So, how many exactly are racist then?

The movement started in university's and has started to influence some government legislation. Im not sure if your wanting a list of names or something?

Heres them protesting that their colored only safe space wasnt big enough and blocking white students from going to class.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R6dzZdceT4

Heres a really obnoxious one boldly sticking up for the "continent" of Hawaiia by harassing a lyft driver and for his bobble head. Dont worry justice was swift and the guy lost his job.

https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comm...use_they_dont/

Heres one who is a lecturer in charge of teaching our next generation od adults denying that there is such a thing as biological sex.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kasiov0ytEc Starts at 11 minutes.

The examples of their madness is endless.

OK. When abouts? Do we know which universities? Has there been any manifestos regarding this movement to come out of these universities?

What legislation? How do they exert this influence?

What are these examples of? I'm not going to watch any ytoobz, but these are vids of some peeps protesting, someone freaking out, and a school lecture, correct? What do they have in common? Why would you assume these peeps really agree on anything? In what way do they constitute an organized movement?

If they want to get their delusional fetish on in the privacy of their own house, fine, but actual females do not have to go along with their delusions. Males like Justin get pissed when they are told they are not welcome in our space...

You are not in charge of those brains you guess about, nor are you charge of where they go and what they do. You don't have any actual control over any of these people or those people , as many as you can name or imagine.

Honestly.
You don't really have any of it. Huff and puff about folks all you want, that's it for real.

At most university's now there is a big trend of social studies courses such as women's studies courses that churn out these SJW ideologues. I dont know what university it started at and I dont care.

The first piece of legislation that springs to mind is the C16 bill in Canada that is looking to police the words that people use. The Bills most vocal opponent is Jordan Peterson a guy who has studied Marxism, Facism and Authoritarian regimes for decades.

There is also a women's and equality commission in the UK who tried to remove a mens right activist from their panel after he was voted onto it.


These are examples of the ideologues that the SJW movement has produced.
Another example that comes to mind are the students in London who demanded that they stopped studying certain philosophers because they are white.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...ng-plato-kant/

Or the South African students who wanted to denounce "white colonian" science in favor of "black" science
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9SiRNibD14

You can bury your head in the sand and pretend this movement doesn't have power or doesnt exist but all evidence points to the contrary , its still in its infancy but these people will run our countries in 20 years.

Wow, it turns out to be my hometown university, and brief employer, SDSU (go Aztecs !!!1!). According to this website, there are 46 undergrad & 19 grad WS majors in the 33778 student population (0.19%). There's 20 Phd granting WS unis in what, ~2500 US colleges.

Dude, I've been over to SDSU. I've met some of these WS majors. Some are scorching hot. All are going to struggle to find jobs. None of them are part of some farcical 'SJW movement'. All the WS programs in the US proly graduate ~350 a year. How many of those grads could even be in this alleged 'SJW movement'... 33%, 3%, 3 total?

This is just a total joke.

Yeah, you hear about things that piss you off. I get that.

That's not the same as imagining a movement to piss you off. Movements have goals. The Temperance movement's main goal was to curtail alcohol usage. They lobbied legislation, packed boards, disputed the science of the day. They also were an organized force. They had there own press, Temperance Leagues, mass meetings, ran candidates.

None of that exists with this so-called 'SJW Movement'. Those random peeps you mentioned above don't share any common goal, and they aren't in any way organized. It's just a random list of shiz that pisses you off.

Brilliant post, co-signed.

The philospohy one seems like it might be reasonable:

"The student union at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) insists that when studying philosophy “the majority of philosophers on our courses” should be from Africa and Asia."

The Telegraph's restatement of their position doesn't seem very accurate.

I appreciate you putting some real world views to the SJW label, btw. There's no doubt that some students on campuses make some dumb demands. But aren't you guys exaggerating the problem? I get called an SJW all the time and I have no idea what views I hold that qualified me for the label. And it seems like there is a spate of articles that try to couch so called SJWs concerns in the most unreasonable terms possible (e. g. the Telegraph article you linked to.)

You must follow some ugly ass models. Did the model with the weight problem march?

And here comes Wil, being misogynistic right on time again. Because he pulls nothing but 5'10 blondes that are dimes. Just absolutely zero self awareness.

Slug, so your "proof" of a movement is about .1% of certain student populations saying something dumb that goes nowhere. Uhhh...OK?

There's nothing misogynistic about calling someone ugly. Or fat. The plus-sized model, who I think is attractive, is in fact a fat person. I have no issue with her being a model, but not calling her for what she is - fat, is absurd.

And, I don't like blondes.

Universities have become alarming in the way they are willing to change their standards in the name of this PC crap. Here's another example of something just downright bizarre (which won the competition, btw), in some different perspectives :

http://www.salon.com/2014/05/13/%E2%..._championship/

http://www.theamericanconservative.c...-debate-title/

https://www.theatlantic.com/educatio...vilege/360746/

They are all discussing the same event. I will use the last example to quote from, as I'm unsure how appropriate the 2nd link is as it is from a conservative viewpoint and I believe Salon is pretty liberal. I'm unsure about theatlantic but it seems somewhat neutral in this instance.

On March 24, 2014 at the Cross Examination Debate Association (CEDA) Championships at Indiana University, two Towson University students, Ameena Ruffin and Korey Johnson, became the first African-American women to win a national college debate tournament, for which the resolution asked whether the U.S. president’s war powers should be restricted. Rather than address the resolution straight on, Ruffin and Johnson, along with other teams of African-Americans, attacked its premise. The more pressing issue, they argued, is how the U.S. government is at war with poor black communities.

In the final round, Ruffin and Johnson squared off against Rashid Campbell and George Lee from the University of Oklahoma, two highly accomplished African-American debaters with distinctive dreadlocks and dashikis. Over four hours, the two teams engaged in a heated discussion of concepts like “***** authenticity” and performed hip-hop and spoken-word poetry in the traditional timed format. At one point during Lee’s rebuttal, the clock ran out but he refused to yield the floor. “**** the time!” he yelled. His partner Campbell, who won the top speaker award at the National Debate Tournament two weeks later, had been unfairly targeted by the police at the debate venue just days before, and cited this experience as evidence for his case against the government’s treatment of poor African-Americans.

Tournament participants from all backgrounds say they have found some of these debate strategies offensive. Even so, the new style has received mainstream acceptance, sympathy, and awards.


What happened here, essentially, is the black students used their own life perspectives to talk about instead of actually discussing the topic that was up for debate. Essentially, they scared all the white people into declaring them the winner because they didn't know how to address it. This is the silent power of PC culture. To vote against the black team would risk being labelled as a racist, and in academia, that is essentially career suicide.

There is a bigger problem here. No one really cares about who won a debate about whatever topic at whatever school. I know I don't, and I think the vast majority of Americans don't.

Critics of the new approach allege that students don’t necessarily have to develop high-level research skills or marshal evidence from published scholarship. They also might not need to have the intellectual acuity required for arguing both sides of a resolution. These skills—together with a non-confrontational presentation style—are considered crucial for success in fields like law and business.

The problem here is that the universities are doing these students a disservice. When these students have to face a boardroom or a court of law, them talking about rap and hiphop isn't going to help them. They are not being prepared to solve challenges in a much harsher working world, where their own experiences and feelings don't mean jack ****.

This is the type of thing people are really anxious about. The downstream consequences of white people being shamed into silence and pandering is actually doing the exact opposite of what they aim to achieve. Once again, the people who will wind up suffering the most are those black students they are tripping over themselves to "help".

thats what these ppl do. they find instances of someone acting crazy. usually these are young ppl in volatile and emotional situatons. they attribute such behavior to everyone in the sjw movement (nevermind that the culprit may not at all be part of the sjw movement.)

facts, evidence, full data, logic, reasoning, honesty are their enemies.

one way in which they operate is by taking the extreme behavior and opinions of a single person under duress and extrapolating it so that such outrageousness is attributed to everyone that they dont agree with.

I was using womens study as an example not saying all SJWs do that course exclusively. Or that everyone who did that course was an SJW. Also I dont know how it works in the US but in the UK for example you can get a degree in something tourism and business for example and then have the option of doing a module in something completely different womens studies for example. So you can still be subject to that indoctination even if you dont major in that subject.

Right but not all movements share the same characteristics , they can be similar in some ways and different in others. And they all do share a common goal. Just because they dont have a board doesn't make them not a movement. And they do mass organize , have their own media (just look at MTV news or Buzzfeed) and have their own candidates running for office.

They want to make the world a better and more fair place and for that I commend them.

But they are trying to achieve those means by using authoritarian tactics and identity politics. Not judging people by their actions but by the color of their skin or their sexual orientation. You say its a tiny minority of people which is fair enough but I just posted a video of hundreds of protesters stopping white people go to class because they wanted a people of color safe space only. I dont understand how that is acceptable to some people.

I mean if this was a group of a dozen nutters I would the concede the point but its hundreds of people.

Another example of the SJW movement gone crazy is accosting this professor for not banning certain Halloween costumes on campus and then going crazy at him because he cant remember all of their names.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5y4iuI1dOpU

This movement is sweeping university's and has started to spill into governments.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...ir_mouths.html

This women asserts that it is her job to shut white people up when they say they are not prejudiced.

Just because they dont have a board or a manifesto doesn't mean that these SJW ideologues arent sweeping their country or that these instances are completely random. There is a constant theme of identity politics , being professionally offended and trying to silence people tell them how to think and what to say.

Yea I agree with you about the telegraph article I read that wrong thought it said that was the union not actually university that was SOAS.

I agree some people overuse the term and just brand anyone who is on the left as an SJW. Iv been called an SJW for supporting Bernie Sanders for example.

I dont think I am exaggerating the problem though. I am all for political correctness but it has gone too far now. To give you an extreme example the Rotherham child abuse ring which involved the abuse of 1400 hundred children went on for 16 years.

The report in to the scandal said they the police and council knew about the scale of the problem but they either didn't believe the scale of the problem or were to nervous to act appropriately as they didn't want to be seen to be be racist and target the Asian community.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-28939089

For me PC culture has gone to far when the police are scared to stop grooming gangs for fear of being called racist.

Suppose defining social justice as a movement involves a lot of work, including dragging stone tablets into the 'courtroom'.

That crash course series installment on justice is a place to start.

I've addressed this a bit in http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/21...onald-1651547/

The women's march was part of a world wide protest against trumps aims and values, to demonstrate that we don't accept them and will keep resisting. From a domestic politics point of view it's a direct attempt to influence the direction our government takes with trump.

Part of it is definitely personal. Politics has been very hard for me to to stomach recently and these events have, to my mind, celebrated all the good things about British values and decency. It helps as all keep active politically and that can make a big difference.

What, exactly, are you fighting against? That Trump is a misogynist vagina-grabber? That he sexually assaults women?

Or maybe he was 60 year old guy who bragged about banging women to another minor celebrity who was younger and better looking than him on a hot mic?

Trump is a man who trusts his daughter and Kellyanne Conway (and Steve Bannon) more than any other person on this planet. Is he really a person who despises women?

No rational human being can believe that.

It's the policies and decisions he will carry out that really matter. On such things as:

The right to choose
LGBTQ rights
Equality
Islamophobia
Climate Change
Global Armageddon (catch all for dangerous and objectionable foreign policy)

Nothing much had happened when the women's march took place because he was just being sworn in, so it was a fairly general statement of concern. The Muslim travel ban protest was far more focused.

I truly don't know what any of that means.

Not sure how to answer that. How about this:

1) We think trump is making (and/or is likely to make) very bad/objectionable political decisions and we oppose that.

2) We want our government to oppose these decisions and distance themselves from the regime making them.

And it WILL NOT stop him from telling you that you're wrong.

O snap a pluralization. Am I crazy to think this means something in addition to 'hay guiz i won a bet this 1 time!'