• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe

The social justice warrior movement and its implications

Those particular words are scrutinized because they just are attempts at cheating the system. If we're talking about a guy named Jamal, no harm, no foul. You know what you're doing, plead ignorance if you want, but you know exactly what you're doing.
 
Those particular words are scrutinized because they just are attempts at cheating the system. If we're talking about a guy named Jamal, no harm, no foul. You know what you're doing, plead ignorance if you want, but you know exactly what you're doing.
Wow I am not surprised but the point flew directly over your head. What is meant by the things we say is open to interpretation and as the governing entity gets more and more aggressive in regulating for reasons such as but not limited to sensitivity and political correctness, freedom of thought and speech surely will suffer. I can make virtually anything derogatory. My aim has been to make 'euro' an offensive term so I could possibly get it banned and then start this thread but I lost resolve. Euro is hard to make offensive mainly bc the bulk of people that can be considered European are Caucasian in descent and political correctness classical theory does not afford this particular group any favor. I can call someone black in a thousand different ways and do it all derogatorily, but the question is why is merely referencing that someone is black offensive in your opinion?
i guess you would know as you are completely retarded.

alasdair

Is this even allowed outside of TL? :\
 
Is this even allowed outside of TL? :\

He thinks he's hilarious with his comments but all he ever does is try to wind posters up. I've yet to see anything of value be posted by him. Amazing really, given his BL title. Someone was clearly being retarded when they gave him the title of Director of Communications..
 
^ if you have a problem with it, it's you who has the problem ss. can't have your cake and eat it...
Those particular words are scrutinized because they just are attempts at cheating the system. If we're talking about a guy named Jamal, no harm, no foul. You know what you're doing, plead ignorance if you want, but you know exactly what you're doing.
of course. it's not about specific words. it's about intent, context and behavior.

alasdair
 
Why can't people hold several ideas at the same time? Maybe leftist "PC" ideas and movements can be useful but the movement among the young is getting a little out of hand as well.

But what really clinches it for me is how much power do these people have outside of a college/university setting or corners of the internet? How much of society is leftist and holds to leftist ideals? Not bloody much.
 
Give me a break. It's a word with a defined meaning. If you have a problem with it, then it is you who has the problem.. which is the crux of all of this really; people perceiving an issue where there isn't one. It wasn't an issue until the PC brigade made it an issue, which again is the whole point of this SJW nonsense.. people interpreting things in a way that they believe they were insulted or someone else is insulted or whatever it is.. believe being the key word.

Retarded is the perfect example of where a word has been reclassified to mean something else. This is PC nonsense, of which the SJW is merely the next evolution. So I disagree with your point Mysterie. It shows quite perfectly the breakdown of society; when a defined word is deemed to mean something else because someone decided their feels were hurt. It is the whole beginnings of the PC phenomina.. where language itself comes under attack, so that someone with an agenda can write a particular social narrative. Which brings is back to the left vs right thing.. you simply can't legislate "niceness", and attempting to do so is fucking stupid. Which is what the left seems to be caught up in trying to do.

I find "mentally challenged" or "exceptional" to be more offensive than retarded because they are clear out lies. You're bullshitting yourself, the child/person, and everyone else by using obfuscating language.. and bullshit inevitably leads to more bullshit.. and then to SJW who have just lost the plot entirely.

There is no need to pussyfoot around the issue.. if a child is retarded, they're retarded. It's not a big deal. If the child is retarded then they probably won't understand any of this anyway! It's the parents or others who are perceiving an issue where there is none.

Again South Park covers this nicely with the character Jimmy, publisher of the school newspaper, using a headline with the word retarded in it.. despite being retarded himself:

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/alexa-moutevelis-coombs/2015/11/19/south-park-brilliantly-mocks-pc-culture

Who's legislating anything? You're just going to be socially ostracized if you use such language. That's freedom of speech too. Language is constantly evolving. Tough shit if you don't like it. No it shouldn't go as far as let's ban words like "niggardly" or medical uses of the word "retarded" but if you pepper your everyday speech with "retarded" you are going to be called out on it.
 
How many of us that we're saying Jamal did you think we're meaning to say the n bomb? That word is abhorrent in any context IMO. Forget all that nonsense my point is made in the sense that you guys interpret one way further attempting to shut down free thought in exchanges. And per my op nobody is blaming you one bit as I said it is understandable for blue light to have a left lean.
This topic simply interests me and the cultural constructs that have gotten us to this place..

70 years ago free speech may of been at its pinnacle though at the sacrifice of many groups of people's not in the majority. Now things have flip flopped to favor those in the minority at the sacrifice to some aspects of free speech. Not taking a stance whether it is good or bad at the end of the day it is pretty interesting IMO
 
It disturbs me that there are people who are more worried about whether nor not they can say the word "retard" without getting dirty looks, rather than realizing every major media outlet is owned by 3-4 conglomerates. What's really important here?
 
This is actually an interesting topic but here's really little to gain in playing out personal disputes across multiple forums...

I am decidedly left wing, though not as much as I was when I was younger. I agree that PCness has gone way to far, to the extent that truth ends up becoming secondary. That's a problem. However, I understand idealism and I can appreciate people wanting to create a different world. But, I don't think taking offense is the way to do that, or using offensiveness to dismiss the content of an opposing argument. I would rather people not be racist or prejudiced but I would defend their rights to be. I don't believe ideas and words should be blacklisted, I think people should be allowed to hang themselves with the scarce logic and rationality of their opinions, if they choose.

In Australia, we have a troubling rise in right wing 'patriot' groups who seek to 'clean up' Australia. Some of these groups advocate a moratorium on immigration from Islamic countries. We had a race riot ten years ago where white people "protested" and essentially started harrassing and violently attacking dark skinned and middle-eastern looking people. Now there is a group that is wishing to hold a ten-year memorial, to celebrate the events of that day. This group is disguisng their intentions by claiming their memorial is about freedom of speech/thought. The manipulation of language occurrs across the political spectrum; it is not confined to the left by any means. Hence, we have right-wing and anti-immigration groups who call themselves patriots such as the United Patriots Front. In Australia, we have the Party for Freedom, who seek a moratorium on immigration from islamic countries, but claim to be upholding freedom. A particularly narrow form of freedom. And we have terms like SJW, which is a thought-stopping catchphrase which, for some, instantly degrades and nullifies another.

My point is that all people manipulate language for their own ends. It is an out-of-control aspect of politics IMO, not something restricted to the left.
 
You pick a particular demographic within the right-wing to demonize the entire right side of the spectrum.

That's not what I'm doing at all. I have right wing friends and I'm well aware of the spectrum. What I'm saying is that the most hatred and discrimination I've experienced in my life has been from people on the right.

I've also experienced discrimination from leftist social justice people too, for various reasons (being a man, etc). But nothing compares to the abuse I've suffered from right wingers.

There's intolerance all over the place but as a political force the right wing are less tolerant. They view change and social modification with great suspicion, even when all the evidence shows it's a good thing. They attack the evidence itself as being from leftist institutions and therefore not credible.

If you want to stay in your bubble then just own up to that. Don't make it about how the world is in some kind of leftist conspiracy.

Nonsense. This is like the environmentalists claiming they care about the environment and insinuating the rest of the population doesn't give a shit. It's annoyingly untrue. And as the case with both movements they only give a shit about you if you fit into one of their nice boxes or criteria.. if you happen to disagree (this point has been made already in the thread) then you're out and ostracized.

I have not found this to be true with the people who are doing the actual social justice work out in the real world, on the ground level. Most of the exclusivity comes from ideologues who aren't real activists. I've had some really amazing interactions with academic activists who are involved in high level stuff.

The problem with social justice people is that they can't make distinctions between systems phenomena and individual level interactions; thus white guys get oppressed in discussions for being white, even though they too have individual stories.

Nonetheless, right wingers, as a group from a systems point of view, are far more discriminatory and vitriolic. I can't really fathom why you'd think social conservatives are en par with social liberals. Saying that all lefties are just faking it is disingenuous. It couldn't be, I dunno, because people want to refine the way humans respect one another? The left gave us secular humanism, the right gave us religious dogma and "traditionalism" in such a narrow field that it excluded so much human variation. Sorry, but your arguments don't add up, historically.

We have much greater access to knowledge and wisdom from the human ethnosphere now that people don't have to hide their true nature as much in order to fit into a traditional model.

Which is exactly what has happened in the 20th century. Bunch of whining people who thought they knew and understood better than the accumulated human wisdom of countless generations, overthrowing this established wisdom in favor of untried methods of social contract and such. And look where we are now.. can't call a retarded child a retarded child, so we lie and call them exceptional children to make ourselves feel less guilty for no reason what so ever. Total idiocy.

Hey, I'm not saying toss out tradition. Through our other conversations elsewhere on the boards you know that I value traditional knowledge in various ways. But that doesn't give you a right to be an asshole to someone, or run your mouth and then tell them to just deal with it -- not when there's so much information available these days to allay even the most basic ignorance. And in your own words, just because it's old or traditional, doesn't automatically make it better or more correct. Most people were illiterate until the past 300 years. Humans also get stuck in tradition when they are too ignorant to question anything... and then it plays out over hundreds of years and right wingers get to call it correct just because of longevity. I don't agree with that. Nothing is sacrosanct to the gaze of critical thought.

Not to mention, it's not even accurate to say that human tradition is unbroken. There are plenty of examples in human history where people broke out of the mold. I think you need to do more studying into history, instead of accepting the current world at face value. Humanity works in cycles, not straight lines.

Fact is, ignorance is always a choice. Personally, I find your examples hyperbolic, and too selective. Have you ever spent significant time with disabled people? I'm talking about people disabled from birth. I have news from you, they get called retarded regularly, and it's harmful to their psyches. So while you're crying about freedom of speech, they have an actual life story that has been impacted by marginalization.

It's possible to point out how someone is different without being a total idiot about it. What I notice about right wingers is that they associate becoming more sensitive to others as becoming more dumbed down or something... like the whole spiel about how men are becoming weaker just because we don't get into fist fights and do stereotypically manly things as much anymore.

I don't see what's so bad about promoting a more respectful atmosphere. Your freedoms are not really being impinged upon.
 
Last edited:
It disturbs me that there are people who are more worried about whether nor not they can say the word "retard" without getting dirty looks, rather than realizing every major media outlet is owned by 3-4 conglomerates. What's really important here?

Yup. I am so sick of even partaking in this debate because it's been setup by the media to keep people fighting over trivial semantics. It allows every day sheep to feel like they're participating in higher level discourse when really they've just put blinders on.

Censorship of media has already happened.
 
I don't see what's so bad about promoting a more respectful atmosphere. Your freedoms are not really being impinged upon.

This is like the other post where whoever it was said the PC movement was asking people to be nice. When intimidation and coercion are used as tactics then it's not really about asking or promoting but about enforcing. Kind of ironic that both of you choose to use sanitized language to represent the PC movement..
 
This is like the other post where whoever it was said the PC movement was asking people to be nice. When intimidation and coercion are used as tactics then it's not really about asking or promoting but about enforcing. Kind of ironic that both of you choose to use sanitized language to represent the PC movement..

I'm not using coercive language or reframing anything. That's what you're doing. I'm just talking like I would normally talk, and it's genuinely how I view the situation. Zero agenda here.

I do notice though that you tend to see agendas everywhere, even in idle conversation.
 
Top