First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
Post Reply "Social Justice Warrior"
22667 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Online
Posted 4/23/16

Yume_Mirai wrote:

no she's pushing her agenda to replace pv to revive the forums, check peripheralvisionary? thread in chit chat, tbh its boring me to tears so I'll go grab a sandwich and milk pfft.


Are you done?

30236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
It doesn't matter.
Offline
Posted 4/23/16
When I hear it it sounds a lot like someone's doing a poor job of pretending to know something about someone else.
13618 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / Australia
Offline
Posted 4/24/16
Haven't used it in verbal argument nor do I have any memory of using it on the forums. Doesn't mean I don't condone the use of the phrase. At this point I'm not sure I care, I'll have to check that, no maliciousness intended.
6022 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / F / Australia
Offline
Posted 4/24/16 , edited 4/27/16

Aethix0 wrote:

"SJW" is overused, that much is for certain. But in a world where people get bullied into attempting suicide just for not drawing a character fat enough in fan art, the term definitely has its valid applications.


This, poor Zamii
47864 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 4/24/16 , edited 4/24/16

SportingNightRaid wrote:

How many SJW threads do we need especially on a site that is used to watch ANIME?!


You do realize that people that watch anime might have opinions about things other than anime, right? When you're talking with live people, do you only talk about one thing? Should I find a different forum each time I want to discuss a different set of topics? There are a lot of people on here whose opinions I genuinely enjoy reading, and if I go to another forum, I'll probably lose that opinion. That's the whole point of having a General Discussion section. If you just want to talk about anime, that's fine, we have threads for that. If Judar had brought this up during a discussion on, let's say, One-Punch Man, then you'd have a point. But at this point, what you're doing is kind of like walking up to a group of people talking about politics in a mall and saying, "You're in a mall, you should only talk about shopping." People have multiple interests, and often want to speak about them. This is a site used to watch anime, but it's also a forum -- a community of people that want to talk about stuff. And, being people, they usually have tings other than anime that they're interested in. This isn't just a site to watch anime, or we wouldn't have a forum at all.


maxgale wrote:

For the purpose of instructing them in the finer arts of humility, which is the best antidote to their poisonous ideology.



Just wanted to first note that, when you talk about 'instructing them in the finer arts of humility' and their 'poisonous ideology,' you know you sound exactly like an SJW, right? In this thread, to say nothing of other ones, you've just talked about shaming them into another position and calling them names in an attempt to, basically, bully them without reason or argument, all while fighting for your 'righteous ideology'. In that capacity, you're doing the same things that you disparage in SJW's.

But here's the more important part. Whenever I've felt shame or humility or whatever wisdom you feel you're imparting on SJW's by insulting them, I've never felt it from insults. In fact, I think it was you who (maybe it was someone else, I don't care to look), in a Black Lives Matter thread a while ago, made me feel a bit of shame in my argument. But it wasn't because of your insults or name-calling (which were used, by the way), it was because you had a good argument, and I clearly had a bad one. Whenever I've ever felt bad about my position, it was because of well-structured and reasonable argument. I don't think I've ever felt ashamed of my positions because someone told me I ought to, or because I was insulted. And what's more, you're going to get even less traction insulting someone that thinks themselves utterly righteous in their ideology. You're just slamming your head against the wall if you think insults will carry any weight with the people you call SJW's. Insults alone won't change their mind without argument, and if you have argument and insults, I can nearly guarantee you that the insults won't be the thing to change their mind.

And I'll say this in case it applies to you, but if it doesn't, then just ignore it. There are people for whom arguments won't make a lick of difference, but if you immediately think that they are one of those people based on their ideology, then you're confounding conclusions with methodology. Any conclusion can follow from false premises. If the moon is made entirely of cheese, and all cheese is edible, then the moon is entirely edible. The conclusion is reached logically, but pointing out my error is a matter of correcting my initial premises. Likewise, I might also just say the moon is edible because I want it to be edible. Just because somebody has a particular ideology doesn't mean that they reached that ideology in the same way, and simply saying that someone with a particular ideology won't be swayed by argument because they have that ideology is a generalization worthy of every SJW you seem to so solemnly hate.

Point is, without argument, insults are worthless, and with them, they're worthless. Edit: I should say, insults are worthless if your goal is to convince anyone. If your goal is a sort of sadistic pleasure in thinking yourself better than the other person, then, obviously, they do have value. I can be a bit of a sadist myself sometimes, so I get that. I'm not above insults myself (one could argue that the first paragraph of my response to you was exactly that), but I don't have any impression that my insult or name-calling will change their mind.
Humms 
10583 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / CAN, ON
Offline
Posted 4/24/16
Social justice warriors is just another excuse created by some other sad excuse that would rather teach people to stand in one spot preaching about something instead of doing something outside of their self righteous bubble. Whenever I hear social justice warrior I just think to myself.

Why do people actually go out of their way to force this label. Why do people actually believe that SJW is something to teach others? Why should we get offended because of it?

I am simply blown away from the amount of stupidity that a lot of people have been voicing, not the people themselves, but the stupidity they ultimately stand behind.

I guess that's why I simply cannot care anymore, and I tell ya; it's working wonders. Reply and post whenever I feel like it, but never giving a damn about my response on certain topics. We don't go looking for things we can't answer, but apparently people know absolutely everything there is to know simply by copying and pasting a fucking piece of information. Things have really changed, and it's starting to finally show itself to the world.
41142 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/24/16
Its such a useful term, so I dont have a problem with it if used reasonably. It often really does seem to accurately describes that particular group's politics, beliefs, interpersonal strategies, and so on. For example, when dealing with a probable SJW, you can guess that the person votes for liberal parties, are on the nurture side of the nature vs. nurture debate, doesn't like ambiguity, uses virtue signalling, ect. That's a lot of information. As long as one doesn't assume it completely describe any individual in front of them, its a useful inquisitive tool.

As for using it as an insult... I've never used it that way, but I can see it being valid in the right context. If one has a discussion and hits a brick wall where their opponent does not challenge provided evidence nor provides their own, relies on emotional strategies, and holds the expected beliefs; then the label fits. Its not an ad hominem attack if the character of the hominem in question is relevant to the argument (or lack of argument). But the onus would be on the person using it to establish that it is relevant, which is a touchy thing to do so I think its best not to. Valid or not. In anycase, while the label probably will not convince that person of anything, they should't be your audience. A debate isn't for the participants, its for everyone else. If I am in front of a person who seems ideologically driven and stubborn, I just play to (and for) the spectators. Its condescending, but, nobody's perfect.
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 4/24/16
Another SJW thread with another SJW leader!
Gotta shoot it down, down I say!


5019 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 4/24/16 , edited 4/24/16
22667 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Online
Posted 4/24/16 , edited 4/25/16

theYchromosome wrote:
Point is, without argument, insults are worthless, and with them, they're worthless. Edit: I should say, insults are worthless if your goal is to convince anyone. If your goal is a sort of sadistic pleasure in thinking yourself better than the other person, then, obviously, they do have value. I can be a bit of a sadist myself sometimes, so I get that. I'm not above insults myself (one could argue that the first paragraph of my response to you was exactly that), but I don't have any impression that my insult or name-calling will change their mind.


Hah, I enjoy your input. I think that's a really great way of summarizing my own thoughts on it.


Humms wrote:

Social justice warriors is just another excuse created by some other sad excuse that would rather teach people to stand in one spot preaching about something instead of doing something outside of their self righteous bubble.


It certainly does have that self righteous edge on it.


Lockgor wrote:

Its such a useful term, so I dont have a problem with it if used reasonably. It often really does seem to accurately describes that particular group's politics, beliefs, interpersonal strategies, and so on. For example, when dealing with a probable SJW, you can guess that the person votes for liberal parties, are on the nurture side of the nature vs. nurture debate, doesn't like ambiguity, uses virtue signalling, ect. That's a lot of information. As long as one doesn't assume it completely describe any individual in front of them, its a useful inquisitive tool.



I used to think somewhat along these lines myself. The reasoning against it, I found, is that it is inherently a pejorative term--not a descriptive one. I originally had viewed it as the latter, but I realize that it is not used neutrally. The popularity of the phrase was accelerated by the GamerGate controversy--harnessed to label the enemy. Never is the label thrown without the negative connotation of the person or persons being unreasonable. It is always a form of insult whether upon a group or an individual. Social Justice is descriptive. Social justice Warrior is slanderous.

22667 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Online
Posted 4/24/16

Sir_jamesalot wrote:

When I hear it it sounds a lot like someone's doing a poor job of pretending to know something about someone else.


That...and I should probably check for spiders.


20927 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 4/24/16 , edited 4/24/16
I dislike social justice warriors........nevermind that's feminists i mix the two up sometimes.
Sogno- 
45742 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/24/16 , edited 4/24/16
no i don't think you're wrong for thinking that

i personally don't consider it an insult. perhaps that's because I'm not of the same mind as these so-called sjws. But I mean it really sounds kind of cool you know? Fighting for social justice? Warrior for social justice?

would i use it in an argument? haha i hate arguing so it doesn't even matter
Posted 4/24/16

PrinceJudar wrote:

It’s often a hand wavy term people use to describe a certain group of people—but it just comes off condescending and mob-like.

It is a pejorative to attack or devalue their opposition’s character. Similarly, it is also used to avoid proper argument.

Commonly, when people throw the label of 'SJW' others will rush up to chew on the bone without much question.

I’m guilty of saying it as a descriptor when referring to a third party, but I don’t even want to use it then. I’d rather say ‘people that support x’ or ‘people that oppose y’. It works just fine without placing oneself on an unnecessary pedestal and it will help you make sure you’ve properly justified your arguments. You don’t need insults, especially when you’re trying to be the self-proclaimed rational one.

I tend to devalue comments that use the label for disparaging their opponent. It demonstrates to me they're either providing entertainment for some audience, wrapped up in dogmatism, or cannot properly form a coherent argument.

Are you going to try and avoid using the term from now on? Have you noticed mob or reactive behavior behind using it? Do you have a good argument for using the insult? Do you think I'm wrong for thinking this way? Why?



"condescending and mob-like"

Explain how an individual calling someone an SJW is mob like. That's just confusing.

"It is a pejorative to attack or devalue their opposition’s character."

How do you know? Are SJW's typically irrational? Do they try to get people fired from their jobs? Do they spit on people? Do they curse at people? Do they shut down highways, events and people wishing to peacefully protest? (We have evidence to suggest they do.)

"Similarly, it is also used to avoid proper argument. "

I think the problem is that you want a quality conversation, but people are animals, including myself. It's hard for me to give an objective point of view on things, when I'm being screamed and cursed at, being accused of being a monster.

"I’m guilty of saying it as a descriptor when referring to a third party, but I don’t even want to use it then. I’d rather say ‘people that support x’ or ‘people that oppose y’. It works just fine without placing oneself on an unnecessary pedestal and it will help you make sure you’ve properly justified your arguments. You don’t need insults, especially when you’re trying to be the self-proclaimed rational one."

People always use these attacks regardless. Your finally starting to see that these people who you think are "rational" aren't at all. They're regressive animals.

Empiricists like myself, only care about the evidence, until we get pissed, then we're not so nice. ( I don't like getting angry though, I'd rather be a happy pony trotting through equestria)

"I tend to devalue comments that use the label for disparaging their opponent. It demonstrates to me they're either providing entertainment for some audience, wrapped up in dogmatism, or cannot properly form a coherent argument."

Are you going to try and avoid using the term from now on? Have you noticed mob or reactive behavior behind using it? Do you have a good argument for using the insult? Do you think I'm wrong for thinking this way? Why?"

I would only use the term, if the person was coming off as vulgar and annoying. If it's a good person like you, then nah.

You're too good for that :P



Posted 4/24/16

Freddy96NO wrote:

Another SJW thread with another SJW leader!
Gotta shoot it down, down I say!




I object!



Too many cute anime photos buzzes your argument!

I win!
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.