Moderators: Tunnelcat, Jeff250
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2 ... ew-survey/A surprisingly large fraction of students believe it is acceptable to act—including resorting to violence—to shut down expression they consider offensive.
TigerRaptorFX wrote:SWJ's are fun to mess with. Just mention Bruce Gender is a man wearing a dress and all hell breaks loose.
Yeah, being a total ★■◆● tends to do that.TigerRaptorFX wrote:SWJ's are fun to mess with. Just mention Bruce Gender is a man wearing a dress and all hell breaks loose.
Snowflake Warriors of Justice.callmeslick wrote:what the hell is an SWJ again?
Call me what you like. I don't care what people identity as or how they want to live. But when someone attacks me because I don't want to along with it. The ★■◆● side me will come out.Top Gun wrote:Yeah, being a total ★■◆● tends to do that.TigerRaptorFX wrote:SWJ's are fun to mess with. Just mention Bruce Gender is a man wearing a dress and all hell breaks loose.
TigerRaptorFX wrote:Snowflake Warriors of Justice.callmeslick wrote:what the hell is an SWJ again?
If someone wants to transition from MTF or FTM, more power to them. I don't have a problem with that. However I refuse to go along with this transtrender B.S or the different made up genders. Then expect the rest of society to identify that person gender as a two-spirit. Better yet someone that can change their gender on a whim, gender fluid I think it is called. The line needs to be drawn somewhere.Top Gun wrote:If you choose to deny reality at the expense of people who have had to go through some incredibly trying ★■◆●, then yes, you are an [Deleted - Personal Shot]. Read a goddamn science textbook.
Glad I can help, I think.Ferno wrote:TigerRaptorFX wrote:Snowflake Warriors of Justice.callmeslick wrote:what the hell is an SWJ again?
That's actually pretty good. I think I'm going to use that now, seeing as what was first a typo is now a happy accident.
TigerRaptorFX wrote:If someone wants to transition from MTF or FTM, more power to them. I don't have a problem with that. However I refuse to go along with this transtrender B.S or the different made up genders. Then expect the rest of society to identify that person gender as a two-spirit. Better yet someone that can change their gender on a whim, gender fluid I think it is called. The line needs to be drawn somewhere.Top Gun wrote:If you choose to deny reality at the expense of people who have had to go through some incredibly trying ★■◆●, then yes, you are an ★■◆●. Read a goddamn science textbook.
No, you don't have to "go along" with it. That's your free speech right. However, that doesn't mean you have to demean others just because you don't go along with it or like doing it. When you demean others, don't be surprised when they respond to you in a negative or hostile way, even to the point of wanting to curtail your "free speech" as a reaction. That's what's missing in today's discourse, just plain being polite towards one another. When someone demeans others, they're nothing but a bully.TigerRaptorFX wrote:Call me what you like. I don't care what people identity as or how they want to live. But when someone attacks me because I don't want to along with it. The ★■◆● side me will come out.Top Gun wrote:Yeah, being a total ★■◆● tends to do that.TigerRaptorFX wrote:SWJ's are fun to mess with. Just mention Bruce Gender is a man wearing a dress and all hell breaks loose.
Social justice warrior.callmeslick wrote:what the hell is an SWJ again?
TigerRaptorFX wrote:So while I may disagree on somethings, the last thing I would want to do is deny someone their freedom of choice.
Sorry about that Tiger. Apologies all around. Next time, tell TopGun, and callmeslick as well, that it's just a joke, because neither one of them got it either. They both tend to get very passionate in their sparring and I hate to have to moderate them (or myself for that matter) when that happens.TigerRaptorFX wrote:It was meant as a joke that went the wrong way. Here is the thing I don’t hate trans or anyone who is different. Like I said before people can live as they see fit. I understand this world has people that see world differently as I know it. So while I may disagree on somethings, the last thing I would want to do is deny someone their freedom of choice.
Y'know the thing I really love about that term is that it is essentially meaningless due to the breadth of its misuse. Put ten people who have used it unironically in the same room, ask them what it means, and you will get ten different answers. It's the ultimate multi-purpose strawman. You continue to tilt at windmills, and it just makes you look foolish.Ferno wrote:Topgun: are you still seriously on that ★■◆●? Let me make it simple. No one's denying anyone's humanity here. Okay? What we're raking over the coals is people who go out of their way to get offended and pull a victim complex. So if you want to try and guilt any of us over any perceived slights, if you want to start any oppression olympics, if you want to act all offended... then you can take your SJW ways and ★■◆● right off.
Because some people don't quite understand its meaning have a bearing on others...Y'know the thing I really love about that term is that it is essentially meaningless due to the breadth of its misuse
I'm sure I could get the same answers from people who use a different slang term -- ask them what 'chode' or 'fairy' means and you get different answers from different people.Put ten people who have used it unironically in the same room, ask them what it means, and you will get ten different answers.
Only to you.You continue to tilt at windmills, and it just makes you look foolish.
One guy agrees with you? Two? So what? In the grand scheme of things, that means nothing.Top Gun wrote:Oh, I think one or two people around here would back me on this one; in fact one of them already has.
I said something, you reacted with vitriol. That tells me that if I say it again, you'll react the same way again. It's that whole 'past behaviour is a good indicator of future behaviour' thing. Remember: I've been around long enough to know how you react to what people say. I know you better than you think.And you give yourself far too much credit: you're not nearly a skilled enough puppetmaster to make me dance
Well, you'd be wrong about that. If you took the time to actually understand my position, instead of reacting, pigeonholing and misrepresenting it, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.At this point I'm just left thinking that you're the type who would have claimed that hippies were going to destroy the world had you been born a few decades earlier.
SJW bashing is the latest trend, and I'm not convinced it's a good trend. Yes, these people are often hysterical. Yes, sometimes they get their facts wrong. However, I think they remind us that a lot of work still needs to be done on matters of equality. Now that it's popular to say "OMG SJWs LOL" there is a real problem with people misunderstanding what a SJW is and how it's different from someone wanting social justice (it can be hard to tell the difference in practice), and this is making the term "SJW" a catch-all for anyone the MRM & Red-Pill crowd disagree with (for example). That's a bit problematic. It's just as easy to call someone a SJW as it is to call someone a Nazi or Fascist, but SJWs, while having a poor execution, usually stand for good ideas unlike Nazis and Fascists.Ferno wrote:But I'll still be talking about SJW's would rather punch, oppress, silence and guilt people for disagreeing with them than actually talk to them... and neither you, vision, or whoever it is will stop me.
You should name them Trump and Kim.Tunnelcat wrote:Tell that to the male guppies currently residing in my fish tank who constantly keep trying to screw each other.
vision wrote:SJW bashing is the latest trend, and I'm not convinced it's a good trend. Yes, these people are often hysterical. Yes, sometimes they get their facts wrong. However, I think they remind us that a lot of work still needs to be done on matters of equality. Now that it's popular to say "OMG SJWs LOL" there is a real problem with people misunderstanding what a SJW is and how it's different from someone wanting social justice (it can be hard to tell the difference in practice), and this is making the term "SJW" a catch-all for anyone the MRM & Red-Pill crowd disagree with (for example). That's a bit problematic. It's just as easy to call someone a SJW as it is to call someone a Nazi or Fascist, but SJWs, while having a poor execution, usually stand for good ideas unlike Nazis and Fascists.Ferno wrote:But I'll still be talking about SJW's would rather punch, oppress, silence and guilt people for disagreeing with them than actually talk to them... and neither you, vision, or whoever it is will stop me.
We both agree that SJWs have been pushing the limits of acceptability, but at the same time I wonder what else can be done? Staying the course doesn't seem to be working. Especially regarding feminism, I know a few old bigots who think feminism was a trend decades ago and has no relevance today. (One of these guys voted for Trump over Clinton because, and I quote, "The job of president is for a man, not a woman." Granted the guy is in his mid-70s, but he's also a voter.)Ferno wrote:Exactly what their predecessors -- actual feminists, second wave feminists -- were against.
return to the 1958 tax code and you'd have a start on that. How everything shakes out in a post-labor economy, where dignity and self-worth(unifiers of family units, to some extent)cannot be rooted in employment. That upheaval in culture is going to be profoundly ugly, I suspect.Spidey wrote:How about a concerted effort to rebuild the two parent family and start forcing parents to stop letting their children drop out of school?
Nothing says social justice like a proper family and a good education…
I agree with that idea, but for it to work we need people to put in effort outside of their in-group. "It takes a village to raise a child" is a nice sentiment, but what about that kid from the other village? As Slick mentioned, economy plays a part in keeping families together. How do we help people who need it the most without the more fortunate crying about government overreach?Spidey wrote:How about a concerted effort to rebuild the two parent family and start forcing parents to stop letting their children drop out of school? Nothing says social justice like a proper family and a good education…
