Your lack of a sense of humor is noted.

Where was the joke?

Wat?

Yeah but technically social justice warrior is not a SJW because one is an acronym and the other are words.

We know your stereotypes.

WTF dude. I consider both of these incidents, which are identical in the same exact 3-characters in a row is bad luck kinda way, except for one little thingee...

The loco engine's number was actually changed. So corporate exec miking maybe seven figures had to make the call... and some poor working folk with a paintbrush and stencil had to do some actual painting work. In other words the "power of 666" actually effected the real world.

This SJWer crap doesn't even get close to actually effecting the real world. Instead it's just gibberish spewed strictly online which has no real world meaning or connections at all. It's all just vacuous trolling. No seven figure exec cares about this shiz. No poor working folk gets ordered to do shiz like even so much as paint something. It's all just childish crap.

A pizzagater is trying to accuse others of believing in dumb conspiracies.

Maxine Waters just called Alan Dershowitz racist for stating the obvious fact that lawyers pick juries based on ethnicity.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/08/0...-people-racist

Please stop with your bull**** - SJWism is alive and well in the real world. It's just the evolution of Leftist thinking.

So... sticks & stones <<<<<< a person actually doing something IRL, even something as mundane as painting a different #### on a loco. Has all this constant hullabaloo you OSJers manufacture regarding these SJWers caused anybody to do something IRL, anything at all... ever ??

If it's "alive and well", we shouldn't have any problems with doing the basic bottom line of news reporting: who, what, when, where, how & why. But when we try that... we run in to a poop-storm of problems. Funny that. And now... just now... we find you spewing more spew in defense, so to speak, of your previous spew.

In the context of the USA, the Donkeys & Elephants collectively hold the middle ground... with say, if we were going to use the traditional left-right scale, about 10% outliers on each end. The Donkeys right now enjoy about a 55%-60% registration advantage over the Elephants. This means that the centrists, the middle 10-20% of USAians, are firmly within the grips of the Donkey party.

I got two Qs for you...

#1. When you say "leftist", what demographics are you referring to?

Are you referring to all Donkeys (including those centrists mentioned above, even those centrists that are 5-10% right of dead center. Ex: H.Clinton fanboys)? Are you referring only to Donkeys to the left of the centrists in the party (Ex: B.Sanders fanboys)? Or, instead of referring to pro-capitalists like the Donkeys, are you referring to anti-capitalists (ex: TQILA-IRGPT)?

#2. When you say "evolution", what time span are you referring to?

When exactly was this "leftist" view different? How has this "Leftist" view evolved over this indicated time span.

It's almost cute how little you understand the world. You are like a small child.

Hey dumb****, when you get out of your parent's basement, feel free to participate.

Haha Jiggy self-reduced to unironic tropism. How do you say artificial intelligence in Soviet?

I'm going to give you one example. Then you're going to need to do your own research.

Remember when they said it was Transgender Pronouns in Canada? Yeah, turns out it was about pronouns:



You would do well by not being so myopic. Just because it doesn't affect you and your sphere doesn't mean it doesn't affect others.

You are aware of "First they came for...." (Perhaps not, you didn't even get the 'tilting at windmills'...).

I could no more explain how society functions to you than I could quantum mechanics to a 5-year-old.

You wouldn't understand how society works if it were explained to you at a 5yo level. I doubt you understand how crayons work yet.

Clovis, is this you:

Well, I don't live in Canada, and our good friends the canucks have a completely different legal framework regarding this kinda shiz. Under the USA#1 1st-A this is all a non-starter. So you have given me exactly -zero- examples so far.

Also... one example does not a conspiracy theory make. We're going to need a little something way beyond mere anecdotal evidence to take any of this SJWer gibberish at all seriously.

You don't know anything about me, so I don't know why you keep making ridiculous guesses like this shiz. Suffice to say you are 100% wrong.

California SB 216:
http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2017/...r-transgenders

New York Pronoun Law:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.7b711b581882

As for being myopic, I can only work with what you're giving me.

Hey look. More people who don't understand what Canadian bill C16 is.

Shocker!

Gee, ever wonder why sites like CBN put in those ellipses instead of just putting the full text of the bill? Man, I have no idea.

Let's go to the tape!

Among other things, the bill would make it unlawful, except as specified, for any long-term care facility to take specified actions wholly or partially on the basis of a person’s actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) status, including, among others, willfully and repeatedly failing to use a resident’s preferred name or pronouns after being clearly informed of the preferred nameand pronouns and*or pronouns, ordenying admission to a long-term care facility, transferring or refusing to transfer a resident within a facility or to another facility, or discharging or evicting a resident from a facility.*

So basically, you can't discriminate against older transgendered people, including REPEATEDLY calling them by the incorrect name or gender pronoun AFTER being informed of the preference.

Could I legally refer to Mr Johnson, a black man, as "That white guy over there" if I was his boss. Or hell could I continually tell people to "go talk to my secretary, Mr. Robinson" after she has told me a number of times that she is a woman?

Should that be legal to you? Or should those affected by it have grounds for suit? Why or why not?

It looks innocuous enough only time will tell if it is as sinister as some are suggesting.

Im dubious for a few reasons. Iv seen hate speech laws misapplied in my own country as well as others but mainly because when Peterson spoke out against the bill and raised concerns about it he was accused of hate speech by proponents of the bill. They were literally affirming the reasons he was worried about it.

Again only time will tell but im suspicious of it I hope im wrong.

The lawyer for CUPE doesn't know what bill 16 is about? You should go educate her.

AFAICT both these laws (or proposed laws) only effect employees of certain businesses during the conducting of that particular business. Under the CRA of 1964 landlords can't discriminate against black folk. This includes willfully and intentionally calling them names (ex: insisting on calling them n-word-ers) while conducting their business of collecting rent. AFAICT these laws are simply extending such niceties to trans folk.

So, sure, you might not care for such laws. Different strokes for different folks. Whatever floats your boat. But let's bring it full circle back to your Wikipedia linkee, and your quote regarding the "evolving" of the "leftist" viewpoint.

• WTF does this have to do with "virtue signalling"/etc?
• How does this relate to having "stood up" to "real" r-word-ism?
• WTF is "real" r-word-ism to begin with?
• When you refer to "leftists", who are you referring to?
• When you say "evolve", what time frame are you specifying?
• How did this "leftist" view change over this time frame?
• Why would anyone even care about shiz so damn incredibly trivial?
• You aren't going to go all LTer, and start arguing against the CRA of 1964, are you?
• Is this all there is? All this sound & fury from you OSJers... and this is it? A complete and total nothing-burger?

It doesn't matter how myopic you feel I am. I doesn't matter if I'm a space alien who's hacked into your interwebs... for that matter. All this focusing on me is simply you trying to change the subject.

Actually - in a country that values Free Speech, yes, you can.
What right does the government have to impose any penalty on what anyone calls anybody?

What kind of backwards thinking authoritarian are you?

Amendment C16 adds literally 4 words to an already existing Canadian law "gender identity or expression."

That is it. It's the exact same anti-discrimination law they've had in place since 1977 except it now include people with alternate gender identity.

Literally nothing else has changed. Anybody who has outrage towards it openly admits that they are fine with these laws when it concerns men, women, people of color, disabled people, etc, but they have a BIG problem with it concerning transgendered people. There is no way to be opposed to this, still be in favor of the 1977 CRA and not be a bigoted **** towards transgendered people.

It is not a hate speech law

The second largest company in the world is being called out on their SJW bull****. You know, that little company that controls 2/3rds of all internet search traffic?

Have a good read, you should enjoy this one:
Google Manifesto