Social Justice Warriors Thread

[SuburbanFarmer]

The goddamn plate lip thing is Central American, and they had Asian tribe in there as well.

One guy has a goddamn rhino in a paddock. Why, is he gonna milk it??

It was a fucking cartoon. Turned it off after 30 mins.

Racist

I also have syphilis, don’t forget. Stop oppressing me.

[Ph64]

10 mins into Black Panther. Wtf am I watching??

I watched that last week.

That’s Marvel jumping the shark

It was fucking awful but, of course, you can’t say that out loud.

It's about "diversity". 300 black people and a white guy, "diverse". 300 white people and one black guy, racist non-diverse white privileged offense.

[BjornP]

Not neccesarily SJW, but related to that way of thinking:

https://theleading.co/stop-telling-peop ... 38ceee53ad

Essentially:

Everyone thinks they are right; no one actively seeks to be wrong. Besides, if we feel and experience something to be true, how can someone else tell us we’re wrong for feeling and thinking a certain way?

[Speaker to Animals]

INFJ

Note the F for feeling instead of T for thinking.

I think the primary thrust of her argument is that addressing conflict in an objective sense fails because both sides think they are right, so simply telling the other side they are wrong, even when you believe them objectively wrong, cannot convince them.

She should have left out the "there is no such thing as right and wrong" part because it is ridiculous to INTP types like most of us, but not entirely unexpected if she scores extremely high in feeling rather than thinking.

Likewise, those of us with jacked thinking scores tend to go with the "fuck your feelings" tactic which, though satisfying, does not convince a feeler of anything other than your being an asshole (which arguably could be our goal).

INFJ feminists I suspect can be reasoned with if you approach it understanding this difference. Unlike the batshit ones, I bet I could sit with her for a while in a fruitful conversation.

Do not write this one off. You can have a good exchange of ideas with her, most likely.

[Speaker to Animals]

We actually could use a female like that to debate as long as we stay committed to not being assholes to one another.

Her INFJ to our over-abundant INTP would be a nice balance.

[Martin Hash]

Not neccesarily SJW, but related to that way of thinking:

https://theleading.co/stop-telling-peop ... 38ceee53ad

Essentially:

Everyone thinks they are right; no one actively seeks to be wrong. Besides, if we feel and experience something to be true, how can someone else tell us we’re wrong for feeling and thinking a certain way?

This attitude only works in a liberty environment, where you are responsible for your own actions. In a Collectivist, group over individual, situation, this concept means you can’t say “no” because that implies someone is wrong.

[Ph64]

Not neccesarily SJW, but related to that way of thinking:

https://theleading.co/stop-telling-peop ... 38ceee53ad

Essentially:

Everyone thinks they are right; no one actively seeks to be wrong. Besides, if we feel and experience something to be true, how can someone else tell us we’re wrong for feeling and thinking a certain way?

This attitude only works in a liberty environment, where you are responsible for your own actions. In a Collectivist, group over individual, situation, this concept means you can’t say “no” because that implies someone is wrong.

I think the daytime sky is green... A nice dark hunter green.

It's what I feel, and it's offensive to me that many people think the sky is blue, it's microaggressive violence against me when they say that. We need laws to prevent me from me from being violated by your belief that doesn't agree with mine. In fact I think we should redefine the electromagnetic spectrum so the color of the sky is now defined as green, yellow is blue, red is purple, and purple is pink, and it's no longer the 'ultra-violet' light it's now 'ultra-fuschia'. After all it's all subjective. Anyone who fails to use the correct 'newthink' terms will be castigated publically on social media, lose their job, and the PayPal followed by all other payment agencies will no longer do business with you.

...

...now, yes, arguably the definition of colors by their wavelength is based on our human perception and what we decided to name those colors long ago. However, one might say that there's a lot of things that just historically were decided (that the wavelengths we see as 'blue' are what we call blue, and not 'fimflazzle'), but our science and in many ways society relies on a group consensus of these things. If I say I'm looking for a blue car and all you show me is pink ones I'm gonna tell you to shove it no matter how much you try to tell me pink is really blue, or the next guy tells me yellow is blue. If I tell you I need a 90-degree elbow joint, I don't care if you 'think' 35-degrees is right, it's not what I wanted. There is a certain consensus in terms that is required for a functional society. And you can complain all you want and throw a hissy fit that we need to redefine 'blue' because it's 'toxically masculine', I'm gonna tell you you're nuts and to fuck off.

[BjornP]

INFJ

Note the F for feeling instead of T for thinking.

I think the primary thrust of her argument is that addressing conflict in an objective sense fails because both sides think they are right, so simply telling the other side they are wrong, even when you believe them objectively wrong, cannot convince them.

She should have left out the "there is no such thing as right and wrong" part because it is ridiculous to INTP types like most of us, but not entirely unexpected if she scores extremely high in feeling rather than thinking.

Likewise, those of us with jacked thinking scores tend to go with the "fuck your feelings" tactic which, though satisfying, does not convince a feeler of anything other than your being an asshole (which arguably could be our goal).

INFJ feminists I suspect can be reasoned with if you approach it understanding this difference. Unlike the batshit ones, I bet I could sit with her for a while in a fruitful conversation.

Do not write this one off. You can have a good exchange of ideas with her, most likely.

I'm sure one could have good exchanges on emotional questions, or ethical questions, or some social issues. And if we're talking about political issues one can have a subjective opinion to, like "is abortion wrong?", or "should there be a minimum wage", or "MUHroads or AHR roads?" ( ), then that, too is something that can't be said to be objectively wrong or right. They may be inconsistent, or they may be based on incorrect facts, but the beliefs themselves are not neccesarily wrong or right - in absolute, objective terms. If that had been all she'd said, I'd have no problem with it.

That she scores high on Feeling in a Meyers-Briggs test explains part of why she thinks that way sure, but I have debated several people like her - and my replies to them have always been to paraphrase, "your feelings about the facts just don't matter to the facts". Do I understand that people don't like hearing that? Yup. Do I enjoy being told that I'm wrong, myself? Nope. But she is implying that it's super-awesome "rude" to tell someone they're wrong - because everything is just interpretation.

And it's not - it's a favor. The very idea that telling someone "You're wrong", is some sort of insult, something that is rude, is what's so... I don't know, spoiled? Or reminds me of that whole helicopter parenting/participation awards for everyone mentality. Treating everyone's beliefs about anything as if those beliefs are all equally valid, because otherwise they'll be... "hurt"? I understand her motivation, that she wants to protect people, want them to feel safe, respected etc... but even from that perspective, ask yourself this: "What favor are you really doing to a woman, who you might even respect alot for how she is as a person outside her stance on science, by not challenging her on her beliefs in things that you know for a fact are untrue"?

[Speaker to Animals]

INFJ

Note the F for feeling instead of T for thinking.

I think the primary thrust of her argument is that addressing conflict in an objective sense fails because both sides think they are right, so simply telling the other side they are wrong, even when you believe them objectively wrong, cannot convince them.

She should have left out the "there is no such thing as right and wrong" part because it is ridiculous to INTP types like most of us, but not entirely unexpected if she scores extremely high in feeling rather than thinking.

Likewise, those of us with jacked thinking scores tend to go with the "fuck your feelings" tactic which, though satisfying, does not convince a feeler of anything other than your being an asshole (which arguably could be our goal).

INFJ feminists I suspect can be reasoned with if you approach it understanding this difference. Unlike the batshit ones, I bet I could sit with her for a while in a fruitful conversation.

Do not write this one off. You can have a good exchange of ideas with her, most likely.

I'm sure one could have good exchanges on emotional questions, or ethical questions, or some social issues. And if we're talking about political issues one can have a subjective opinion to, like "is abortion wrong?", or "should there be a minimum wage", or "MUHroads or AHR roads?" ( ), then that, too is something that can't be said to be objectively wrong or right. They may be inconsistent, or they may be based on incorrect facts, but the beliefs themselves are not neccesarily wrong or right - in absolute, objective terms. If that had been all she'd said, I'd have no problem with it.

That she scores high on Feeling in a Meyers-Briggs test explains part of why she thinks that way sure, but I have debated several people like her - and my replies to them have always been to paraphrase, "your feelings about the facts just don't matter to the facts". Do I understand that people don't like hearing that? Yup. Do I enjoy being told that I'm wrong, myself? Nope. But she is implying that it's super-awesome "rude" to tell someone they're wrong - because everything is just interpretation.

And it's not - it's a favor. The very idea that telling someone "You're wrong", is some sort of insult, something that is rude, is what's so... I don't know, spoiled? Or reminds me of that whole helicopter parenting/participation awards for everyone mentality. Treating everyone's beliefs about anything as if those beliefs are all equally valid, because otherwise they'll be... "hurt"? I understand her motivation, that she wants to protect people, want them to feel safe, respected etc... but even from that perspective, ask yourself this: "What favor are you really doing to a woman, who you might even respect alot for how she is as a person outside her stance on science, by not challenging her on her beliefs in things that you know for a fact are untrue"?

I understand where you are coming from. I share your bias towards objective truth over interpersonal concerns. But consider the following:

A chick like this is, in her own way, just as objective as you are. To her, the objective truth is in understanding you and why you came to the beliefs and values you espouse. People like you and me fixate on the the world of ideas, external to us, as the objective truth. People like her fixate on the people themselves. To her, your ideas are more like software output running on a computer (your brain), and she would like to know why the software generated this output. You are like a self-aware software program that is trying to print out what you deem to be the correct output given some external inputs. Do you see the disconnect and why both of you have valid ways of approaching the world in the ways that you do?

She is not really very different from us, but she is oriented towards an objective reality slightly different from us. In some ways, these INFJ chicks are more meta than us.

I agree her argument in the beginning (point one especially) was invalid and didn't help what she was trying to convey. She was trying to explain how she doesn't want to do the things you said you are tired of dealing with (and so am I) but, rather, wishes to understand why the person came to those beliefs in the first place.

Also, one can hardly blame recent college graduates for thinking "there is no right and wrong" when that is all that universities inculcate, unless they substitute right and wrong with oppressor and oppressed.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

I am pretty sure people can think their way into wrong beliefs just as well as they can feel their way into them.

Just sayin.