DescentBB

Hey, if I find what you say offensive- I should be able to physically assault you to shut you up...

...at least that's what all too many college students NOW BELIEVE.

A surprisingly large fraction of students believe it is acceptable to act—including resorting to violence—to shut down expression they consider offensive.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2 ... ew-survey/

Don't worry, you're safe. I actually believe in the FIRST AMENDMENT- (yanno, that little thing in our constitution that guarantees freedom of expression?)

of all people. Chris Matthews agrees with you, and said the same thing, without spittle forming at the corners of his mouth......

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... n-1-graph/

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... inorities/

Those aren't leftists. Those are SJW's.

SWJ's are fun to mess with. Just mention Bruce Gender is a man wearing a dress and all hell breaks loose.

what the hell is an SWJ again?

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, pretty much. Just about any joke will set them off on their oppression olympics.

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.

More on-topic, no, just pieces of Nazi ★■◆●.

callmeslick wrote:what the hell is an SWJ again?

Snowflake Warriors of Justice.

Top Gun wrote:

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.

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.

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.

TigerRaptorFX wrote:

callmeslick wrote:what the hell is an SWJ again?

Snowflake Warriors of Justice.

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.

----------

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.

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.

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.

Ferno wrote:

TigerRaptorFX wrote:

callmeslick wrote:what the hell is an SWJ again?

Snowflake Warriors of Justice.

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.

Glad I can help, I think.

btw, hi tiger!

hit me up on gmail, facebook, SMS or whatever.

TigerRaptorFX wrote:

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.

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.

you have no real clue about gender genetics and expression, huh?

TigerRaptorFX wrote:

Top Gun wrote:

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.

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.

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.

callmeslick wrote:what the hell is an SWJ again?

Social justice warrior.

Okay whoa hold up TC.

I've known TigerraptorFX for years and that's the last thing he's do. He made a joke.

Don't crap on his head.

I guess I didn't get the joke, although I wasn't really ragging on him. I was just trying to continue the conversation in an effort to see if he was trying to make a point or just riling up the crowd for the hell of it.

Well, you could have just asked.

Just for the sake of clarity (and this is for you aswell, slick) is that when he said 'transtrender', he's talking about people who wear the badge 'trans' or 'gender<insert ending here>' to look popular in the hivemind rather than actually being what they call themselves.

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.

TigerRaptorFX wrote:So while I may disagree on somethings, the last thing I would want to do is deny someone their freedom of choice.

And that seems to be the missing part for a lot of people. I refer to those who consider a simple disagreement on the same level as dehumanizing another -- and i'm sure you know a few of those.

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.

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.

You'll pardon me if I don't find such things particularly funny, especially when delivered with no context whatsoever.

Elsewhere:

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.

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.

Y'know the thing I really love about that term is that it is essentially meaningless due to the breadth of its misuse

Because some people don't quite understand its meaning have a bearing on others...

Put ten people who have used it unironically in the same room, ask them what it means, and you will get ten different answers.

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.

You continue to tilt at windmills, and it just makes you look foolish.

Only to you.

You were fine with what I said before I started talking about SJW's, and now that it's rubbed you the wrong way (perhaps you share similar behaviours and don't like being called on it), suddenly I'm 'foolish'. That's the problem with groupthink - is when someone you think shares the same opinion suddenly breaks from the mould or doesn't fit in to what you think they should be, they're now <insert name here>. But I guess that's par for the course - criticize or mock a subset or a certain behaviour and suddenly the person doing the criticizing/mocking is misrepresented, packaged, and dismissed as a <name>. So, I guess what you can take away from this is this: Go ahead and call me the worst thing you can possibly imagine, I've been called way worse.

It's fine. I'll say my piece, you'll find something to get offended over, you'll call me all sorts of names and it just won't make a dent. This isn't my first rodeo man. I'll play my fiddle, and you'll do your dance.

Oh, I think one or two people around here would back me on this one; in fact one of them already has. And you give yourself far too much credit: you're not nearly a skilled enough puppetmaster to make me dance. 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.

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.

One guy agrees with you? Two? So what? In the grand scheme of things, that means nothing.

And you give yourself far too much credit: you're not nearly a skilled enough puppetmaster to make me dance

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.

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.

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.

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.

Cue a topgun tantrum in three... two... one...

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.

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.

Most of the time when someone pushes back against being called a Nazi they are usually a while male who starts off his reasoning with "I'm not a racist, but..." before going into some shitty eplanation about how he's right and you're wrong. But SJWs are often from historically mistreated groups. Some of them really have had terrible experiences that led them to their extreme views. As such, I'm more likely to look at their behavior with compassion and understanding.

You guys are speaking Chinese >_>

God only created 2 genders. Whatever you're born as that's what you are. Get over it.

Tell that to the male guppies currently residing in my fish tank who constantly keep trying to screw each other.

Tunnelcat wrote:Tell that to the male guppies currently residing in my fish tank who constantly keep trying to screw each other.

You should name them Trump and Kim.

Yeah, I should. One of them is even colored orange. It's perfect.

vision wrote:

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.

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.

Wanted to get to this earlier, but I had a project due and that needed every spare minute I had.

No one's arguing that more social work is needed to be done (IE more acceptance of LGBTQ), but the way SJW's are doing is horribly wrong. Instead of making society more egalitarian, they're pushing for protected classes -- which leads to segregation. The whole movement is counter to the beliefs where instead of eliminating segregation and protected classes... they're pushing to reinforce them -- for their team instead. And their weapon of choice has been guilt and shame.

Exactly what their predecessors -- actual feminists, second wave feminists -- were against.

the SJW crap with Ferno is getting every bit as tedious as NS with his anti-muslim crap. What the ★■◆● are SJW's and why are you suddenly wetting yourself over a made-up description of your fellow man?

Ferno wrote:Exactly what their predecessors -- actual feminists, second wave feminists -- were against.

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.)

Maybe with everyone's help we can find examples of things that both raise awareness and have meaningful impact in today's cultural climate, then politely ask SJWs to do that instead? I can't think of any off the top of my head.

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…

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…

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?

Thanks for making my point, because a SJW will never tell someone what they need to hear because their problems are always caused by something/someone else.

Here is the perfect example…

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/ ... rent-homes

Note how the cuts in welfare are being blamed for the rising poverty, and not the root cause.

Sure remove the bandage and watch the festering wound bleed, but don’t talk about the disease.