I was just saying you were wrong. Not all OSJers are white, racist, fascists. That is all.

You are wrong about every subject you speak about. Reading your posts is comedy gold.

Guys, wil REALLY doesn't care what you think about him.

I really don't. Watching you people fumble and **** up everything is amusing. You people are wrong about every single subject because you view everything in the world through feelings based idiocy.

Everything is wrong from your side. You would think that when results keep coming up showing you are incorrect you may take a second to question your decision making process, yet you people don't.

Truth is the only thing that is important. Your feelings don't mean jack ****.

In the end, this is all about empathy, isn't it? We have a similar term in German, "Gutmensch" (literally "good-human"). Like SJW or liberal (as it's used in the US), the words themselves ostensibly describe positive traits: Social justice, freedom or goodness.

In come the people you could call right-wingers, deplorables or evil. They lack empathy. They can't imagine other people aren't like them. They think everybody is a secret racist, because they're racist. They can't imagine people actually caring about refugees, because they don't care about brown people dying overseas. So to keep their world-view intact vis-a-vis people fighting for refugee rights, they make up ulterior motives for them, conspiracy theories isn't wrong either.

Like the SJW who only does it for the hypothetical pussy (which that loser'll never get haha!). The liberal who can't stand freedom of speech. The good-human who isn't actually good and just acts it for the social credit / peer pressure.

Liberals, SJW and so on are just synonyms of good people. Deplorables know this. They also know they are not like them, ergo: Liberals, SJW can't be truly good people, after all, that would make deplorables not so good people. Every "point" or thought they have starts with this premise. Their enemy needs to be evil, stupid and so on, because otherwise it would mean that they are it, themselves.

Notch defined SJWs as "Anyone who believes personal feelings are worth defending more than personal liberties." I think that is accurate.


This made me LOL. You sound exactly like the leftist counterpart of a rapture ready Christian right-winger.

Yep. Well said.

The OSJers always start out swearing they're good-siders, and always end up concluding that these mysterious SJWers are the real bad-side-doers.

Europa nailed it. That's what the whole "virtue signaling" line is about. The far right thinks liberals are just as racist as they are, but they are hiding it because reasons.

The amazing thing is I gotta figure OSJers do their thingee for what I'd call "lack of virtue signalling".

IRL the usual suspects who habitually derail conversations with laments about the "sandy vagina PC Police" aren't bitter, they're loving their turn in the spotlight, and they're playing to the crowd. Online, our OSJers get so excited, they can't even do it right (like you can't actually "shout down" peeps online), and they just love 'em a circlejerk.

Yeah, PC Police running amok, got it c1990.

Liberals are as racist as can be. They are just racist against a different group.

Jesus Christ.

Correct point, made excellently.

It's funny Europa talked about empathy because this is the EXACT thing that SJWs have lacked over recent Brexit and Trump votes.

Not for a single ****ing second did they stop to consider WHY those votes happened the way they did.

Instead they doubled down and doubled down again that it was because half the voting population are racists.

I mean it should be embarrassing to people that they lack empathy on that scale, that they could be that sneering and that condescending.

And for the record, I voted to remain in the EU, and I would have voted Hilary.

I have empathy. You people who can't reflect on what has happened have none.

Well, that fits anti-abortionists now doesn't it? A lot have the personal feeling that abortion is murder, and to defend that feeling they're more than willing to deprive woman the personal liberty to choose.

Or how about anti-nudists, they (correctly) feel having to look at my junk is odious, and to defend that feeling they're all hippy-happy to deprive me of my personal liberty to let it all hang out.

Oh wait, I got another one. What about those uppity NCA&T students back in the day. They had the personal feeling that segregated lunch counters were not cool, and they defended that feeling by disrupting the store owner's personal liberty to discriminate. If that happened today, would those uppity students be SJWers?

ZOMG youz dudez are really bad at this shiz !!!1!

You are completely missing the point.

If SJW behaviour mirrors extreme right wing anti-abortionist nutters.

If SJW behaviour puts them in the same emotion-led, faith-based park as evangelicals ...

Then it should be a problem for anyone who has a problem with those same people.

This is why there's such a huge cross over between atheists and anti-SJWs.

Richard Dawkins is against both Christian fundamentalists AND feminist fundamentalists / SJWs.

Virtually all of the major anti-SJW voices, Amazing Atheist, Thunderfoot, and so on, got their start attacking evolution deniers and religious nuts.

Isn't it interesting they found themselves up against SJWs and transitioning many of the same arguments against them, because they too deny science, don't use reason, argue from faith and zealously decry non-believers.

So well done, you played a blinder here, you proved their point, and mine, and others of us who see sense.

Yes, the truth's out there, I just can't see it... I've heard all that crap before.

But still, nobody can tell us who these dastardly SJWers happen to be. It remains a mystery, wrapped in intestines, and boiled. Here's the thing: this notch-head didn't describe who these SJWers are, he described what he doesn't like about them. That's what you fools keep doing every single time.

The fact is you can't describe who these SJWers are... not the dastardly things they do, or how much you despise them, or their testosterone level, or whatev... but simply who they flippin' are. The fact is you'll also go to amazing lengths to avoid discussing the above. The fact is this all is very easy to demonstrate...

Q: If the NCA&T sit in happened today, would those uppity students be SJWers?
A: ??

100,000 sjw's join the women's march in London to protest the democratically elected president of a foreign country 3000 some-odd miles away. This at a time when social care budgets have been cut and the homeless are sleeping rough in doorways in ever increasing numbers while the price of the capital's housing skyrockets.

Of course their bit of communal group hug and virtue signalling costs hundreds of thousands of pounds to police and clean up after, but obviously it's way more important that they have their pathetic five minutes of group therapy than actually do something that might make a difference to a real person.

A plague on the lot of them.

Well, SJW a broad catch-all term that should only be used in the abstract or as an insult, and I think Cotton Hill put out a pretty good definition somewhere. I'd only add that it describes people who seem to think of various -isms like racism, sexism, so on, as sins that must be shamed away in the same way the Church treats evil, which clearly doesn't work. Anyone who questions their methods are also clearly sinners who secretly sympathize with the devil and must also be shamed for their crimes of thought.

That and, if you read one of these threads and can't spot an SJW on the first page, then you are probably an SJW.

OK VG. This is much better. This is actually telling us who a subset of these SJWers happens to be. In particular, we now know that the ~100k participants in the London Women's March are SJWers (and perhaps by extension, the ~3m marchers world wide... perhaps).

Maybe it's not all a conspiracy theory after all...

But right here we run into a road block again. First, of course, how are we supposed to 'grok' what peeps "seem to think". But second, I imagine only a small minority of those marchers were "seeming to think" about some farcical sin & shame morality play. Maybe I'm wrong, but we can be certain that not all 100k of those London SJWers were "seeming to think" the exact same thing. So once again, it looks like...

OSJers (illiberal liberals, whatev) use the term SJWer (or whatev) to mean whoever they personally don't like.

Yeah, I wouldn't consider all of the protesters to be SJW's, and clearly lots of people use the term however they please. Kind of like the term bigot and all the various -ists.

But Gin n Tonic considers all of them SJWs. So do the editors of the Oxford Dictionary (not that they matter ITT). We await word of LordJvK's personal usage. A pattern is emerging however. It seems to be a personal usage. And in all non-ironic usages it's a derogatory. In other words, it seems to mean...

Whoever the OSJer personally doesn't like.

No. No it's not. Peeps calling other peeps bigots aren't shy about identifying exactly who they're calling bigots. That whole calling out by name thingee is precisely what makes the OSJers so damn bitter... remember?

OTOH, the OSJers are more than shy about identifying who exactly who they're calling SJWers. It's like pulling teeth to even get them to spit out the slightest bit of information. It took what, three days for someone to spit out that the 100k marchers in London were SJWers.

You couldn't find two things that are more different.

Correct point, excellently made.

I suspect there were plenty of non-SJWs caught up in these protests. I know some fairly normal people who went, for example.

There were plenty of SJWs there too of course.

Let's take a look at something this guy wrote (spoiler because it's offensive as hell):



Somehow--and shockingly!--your "anti-SJW" heroes end up being terrible, terrible people.

This must seem like magic to some of you. How can I know that searching these "anti-SJWs" will turn up odious, horrible beliefs?

Because the term SJW was coined by terrible people and continues to be spread and used by terrible people. If you're not a terrible person you may want to find a different term.