Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

Whenever there's any new meme or event remotely related to racism, sexism, transphobia, etc, there always seems to be a large number of people who are dismissive or outright hostile towards any serious discussion of these issues. If you try to suggest that there is a problem, say, with the way that trans people are often treated in American society, these people will just dismiss you with "lol fuck off back to Tumblr you SJW."

I feel like calling someone an "SJW" has become a thought-terminating cliché that people use to shut out any discussion of equal rights for minorities. Rather than accept the fact that maybe there is still racism or sexism or whatever prevalent in society, they'll just say "lol fuck off back to Tumblr sjw did I trigger you" and feel like they've won the argument.

Sometimes I feel like "SJW" on KYM has become anyone who remotely cares about equal rights for women or minorities or that "politically correct pussies" on KYM are just people calling for other people to be respectful and not dicks.

Yeah, I noticed that a lot here too. Lots of libertarians on this site I suppose. The same goes for the term "liberal" on most news sites.

I will admit, I do tend to use the phrase 'SJW' like a kind of slur. I could say it's because I do actual activist work and have a low opinion of armchair activists, but I'm not that narcissistic. Everyone will end up doing some real activism in their lifetime.

Tumblr is widely mocked because it has created several echo chambers for people to buy into their delusions or continue destructive behavior. There is a Tumblr dedicated to chronicling all the genders that people make up on it. There are hundreds of these, and people are encouraged to believe in them. Of course such people will get mocked and stereotyped.

Very few people with their heads screwed on right are going to claim that there is no racism or sexism in society. The idea that any kind of -ism can be fully terminated though, is naive. There are always going to be people who will hate others for whatever reason. You can't stop that. It sucks, but unless you plan on policing the entire planet, you can't control it.

I care about equal rights for all, and have attended meeting and protests in real life and online for them. At the same time, due to my opinions on various things, I've been labeled anti-SJW by some. I've also been called anti-christian, anti-atheist, anti-left, anti-right, anti-feminist, anti-MRA and so on in various places on the net. Personally, I wish people would just call me anti-bullshit, since it comes from all sides and all people.

But I'm only speaking for myself here. KYM has 'SJWs' and people who are 'anti-SJW', as well as everything in-between.

I strongly dislike and disapprove of the usage of terms such as "SJW" by people who are attempting to make a serious point on a particular issue (as opposed to a tongue-in-cheek one).

I do not believe that labels are always a bad thing. They are often necessary for the purposes of self-identification, for instance; it is a better idea to state "I am an X" on your "About" page than to bombard visitors with an essay about your beliefs. However, when you are debating or voicing your grievances on one particular issue, pinning the other side down to a very broad label is intellectually lazy and dishonest. Take, for instance, this top comment regarding the #Shirtstorm controversy:

It implies two things:
1) all feminists agree that the shirt was wrong.
2) all of the feminists who agree that the shirt was wrong are in perfect harmony in regards to their motives, level of agreement, and desired outcome.
Neither of the above assumptions are true. The comment is a wholly unjustified attack upon all of feminism based on nothing more than a few articles and tweets. It is, to put it quite bluntly, a circlejerk post, designed to appeal to a person's biases rather than their sense of reason.

"SJW" has it even worse than "feminist", partially owing to the fact that "feminist" has, at the very least, a somewhat concrete definition. "SJW", on the other hand, is a very nebulous term, and can be easily manipulated without the potential threat of someone correcting your definition. Liberals use the label as a pejorative against extremists. Fascists on Stormfront use it as a pejorative against anyone to the left of Goebbels.

Human beings are complex; each of us are unique in our thought processes, beliefs, and attitudes. Even a movement that seems as simple and straightforward as social justice activism ("equality for the disadvantaged") harbors a constellation of factions and competing ideologies, many of which can be understood only by those willing to dig beneath the surface.

Applying terms such as "SJW" to someone despite knowing close to nothing about them outside of a single opinion; treating all of the people with whom you disagree as some swarming "other" lacking in individuality; drawing conclusions about a vast, complex, and multi-layered ideological movement based on a handful of partisans in an ultimately minor conflict… these are all signs that a person has not dug beneath the surface, has no respect for their opposition, and is ultimately more interested in partisanship than the truth.

The solution is to identify sides on an issue-to-issue basis. For instance, a sizable chunk of self-identified conservatives support (or are neutral on) gay marriage, while a small portion of liberals oppose it. Something along the lines of "same-sex marriage opponents" ("SSM opponents" for convenience) would thus be a more accurate label for people who disagree with the legalization of gay marriage than simply "conservatives".

The entire term SJW has lost all meaning because people just use it to describe "people who disagree with me". If you don't like what they like, it's probably because you're a SJW. The entire label is taken out of context and I don't even know what it means anymore. It only makes the self-acclaimed 'anti-SJWs' look like tools because how boring must your life be if you identify yourself through your hate of a group you pretty much label anything with a different opinion than you. You're not anti-anything, you're just a narcissist.

Same thing with feminism. You see people praising feminists like Christina Hoff Sommers, only to then later make a comment about how "feminists are so dumb". I know they mean the more feminazi levels, but damn how difficult is it to not generalise.

Don't all derogatory slurs end up this way?

There's no official group or demographic that goes by the name of SJW which leaves it devoid of any ground definition.

It is, and always was a slur, right from the beginning. Created by angry people to criticize advocates of social justice that angered them

Since it was made to label something in anger, I suppose anger drives it's meaning….whatever that anger is.

It find it comparable to other slurs such as "bible basher" or "libtard"

But another thing about slurs is that they can easily blow over, or get assimilated by groups that can redefine it

Welcome to the internet, where everyone missuses words.

This.

Also, I will admit to using the term "SJW" as something to be frowned upon, but that's not always the case. Sometimes, social justice is a good thing, and the people who jump behind them are legitimatley good people. In theory, you COULD call those people SJWs, as they are "warriors" who try to debate about social justice issues verbally and otherwise.

The devil is in the details, as they say.

well, social justice is always a good thing, adding warriors is what makes SJW a term to ridicule a person with a twisted appoach on the topic, or a very extreme opinion she/he can only hold because this is the internet (the term "keyboard warrior" comes to mind). most people will have a different definition of a ridiculous opinion regarding social justice, so everyone's definition of a SJW will be different, to some, SJW are the same as "cultural marxists", or self-loathing white people, or i dunno. i also think that it's characteristic of the stereotypical SJW to focus on very small, normally insignificant issues or issues that really aren't one (white people wearing dread-locks, health insurance asking for your sex etc.). the anti-SJW side takes these examples plus some weird isolated cases of people, from a group that is being defended by SJW, being involved in a crime or some other negative happening, geared towards the media.
i also hold a lot of opinions that'd make me a SJW to some people.

i hold feminism in high regard, i think MRA and "equalism", or any other reactionary counter-movement to feminism is bullshit, becasue feminism is already about equailty, therefore if feminism reaches its goals, the (valid) issues that MRA complain about will also disappear (the pile of non-valid ones are sexist bs though). feminism is deep-seated in most marxist ideologies (though some, like stalinists, believe that feminism is useless in a capitalist society), gender roles are a product of capitalism, since only women can provide reproduction labour.
many may disagree, but this is also the reason why the mystified "patriarchy" doesn't exist, today's gender roles are purely a product of capitalist profit maximisation, there are even studies about how women contribute more to the economy if they stay at home and raise children.
the negative view on feminism again stems from questionable figures geared towards the media (she, who shouts the loudest, will get the most attention) and today's more liberal upbringing. many women and girls in first world countries these days don't suffer from the more obvious oppression, that was present at the times when feminism started, and may think that the demands of feminists are unreasonable. that opinion will most likely be reinforced by conservative media and/or parents.
a link to an article was posted in the feminism discussion thread, where female celebrities said that they aren't feminist, that they love men and that they are for equality, the misconception that feminism is about female superiority and all feminists are lesbian, men-loathing female supremacists is also a fairy tale, but apparently it's an opinion that is deep-seated in large parts of society. people just repeat what they've picked up somewhere, formation of opinion based on smattering, i experience that a lot when talking about topics like immigration, socialism, social justice, integration vs. assimilation and feminism etc.

PS: uhh, my writing is coherent and stringent as usual…

It's also been co-opted by gamergate. Before GamerGate it was a slur against anyone who was belligerent or miguided in their fight for "equality" by either attacking everyone of a "majority" race, sex, orientation, identy etc. or by being armchair activists with nothing better to do than scream racism at every opportunity. But GamerGate has now taken it to mean anyone who disagrees with them. And they don't stop with gamergate. I've seen people blame the British anti-porn laws that came from the conservative government blamed on the SJW's.

I find it rather uninteresting to discuss the label of any given person. What needs to be discussed is ideas, not individuals.

The only exception to this principle, I think, would be politicians, as the voter might require a shorthand as to what they are voting for.

So, dismissing anyone's point by labeling them is ultimately intellctually cowardly and usually an argumentum ad hominen, a logfical fallacy.

I personally dislike the term "social justice" because I find it way too nebulous to take seriously as a movement/philosophy. Instead, it seems to me like little more than an approbative, i.e. the antonym of the pejorative- a propaganda device used in an attempt convince people that whatever it's applied to is good, just, and worthy of support without having them really think about it with a degree of rationality. Of course, I can't speak for everyone who uses it, nor everyone who derides it.
Now on the "political correctness" end, this definition highlights pretty well where the hate comes from:
"the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against"
That's the key. When not taken to extremes, most people just call that "not being a dick" instead.

Terms of pride by one side are invariably used as terms of disapproval by the other. This is not unique to "social justice" movements.

On the political side of things, you have socialist, Communist, capitalist, feminist, establishment, libertarian, liberal, Progressive, Occupiers, Tea Partiers, anarchist, etc. -- all with different connotations depending on who you ask.

Religiously, you have any demonym for any religion you can think of (Jew, Christian, Muslim, etc.), along with common derivations like "born again Christian."

Let's not even get started with ethnic uses of self-identification that are then used disparagingly by others.

At the same time, that doesn't make the mere use of those terms illegitimate. Indeed, they're valuable placeholders and identifiers such that one's speech can be clear, but that all depends on the context. SJW, for example, can mean simply someone adhering to a particular brand of leftist (again, another term with dual meanings) ideology, just as Tea Partier can merely refer to someone adhering to a particular brand of right-wing ideology. People can use both terms and say, without condescension, "I disagree with the SJW/TP movements," so long as they remain aware that the labels don't end the debate and that they may be called upon to explain why.

You pretty much hit the nail on the head OP. Seems to me that the term SJW has basically become a device to lump any dissenting opinion into a seemingly evil group, just to give their so-called cause an enemy to fight against and keep things rolling.

I would mention a famous leader who used this exact tactic but then I would be initiating Godwin's Law…

Not to mention if you find one joke unfunny and offensive, the will immediately call you that "omg ur a SJW go back to tublmr or [insert a death threat], though I've seen this example more outside of KYM (to be more exact: Youtube).

It depends on how you word it. Word it like an SJW and they will call you one. present evidence and an interesting argument and you are far less likely to be labeled an SJW.

The thing is, not all opinions have to be backed up with facts. You're not forced to like a joke if you think it was not funny and you don't have to have reasonable arguments to not find it funny. It's your opinion and your taste. You have the right to express it the same way those who liked it did.

I admit I used the term more often then I should have, but the way I see it there are two different versions of Social Justice:

The first one is egalitarianism: Knowing and helping the actual oppressed people and breaking the walls between the genders/sexualities/race/trans categories though actions rather than mere words (trying to get gay marriage legalized is an example, as well as oh everything Martin Luther King Jr did [though to different extents] and the Woman's Suffrage Movement of the last century)

The second one is what I use "SJW" to refer to: narcissists and special snowflakes that had their intentions behind a mask that looks like the above group in order to oppress or harass the "privileged"

The thing is that is how I define the term, others have different different intentions and those may very be their version of "Jew" as crymeariver implied. As it is. I think that the misuse by GamerGate came about by people of both sides using it to extreme dilution (it basically became a different way of saying "Puritan" by the time the porn laws in the UK came to light) and because a known amount of detriments to their respective causes (Sarkessian for example) became associated with the term, as well as misusing Social Justice for selfish ends.

I think this needs to be brought to light: The people on this site that misuse SJWs are (mostly) trying to equality, but they must be reminded of this quote: He who fights monsters should see to it that he himself does not become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also.

tl;dr: OI amite my misuse of the term and agree that it should stop or else their opponents would be just as bad as them.

PS. I'm starting to think the "SJW" misuse is also a factor to neutrals low opinion on the movement