what constitutes a social justice warrior?

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 ?

Sand

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.

What they were referring to was more than social ostracisation by "SJWs". That's passive by a small, unrepresentative group. It wouldn't even get noticed by the target.

I think what's objectionable is the organised aggressive targeting by a group of a prominent individual for their views or actions no matter how innocent or minor. A witch-hunt, where the mob burn someone in effigy to drive out the evil spirits in a ritual that goes back to the dumbest eras of human history. Its now given a facelift thanks to instant communication.

Its basically bullying as demonstrated by that ludicrous #shirtgate nonsense where a man was vilified, demonised and driven into a breakdown by narcissistic morons on the internet for the high crime of wearing an edgy shirt.

MathDebater

I thought these people only stayed in the confines of universities and social media? 

Primarily they do yeah. These lads organised online as they knew there would be little opposition to them. If a bit of muscle was in attendance they would have ran laps.

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?

Nothing extreme about wanting proper border controls in place.

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.

I think it's sad that people would shun someone just for airing their views.

bodice ripper

The Diabolical Monocle wrote: »

Got a problem with the glorious white man ?

Of course not, some of my best friends are white men.

MathDebater

bodice ripper wrote: »

Of course not, some of my best friends are white men.

Live in Europe. Bitch about the very people that built the continent.

Thus is the SJW.

Junkyard Tom

MathDebater wrote: »

Bitch about the very people that built the continent.

And destroyed it a few times too. White pride.

TheBeardedLady

Nothing extreme about wanting proper border controls in place.

Well we'll save the fun debate for another time - can't wait!

I think it's sad that people would shun someone just for airing their views.

Sad it has to come to that, alright.

RDM_83 again

Being a SJW is like being a Hipster, nobody ever calls themselves one and its really hard to properly define but everybody knows what and who they are

bodice ripper

MathDebater wrote: »

Live in Europe. Bitch about the very people that built the continent.

Thus is the SJW.

Twas clearly a joke, but rage away at imagined boogymen if you like...

Hans Bricks

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

White pride.

Thats the spirit

Patrick Wheelock

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Being a SJW is like being a Hipster, nobody ever calls themselves one and its really hard to properly define but everybody knows what and who they are

and the people who deny the existence of SJWs and hipsters are generally SJWs or hipsters themselves.

TheBeardedLady

Patrick Wheelock wrote: »

and the people who deny the existence of SJWs and hipsters are generally SJWs or hipsters themselves.

Not really.

MathDebater

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

And destroyed it a few times too. White pride.

There are only around 300 White lions left in the world. They will probably go extinct in our lifetime.

http://whitelions.org

Junkyard Tom

MathDebater wrote: »

There are only around 300 White lions left in the world. They will probably go extinct in our lifetime.

Hopefully not.

kowloon

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Being a SJW is like being a Hipster, nobody ever calls themselves one and its really hard to properly define but everybody knows what and who they are

I'm not sure, I'm more confused now than I was at the start of the thread.

anvilfour

The Mangina stooges of Feminazis.

tipparetops

see how a thread about sjw can quickly be derailed by sjw.
you are against gay marriage = homophobic
you want borders controlled= racist
you question climate change= u must be questioned

but back in the real world the right is rising across Europe.
enjoy your period of left wing loony nonsense, its days are numbered.

TheBeardedLady

tipparetops wrote: »

see how a thread about sjw can quickly be derailed by sjw.
you are against gay marriage = homophobic
you want borders controlled= racist
you question climate change= u must be questioned

but back in the real world the right is rising across Europe.
enjoy your period of left wing loony nonsense, its days are numbered.

Ooooh how ominous!


What would be the right-wing SJW equivalent for this guy?

TheBeardedLady

anvilfour wrote: »

The Mangina stooges of Feminazis.

This thread is a goldmine for the Daily Mail headline writers.

anncoates

Patrick Wheelock wrote: »

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.

Sounds like a fascinating social resource.

P. Breathnach

TheBeardedLady wrote: »

Ooooh how ominous!


What would be the right-wing SJW equivalent for this guy?

Obvious: Social Injustice Warrior.

tipparetops

TheBeardedLady wrote: »

Ooooh how ominous!


What would be the right-wing SJW equivalent for this guy?

The opposite of SJW's are SMB's.
Can you guess what SMB's stand for.

One eyed Jack

tipparetops wrote: »

see how a thread about sjw can quickly be derailed by sjw.
you are against gay marriage = homophobic
you want borders controlled= racist
you question climate change= u must be questioned

but back in the real world the right is rising across Europe.
enjoy your period of left wing loony nonsense, its days are numbered.

Climate change has nothing to do with social justice in fairness, you keep bringing that up but it has nothing to do with anything, only to serve as an example of how silly some people can be regardless of whether they identify more with right wing or left wing ideologies.

I would always have thought of 'social justice warriors' (and I admit to using the term pejoratively) as those people who point out problems they see in society, but expect everyone else to do something about them, the ranty types who are all talk and no action, who need to find something to be miserable about in order to give their lives meaning.

They are incredibly fickle and have short attention spans, preferring to talk about people in terms of 'causes' and having 'safe spaces' for people according to their carefully labelled demographics, ignoring anyone who doesn't quite fit the profile of their 'cause du jour'.

That's not social justice, and it sure as hell isn't respect for diversity, all the things they claim to fight for, they seem to have their own spin on it that nobody else 'could possibly understand', and that makes them feel like an individual, makes them feel like they are a morally and intellectually superior human being, when all they really are is quite a sad individual by society's standards, ironically the same society they wish would respect them, the same society they reject and want to change to suit them and their ideological perspective.

TheBeardedLady

tipparetops wrote: »

The opposite of SJW's are SMB's.
Can you guess what SMB's stand for.

Sexy Male Botanists?

Surly Mothers of Builders?

Sausages Mushrooms and Brown Bread?

tipparetops

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Climate change has nothing to do with social justice in fairness, you keep bringing that up but it has nothing to do with anything, only to serve as an example of how silly some people can be regardless of whether they identify more with right wing or left wing ideologies.

I would always have thought of 'social justice warriors' (and I admit to using the term pejoratively) as those people who point out problems they see in society, but expect everyone else to do something about them, the ranty types who are all talk and no action, who need to find something to be miserable about in order to give their lives meaning.

They are incredibly fickle and have short attention spans, preferring to talk about people in terms of 'causes' and having 'safe spaces' for people according to their carefully labelled demographics, ignoring anyone who doesn't quite fit the profile of their 'cause du jour'.

That's not social justice, and it sure as hell isn't respect for diversity, all the things they claim to fight for, they seem to have their own spin on it that nobody else 'could possibly understand', and that makes them feel like an individual, makes them feel like they are a morally and intellectually superior human being, when all they really are is quite a sad individual by society's standards, ironically the same society they wish would respect them, the same society they reject and want to change to suit them and their ideological perspective.

climate change/global warming policies have a serious effect on social issues.
To say it does not is simply a sign of ignorance, regardless if they are right/left leaning.

RayM

tipparetops wrote: »

The opposite of SJW's are SMB's.
Can you guess what SMB's stand for.

Sad male bastards?

One eyed Jack

tipparetops wrote: »

climate change/global warming policies have a serious effect on social issues.
To say it does not is simply a sign of ignorance, regardless if they are right/left leaning.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Climate change has nothing to do with social justice in fairness.

Wanna play spot the difference?

tipparetops

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Wanna play spot the difference?

do you?
climate change policies affect social issues, social justice warriors affect climate change policies.
climate change is consider a social issue.

anncoates

tipparetops wrote: »

The opposite of SJW's are SMB's.
Can you guess what SMB's stand for.

Serial Multiple Boardsaccounts?

bodice ripper

tipparetops wrote: »

see how a thread about sjw can quickly be derailed by sjw.
you are against gay marriage = homophobic
you want borders controlled= racist
you question climate change= u must be questioned

but back in the real world the right is rising across Europe.
enjoy your period of left wing loony nonsense, its days are numbered.

it went so well the last time.

tipparetops

anncoates wrote: »

Serial Multiple Boardsaccounts?

I often wonder, how many people have actually made the posts on this thread.
There could be 10 people, all with multiple accounts.
Anncoates could be Tipparetops.

Not a NSA agent

tipparetops wrote: »

I often wonder, how many people have actually made the posts on this thread.
There could be 10 people, all with multiple accounts.
Anncoates could be Tipparetops.

No need to insult other posters

TheBeardedLady

tipparetops wrote: »

I often wonder, how many people have actually made the posts on this thread.
There could be 10 people, all with multiple accounts.
Anncoates could be Tipparetops.

Tell us the bleedin' answer! the suspense is killing us here!

PopePalpatine

tipparetops wrote: »

you question climate change= u must be questioned

I thought you wanted a debate on climate change? :rolleyes:

Not a NSA agent

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I thought you wanted a debate on climate change? :rolleyes:

You cant question someone, it makes you a SJW!

A person should be free to make any claims they want, even if they go against current studies and you must not question them!

One eyed Jack

tipparetops wrote: »

do you?
climate change policies affect social issues, social justice warriors affect climate change policies.
climate change is consider a social issue.

Ahh, I see the fundamental difference now - you think social justice warriors actually contribute something to society, thereby affecting social policy on climate change; my position is that the only thing social justice warriors contribute to the issue of climate change is an excessive amount of hot air and the clumsy carbon footprints of an awkward teenager with their protestations of the injustice and 'unfairness of it all' from their €800 iPhone 6's.

If someone is actually doing something positive about an issue to affect a change in society, then I wouldn't consider them a social justice warrior, I'd consider them a leader, because they are showing leadership, taking on the challenge of doing something about an issue rather than expecting everyone else should change to suit them 'just because', or 'it's the right thing to do', etc.

tipparetops

tipparetops wrote: »

enjoy your period of left wing loony nonsense, its days are numbered.

Actually, trends would suggest the opposite.

You should do some reading on what economists call 'creative destruction'.

Basically, as capitalism spreads education, it endows people with the vocabulary and the ability to challenge and critique any constraints on their welfare, such as oppressive work practices, unemployment, and the favourable treatment of the wealthy, and ultimately to challenge capitalism itself.

It's actually a view shared by well-known economists on both sides of the left-right divide, for what it's worth.

'Left wing loony nonsense' is here to stay. Time to invest in hemp, polyamorous dating sites, and trans-ethnic beauty parlours.

tritium

TheBeardedLady wrote: »

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.



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


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.



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.

A simple example of sjw in action would be the recent Oxford debate on abortion that was cancelled because of threats of unspecified disruption by groups opposed to two men discussing such a topic. Said groups earnestly plead how distressing such an event might be for those they "represent" while promising unspecified bad happenings if it goes ahead...

Not a NSA agent

tritium wrote: »

A simple example of sjw in action would be the recent Oxford debate on abortion that was cancelled because of threats of unspecified disruption by groups opposed to two men discussing such a topic. Said groups earnestly plead how distressing such an event might be for those they "represent" while promising unspecified bad happenings if it goes ahead...

The iona institute have become sjws? :pac:

TheBeardedLady

tritium wrote: »

A simple example of sjw in action would be the recent Oxford debate on abortion that was cancelled because of threats of unspecified disruption by groups opposed to two men discussing such a topic. Said groups earnestly plead how distressing such an event might be for those they "represent" while promising unspecified bad happenings if it goes ahead...

Ye see, I'm not denying the existence of SJWs if you go back on my posts there, I take issue with anyone with leftist views being labelled as such as happens on Boards all the time. And I will say it again: that kind of behaviour is not exclusive to the left.

One eyed Jack

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Actually, trends would suggest the opposite.

You should do some reading on what economists call 'creative destruction'.

Basically, as capitalism spreads education, it endows people with the vocabulary and the ability to challenge and critique any constraints on their welfare, such as oppressive work practices, unemployment, and the favourable treatment of the wealthy, and ultimately to challenge capitalism itself.

It's actually a view shared by well-known economists on both sides of the left-right divide, for what it's worth.

'Left wing loony nonsense' is here to stay. Time to invest in hemp, polyamorous dating sites, and trans-ethnic beauty parlours.

Is that not a paradox?

By claiming that left-wing ideologies are 'here to stay', would that not mean they would reach a point where these ideas are considered the preserve of conservative ideology? As in the ideas become ingrained in society.

I don't think left wing ideologies have ever gained any traction in society until the point where they became a right wing conservative ideology.

Marriage equality being a good example actually - the idea of monogamous marriage itself being a conservative, traditional ideology, so introducing marriage equality wasn't actually all that liberal, it was actually buying into a conservative institution and not all that revolutionary at all?

As for ideas about capitalism spreading education, that sounds more to me like a chicken and egg situation. I don't think it's capitalism spreads education at all, but rather the other way around, and it's actually social justice spread by socially conscious people that spreads education and gives people without access to education the opportunities to educate themselves that capitalism would seek to deny them.