fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2180 ]

[ SECRET POST #2180 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2180 ⌋

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

#10 is a moving .gif!

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

[Fraiser]

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

[Homestuck]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Kili/The Hobbit]

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

[ ----- SPOILERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]

09. [SPOILERS for the Walking Dead]

__________________________________________________

10. [SPOILERS for How I Met Your Mother]

__________________________________________________

11. [SPOILERS for Rise of the Guardians]

__________________________________________________

[ ----- TRIGGERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]

12. [WARNING for abuse]

__________________________________________________

13. [WARNING for rape, noncon]

[American Horror Story Asylum]

__________________________________________________

14. [WARNING for rape]

[MLP: FiM]

__________________________________________________

15. [WARNING for rape]

[Hallelujah by Leonard Cohen]

__________________________________________________

16. [WARNING for suicide]

[Doctor Who]

__________________________________________________

17. [WARNING for rape]

__________________________________________________

18. [WARNING for IRL murder/shootings]

__________________________________________________

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #311.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I can related to this. I can understand some people needing to complain about the extreme SJWs, who can actually be pretty intimidating and OTT (although I can understand their need to rant about things!). However, I think a lot of the anti-SJW backlash risks turning it into people complaining about social justice and PC issues in general, even when they're perfectly legitimate issues, something which I'm starting to see more and more of from the anti-SJW crowd. I'm not saying everyone who complains about SJWs are using it as an excuse, but it certainly leaves an open door for those kinds of people.

Personally I see it as being entirely on the heads of the rabid SJers, that they're turning people off a good cause by being nasty about it. Yadda yadda a good cause should be supported regardless of if its supporters are moron jerks, but if all you ever see re: some cause you aren't familiar with is said moron jerks, then you're gonna want to avoid that thing in order to avoid the moron jerks. That's on THEIR heads. This problem was directly caused by Sjers acting like jackass self-righteous pricks, and no matter how many times someone flounces about how that shouldn't matter re: the cause itself, the fact of the matter is that IT IS NOT THAT HARD NOT TO BE A JACKASS SELF-RIGHTEOUS PRICK ABOUT THINGS and if you act like one, people WILL dislike you and that dislike will likely extend to the thing that you are being a jackass self-righteous prick about.

THIS.

Yes, this.

I was like that for a bit. But I think I can make the choice to still care about issues even with idiots ranting and taking advantage of them. EVERY group has its bad apples. Something like this was bound to happen, and we can either contribute to the gaping chasm between the two sides by polarizing everything into "anti-SJ idiots" and "SJWs" or we can decide to take a middle ground and actively work on issues that are important to us, and engage in discussion about them with other reasonable people.

As offputting as some blowhards can be, I kind of have to question how much a person cares about a social issue if the self-righteous pricks are enough to turn them against it.

Avoiding those places/people or even avoiding talking about those issues, maybe. But actively fighting against those causes as a whole, the way the rabid anti-SJers do? Yeah, I don't think they were ever really on the anti-oppression side.

I think when people feel genuinely threatened, and intimidated by these Social Justice people then yes, I can see why some folks turn away from certain causes.

If someone wants to fight for you, and all you do is stomp on their face and spit in their eyes, then I don't think anyone can ask them to really stick around.

Rights are won by being better thain the hate, not by turning into the hate.

Just to clarify, I don't advocate some one who goes full on raciest/homophobic/Transphobic fuckwit because of SJWs (because that's just wrong in any context), but I do understand why so many lash out, and their otherwise genuine support for a cause to the sidelines.

Biting on a helping hand, isn't good for anyone.

Not my point. My point is that people who ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE ISSUE AT HAND will be turned away from or even against it if all their exposure comes through jerks, and that this phenomenon, and the backlash against extremism that you see in EVERY movement ever, is directly caused by those nutjob extremists.

I think there are a few problems with this reasoning.

One, there's a difference between supporting a cause and getting involved in it. I've known women who were put off from getting involved in feminist organizations because they had some bad experiences with groups they'd tried joining. This is understandable. However, these women still supported many of the things feminists fight for, such as pay equality and reproductive freedom. Deciding you don't believe in women's rights or gay rights or racial equality because you had a bad experience with some people is no one's fault but your own. If you only believe in social justice when you personally like the individuals you're supporting, then I question your conviction. And frankly, I resent the idea that I should have to actively suck up to people in order to have things like protection from discrimination.

Related to that first point, this reasoning isn't limited to stuff like you're describing. It can also be used to police how people act even when they're not hurting anyone. I've seen LGBT people criticize other LGBT people who are "too" butch or effeminate, or who are into drag, because this is "threatening" to homophobes. The implication is that we all have a responsibility to make ourselves palatable to our oppressors if we expect to have equality. How is that reasonable?

Finally, people who are bigoted and have a strong bias against a group of people will often use anything they can to support that bias. There can be a lot of confirmation bias, and a lot of people are literally never pleased. It doesn't matter how "nice" people are, there's always a reason, in their mind, to discredit the cause. So you really can't win.

None of this is an excuse to act like SJWs do. Nor do I argue with the idea that SJWs do more harm than good when it comes to educating people and rallying support. But putting all the responsibility on them takes responsibility away from other people to be reasonable and have empathy.

I understand what you're saying, and I agree that SJWs make it harder, not easier, for people to understand the issues at hand, relate to them, and get involved. No argument there. And I would say that SJWs can make it harder for people to understand subtle issues and arguments. But I maintain that anyone who would turn their back on social justice entirely because of the actions of a few people they encounter probably has the wrong idea to begin with. You should support things like liberty and rights because you believe it's ethical.

It's probably just me, but I'm feeling a weird sense of deja vu reading this after reading brony debacle #582 above. Some bronies are rapists, so the onus is on all other bronies to show how they're different, and it's the bad bronies' fault. Some SJWs are assholes, so the onus is on all other social justice activists to show how they're different, and it's the bad SJWs' fault.

Just me? Oh, well.

^THIS.

I agree they are very similar and both are bad reasoning. (not related but I was really pissed when I saw the stuff beings aid upthread, and as much as I wanted to say something I didn't feel like getting a whole bunch of anons telling me i'm an awful sack of shit. :/ It's sad when just speaking up to say 'hey I don't agree with what this guy did but I know for a fact not all people who use the word brony aren't like this' is enough to have someone scream "FUCK YOU BURN IN HELL" or something at you. I was actually relieved when someone very close to me who was an mlp fan said they weren't to fond of the term brony anymore because I was always so worried about him getting that kind of treatment.)

Anyway relating to the topic here I personally draw a mental distinction between SJ warriors and SJ allies. Allies are the good ones who want to raise awareness (at least that's how I group them). Warriors are the irrational ones. I think they're missing the whole point. SJ was meant to fight bigotry and intolerance itself. Not the people we think are responsible for it. Because when we do that we're not stopping it, we're only spreading it. and more intolerance is something we certainly don't need in the world.

I think you might be confusing the problem with the result.

There are a lot of self-proclaimed Social Justice Warriors who a) will not engage with anyone who's ignorant (e.g. "it's not my job to educate"), thereby crippling their social power; b) will not entertain any ideas that differ from their own (e.g. "just as gender is a construct, so is biological sex"), thereby crippling their ideological power; and c) are more concerned with making themselves feel good than with effecting any actual change (e.g. "I shouldn't have to do anything, because your suggestion that I should do something is indicative of institutional racism/sexism/homophobia/transphobia"), thereby crippling their transformative power.

This is the reality: Social Justice Warriors are just as poisonous as anti-social justice people. They hinder progress because it is not their primary interest. They are not the "lesser of two evils." You need to seek out people who are interested in social justice for its own sake rather than people who are interested in it only for its potential to self-aggrandize.

And you've articulated my issues with certain portions of the Internet SJ movement perfectly.

That being said, SJ in and of itself is not a bad thing, and as you pointed out, it's good to seek out people who are interested in SJ for its own sake and not just as a way to feel superior to others/prop themselves up. I promise they exist, and they do good work.

This!

They don't want to change the world, they just want to 'win'.

Then there's when they attack the people who actively, truly work for real social justice, because they're 'not doing it right'.

And, of course, when they hold offensive, oppressive ideas up as progressive and yell about them with equal fervour to truly progressive ones. ('Transwomen aren't women', 'interracial relationships are racist', etc.)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #2180 ]

N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F

Re: N!F