# Stupid Social Justice Warrior Bullshit O' the Day. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 17, 2017, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443 "2017-03-17T22:14:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 47
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 11:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/921 "2017-05-04T11:00:00Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > … > So, how am I to see or hear “SJW” and not instantly think that the person using it is an utterly loathsome shitbag? You’re not to; you have solved it, you have cracked the code. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Sanchez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19adc/32.png) [@Rick\_Sanchez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Sanchez)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/922 "2017-05-04T11:16:47Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > Of course not, just as there is nothing stopping others from judging you accordingly, with all the attendant social consequences. > > So are we done here? Seems we are. So long as we all agree that some complaints are without merit, that not everyone who demands an apology deserves one, and it’s perfectly possible that sometimes, people are wrong to be offended then, yes, I think we’re done. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/923 "2017-05-04T11:46:57Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > Seems we are. So long as we all agree that some complaints are without merit, that not everyone who demands an apology deserves one, and it’s perfectly possible that sometimes, people are wrong to be offended then, yes, I think we’re done. It’s funny, though, how so many take that reasonable position and immediately extrapolate it to “…and therefore any complaint \*\*I personally \*\*feel to be without merit may be disregarded and the complainant assumed to be an oversensitive SJW.” Not that you’d do this, of course. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/924 "2017-05-04T13:48:43Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > Seems we are. So long as we all agree that some complaints are without merit, Oh, yes I would agree with that. This thread contains many examples of that. Where there is a complaint that someone on the internet said something that wasn’t complementary to straight white males. > [@](#): > > that not everyone who demands an apology deserves one, This is true, but that means that you are assigning yourself as the arbiter of who deserves an apology, and that seems like more work than simply apologizing and moving on. > [@](#): > > and it’s perfectly possible that sometimes, people are wrong to be offended then, Oh, absolutely. Thee are many examples in this thread of people getting offended over what some college stunde on some blog said somewhere, or get offended about some article that they read on an alt-right site that changes the context and meaning of otherwise innocuous actions into some sort of assault on the sensibilities of the straight white guy, and not only are they often wrong to be offended, they are often wrong than there was anything to be offended about in the first place. > [@](#): > > yes, I think we’re done. That’s cool. At least you learned somethign from your participation in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Sanchez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19adc/32.png) [@Rick\_Sanchez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Sanchez)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/925 "2017-05-04T14:12:14Z")
> [@k9befriender](#): > > Oh, yes I would agree with that. This thread contains many examples of that. Where there is a complaint that someone on the internet said something that wasn’t complementary to straight white males. You mean racism. > [@](#): > > This is true, but that means that you are assigning yourself as the arbiter of who deserves an apology, and that seems like more work than simply apologizing and moving on. I apologise to people on the basis of whether or not I feel they deserve it, not because it makes life easier for me. That’s because apologies actually _mean_ something to me. They’re not get out of jail free cards to be deployed as and when it’s convenient. > [@](#): > > Oh, absolutely. Thee are many examples in this thread of people getting offended over what some college student on some blog said somewhere, or get offended about some article that they read on an alt-right site that changes the context and meaning of otherwise innocuous actions into some sort of assault on the sensibilities of the straight white guy, and not only are they often wrong to be offended, they are often wrong than there was anything to be offended about in the first place. There are also examples of students using the heckler’s veto to shut down invited speakers because they think any speech which offends them doesn’t deserve to be heard by anyone. What do you have to say about them? I already know you have a blasé attitude to racism, but what about slander, defamation, disorderly conduct and other manifestations of autistic screeching? Innocuous? Hijinks? Harmless fun? > [@](#): > > That’s cool. At least you learned somethign from your participation in this thread. I’ve learnt that you’re warmly approving of racism, provided it’s directed at white people. That’s certainly something. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/926 "2017-05-04T14:14:55Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > You mean racism. Duly noted that you consider anything not complimentary to straight white males to be racism. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Sanchez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19adc/32.png) [@Rick\_Sanchez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Sanchez)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/927 "2017-05-04T14:23:19Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Duly noted that you consider anything not complimentary to straight white males to be racism. Straight and white are unnecessary qualifiers but yes, uncomplimentary generalisations about an entire racial group (indeed, _any_ generalisations about a racial group, complimentary or otherwise) are racist by definition. That this is unclear to you is indicative just how far down the identity politics rabbit hole you’ve fallen. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/928 "2017-05-04T14:29:24Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > Straight and white are unnecessary qualifiers but yes, uncomplimentary generalisations about an entire racial group (indeed, _any_ generalisations about a racial group, complimentary or otherwise) are racist by definition. That this is unclear to you is indicative just how far down the identity politics rabbit hole you’ve fallen. And yet you’re the one expanding it to “all”. I refer you back to a previous post of mine: > [@Gyrate](#): > > And yet my personal experience is that “person from Group B says that some people in Group A are doing shitty things to people from Group B right now, and then other people in Group A - who may not even have been the ones referred to by Group B - act as if the initial accusation was aimed at all members of Group A and lash out at the initial accuser (and sometimes all members of Group B) and demand that their hurt feelings be addressed before the original - and much more substantive - issue is dealt with”. That’s the reality that keeps getting handwaved away. Keep waving those hands. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/929 "2017-05-04T14:48:08Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > Seems we are. So long as we all agree that some complaints are without merit, that not everyone who demands an apology deserves one, and it’s perfectly possible that sometimes, people are wrong to be offended then, yes, I think we’re done. Please share with everyone the objective algorithm for calculating “merit”. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/930 "2017-05-04T15:15:29Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > You mean racism. No, I mean what I said. You complain any time there is anyone on the internet that is not complimentary to white straight males. They don’t even have to be insulting to us, just as long as they do not hold us as above them, that is enough to offend you. > [@](#): > > I apologise to people on the basis of whether or not I feel they deserve it, not because it makes life easier for me. That’s because apologies actually _mean_ something to me. They’re not get out of jail free cards to be deployed as and when it’s convenient. I apologize to someone when I come to realize I have caused them harm. The easiest way to determine that is if they tell me that I have caused them harm. Rather than potentially compounding that harm by then calling the person I may have harmed a liar, I apologize, and make note of how to reduce the harm I do to others. I could be defensive, and complain that anyone who says that I harmed them is a liar, but that not only is a very antisocial position to take, it’s also much more work than I am willing to put in. > [@](#): > > There are also examples of students using the heckler’s veto to shut down invited speakers because they think any speech which offends them doesn’t deserve to be heard by anyone. What do you have to say about them? I already know you have a blasé attitude to racism, but what about slander, defamation, disorderly conduct and other manifestations of autistic screeching? Innocuous? Hijinks? Harmless fun? I am not sure you know what the heckler’s veto is. Actually, I am pretty sure that you do not understand any of the terms you used in that paragraph. > [@](#): > > I’ve learnt that you’re warmly approving of racism, provided it’s directed at white people. That’s certainly something. Then you are a truly poor student. I am sorry for you. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/931 "2017-05-04T15:18:53Z")
I do find it kinda funny that a guy with the name ‘Sanchez’ is playing the alt-right all-white martyr. You’d think white supremacists wouldn’t want a hispanic in their midst. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Sanchez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19adc/32.png) [@Rick\_Sanchez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Sanchez)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/932 "2017-05-04T16:03:45Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > No, I mean what I said. You complain any time there is anyone on the internet that is not complimentary to white straight males. They don’t even have to be insulting to us, just as long as they do not hold us as above them, that is enough to offend you. Bullshit, you liar. > [@](#): > > I apologize to someone when I come to realize I have caused them harm. The easiest way to determine that is if they tell me that I have caused them harm. Rather than potentially compounding that harm by then calling the person I may have harmed a liar, I apologize, and make note of how to reduce the harm I do to others. You just lied about me. I don’t “complain any time there is anyone on the internet that is not complimentary to straight while males”. I find your lies offensive and hurtful. I expect your apology in due course. > [@](#): > > I could be defensive, and complain that anyone who says that I harmed them is a liar, but that not only is a very antisocial position to take, it’s also much more work than I am willing to put in. If you did that _every_ time, that would indeed make you a prick. Well, _more_ of a prick. Sometimes, however, people pretend to take offence to score points. They pretend to take offence to shut you down. Sometimes, their offence genuine, but is more of a reflection of their skewed priorities than it is on the offensiveness of what you may have done. If you can’t tell those people apart from the people you’ve genuinely hurt (or if you’re too chickenshit to stand up to them), you’re simply asking to be taken advantage of. > [@](#): > > I am not sure you know what the heckler’s veto is. > > Actually, I am pretty sure that you do not understand any of the terms you used in that paragraph. In common parlance, the term “Heckler’s veto” is used to describe situations where hecklers or demonstrators silence a speaker without intervention of the law. Like the SJW dickheads did to Jordan Peterson in the video linked to in my OP. > [@](#): > > Then you are a truly poor student. I am sorry for you. A student can only be as good as his teacher. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Sanchez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19adc/32.png) [@Rick\_Sanchez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Sanchez)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/933 "2017-05-04T16:06:41Z")
> [@Chimera](#): > > I do find it kinda funny that a guy with the name ‘Sanchez’ is playing the alt-right all-white martyr. > > You’d think white supremacists wouldn’t want a hispanic in their midst. It’s a ‘Rick and Morty’ reference. I’m not alt-right, I’m not a white supremacist, you can’t possibly have fairly gotten that from anything I’ve written, and thus I can only conclude that you’re either a shameless liar, or are simply so dirt stupid that you have to whistle when you go to the toilet to remind yourself which end to shit through. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/934 "2017-05-04T16:23:04Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > Bullshit, you liar. Just last night, at 7:36, you complained about a university putting out a pamphlet that encouraged its staff member to take note that some things that they could do could make their students feel uncomfortable, and that the students may take it as racism. Now, you linked to a hit piece that took that pamphlet out of context, and lied about it’s actual use and intent, but even with their lies, you cannot show where in that article it was racist against white men, just how to be less racist towards minorities. > [@](#): > > You just lied about me. I don’t “complain any time there is anyone on the internet that is not complimentary to straight while males”. I find your lies offensive and hurtful. I expect your apology in due course. I do apologize if I hurt your feelings by pointing out the gross inaccuracies in your assessments. And you lied about me lying about you. And, this being the pit, it aint no safe place, so if your precious sensibilities are offended, I suggest you take your idiocy elsewhere. > [@](#): > > If you did that _every_ time, that would indeed make you a prick. Well, _more_ of a prick. Sometimes, however, people pretend to take offence to score points. They pretend to take offence to shut you down. Sometimes, their offence genuine, but is more of a reflection of their skewed priorities than it is on the offensiveness of what you may have done. If you can’t tell those people apart from the people you’ve genuinely hurt (or if you’re too chickenshit to stand up to them), you’re simply asking to be taken advantage of. If you do that every time to the same person, if every time you walk by a person, they complain that you have harmed them in some asinine way, I would agree. But you are not talking about a single person, you are talking about large groups of people, often comprising millions of people each. So, if you offend one minority in one way, and apologize, that does not mean that if you offend another minority, then you don’t need to apologize. You are treating demographic cohorts as if they are some sort of organized entity, or even as if they were a single individual. That is your failing. > [@](#): > > In common parlance, the term “Heckler’s veto” is used to describe situations where hecklers or demonstrators silence a speaker without intervention of the law. Like the SJW dickheads did to Jordan Peterson in the video linked to in my OP. Your common parlance is exactly at odds with the actual useage, but whatever. If a speaker gets disinvited because the students make their voices heard, then I see no problem with that. He specifically advocates to remove protections from people, including the protection against genocide. Now, I am not sure why you would want to invite a speaker that advocates for genocide just because of your gender expression, but I can see why I would be inclined to object to him being given validity, and a platform to validate the listener’s bigotry. > [@](#): > > A student can only be as good as his teacher. Actually, a teacher’s greatest moment is when his student surpasses him, but in this case, I suppose I will have to settle for when the student learns to wipe his own ass. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Sanchez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19adc/32.png) [@Rick\_Sanchez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Sanchez)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/935 "2017-05-04T17:12:52Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Just last night, at 7:36, you complained about a university putting out a pamphlet that encouraged its staff member to take note that some things that they could do could make their students feel uncomfortable, and that the students may take it as racism. Now, you linked to a hit piece that took that pamphlet out of context, and lied about it’s actual use and intent, but even with their lies, you cannot show where in that article it was racist against white men, just how to be less racist towards minorities. The pamphlet contained the _extremely stupid_ suggestion that not making eye contact could be construed as a racial microaggression. I pointed it out, not as an example of racism against white men, but as an extreme example of the kind of micromanaging nonsense busybodies come up with when they don’t have enough _real_ work to do. Everything else is pure projection on your part. You took my post out of context and then lied about my intent. But still, if you think the article I linked to was a “hit piece”, maybe you’ll find [this](http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/oxford-university-autistic-students-eye-contact-racist_uk_58fdd466e4b06b9cb9182362) Huffington Post article on the subject more palatable, even though it says _the exact same fucking thing._ > [@](#): > > I do apologize if I hurt your feelings by pointing out the gross inaccuracies in your assessments. Oh, the old “I’m sorry you’re offended” non-apology apology. Not good enough. You _lied_ about my views, knowingly and repeatedly. I want an apology for your _lies_. > [@](#): > > And, this being the pit, it ain’t no safe place, so if your precious sensibilities are offended, I suggest you take your idiocy elsewhere. Being in the Pit doesn’t excuse lying. I’m offended by your _lies_. I expect a sincere apology. Or, alternatively, you could do what you actually _want_ to do and tell me to fuck off, thereby tacitly admitting your premise is bullshit. Either or. > [@](#): > > But you are not talking about a single person, you are talking about large groups of people, often comprising millions of people each. I’ve been confining my criticisms to hypersensitive fauxial justice hypocrites. I’ve not talked about any group “comprising millions of people each”. If you disagree, by all means quote me so I can point out how you’re wrong in more detail. > [@](#): > > You are treating demographic cohorts as if they are some sort of organized entity, or even as if they were a single individual. That is your failing. Again, quote me or retract. > [@](#): > > Your common parlance is exactly at odds with the actual useage, but whatever. Oh, cut the shit. You know damn well that the term “Heckler’s veto” has two distinct meanings. The former is a legal expression in which the government shuts down speech for fear of inciting violence from hecklers, and the second is a common expression which denotes the practise of shouting speakers down from the audience. There is no one definition which is the “actual” definition. _Both_ are _actually used_, and the latter definition is considerably more common than the former. > [@](#): > > If a speaker gets disinvited because the students make their voices heard, then I see no problem with that. Peterson wasn’t “disinvited”. He was invited, and then, when he actually turned up, a bunch of assholes summarily decided that his speech shouldn’t be heard and shouted him down screaming “TRANSPHOBIC PIECE OF SHIT!” and “NO SPEECH FOR JORDAN PETERSON” over and over again until he left. You want to whine about this being an example of the heckler’s veto? Fine. Call it “Being a bunch of self-righteous cunts” instead. Whatever. > [@](#): > > He specifically advocates to remove protections from people, including the protection against genocide. Bullshit. Cite? > [@](#): > > Now, I am not sure why you would want to invite a speaker that advocates for genocide just because of your gender expression, but I can see why I would be inclined to object to him being given validity, and a platform to validate the listener’s bigotry. I’m not sure why you don’t make even the slightest effort to learn what a person’s arguments actually are before spouting off. Actually, wait. I _am_ sure. It’s because you’re a liar. > [@](#): > > Actually, a teacher’s greatest moment is when his student surpasses him, but in this case, I suppose I will have to settle for when the student learns to wipe his own ass. If that’s your standard, I’m happy to say I surpassed you a very long time ago. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/936 "2017-05-04T17:34:04Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Ok, can someone clarify my understanding here? Whenever I see or hear “SJW” used, it seems to translate literally to “a person who feels that jigaboos, fairies, wetbacks, dykes, slopes, tree huggers, atheists and such like deserve to be treated with the same respect as decent god-fearing white folk”. It appears to wrap up every bigothet within it, the words that the user desperately wants to be able to freely pepper their language with were it not for the goddam PC-Patrol. > > So, how am I to see or hear “SJW” and not instantly think that the person using it is an utterly loathsome shitbag? Say what? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/937 "2017-05-04T18:22:15Z")
> [@Rick\_Sanchez](#): > > The pamphlet contained the _extremely stupid_ suggestion that not making eye contact could be construed as a racial microaggression. I pointed it out, not as an example of racism against white men, but as an extreme example of the kind of micromanaging nonsense busybodies come up with when they don’t have enough _real_ work to do. Everything else is pure projection on your part. > The pamphlet, aimed at staff, in an effeort to make students more comfortable, gave the same information that really any decent HR person would. “Make eye contact with your students.” The fact that it went on to explain that not making eye contact with the student could be considered as being dismissive, and could even be perceived as having racial intent is actually pretty good advice. > > The fact that people went crazy over it, and the telegraph article take it out of context, and pretty close to outright lies about the content, does not make it less good advice. > > If you want to make people feel as though you are engaged with them, and not being dismissive, maintain appropriate eye contact. > > > [@](#): > > > > You took my post out of context and then lied about my intent. > > Your post had no content to it but the link, there was no context to take it out of. It was posted in a thread called “Stupid Social Justice Warrior Bullshit O’ the Day”, so the context it was in, was complaining about something that you thought was stupid social justice warrior bullshit. > > There literally is no other way to take your post. > > > [@](#): > > > > But still, if you think the article I linked to was a “hit piece”, maybe you’ll find [this](http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/oxford-university-autistic-students-eye-contact-racist_uk_58fdd466e4b06b9cb9182362) Huffington Post article on the subject more palatable, even though it says _the exact same fucking thing._ > > It covers the same story, but if you actually read the article, you will see that it does it without the misrepresentation and lies of the telegraph article. > > > [@](#): > > > > Oh, the old “I’m sorry you’re offended” non-apology apology. Not good enough. You _lied_ about my views, knowingly and repeatedly. I want an apology for your _lies_. > > As you have yet to appologize for falsely accusing me of being a liar, I think not. > > > [@](#): > > > > Being in the Pit doesn’t excuse lying. I’m offended by your _lies_. I expect a sincere apology. Or, alternatively, you could do what you actually _want_ to do and tell me to fuck off, thereby tacitly admitting your premise is bullshit. Either or. > > Being in the pit also does not excuse such a piss poor excuse for an argument. I actually count 6 logical fallacies in those 5(ish) sentences. That’s impressive, but not in a good way. > > > [@](#): > > > > I’ve been confining my criticisms to hypersensitive fauxial justice hypocrites. I’ve not talked about any group “comprising millions of people each”. If you disagree, by all means quote me so I can point out how you’re wrong in more detail. > > Now, if you want to get a good example of taking things out of context and them lying about them, your statement right there is a perfect example. I won’t call you a liar, because it is possible that you actually are stupid enough to think that you have a point there. > > Once again, read the line before and after the line that you quoted, and you will see that I was not talking about your criticism, but was talking about why just because you have apologized to one person for offending them, does not mean that you do not need to apologize to someone else for offending them, even if you offended them in the same way that you already apologized for. > > > [@](#): > > > > Again, quote me or retract. > > Again, stop taking lines out of context and lying about them. > > > [@](#): > > > > Oh, cut the shit. You know damn well that the term “Heckler’s veto” has two distinct meanings. The former is a legal expression in which the government shuts down speech for fear of inciting violence from hecklers, and the second is a common expression which denotes the practise of shouting speakers down from the audience. There is no one definition which is the “actual” definition. _Both_ are _actually used_, and the latter definition is considerably more common than the former. > > And the first I agree is a problem in the very rare times when it gets used. > > The second, well, just because you have a right to speech doesn’t mean that you have the right to be heard. I agree it’s rude, and should not be a standard, but there are people out there who have no business being encouraged to spew their hate and validate the views of the listeners. And if I can drown them out with my peaceful voice, then that is as much my right as it is for them to speak in the first place. > > > [@](#): > > > > Peterson wasn’t “disinvited”. He was invited, and then, when he actually turned up, a bunch of assholes summarily decided that his speech shouldn’t be heard and shouted him down screaming “TRANSPHOBIC PIECE OF SHIT!” and “NO SPEECH FOR JORDAN PETERSON” over and over again until he left. You want to whine about this being an example of the heckler’s veto? Fine. Call it “Being a bunch of self-righteous cunts” instead. Whatever. > > That’s what I call being disinvited. I would condone any violence, but I have no problem with people speaking their mind, even if that drowns out someone’s speech of hatred. > > > [@](#): > > > > Bullshit. Cite? > > [he objects to the Canadian government’s Bill C-16, which proposes to add “gender identity or expression” to the list of identifiable groups against whom it is illegal to promote genocide or publicly incite hatred under the Criminal Code](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_B._Peterson) I’m not sure why you don’t make even the slightest effort to learn what a person’s arguments actually are before spouting off. Actually, wait. I _am_ sure. It’s because you’re a liar. [/quote] Okay, what are your arguments? I can only base them on what you have said in this thread, if you would like to cite other sources that I may pursue to divine your true intentions you are welcome to. > [@](#): > > If that’s your standard, I’m happy to say I surpassed you a very long time ago. If I was teaching a class on logical fallacies, I’d pass you magna cum laude. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/938 "2017-05-04T18:48:30Z")
(In Europe is there much similar to the U.S. “SJW” dialog we see in this thread?) Clearly, social change proceeds too quickly for conservatives’ comfort, but ideally that throttle serves as a time-tested stabilizing influence in society. And there is often much wisdom in caution. But wisdom is largely irrelevant to the issues right-wingers raise today. (N.C.'s public restroom law :smack: ). Instead we have distracting debates that just feed political rage and hatreds. Bipolarization increases; political failure often results; often the failure is deliberately plotted and achieved by kleptocrats. \*\*Let me ask the anti-SJW crowd here a serious and important question: \*\* **Please give a 120- to 300-word account** of the thing you’ve done or said in past R.L. that would draw the most charges of “racist,” or “chauvinist,” etc. from competent and relatively moderate observers Until I get such specific responses, I want to reserve judgement. > [@eschereal](#): > > Ok, can someone clarify my understanding here? Whenever I see or hear “SJW” used, it seems to translate literally to “a person who feels that jigaboos, fairies, wetbacks, dykes, slopes, tree huggers, atheists and such like deserve to be treated with the same respect as decent god-fearing white folk”. It appears to wrap up every bigothet within it, the words that the user desperately wants to be able to freely pepper their language with were it not for the goddam PC-Patrol. > > So, how am I to see or hear “SJW” and not instantly think that the person using it is an utterly loathsome shitbag? Surely you must see this turns your opponent into a strawman, the Scarecrow in Oz. You may find the wingnut loathesome, but suppose it’s due to a physical ailment, e.g. the “bloated amygdala syndrome.” You don’t say angry words to the blind, deaf, crippled, etc. I do _not_ think that all of those advocating nuance or moderation in this thread suffer from the bloated amygdala ( :eek: ), but even if they did — Why not show pity and help train the handicapped? > [@k9bfriender](#): > > Be careful not to trigger the special snowflakes. You know that referring to them as bigots could trigger their delicate sensibilities, and cause them to do something irrational, like vote for trump. Likewise calling them loathsome or shitbag. > > The PC term is Anti-Social Injustice Cowards. Thank you **Mr. Befriender** for the more nuanced response to the (alleged) shitbags. > [@Orr\_G](#): > > You know, for a brief window there, and I was undoubtedly lagging behind the times, it seemed like the term Social Justice Warrior was vaguely useful to describe a certain sort of person in certain situations… > > But it was not meant to be. Whatever utility the term might once have had for moderate and/or reasonable folks on the left to play No True Scotsman has long been ruined. > > … I still hold out hope that many of the young and/or clueless who’ve been sucked into one or another clickbait-driven flame war can be convinced to save themselves from a life of outrage and pointless bigoted hate. +++ > [@Gyrate](#): > > Remember, kids: it’s not racism, sexism or homophobia until a straight white male tells you it is! ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2017, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/939 "2017-05-04T23:33:02Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > \*\*Let me ask the anti-SJW crowd here a serious and important question: > \*\* **Please give a 120- to 300-word account** of the thing you’ve done or said in past R.L. that would draw the most charges of “racist,” or “chauvinist,” etc. from competent and relatively moderate observers > > Until I get such specific responses, I want to reserve judgement. I’ve objected to large-scale “Women In Media” events organised by professional bodies of which I’m a member and said organisation’s efforts to promote everything women working in the media do, when they are not providing the same promotion efforts to “men in media”. There are female-only grants available, but not men-only grants. Women make up the large majority of journalists and PR folks in this country; they’re not a minority or oppressed and the media is running increasingly more “lifestyle” and “soft” news, with advertising increasingly targeted at female audiences and about typically female-appealing subjects. That’s no criticism of the journalists/PR folks themselves - many of them are fantastic and extremely talented - but the point remains professional bodies think it’s OK to organise “Yay women in media!” events, but an event for “Yay men in media!” would be torn to shreds on social media and IRL by the offenderati. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2017, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443/940 "2017-05-05T18:19:12Z")
> [@Martini\_Enfield](#): > > Women make up the large majority of journalists and PR folks in this country; Cite? ETA: oh wait I found[one](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/11/women-journalists-still-underrepresented-in-newsroom_n_3579880.html)but it doesn’t support your claim [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443.md?page=46) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stupid-social-justice-warrior-bullshit-o-the-day/782443.md?page=48)