Here’s an idea: Start your own thread about what shit heads Nazis are. I’ll back you 100%.
While it’s dumb and self-defeating* for leftists to prevent those with contrary views from speaking (on campus or elsewhere), I’m not sure this practice is so much more prevalent now than it was in past decades.
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/mcnamara-shouted-down-at-harvard-speech
*it should be mortifying to see right-wingers casting themselves as defenders of free speech.
It’s entertaining whenever the term SJW gets brought up in a negative sense on the SDMB half of you start to lose your shit.
People are starting to catch on to the lefts hypocritical bullshit. Notice I said left, not Liberals there’s a difference.
Can you point to the shit-losing half of this thread? I’m not seeing it.
Anyway, back to SIWs – Steve King, SIW from Iowa is apparently looking for a safe space for white people.
Many SIWs are calling for a boycott of Hawaii because, I think, some judge there is following the law. I guess those snowflakes need a safe space from the rule of law.
Let’s not forget the annual boycott of Starbucks because they use the wrong cups at Christmas, or something ridiculous like that. Christian SJWs, amirite?
Why are you so hell-bent on hijacking the thread? You don’t see me posting about kids accidentally shooting each other in the ‘Positive gun news of the day’ thread, or about old ladies fending off home invaders in the ‘Stupid gun news of the day’ thread. You don’t see me going into the ‘Controversial encounters with police’ thread, posting entirely uncontroversial encounters with the police and signing off my posts ‘Good job, officers!’ You don’t, in short, see me threadshitting in other people’s threads. So why are you so determined to fuck up this thread by shitting all over it?
If you want to start a thread about Steve King, start one about Steve King, or post in the ‘Stupid Republican idea of the day’ thread where your complaints would constitute a salient contribution instead of a threadshitting hijack. If you want to start a thread about fake war on christmas bullshit, no-one is stopping you. Why do you insist on dumping your irrelevant bullshit here, and what the fuck is your problem?
Sorry, snowflake. I should have put a trigger warning in.
Trigger warning: I’m about to disagree with you.
I’m not sure what you mean by hijacking. I thought SJWs spend time worrying about trivial bullshit. Isn’t that what the Starbucks coffee-cup-gate thing was? What would you call those calling for a boycott of Hawaii if not SJWs?
Wait, are SJWs only on the left of the political spectrum? What’s the word for those who get all worked up about trivial bullshit on the right?
The fuck is the problem is that you’ve taken a term popularized by one of the great misogynist movements in the US in the past decade, and you’ve tried to act like there’s some utility to the term beyond branding yourself as a flunky of the 4chan brigade.
The fuck is the problem is that you persist in pointing your finger and laughing at folks who have virtually no impact on public discussion–indeed, the only way you find out these people exist is through right-wing blogs that also mock them–acting as though these people are worth talking about.
Meanwhile, the fuck is the problem is that when people point out to you that the real outrages are coming from Republicans who hold actual power, you–let me borrow Ibanez’s phrasing here–lose your shit.
That’s the fuck is the problem.
Doesn’t have one. Wants to talk about stuff you don’t want to talk about, and you can’t stop it.
I wouldn’t call them SJWs I think those nutjobs were Religious Right. Jesus fucking christ, your starbucks cup was plain red and you flipped the fuck out. Maybe you could use a bit less caffeine.
Here’s the video that (I think) really got this all started, you can find your way to his page if you want, he’s about as religious right as they come.
But let’s think about this for a minute, it’s not like Starbucks changed their cup to ‘There’s no god’, they just put out a plain red cup. This guy, and so many like him, are up in arms (literally and figuratively) because one year their cups had a design he liked and the next year it didn’t have any design. IIRC, the design was just some ornaments or snowman or something. I don’t even think it had wording on it.
But it seems with the RRs, like with the SJWs it still seems like ‘you need to do it my way or you’re wrong and evil’. We’ve all seen SJWs tell people that they’re nazis or rapists or racists if they don’t support some statement they made. Go look your RR friend’s pages and it’s the same thing. Don’t agree with me, off to hell with you, sinner. Though it is a bit entertaining watching them struggle with the current considerably more liberal pope.
You’re being disingenuous in order to justify your threadshitting. Earlier, you tried coining the term ‘SIW’ for ‘Social Injustice Warrior’ and you’re now trying to shoehorn examples you believe fit that description into this thread and calling them SJWs in an attempt to derail the thread.
I don’t know what the word is for people who get worked up about trivial bullshit on the right. How about you make one up and start a thread calling them out and leave this one alone.
Trigger warning: This post may disagree with you. Also, it mentions Satanists, which may trigger some people. Also, Christians may feel slightly uneasy associating with some people mentioned in the article.
Check out these SJW: http://www.peacock-panache.com/2016/12/boca-raton-satanic-display-protest-26752.html
They were so freaked out by some Satanists expressing themselves that they protested the display. Here’s a quote from the article:
[QUOTE=SJW]
“This is terrible. As a Christian, I cannot stand for this. This should not be included in our freedom of speech.”
[/QUOTE]
Here’s another great one:
[QUOTE=SJW #2]
“Would they be OK with a Nazi flag? They’re both evil…”
[/QUOTE]
Here’s another one:
[QUOTE=Also SJW #2]
Boykin shouted, “tear this thing down!”
[/QUOTE]
Can you believe how they are trying to squelch the Satanists free expression and exercise of religion? Comparing them to Nazis? Christian SJWs, amirite?
In order to avoid anything resembling a threadshit, could you explain what “SJW” means? Because by my understanding, it’s essentially a right-wing snarl word, intended to impugn any liberal standing up for any liberal cause. It doesn’t actually have a real meaning, instead simply being a verbal cudgel against anyone from video game critics who think a particular art style is demeaning to journalists who think white people are evil to antifa rioters who violently break up a bigoted douchebag’s speech at a college to Jim Fucking Sterling, Son. People often try to define it in terms of moralists, or people who use force to stifle speech, but I have never seen it used to describe, say, the Christians who would illegally tear down a Satanist monument, so clearly there’s some inconsistencies here. It’s bizarrely broad and overused to the point of cliche, and it’s not made better by the fact that the origin of the term can be found in the Gamergate Movement, which is like being a term invented by Rush Limbaugh or Milo Yiannopolous - not a point in its favor. So to avoid all future hijacks, perhaps you’d like to explain what the fuck a “social justice warrior” actually is.
When has it ever been brought up in a positive sense?
Serious question - it seems to me the only time I see a person invoking the concept, it is to sneer at it and broadly generalize about it.
My guess is that it’s a word for left wingers who do stuff the OP doesn’t agree with. In that case, I’m not sure why he just doesn’t use the Stupid Liberal Idea of the Day thread, since that thread is directed at all liberals, not just Democrats (unlike SRIOD, which specifies Republicans). But, since he hasn’t defined it that way, I’m going to continue to assume it means people getting worked up over things, right or left.
What a trivial nitpicker you are. The term SJW, as a pejorative, is now so well established that it has its own entry in the dictionary. And I’m supposed to abandon it because you don’t like the people who popularised that definition? I hope for your sake you never find out who popularised the term Nazi.
Furthermore, it has been patiently explained to you, over and over again, that SJW is only a pejorative because of the actions of the foot stamping toddlers I linked to in my OP. If college progressives weren’t egregiously authoritarian and self-righteous, how did SJW ever take on negative connotations in the first place?
It seems to me there are two possible answers to that question. The first is that the bored teenagers on 4chan are actually evil geniuses who launched a propagandistic hate campaign against reasonable progressivism that was so successful the dictionary definition of SJW had to be amended to reflect its new status as a pejorative. That’s explanation one. That’s your explanation. To save time, I’ll simply refer to it as “The retarded explanation”, because it’s retarded and so are you.
The second explanation is that regular people saw these shrieking asshole activists and realised that a lot of the things they stood for were bigoted, intolerant, authoritarian, and just generally awful. They then decided that if people as unpleasant as that were calling themselves Social Justice Warriors, then maybe a Social Justice Warrior wasn’t such a good thing to be.
I know it’s comforting to hold on to the weird conspiracy theory that the meaning of all words is dictated by capricious meme jihads on 4chan, but the fact of the matter is that the term SJW has negative connotations because people who call (or once called) themselves SJWs have been behaving very badly for a very long time. The link in my OP was just the most recent example. There are so many such incidents, referenced in so many other threads, that I decided that keeping all these incidents in one place might be useful.
Firstly, I’m not laughing at SJWs. I don’t find authoritarians funny.
Secondly, while individual SJWs may not have much impact on public discussion, they do have some, and this impact is multiplied when they gang up on people. When SJWs flip their shit because a speaker they don’t like is coming to campus, they make it less likely that other universities will invite that speaker, or others like him. This stifles discussion by narrowing the scope of “acceptable” opinions. This is bad. Bad enough that I would have thought even a lead paint chip sucking simpleton like you would be able to grasp the ramifications. I guess I’ve over-estimated you.
Then why don’t you start your own thread about those outrages? Better yet, why don’t you, in your capacity as a deadbrained fucknut who knows nothing about anything, rank the problems facing our public discourse in order of importance so us peons know which ones we’re “allowed” to tackle and when.
Well, I hope you got all that out of your system.
Now piss off.
So do we have any actual SJW bullshit in this thread yet?
Yes. Hoop earrings are the equivalent of war bonnets. That’s was my exact point. :rolleyes:
Right. And it’s the idiots that are being referred to as SJWs. Ones who DO seriously see no difference between someone wearing a war bonnet vs hoop earrings.
Doesn’t mean they aren’t stupid or annoying. It doesn’t mean we can’t point out, hey, that’s a really stupid position.
Yes and no. Social justice is a good thing, a great thing. But as I said before, I generally differentiate between social justice warriors and social justice activists. The latter are the people you’re talking about. A SJW is a term for someone who’s too busy worrying about FWPs, for the most part. You really, really believe that whether or not a fictional character character has shaved arms is a social justice point? Or the fact that school cafeteria food wasn’t authentic? That I, as a white woman, can’t wear hoop earrings?
I’m not talking about wearing a war bonnet, or a bindhi. Those have actual religious and/or cultural significance. (FWIW, I feel the same way when I see those little goth shits wearing Rosary beads as necklaces). But hoop earrings, winged eyeliner, etc – those are somehow the equivalent of all that? Where do we draw the line?
Honestly, how would YOU term these things? Would you really see these as “social justice issues”? Or just stupid people being stupid?
Reclaiming the term? I think it’s a little late for that. But in this case, does it really matter? As long as you’re actively working to make sure people have health care, that they aren’t being discriminated against for being gay, or black, or trans, that there’s no lead in our water, why waste time argueing semantics? Unfortunately, the assholes ruined the term for the rest of us. That happens a lot in language.
It has nothing to do with “MY cause is good, YOUR cause isn’t.” It’s more like “just because someone says it’s about social justice doesn’t mean it is.” Sometimes it’s just like a bunch of middle school girls bitching over each other’s clothes.
A white politician quotes Beyonce to make a good point. Others tell her that because she’s white, she’s not allowed to use the words of a black woman to make her point.
Could you point to specific posts that you consider good examples of posters ‘losing their shit’?
Maybe I’m jaded these days, but I don’t recall seeing much in this thread that would make it ineligible for moving to GD.
Well, sure, there’s a difference. ‘Left’ is an all-inclusive term that includes everything that isn’t center, right, or just plain uncategorizable. ‘Liberal’ is part of ‘left.’
Maybe you mean ‘far left.’ Or maybe you don’t. Since you don’t provide examples of “the lefts hypocritical bullshit,” there’s no way to tell.
Huh. You mean if social justice activists are fighting* for or against something, it’s not a first-world problem? (Had to look up FWP, btw; I’m not hep to the latest acronyms.)
Oh good. Then there’s no first-world battle over health insurance or the minimum wage or paid overtime or paid parental leave or lead in the water supply; we’ve won, and I can stop calling my Congresscritters about such things.
*Doesn’t this make them warriors?
Becaue the term is going to be thrown at us when we’re fighting those sorts of battles. No, not ‘going to be’ - it’s already been happening. Too late.
Yeah, happened to ‘queer’ a long time ago. The gays took it back.
Look, we’ve lost the battle to shear it off and see that it only applies to a particular class of lefties. And this is a hell of a lot easier to reclaim than ‘queer’ because fighting for social justice is really and truly and blatantly obviously a Good Thing.