Does not surprise me in the slightest that this type of behaviour would be welcome here.

All they do is:

1. Label people as social justice warriors
2. Shout down people they believe are social justice warriors
3. Ask for bans to be lifted on those that dislike social justice warriors

Those are not the only moves in the anti-SJW trick box.

One of their favourite moves is to create a strawman, this kind of thing may be to suggest that social justice warriors are self hating, either in the sense that they hate their whiteness or the maleness, or they hate their society to the extent that they would welcome terrorist acts in order to destroy the borders of their country (not a particularly smart move this because terrorism motivates stronger borders rather than weaker borders but these people aren't smart).

They are as illiberal and as totalitarian as any Nazi or communist. I blame them entirely for the current state of things. By being so incredibly partisan and so incredibly stupid that even when their side is ****ing Donald Trump it manages to be the social justice warriors fault rather than the people that voted for Donald Trump.

Sorry no youtubes

There's probably truth to this, dereds, and I agree SJW is essentially derogatory. I'm not a big fan of the term either, however, there should be a way of describing the loud, mostly online and mostly crazy contingency of the social justice left who go around calling everyone who disagrees with their politics some variation of bigot, and tries to shame people like Ellen for harmless funny jokes. I don't like social justice warrior, because it too easily confuses good, sane advocates with loons, but it is what it is.

Anyway, there should be no restriction, imo, of posters using this term to describe groups of people in the abstract. If that's the term they use to describe such crazies, they ought to be able to criticise them in the same way you can criticize people you consider white supremacists. But it should be considered a personal insult if directed at a poster specifically, and that poster doesn't actually identify as a SJW.

I've gone around the houses trying to do without the label since it was co-opted by the far right, and people of the SJW mindset simply cannot entertain nuances like two different types of people using the same word.

They see the word as being inextricably tainted, and use it as proof that you must also be "of the far right".

But there is no other catch-all term that captures exactly what we are talking about quite like it.

And this is half the problem -- we are seeing the same thing as the far-right types because ON THAT SCORE they are actually correct.

This is why it's dangerous. Trump and co are dangerous enough when all they have is lies, but arming them with stuff that is actually true puts them over the top.

This is why I am against blind partisanship, you are literally giving the other side ammunition to fire at you with.

To be fair, these OSJers (Opponents of Social Justice) have been around long before they coined the term 'SJW' during GamerGate, or PizzaGate, or whatev. Anyone who's ever destroyed a conversation IRL by lamenting the "PC Police run amok", or trolled an online forum about "yelling & screaming" or "shouted down"... those are all OSJers.

It's flat out loltastical that they claim the folks they call SJWers forced D.Trump to be elected. To a man (they are all male), OSJers swear they're on the side of those they call SJWers. It's also loltastcial that they believe anyone sane would believe they are on the same side... but they seem to have fooled themselves.

See.. shiz like this is why D.Trump was forced to win. You are the real r-word-er !!!1!

Here are some female anti-SJWs:

shoe0nhead: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0a...r7D1M7KCFYzrLQ

Blair White: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDm...tOrEqgsL4-3C8Q

Diane: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVR...BevsDGOeE1DL3A

These are just three prominent ones, there are many others.

lolyoutubes

theres going to be large variation with large groups obviously, but i already have posted a couple professors discussing actual data showing that SJW's are more agreeable (one of the main personality traits) while also being lower testosterone beta males

i think theres a lot of bitterness. it makes sense. if you have weak social skills, youre going to be bitter in general and at society for creating social norms. its kind of a revenge of the nerds syndrome imo

also arguing about sjw's leading to a trump victory is interesting but what isn't even disputable is that SJW's and the sjw media (msm) made the trump victory a huge surprise. to pretend like viscious mobs trying to ruin your life and career didn't silence people was absurd. the vote is definitely proof that people were silently objecting to the sjw nonsense. weather it caused people to switch candidates is another arguement

Is the 'rather' a straw man? It a very standard idea that how we behave makes a difference to how other's behave e.g. some would say that trump recent ban helps recruit for isis. That's not absolving the people who do join isis or saying they don't bear more responsibility for what they do. It's not even saying that they are any less responsible for what they do. It's saying that trump is responsible for making it worse.

SJWs can't be compared to trump in values or intention but they still might be wrong in their approach. Or they might be right.

So... your only quibble is that there actually are a few female OSJers.

No comment on how OSJers are basically getting high on their own supply.

Like when they imagine most of their fellow OSJers are actually on the same side of those they now call SJWers? How they imagine they know how to do shiz better than the people who actually do shiz? How they loltastically claim they're just innocently offering good advice to help the SJWer team? How they loltastically imagine any sane person would buy into their whole silly conspiracy theory.

I am only in the business of pointing out that SJW-ism is a pernicious and cancerous form of thinking that is ruining sensible discourse.

I am not in the business of defending anyone else who has attacked SJW-ism. I speak for myself only.

Cool I guess. However, you got the wrong thread.

The business of this thread is pointing out that OSJ-ism is a pernicious and cancerous conspiracy theory that has been ruining sensible discourse since c1990. Sorry about that.

I'll leave you to it then.

If there are SJWS and anti-SJWs who both want the same SJ but think the other is doing it wrong then isn't the important thing to find a way to cooperate rather than fighting among themselves?

All they need to do is recognise the proSJ in the others and add the humility to recognise that any of them might be wrong about the best approach.

more agreeable to what?

and I would really like to see this evidence of lower test.

and also, how the hell do you measure that someone is a beta male?

Bottom line, OSJers are peddling a manufactured and pernicious conspiracy theory. It goes like this: "The run amok PC police are forcing bad thing X to happen... blah, blah... they're the real X-word-ers".

They're not interested in having a meta-conversation regarding tactics. Nobody who derails a conversation with complaints about the "sandy vagina PC police", "SJWers", or whatev, ever are.

They can't actually anyways. Like all conspiracy theories it don't make a lick-o-sense. Like: The illuminati, who own the cosmos, are forced to blow up their own buildings. The SJWers, who control the MSM, are forced to sabotage their own causes. That's why D.Trump got elected. They're the real r-word-ers.

Shame trolley, you need to wake up.

Not everyone who is against SJWism is a right wing nutjob conspiracy theorist.

I find it hard to believe the group you portray (assuming they exist) believe in the same social cause justice as those we are talking about as SJWs. There are definitely people who share the common cause of SJ but dispute method. They seem to disagree on the point I made to dereds using trump in the example because they all agree about what a **** he is even if they don't agree on this point.

That's not what I said. I said OSJ-ism (aka SJW-ism) is itself a manufactured and pernicious conspiracy theory. Being anti-SJWers is like being anti-illuminati. Everyone who says they are pro-SJWers, or pro-illuminati, are laughing -and- pointing.

Shouldn't that give you pause?

Then they have the choice to make their arguments for social justice by their preferred methods and leave others to their methods, like I guess if they believe their methods are somehow thwarted by SJWs then they have cause to complain but this isn't obvious when they never actually make a claim for social justice or demonstrate their own methods. When you spend more time arguing with the people whose goals you share than you do with those you oppose you're doing it wrong. This seems like OSJers are doing it wrong.

63m people voted for Trump, I'm supposed to accept that a significant enough number of them share the goals of SJWs but deplore the actions of these SJWs enough to vote for Trump?

Bollocks.

Of course not. They're all a buncha concern trolls y/o are high on their own supply.

That's not what's going on with the OSJers. Conversations never get derailed by the "Sandy Vagina" type of comment, then segue into a nuanced productive meta-conversation regarding the relative merits of this or that tactic. Those conversations are just usually derailed. OSJers will refuse flat out to ever have that meta-conversation, often going to absurd lengths to avoid it.

Again, it's because they can't go there. It's a conspiracy theory, and doesn't make a lick-o-sense. The D.Trump example isn't relevant here. We know who D.Trump is, who exactly the SJW/illuminati are will always remain a mystery. We know how Executive Orders work, how this 'force' the SJW/illuminati use to do their dastardly deeds will always be a matter of faith. And such, on and on, around we go.

Its all true of both sides though. Within the definition we seem to be using, the antiSJWs are just more willing to acknowledge that the SJWs share the same goals. That's not unexpected given the respective methodologies.

You are just entirely wrong about that. So there's that. 100% flat out wrong.

I like SIJ better than OSJ.

Social Injustice Warriors

Completely wrong-headed post.

I've honestly never thought that the term was negative. But then, some people say that "liberal" is negative as well. So what do i know.