fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2528 ]

[ SECRET POST #2528 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2528 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 030 secrets from Secret Submission Post #361.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I'd like to see some precise definitions of the term "social justice warrior". I'm one of those people who tends to think it gets applied too broadly, so that very often anyone who "does social justice" gets slapped with that label. But for those who think it's a useful label, I'm trying to work with you.

I thought I had it figured out. The SJWs were the ones who are abusive bullies. As long as you aren't attacking other people you aren't one. I still think the term gets applied to people who don't deserve it, but I can get behind that use.

But then yesterday when people were talking about them on Tumblr, they kept talking about "SJW posts". What counts as an SJW post? It sounds like a lot of the people complaining yesterday were talking about people who just said that something was offensive and you disagreed. What's so terrible about that? Tell them why you disagree or ignore it. As long as they're not being abusive, why is that such a big problem?

It's like religious people who need to talk about their religion and convert you all the time.

They don't have to be abusive to be obnoxious and annoying people that nobody wants to be around. Both are still bad.

Both also tend to ignore all common sense and logic and cherrypick and/or warp facts to fit into their worldview. Then insist they're right and you're wrong for not agreeing.

It doesn't have to be full-on abuse.

That's a pretty good way of putting it. As somebody who regularly encounters both kind of people, they do have a lot of similarities in that way.

Did you see that post on tumblr listing the non-white movies Disney has made in the past decade and how they're all 'turn into animal movies', and they purposefully left out Lilo and Stitch? That one movie that not only had PoC leads, but they were also female, and handled a delicate sisterly relationship so well? I'd say that's a SJW post.

That annoyed me too but you seem really upset over that post in particular.

Re: SJWs

(Anonymous) - 2013-12-05 00:24 (UTC) - Expand

I remember that post. I made a comment/reblog about Lilo and Stitch, but I don't have many followers so I think it got ignored.

People who white knight on behalf of a group to seem better than everyone when they don't necessarily like or care about that group, i.e. LGBT rights or any native population.

It's not just finding something offensive, it's the way you go about letting someone know.

just my .02

People who see ill when there is none, blame individuals for stuff they didn't do, and tell those in minority/otherwise marginalized groups how they should think and what they should be offended by

Someone who is entirely lost in the subjective experience as the only one of value, tied with an absolute belief in the kyriarchy as the only frame of reference with which to view the world.

Though I’ve never seen it without a shit understanding of basic logic, and a persecution complex.

This is it exactly.

Re: SJWs

(Anonymous) - 2013-12-05 00:50 (UTC) - Expand

Re: SJWs

starphotographs - 2013-12-05 01:02 (UTC) - Expand

I think the worst SJW type posts are when people see things in black and white, all or nothing. If one person makes an ignorant comment, it makes them the worst person ever, rather than someone who just didn't know better and should be told differently. Or people who go after people for making a mistake or even when there's no evidence against them. A friend of mine got really nasty messages on Tumblr for reblogging a gifset of someone some SJWs didn't approve of. Stuff like that.

It's people who take it to an extreme. I actually agree with a lot of ideas in SJW; I think there should be a lot more diversity in things, and I want minority groups to be able to get acceptance. It's just when people take it to extremes, see things in black and white, refuse to accept alternate viewpoints and they harass people about it, THAT'S when it goes too far for me.

Right, I forgot to mention the impenetrable black and white thinking. The inability to recognize nuance and complexity is a standout feature of a dumb people though, to be fair.

16-YEAR-OLD JUDY GARLAND DID BLACKFACE ONCE.

IRREDEEMABLE HUMAN BEING.

SJWs are one of those things where you just know it when you see it. It's not that they're championing equal rights and that makes people angry (most of the people who get angry about SJWs, myself included, are part of the minorities they're supposedly championing). It's the way they go about it, and their general ignorance of the subjects they're spouting off about, and the batshit insane levels they take it to. It's the one-upmanship, where the more minority statuses you can claim, the more legitimacy you gain in the community.

These are the people who run hateblogs where they rant about "white people" (who are often really non-white or mixed people who just happen to look too white for the SJWs) wearing beads or braids in their hair. People who will launch into frothing rages at a black person from Chicago writing about their OWN EXPERIENCES in an inner-city school, just because that black person refuses to fit the SJW ideal of liberalness. These are the people who will gather their friends to send hundreds of angry messages to someone, telling them to kill themselves or tracking down their personal information because they used the term "Gypsy".

i think you pretty much hit the nail on the head with this one, unless you're not in fact an autistic black native american transgender woman with dwarfism, visible body scarring and prosthetic limbs, in which case you should burn to death in the pits of problematic lego hell

When I think of a SJW post I think of stuff like this:

http://wtfsocialjustice.tumblr.com/tagged/post

Especially the "I've had it with you White Bitches" one. Just thoughtless garbage hating on a "privileged" group for existing I guess? Telling them to fuck off for no reason. There's a new trend where you always specify "cis" even if it isn't relevant at all. I see you Tumblr. I see you scrounging for points.

(Not everything there is an example btw. Otherkins/Pedophile Apologists/Fat Activists are a kind of madness unto themselves.)

As for what a SJW is... eh. It's kind of a case by case basis to me. If you have to ask yourself "Is this person a SJW" the answer is probably no because you know them when you see them.

See, I find this kind of weirdly hard to define. The actual definition-- like, where the term came about within academic circles-- has an incredibly semantically different definition than the one we see bouncing around in fandom.

In academic circles, social justice warrior most closely approximates the definition of activist. Fucked if I know why they decided to come up with a separate term (I'm sure it's embedded in recent social inequality history), but I've seen it used a lot in sociological circles.

I'm sure most other people will come up with the fandom-centric definition.

really? i've never really heard use of the term social justice warrior outside fandom-y circles. do you have any links?

You might be an SJW if you think that language checking members of minority groups over the shibboleth of the day is the height of online activism.

I generally see SJWs as people who use social justice issues to stroke their own egos. They do this by looking for excuses to push other people down for social justice infractions so they can feel superior in comparison.

Strategies involve: making assumptions about strangers, taking things out of context, acting like researching the context is someone else's problem, refusing to admit to being wrong if context is eventually found and proves the SJW to have been mistaken, bearing grudges indefinitely, refusing to accept that people can change, refusing to accept an apology or else quietly letting the subject drop without acknowledging the apology, ignoring big problems in favor of small ones because it's easier to find people who are ignorant of or indifferent to the latter, getting extremely hung up on terminology, and picking fights on the internet instead of doing something to help people.

As others have noted, it's not an easy thing to define, I think because there's more than one type. I consider the term to apply (mainly at least) to the following:

- People who rarely talk about anything else and never shut up about it, including people who derail conversations that started out unrelated into SJ debates and then won't let the subject drop.

- People whose goal seems to be making other people feel bad about themselves and/or whatever group they belong to, as opposed to simply pointing out things they consider problematic.

- People who use language that would be considered problematic itself if it was directed at a marginalized group rather than a privileged one--i.e., bullying tactics, sneering, insults, slurs, any form of ad hominem attack really.

- I'm not sure whether people who fly off the handle and spew capslocked obscenities in response to anything they disagree with are SJW's exactly, but they're just as goddamned annoying and certainly don't inspire me to any more sympathy for their causes.

People who play Oppression Olympics. Lots of SJWs tend to do this, where they'll campaign one particular thing, but then completely degrade any other group that might have issues they want to solve too.

Also I think the main difference between a Social Activist and a SJW, is that a Social Activist has passion where as a SJW is fueled by anger. It's good to have passion for your causes. That's the only thing that's going to motivate you to get them done. But people who are fueled by anger rarely get anything done, and they're the type who are looking for someone to attack (usually singling out individuals to bully) rather than solving any problems.

Basically everything nyxelestia said about this too. I'm just too tired to type it out myself.

Social Justice Warrior (n.):

"You're either with us or against us" mentality - everything is in black and white, if someone makes a stupid ***-ist/***-phobic comment (referred to here on out as istphobe comments because doing it properly is a pain in the ass), they are clearly an unrelenting bigot, and there is no such thing as actual ignorance (as in, someone literally just did not know some term, phrase, or other content was an issue)

"It's not my job to educate you" - as I mentioned, while some people are jerks, some people are just genuinely ignorant, in that they do not know something will be offensive or why it would be so, and SJW's have a tendency of assuming that a.) everyone already is well-educated on the issue and thus is trying to be offensive on purpose, or b.) if they have somehow "made it this far" (whatever that means) then there is no point to try and educate them 'now' because clearly there is no hope for them; they insist it is on the part of the person who made the istphobic comment to somehow know when they are going to be offensive, even if it's something they had no prior knowledge of

Leaving out contrary information - the most recent example is someone making a list of all Disney movies with POC leads and leaving out Lilo and Stitch, which is not only a movie but several movies and a TV show with powerful female characters with their own agency and which highlights some RL difficulties and even subtly hints/touches upon economic exploitation of indigenous populations in Hawai'i by the tourism industry...aka, from the social justice perspective, one of the best movies you can have for kids that still sticks to conventional Disney ethics*; however, it can also be something like saying a show "only has two female main characters" when there are only five total (can't remember where this is from but it was something I saw a few years ago)

"Fuck Off, [Insert Majority Here]!" - a tendency to attack people for any kind of majority privilege, regardless of context (i.e. take a look at the "die cis scum" tag on Tumblr)

"Don't silence me!" - a tendency to assume that anyone of a majority trying to speak on a minority issue (i.e. a white person speaking on an ethnic issue, a cis person trying to speak on a trans issue, etc) automatically equals silencing members of that minority, or similar tactics

"Apologies don't fix anything!" - a refusal to accept apologies and a tendency to continue harassing people after they have apologize, or to assume any apology made is insincere/forced and that they obviously don't mean it

Exploding Over Small Details - SJWs will be the type to decry an entire piece of media over one misstep, or to equate even the smallest istphobic missteps with the most egregious examples of bigotry (i.e. calling a movie a sexist movie if a man calls a woman a bitch, even if the movie and the character otherwise treat women very well)

Assuming Insult No Matter What - they tend to ignore the reality that someone that can be severely insulting in one area or to one generation can be completely benign in another - so you might get someone who refers to a black character as a "darkie" either because it isn't pejorative where they come from, or English is not their first language and they were lead to believe this was an okay term; this ties into "not my job to educate you" and "refusal to accept apologies" in that they tend to have the attitude that everyone they speak to has exactly the same knowledge-background as them and thus if they use a word, then they know it's an insult and refuse to accept that someone may genuinely not know

There is some more to it (namely the reputations for bullying and harassment), but these are the biggest ones.

The reason why people dislike SJW's, though, is because of the way they tend to turn people off of their main cause. I'm in a rush so I'll leave a link to somewhere that I explained it a little better:

http://fandomsecrets.dreamwidth.org/806413.html?thread=654471437#cmt654471437

(And rather conveniently, an SJW downthread).

* = sorry if it's ranty, but Lilo and Stitch is my favorite Disney second only to Mulan, and a lot of that is for the reasons I've listed here, so I took it a bit more personally than I normally do when this was left out

SJWs are extremely hypocritical, when you stop and think about it. They expect everyone to be completely understanding of and sensitive to people who are different, and yet they have very little of this sensitivity and understanding themselves in that they assume everyone has had the right series of life experiences, educational opportunities, and cultural influences to achieve this level of perfection.

This is why I lose respect for and have no interest in the ravings of people who go the SJW (rather than SJA) route. They're too close-minded and hypocritical to have a leg to stand on.

Good post(s)!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #2528 ]

SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

Re: SJWs

SA

Re: SJWs - some SJW spotting tips

Re: SJWs - some SJW spotting tips