[ SECRET POST #3461 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3461 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 54 secrets from Secret Submission Post #495.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: SA

[(Anonymous)]

So, to sum up what you're saying here, it seems like there are two real arguments you're making here.

1) From an intellectual point of view, SJW ideas put too much emphasis on power in society and language rather than individual liberty; this leads away from equality in society on principle.

2) In practice, SJW ideas set up a hierarchy of victimhood that is fundamentally reproduces the problem with the original structural inequality.

That makes sense, and the one question I have is that I'm not entirely sure that you have the same thing in mind that SJWs do when they talk about structural inequality. They usually refer to something pretty broad-reaching that touches language but also has to do with things like systemic poverty, violence, discrimination, etc. Do you view that kind of broad-reaching structural inequality as existing in your case? Or do you reject that kind of broad understanding of structural inequality? Or some other position

Re: SA

[(Anonymous)]

You understand me perfectly.

They usually refer to something pretty broad-reaching that touches language but also has to do with things like systemic poverty, violence, discrimination, etc. Do you view that kind of broad-reaching structural inequality as existing in your case?

Oh, absolutely. I'm a liberal, after all. I would love to see them actually address these real-life issues. They seem more interested in policing language, though.

Re: SA

[(Anonymous)]

You are not a liberal.

Re: SA

[(Anonymous)]

And you are an illiberal asshole.

Re: SA

[(Anonymous)]

No, that's YOU. Stop projecting and go back to /pol/.