never. But they're my views and I don't push them on anyone else.

Genuine SJWs are a different kettle of fish though. I might share similar views to them but the similarities end there. I don't know how many genuine SJWs there are on Boards - I can think of one or two in AH that I suspect might be but the rest? They're people who hold opposing views to your own and won't be convinced of the contrary...just like you.

MathDebater

SJWs are people who spray paint and smash up ATM machines and banks making it impossible for normal people to take out money to pay bills, feed their families etc. because whether they like it or not, most companies pay wages directly into banks.

I'd consider these to be far left fringe groups and extremists. Anarchists, communists etc. Not SJWs.

I will never, ever be convinced that UKIP are sound underneath it all and have the citizens best interests at heart. I will never be convinced that the TTP agreement is a swell idea

They actually say yes to free trade; no to TTIP. Farage has just written a column on it at BreitbartLondon explaining the concerns he has with it. Noam Chomsky and Nigel Farrage are saying pretty much same thing about TTIP.

UKIP, SNP, Plaid and the Greens are the only political parties against it. An unholy alliance if ever there was one.

TheBeardedLady

I'd consider these to be far left fringe groups and extremists. Anarchists, communists etc. Not SJWs.

So SJWs are simply those who hold leftist views?

They actually say yes to free trade; no to TTIP. Farage has just written a column on it at BreitbartLondon explaining the concerns he has with it. Noam Chomsky and Nigel Farrage are saying pretty much same thing about TTIP.

I wasn't referring to Farrage's stance on TTIP though. There's a few things beyond this that we agree upon but on their main issues we differ dramatically.

TheBeardedLady

I'd consider these to be far left fringe groups and extremists. Anarchists, communists etc. Not SJWs.

So SJWs are simply those who hold leftist views? In real life, those who are the most aggressive regarding their views are those I outlined in my previous post.

They actually say yes to free trade; no to TTIP. Farage has just written a column on it at BreitbartLondon explaining the concerns he has with it. Noam Chomsky and Nigel Farrage are saying pretty much same thing about TTIP.

I wasn't referring to Farrage's stance on TTIP though. There's a few things beyond this that we agree upon but on their main issues we differ dramatically.

MathDebater

So SJWs are simply those who hold leftist views? In real life, those who are the most aggressive regarding their views are those I outlined in my previous post.

As I said in post 26 in this thread:

An SJW is someone with left wing views who is incapable of tolerating dissenting opinions and attempts to police the thoughts and speech of others.

They are usually white, middle to upper class and have little interaction with the actual groups they perceive themselves to be fighting for.

They rarely resort to violence. SJWs are rarely found outside of universities, the internet and the media.

TheBeardedLady

MathDebater wrote: »

They rarely resort to violence. SJWs are rarely found outside of universities, the internet and the media.

Out of curiosity, how can they do something as sinister as police the thoughts of others if they basically spend all their time hidden away?

My experience of those who genuinely bully others are the types I've outlined in my previous post otherwise it's just someone with left-wing views having a rant.

MathDebater

By kicking up a ****storm via traditional and social media. By starting witch hunts against people who go against their mantras. By controlling discussion on issues such as the Gaza strip, immigration, criticism of certain religions(Catholic church is fair game), gay marriage, gender issues and abortion. If you go against the mantra in a university setting, for example, you will be ostracised.

SJWs have no interest in debate but in controlling the narrative and silencing those that they disagree with. The first pages of this thread is littered with them ffs.

AndonHandon

A SJW is one who gets offended on behalf of someone or some group of people particularly where it is arguable that the catalyst for them getting offended is in fact offensive.

One item that gets SJW particularly riled up is macho, LAD-type behaviour by adults. To me (while not condoning or berating it), seeing such behaviour being chastised, in the way it sometimes is,makes the person seem like they have a chip on their shoulder from their days as a teenager when they were a nerd and envied the care-free, popular way others went about their life.

TheBeardedLady

By kicking up a ****storm via traditional and social media.

Like The Daily Mail, then? Preaching to the converted. People tend to consume media that matches their ideology. Personal choice. No "witch hunt". Boards might have a left-wing leaning (I'm not actually sure tbh) because most posters on here are left-wing and it's your choice to be here or not. There's plenty of forums for those who hold right-wing views that I wouldn't go near with a barge pole but I don't feel "hunted" for making that personal choice. This is not North Korea, chum.

By starting witch hunts against people who go against their mantras.

A witch hunt or just going off on a rant that can be ignored?

By controlling discussion on issues such as the Gaza strip, immigration, criticism of certain religions(Catholic church is fair game), gay marriage, gender issues and abortion. If you go against the mantra in a university setting, for example, you will be ostracised.

Sounds like typical group behaviour to me not exclusive to leftists.

So if you're against same sex marriage, for example, you're joining those who agree with you and also ostracising those with differing views to you. Just as an example, I'm very sure I wouldn't be welcome to join the Iona Institute or to join a church choir in a Catholic Church as my ideology differs from theirs. I'm very sure I'd get shouted down if I tried to express my opinion on that horrible Red Pill forum on Reddit (not to say they're anything to do with the right-wing). I don't feel the victim of a witch hunt as a result though.

You're exaggerating tbh.

SJWs have no interest in debate but in controlling the narrative and silencing those that they disagree with. The first pages of this thread is littered with them ffs.

The use of SJW and hyperbolic and frankly hilarious language such as "witch hunt" when referring to overly enthusiastic university students and ranty leftists on the internet is a way of shutting down opposing opinions to your own as well by making them/us seem hysterical and bullying and putting a more sinister slant on what's really happening here - people of differing views having a (not very prooductive) argument on the internet. That's not really debate either, Mathdebater.

tipparetops

SJW's understand that control of the education system and the media is required to effect gradual but far reaching ideological change.
Next up for legislation will be Surrogacy, Abortion, Euthanasia.

AndonHandon

tipparetops wrote: »

SJW's understand that control of the education system and the media is required to effect gradual but far reaching ideological change.
Next up for legislation will be Surrogacy, Abortion, Euthanasia.

The sooner we can grow our own people to do with them as we please, the better.

TheBeardedLady

tipparetops wrote: »

SJW's understand that control of the education system and the media is required to effect gradual but far reaching ideological change.
Next up for legislation will be Surrogacy, Abortion, Euthanasia.

Haha.

Cuban Pete

MathDebater wrote: »

By kicking up a ****storm via traditional and social media. By starting witch hunts against people who go against their mantras. By controlling discussion on issues such as the Gaza strip, immigration, criticism of certain religions(Catholic church is fair game), gay marriage, gender issues and abortion. If you go against the mantra in a university setting, for example, you will be ostracised.

SJWs have no interest in debate but in controlling the narrative and silencing those that they disagree with. The first pages of this thread is littered with them ffs.

Well, see, here's the problem: is social ostracising necessarily a bad thing? Does anyone have a right to force people to interact with them?

Forget about the politics of the people doing it for a moment, because this is actually quite an interesting point.

tipparetops

TheBeardedLady wrote: »

Haha.

As people turn away from the RC faith, they are turning to the new faith - Liberalism.
Liberals used to be laughed at in this country, now there is people who actually take such issues as Global Warming seriously.
so seriously its been renamed climate change.

RDM_83 again

tipparetops wrote: »

As people turn away from the RC faith, they are turning to the new faith - Liberalism.
Liberals used to be laughed at in this country, now there is people who actually take such issues as Global Warming seriously.
so seriously its been renamed climate change.

(Anthropogenic) Climate Change is scientific model/theory, its nothing to do with ideology, how we respond to it may be ideological, but the idea that if pump X amount of Carbon or Methane into the atmosphere, if we reduce the carbon sequestration capacity due to X activities (Bog cutting, deforestation) isn't a question of feelings or social justice its a question of data into dynamic models, long term measurements, predictions and evaluations.

You can use climate change to justify many political positions, IMO depending on seriousness it would actually be a justification for a deeply totalitarian society

TheBeardedLady

tipparetops wrote: »

As people turn away from the RC faith, they are turning to the new faith - Liberalism.
Liberals used to be laughed at in this country, now there is people who actually take such issues as Global Warming seriously.
so seriously its been renamed climate change.

Oh god.

Patrick Wheelock

Is anybody interested in a list of prominent Irish SJWs that you might encounter on Twitter / Facebook?

I can put one together if you like. People you need to AVOID.

tipparetops

RDM_83 again wrote: »

(Anthropogenic) Climate Change is scientific model/theory, its nothing to do with ideology, how we respond to it may be ideological, but the idea that if pump X amount of Carbon or Methane into the atmosphere, if we reduce the carbon sequestration capacity due to X activities (Bog cutting, deforestation) isn't a question of feelings or social justice its a question of data into dynamic models, long term measurements, predictions and evaluations.

You can use climate change to justify many political positions, IMO depending on seriousness it would actually be a justification for a deeply totalitarian society

Global warming has been debunked, so Climate change became the new concept to be worshiped.

Scientists reliant on funding enter whatever values into whatever models to get that funding.

MathDebater

Personal choice. No "witch hunt". Boards might have a left-wing leaning (I'm not actually sure tbh) because most posters on here are left-wing and it's your choice to be here or not. There's plenty of forums for those who hold right-wing views that I wouldn't go near with a barge pole but I don't feel "hunted" for making that personal choice. This is not North Korea, chum.

I've no wish to enter an echo chamber. I'm interested in discussion and debate with people with views I may not disagree with. What's the point in having a discussion with people all singing from the same hymn sheet?

I've no interest in shutting down people or opinions. I'll never report someone for giving their opinion.

A witch hunt or just going off on a rant that can be ignored?

A youngish chap tried to set up a UKIP lite/Irish version of the party. A load of SJWs turned up just to disrupt it and shout him down. One of whom, is funded by the EU. If that's not a witch hunt, I don't know what is.

http://www.thejournal.ie/identity-ireland-meeting-1993911-Mar2015/

He went against the grain and is fcuked now. You'd swear he was the second coming of the moustached one. Being under 30 and going public with your vaguely right wing views is not good for your social standing, career prospects or, in some cases, your health.

Doing so in a university setting is practically a revolutionary act.

So if you're against same sex marriage, for example, you're joining those who agree with you and also ostracising those with differing views to you. Just as an example, I'm very sure I wouldn't be welcome to join the Iona Institute or to join a church choir in a Catholic Church as my ideology differs from theirs.

I'm not against gay marriage or a practicing Catholic. I'm agnostic. Plenty of Catholics did vote for gay marriage and do still attend church. All my older family members are practicing Catholics, voted for gay marriage and will attend church in the morning. On the otherhand, the two gay men who publicly opposed gay marriage have been completely shunned by the gay community and mocked and pretty much bullied by SJWs online.

PopePalpatine

tipparetops wrote: »

As people turn away from the RC faith, they are turning to the new faith - Liberalism.
Liberals used to be laughed at in this country, now there is people who actually take such issues as Global Warming seriously.
so seriously its been renamed climate change.

Climate change is accepted by 97% of climatologists, i.e. people who actually know what they're talking about.

tipparetops

TheBeardedLady wrote: »

Oh god.

He is listening, always, maybe you could drop by a church and start listening to him.

tipparetops

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Climate change is accepted by 97% of climatologists, i.e. people who actually know what they're talking about.

Than why do you never see a full debate anywhere on climate change/global warming.
Never, because climate change is like believing in God, no proof, its a leap of faith.

MathDebater

Cuban Pete wrote: »

Well, see, here's the problem: is social ostracising necessarily a bad thing? Do anyone have a right to force people to interact with them?

Forget about the politics of the people doing it for a moment, because this is actually quite an interesting point.

Depends on the viewpoint given that causes that ostracism. Fifty years ago if you went against the Church you were a social pariah in some quarters. 25 years ago it was the same if you campaigned for gay rights.

Today, if an Irish politician publicly stated that we should not be taking in Med migrants and instead only welcome in skilled non EU citizens; the media would crucify them. Even though polls suggest that such an opinion would be shared by the majority of Irish people. The politician in question would be roundly condemned. Killian Forde might leg it to the Gardai again.

PopePalpatine

tipparetops wrote: »

Than why do you never see a full debate anywhere on climate change/global warming.
Never, because climate change is like believing in God, no proof, its a leap of faith.

This should get you started: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=climate+change&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=

bodice ripper

tipparetops wrote: »

He is listening, always, maybe you could drop by a church and start listening to him.

I went, but all I found was just another old white guy telling me what to do. I wasnt short of them.

TheBeardedLady

I've no wish to enter an echo chamber. I'm interested in discussion and debate with people with views I may not disagree with. What's the point in having a discussion with people all singing from the same hymn sheet?

I've no interest in shutting down people or opinions. I'll never report someone for giving their opinion.

Groovy. My point is, you can make the choice. You're free to do so.

A youngish chap tried to set up a UKIP lite/Irish version of the party. A load of SJWs turned up just to disrupt it and shout him down. One of whom, is funded by the EU. If that's not a witch hunt, I don't know what is.

http://www.thejournal.ie/identity-ireland-meeting-1993911-Mar2015/

Wait...I thought these people only stayed in the confines of universities and social media? These sound more like the kinds of people I identified in my original post and a little more than people ranting on the comments page of The Guardian.

He went against the grain and is fcuked now. You'd swear he was the second coming of the moustached one. Being under 30 and going public with your vaguely right wing views is not good for your social standing, career prospects or, in some cases, your health.

Doing so in a university setting is practically a revolutionary act.

Most countries in Europe right now have right-wing governments...including our own - he's hardly going against the grain now, is he?

His views were a little more extreme than just your moderate right-wing views so it's hardly surprising he got stick for it, is it?

I'm not against gay marriage or a practicing Catholic. I'm agnostic. Plenty of Catholics did vote for gay marriage and do still attend church. All my older family members are practicing Catholics, voted for gay marriage and will attend church in the morning. On the otherhand, the two gay men who publicly opposed gay marriage have been completely shunned by the gay community and mocked and pretty much bullied by SJWs online.

I wasn't relating the Catholic church with same sex marriage - they were two separate examples.

It's kind of obvious you will be shunned (ignored) from one group for having opposing views on something so controversial and personal as same sex marriage. Hardly the preserve of the left though, is it? Bullying online is not on and I don't condone it but again, not the preserve of the left. It'd be very easy for me to list off cases of right-wing voters using similar tactics but I won't as I believe you're already aware of them.

The Diabolical Monocle

bodice ripper wrote: »

I went, but all I found was just another old white guy telling me what to do. I wasnt short of them.

Got a problem with the glorious white man ?