Social Justice Warrior- the buzzword of the Internet

[heavens-champion 1,905]

Anyone tired of people on the Internet blaming Social Justice Warriors for everything? Or using the phrase, for that matter?

Edited June 29, 2018 by heavens-champion

[Jedishy 3,549]

I think the term will fall out when they stop with their moral busybodying and ruining lives over a bad joke. Sure I can get that the overuse of the term sucks and sure some people see things everywhere. But there are concerning trends towards PC bullying and people are tired of it. 

[They call me Loyalty 1,948]

Some may use society to excuse their personal issues. It is a mean to catalyze distortions of the self. And so do all who complain about the social warrior-types.

It's humanity, always perfect.

[Singe 2,111]

The only circumstance I tend to see it fitting is when it comes to the occurring reforming of traditionally establish things to fit the progressive ideals and it drives (some or all) the original fans to rebuke it. Like comic books, DC and Marvel changed things up to appeal to progressives and then had to roll it back after fans rebuke. Looking at the content of some of these progressive works like with comic books those writers will take their interpretations strongly and personally in changing an established original character to fit a diversity quota or a new diversity quota character that rides off the coattails of established original character.

Otherwise, way over used.

Edited June 29, 2018 by Singe

[Lucartini 104]

7 hours ago, heavens-champion said:

Anyone tired of people on the Internet blaming Social Justice Warriors for everything? Or using the phrase, for that matter?

I'm tired of the social justice warriors attacking all the things I care about and love. Why would I be tired of people hating those monsters?

http://msmagazine.com/blog/2010/12/09/my-little-homophobic-racist-smarts-shaming-pony/

[Vlazamal 338]

 

The more radical "Social Justice Warriors" that used to go around pushing various political ideals in places where there shouldn't were a problem in some places and fandoms in particular, albeit a small one.  This was in around 2014-2016.

Nowadays I hardly see any after, and people just overuse the term for anything they dislike. It's become more of a scapegoat term. This graph should help show a guide to the different buzzwords.

 

[MangoFoalix 25,038]

9 hours ago, heavens-champion said:

Anyone tired of people on the Internet blaming Social Justice Warriors for everything? Or using the phrase, for that matter?

In my honest opinion, is usually is their fault for most stuff. Reason being is that with their extremist views and actions they get themselves into all kinds of trouble. This is true for any group of extremists. Maybe you could reclassify them as something else but they usually deserve what they get since they bring the negative attention upon themselves.

[Gestum 2,493]

It's a great word. Everytime someone uses it unironically I know that I should avoid that person and that I won't miss out on anything worthwhile by not speaking to him/her.

[Goat-kun 2,530]

Examples needed. I cannot discern if you are a lefty moaning about being exposed or just another normie not understanding how the internet works.

 

 

P.S: It's all very simple. Racists do exist but the word "racist" has been reduced to a buzzword by the SJWs. Still, the existence of racial collectivist alt-right people is not a secret. When someone states SJWs do not exist there is something wrong either with their information or their agenda. Wear your racial collectivist SJW badge proudly SJWs. It is your crooked cross to bear

[Celli 4,339]

It's meant to be used for shitty people who act offended at every little thing, and pretend to care about Social Justice but in reality they only want special treatment.

That being said a lot of people use it for people they don't like and the phrase has lost meaning.

[Rainbow Dash 1,472]

12 hours ago, heavens-champion said:

Anyone tired of people on the Internet blaming Social Justice Warriors for everything? Or using the phrase, for that matter?

The phrase has been around since 2011. Its not going away anytime soon. It came from twitter and to be honest, twitter makes little to no sense to me. When i used it, it was just people posting nonsese every minute. Like, your a cool cat; but i dont wanna know what your thinking every minute of the hour of every day.

getting back to the topic, SJW is a blanket term now to call someone who has a different opinion on things then you. Literally people could argue about how to make a PB&J sandwhich. One side says this way, while the other says vice versa. Pretty soon someone from side A will call someone from side B a SJW.

Its just one of those internet things that will fade away with age. I mean, 10 years ago we werent worried about the meme of the week. We were mostly worried about what cool new website will pop up.

[Jedishy 3,549]

10 minutes ago, Celli said:

It's meant to be used for shitty people who act offended at every little thing, and pretend to care about Social Justice but in reality they only want special treatment.

 

Bro Hoof for this

10 minutes ago, Celli said:

 That being said a lot of people use it for people they don't like and the phrase has lost meaning.

Has it? People use words improperly all the time ( confusing respect for civility as an example ) does that mean that the meaning is lost? Or does that mean we ought to ignore them like someone who misuses there when they mean their 

[Olly 1,011]

12 hours ago, heavens-champion said:

Anyone tired of people on the Internet blaming Social Justice Warriors for everything? Or using the phrase, for that matter?

People love buzzwords. People love bandwagons- mob mentality rules people. "SJW" is a term so overused to mean so many things by all kinds of people, it's practically meaningless. It's just a verbal way of asking for a fist bump from strangers like, "wow those SJWs right"? 

At least that's what it seems like to me, from my cynical view. It's another fad that will run it's course. 

[Dark Qiviut 22,447]

I started to use "SJW" quite a bit in 2015 after cyber terrorists within the SU fandom nearly successfully bullied a fan artist to suicide and ended it around early-2017 or so to insult conspiracy theorist Paul Joseph Watson as "PSJW." Needless to say, I really regret ever using that phrase. Now when I see "SJW," it's like what the OP says, a magical buzzword. An ad hominem. It lacks any merit and jumped the shark long ago.

Edited June 29, 2018 by Dark Qiviut

[Jeric 46,860]

I'm tired of all the buzzwords. The English language is robust enough to not have to rely on commonly used words online with such smugness that I almost suspect the person saying them feels a sense of pride -- as if they created the word or phrase. 

When language becomes the equivalent of pogs, Neopets, crocs, and slap bracelets, I tune out. SJW, fascist, Mary Sue, cringy, virtue signaling, triggered, overrated, meh ... all of them. 

I suppose I shouldn't fault people for enjoying their linguistic Tamagotchi. 

 

[Guest]

Every discussion relating to the use of that term is tedious and frankly boring at this point. I'm sick of the term being used either as a badge of identity or an insult. The world today is overrun with useless ideologies and people complaining about how unfairly oppressed they are by mean people calling them names.

Oh god the horror...

All of it is noise to me now. High-pitched bellyaching done for the sake of itself. I've got more important things to waste my time on.

Addendum: And you should as well, reader.

[honk friend 1,978]

2 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

Examples needed. I cannot discern if you are a lefty moaning about being exposed or just another normie not understanding how the internet works.

P.S: It's all very simple. Racists do exist but the word "racist" has been reduced to a buzzword by the SJWs. Still, the existence of racial collectivist alt-right people is not a secret. When someone states SJWs do not exist there is something wrong either with their information or their agenda. Wear your racial collectivist SJW badge proudly SJWs. It is your crooked cross to bear

Exposed for what? Being more sympathetic?

The reason why racism isn't a buzzword is because, you don't need to figure out what the person who said it meant, you don't need to draw from context or anything like that. A so-called "SJW" can argue a point with a term as simple as "racist" or "sexist" or "homophobe" or "transphobe" because it's obvious what is meant by those words. Shit like "SJW" and "virtue-signalling" and "triggered" and "cuck" take a bit more assumption because they're either REALLY vague or REALLY meaningless. You can put up an argument for why somebody is racist, sexist, homophobic, or transphobic, but what the fuck is meant by "virtue signalling"? Telling people not to be assholes? What about "SJW"? Anyone on the left, or anyone with socially progressive views? "Cuck" is a fun one, because apparently it's emasculating to accuse someone of having a harmless kink and shame everybody who actually DOES have it. Frankly, you're an asshole if you say someone is "triggered" because you're essentially hijacking a word that's meant for sufferers of trauma-related disorders and shaming people who actually DO get triggered.

To put it simply, if you use "SJW" or any other buzzword along those lines, you're really not worth talking to or discussing anything with.

[Misty Shadow 7,956]

2 minutes ago, Sunset Rose said:

Every discussion relating to the use of that term is tedious and frankly boring at this point. I'm sick of the term being used either as a badge of identity or an insult. The world today is overrun with useless ideologies and people complaining about how unfairly oppressed they are by mean people calling them names.

Oh god the horror...

All of it is noise to me now. High-pitched bellyaching done for the sake of itself. I've got more important things to waste my time on.

Sums up my thoughts pretty well. Is the term overused? Yes. But who cares? Is the term always deserved for the target of criticism? No. But who cares? This is a perfect example of a non-issue, let the cesspool of the internet wear out whatever buzzwords they want. If you care that much, vote by not using those words anymore. Otherwise, find actual problems to worry about. We'd all be better off realizing how materialistic and meaningless squabbling over this crap really is.

[Goat-kun 2,530]

50 minutes ago, Jeric said:

I'm tired of all the buzzwords. The English language is robust enough to not have to rely on commonly used words online with such smugness that I almost suspect the person saying them feels a sense of pride -- as if they created the word or phrase. 

When language becomes the equivalent of pogs, Neopets, crocs, and slap bracelets, I tune out. SJW, fascist, Mary Sue, cringy, virtue signaling, triggered, overrated, meh ... all of them. 

I suppose I shouldn't fault people for enjoying their linguistic Tamagotchi. 

 

 You probably don't watch Expanse, do you? Groups of people have been enjoying this group naming tradition since forever and will hopefully continue to do so far into the future

23 minutes ago, Annie said:

Exposed for what? Being more sympathetic?

The reason why racism isn't a buzzword is because, you don't need to figure out what the person who said it meant, you don't need to draw from context or anything like that. A so-called "SJW" can argue a point with a term as simple as "racist" or "sexist" or "homophobe" or "transphobe" because it's obvious what is meant by those words. Shit like "SJW" and "virtue-signalling" and "triggered" and "cuck" take a bit more assumption because they're either REALLY vague or REALLY meaningless. You can put up an argument for why somebody is racist, sexist, homophobic, or transphobic, but what the fuck is meant by "virtue signalling"? Telling people not to be assholes? What about "SJW"? Anyone on the left, or anyone with socially progressive views? "Cuck" is a fun one, because apparently it's emasculating to accuse someone of having a harmless kink and shame everybody who actually DOES have it. Frankly, you're an asshole if you say someone is "triggered" because you're essentially hijacking a word that's meant for sufferers of trauma-related disorders and shaming people who actually DO get triggered.

To put it simply, if you use "SJW" or any other buzzword along those lines, you're really not worth talking to or discussing anything with.

Sympathetic? Oh dear gods, no. Exposed as overzealous ideologues tilting at windmills. You are creating your enemies out of thin air. Nazis, KKK, and redneck gay haters are not hiding behind every corner. And while it is obvious what being racist means, it's not so obvious if the person you are calling racist is actually racist. That is pretty much the crux of our problem. The insert word-phobic thing is a bit more disingenuous and preposterous since it implies that the fear is irrational. People are allowed to dislike something or feel threatened. That is not a phobia.

 

Triggered: at first it was meant to be used by those with PTSD, but then a lot of self-diagnosing happened on the left and everyone was reliving their traumatic experiences and feeling extreme discomfort and every damn thing possible. Hence it became a meme.

 

Cuck: self-explanatory to anyone who watches corn. The internet saw it as a fitting description for a beta male who cannot satisfy their female partner, so she seeks sexual fulfillment in the company of other more dominant males. It's likely interchangeable with soyboy.

 

Virtue signaling: it means you feel compelled to constantly behave in such a way that other people of your group will think of you as a virtuous person. You take every opportunity, no matter how insignificant, to acknowledge the teachings of your ideology so that others will be impressed and perhaps give you some benefits. Religious groups and despotic regimes have a lot of it. Like how you couldn't even buy a radio without Communist Party's approval back in the good old days.

 

What can I say, words evolve. And SJW does describe your belief system quite nicely and hilariously. I will continue to use it, though I do feel sorry for the word "justice" crammed in the middle. It's an illusion. The better term would be along the lines of Social Engineering Warriors, and even that's an undeserved compliment for a whole lot of you.

[honk friend 1,978]

2 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

 Sympathetic? Oh dear gods, no. Exposed as overzealous ideologues tilting at windmills. You are creating your enemies out of thin air. Nazis, KKK, and redneck gay haters are not hiding behind every corner. And while it is obvious what being racist means, it's not so obvious if the person you are calling racist is actually racist. That is pretty much the crux of our problem. The insert word-phobic thing is a bit more disingenuous and preposterous since it implies that the fear is irrational. People are allowed to dislike something or feel threatened. That is not a phobia.

Triggered: at first it was meant to be used by those with PTSD, but then a lot of self-diagnosing happened on the left and everyone was reliving their traumatic experiences and feeling extreme discomfort and every damn thing possible. Hence it became a meme.

Cuck: self-explanatory to anyone who watches corn. The internet saw it as a fitting description for a beta male who cannot satisfy their female partner, so she seeks sexual fulfillment in the company of other more dominant males. It's likely interchangeable with soyboy.

Virtue signaling: it means you feel compelled to constantly behave in such a way that other people of your group will think of you as a virtuous person. You take every opportunity, no matter how insignificant, to acknowledge the teachings of your ideology so that others will be impressed and perhaps give you some benefits. Religious groups and despotic regimes have a lot of it. Like how you couldn't even buy a radio without Communist Party's approval back in the good old days.

What can I say, words evolve. And SJW does describe your belief system quite nicely and hilariously. I will continue to use it, though I do feel sorry for the word "justice" crammed in the middle. It's an illusion. The better term would be along the lines of Social Engineering Warriors, and even that's an undeserved compliment for a whole lot of you.

The fact that you think there's literally anything in social justice ideology that someone would be ashamed enough about to be "exposed" of is hilarious, because frankly, everything you write "SJWs" off as is mostly outright false. Being socially progressive isn't some status symbol that you can wear for social capital, they're totally valid political beliefs that are written off and mocked by people like you MUCH more often than they're validated or even praised by people who share or benefit from similar beliefs. If someone calls you out for being racist/sexist/x-phobic, it's not a matter of "I'm signaling my virtuous behavior to other like-minded people so I can look like a good person", it's "I'm calling out this toxic behavior because the world is better off without it.". Also, phobia doesn't mean irrational fear, it can also mean irrational aversion, a phobia isn't strictly a fear. Transphobes aren't scared of trans people, but they do think of them as less of a person and justifying their irrational hatred of trans people is a shitty thing to do.

First of all, it doesn't matter if one person or a million people self-diagnoses with PTSD or any trauma-related disorder (if you can even find evidence that they ARE self-diagnosing), triggers aren't something you poke fun at, it's not just some funny "meme" you poke fun at for laughs, doing so is a shitty thing to do.

Second, "beta male" is a buzzword because alpha and beta males don't literally exist, soyboy is a buzzword because soy doesn't have any significant impact on your hormone levels, and you shouldn't shame somebody based on a harmless kink that they take part in in their own free time, because that's a shitty thing to do.

Finally, virtue signaling is a buzzword because, again, it's based solely on the assumption that people hold social justice beliefs just for social capital. It doesn't take 2 seconds of thinking to realize that the actual effect of this so-called "virtue signaling" is actually the opposite and has been for several years, nobody "virtue signals" for influence, they do it because there are people out there doing shitty things.

Edited June 30, 2018 by Annie

[Jeric 46,860]

1 hour ago, Goat-kun said:

 You probably don't watch Expanse, do you? Groups of people have been enjoying this group naming tradition since forever and will hopefully continue to do so far into the future

Color me intrigued. I now have to find out what the hell that means. 

 

 

 

I do want to touch on two items briefly, and I am so going to catch hell for this from some, but eh. 

1 hour ago, Goat-kun said:

but then a lot of self-diagnosing happened on the left

This, if it doesn't yet exist, needs a separate topic in Debate Pit. I often bear my teeth when someone dismisses the entirety of psychology, by I save my strongest disdain for those that have used nothing but online resources to determine they have a disorder when, in truth, all they have is an insufferable personality with distinct lack of accepting personal responsibility. The word triggered becoming a meme might actually have been a good thing because of that. 

2 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

And while it is obvious what being racist means, it's not so obvious if the person you are calling racist is actually racist.

And this is another concept that probably deserves a good honest debate too. I have friends and family who have been fair minded individuals who have been singled out as racist, sexist, etc online for various, almost reasonable views. I actually would have considered them social moderates or centrists. Over the last five or so years, they have slowly been embittered and poisoned by the rhetoric of some, to the point that now I so see a stronger and unflattering position toward various groups that wasn't present before. I have slowly accepted that the irrational belief that there are monsters in every closet has actually started to create some, like some sort of Newtonian inspired social law. The words that I dismiss so much had something to do with that by trying to manifest guilt where none was earned. As we approach a time where the SCOTUS is poised to swing right, and some of the progress I approve of may be modified, I have to look at the hard-left progressives and wonder aloud, "Is this your doing? Was shaming a chunk of the nation with terms like white privilege worth THIS?" 

Being adrift in the middle can be infuriating. So, I suppose my final word on this is, without buzzwords, people would have a harder time taking a short-cut to inducing the social dichotomy that we now live in. Of course, I'm realistic so I know and understand that they are not going anywhere. I suppose I am just as flawed as any Joe Q Public with my own biases and prejudices, but I'll gladly use three sentences to communicate those flawed ideas instead of using the Konami Code to do so. 

Twenty years ago I was seen as conservative. Four years ago I was seen as liberal. Maybe it is the fact that I am in my 40's now, but I'm quite comfortable in my world view. It serves me well enough to suggest no buzzword is going to change my mind. 

[DJ_Bonebraker 183]

32 minutes ago, Jeric said:

And this is another concept that probably deserves a good honest debate too. I have friends and family who have been fair minded individuals who have been singled out as racist, sexist, etc online for various, almost reasonable views. I actually would have considered them social moderates or centrists. Over the last five or so years, they have slowly been embittered and poisoned by the rhetoric of some, to the point that now I so see a stronger and unflattering position toward various groups that wasn't present before. I have slowly accepted that the irrational belief that there are monsters in every closet has actually started to create some, like some sort of Newtonian inspired social law. The words that I dismiss so much had something to do with that by trying to manifest guilt where none was earned. As we approach a time where the SCOTUS is poised to swing right, and some of the progress I approve of may be modified, I have to look at the hard-left progressives and wonder aloud, "Is this your doing? Was shaming a chunk of the nation with terms like white privilege worth THIS?" 

Being adrift in the middle can be infuriating. So, I suppose my final word on this is, without buzzwords, people would have a harder time taking a short-cut to inducing the social dichotomy that we now live in. Of course, I'm realistic so I know and understand that they are not going anywhere. I suppose I am just as flawed as any Joe Q Public with my own biases and prejudices, but I'll gladly use three sentences to communicate those flawed ideas instead of using the Konami Code to do so. 

Twenty years ago I was seen as conservative. Four years ago I was seen as liberal. Maybe it is the fact that I am in my 40's now, but I'm quite comfortable in my world view. It serves me well enough to suggest no buzzword is going to change my mind. 

I agree 110% with this, Jeric.  I'm kinda the same way, but a bit younger, and at this point, sick of the whole, to quote George Washington's farewell address , "alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension" that BOTH major political parties (and their strong supporters) engage in, that I'm basically saying (to quote Mercutio) "A plague on BOTH your houses!"

And the back & forth between Tumblr white knights (a.k.a. SJW) and self-declared "Deplorables" makes me want to do like Moe in the Three Stooges & bonk both sides' collective skulls against each other until some sense gets knocked into them.

I mean it's just sad & disturbing that I, as a member of the LGBTQIA community, get a lot of flack FROM said community because I call certain "activists" out for doxxing people, inciting the rest of the community (and other far-left types) to harass & heckle them & generally do their best to ruin their lives just because they may have said something homophobic once, 10 years ago or some utter BULLSHIT like that!  I mean I'm like, "You want the Republicans to increase their majority in congress & Trump to get re-elected?  Because that is how you increase the Republican majority in congress & get Trump re-elected!"

I mean I actually agree, in principle, that people shouldn't be using slurs of any kind (racist, ableist, homophobic, etc), but going out of your way to harass someone, ruin their livelihood & in at least one recent case, push them into committing suicide (and then laughing about it as some did on the facebook post I saw sharing the news article about it), makes me not want to be associated with the LGBT community anymore, even though I AM transgender!

Now that, is what I consider to be the kind of behavior exhibited by so-called Social "Justice" Warriors (more like Social Lynch-Mob Warriors if you ask me, going about like that!), and I will not hesitate to call people out for crap like that either, especially since that's the exact same kind of tactics the Klan & other far-right groups use to intimidate people, and I don't care if you're cause is the "right" one, the end NEVER justifies the means.  Hell, more atrocities have been committed through the ages using the excuse that the end justifies the means than any other reason.

[Twiggy 2,966]

The phrase has been quite overused, so I've made an effort to stop using it unless I'm trying to explain the concept of intersectionality to a layman. Instead I just call them intersectional ideologs or, if I want to be a little cheeky, White-exclusionary identitarians. 

As for blaming them for anything, I see it as akin to a man blaming his forgetfulness on his scattered life, rather than blaming it on the giant brain tumor that is causing it. "SJWs" are nothing more than the foot soldiers of a decadent socialist bourgeoisie, which is somehow not an oxymoron. Many of these people claim to be Marxists, but I would bet my bottom dollar that Marx would be WTFing at their very existence were he alive today. 

[Goat-kun 2,530]

11 hours ago, Annie said:

The fact that you think there's literally anything in social justice ideology that someone would be ashamed enough about to be "exposed" of is hilarious, because frankly, everything you write "SJWs" off as is mostly outright false. Being socially progressive isn't some status symbol that you can wear for social capital, they're totally valid political beliefs that are written off and mocked by people like you MUCH more often than they're validated or even praised by people who share or benefit from similar beliefs. If someone calls you out for being racist/sexist/x-phobic, it's not a matter of "I'm signaling my virtuous behavior to other like-minded people so I can look like a good person", it's "I'm calling out this toxic behavior because the world is better off without it.". Also, phobia doesn't mean irrational fear, it can also mean irrational aversion, a phobia isn't strictly a fear. Transphobes aren't scared of trans people, but they do think of them as less of a person and justifying their irrational hatred of trans people is a shitty thing to do.

First of all, it doesn't matter if one person or a million people self-diagnoses with PTSD or any trauma-related disorder (if you can even find evidence that they ARE self-diagnosing), triggers aren't something you poke fun at, it's not just some funny "meme" you poke fun at for laughs, doing so is a shitty thing to do.

Second, "beta male" is a buzzword because alpha and beta males don't literally exist, soyboy is a buzzword because soy doesn't have any significant impact on your hormone levels, and you shouldn't shame somebody based on a harmless kink that they take part in in their own free time, because that's a shitty thing to do.

Finally, virtue signaling is a buzzword because, again, it's based solely on the assumption that people hold social justice beliefs just for social capital. It doesn't take 2 seconds of thinking to realize that the actual effect of this so-called "virtue signaling" is actually the opposite and has been for several years, nobody "virtue signals" for influence, they do it because there are people out there doing shitty things.

Virtue signaling is not happening between you and someone you think is an asshole. It is happening between you and other like-minded individuals. Its whole purpose is to establish yourself as the most pure and virtuous person inside YOUR group so that others will not doubt and harass you for your lack of "faith". It is a tool for acceptance. Believing or not believing in your ideology is irrelevant. You can also virtue signal without a hostile target by constantly preaching the ideology within public spaces even if there is nobody there who doesn't already know everything you do about the subject. Of course, lefties are not the only ones who virtue signal. As I said, religious conservatives do it too, as are alt-right. It's not something you have invented. You are merely using it the same way.

 

Saying something is a valid political belief is not enough. Show it to me. How is your collectivist ideology better than liberal approach that emphasizes rights of an individual? All I see is Richard Spencer dressed in a rainbow flag. Note that under our radical centrist approach there is no trans community, only trans individuals who enjoy the same rights as everyone else.

 

Phobia (ICD F40 - a bucking definition)

A phobia is a type of anxiety disorder. It is a strong, irrational fear of something that poses little or no actual danger. People with phobias try to avoid what they are afraid of. If they cannot, they may experience panic and fear, rapid heartbeat, shortness of breath, trembling, a strong desire to get away. Treatment helps most people with phobias. Options include medicines, therapy or both.

The way you are using phobia is to discredit and attack people who express their dislike of something you feel very strongly about. You often don't even try to explain why they shouldn't be so adversarial. You just lash out at them with labels like phobe or racist. Maybe they don't like trans people and maybe that's shitty. They should be free to feel however they like without being harassed or suffering legal consequences.

 

I take that some people with PTSD might feel offended my internet's humorous utilization of the word "triggered". I am guilty of doing that myself. However, I do believe that they would be even more offended by those who have hijacked this word and have been using it to block conversations by feigning PTSD. That was not a right wing tactic. At the end of the day you can feel however you like about the use of this word, but do not expect to be believed or acknowledged. That's that.

 

The last time I checked, we, the animals, still tend to form hierarchical structures based on our attributes. There are alphas and there are betas. Nature is cruel.

 

Now it's my turn: define shitty things. Am I doing shitty things by writing this? Are others doing shitty things by interacting positively with me? Should there be consequences? Please, tell me where does the buck stop.

[honk friend 1,978]

3 hours ago, Goat-kun said:

Virtue signaling is not happening between you and someone you think is an asshole. It is happening between you and other like-minded individuals. Its whole purpose is to establish yourself as the most pure and virtuous person inside YOUR group so that others will not doubt and harass you for your lack of "faith". It is a tool for acceptance. Believing or not believing in your ideology is irrelevant. You can also virtue signal without a hostile target by constantly preaching the ideology within public spaces even if there is nobody there who doesn't already know everything you do about the subject. Of course, lefties are not the only ones who virtue signal. As I said, religious conservatives do it too, as are alt-right. It's not something you have invented. You are merely using it the same way.

 

Saying something is a valid political belief is not enough. Show it to me. How is your collectivist ideology better than liberal approach that emphasizes rights of an individual? All I see is Richard Spencer dressed in a rainbow flag. Note that under our radical centrist approach there is no trans community, only trans individuals who enjoy the same rights as everyone else.

 

Phobia (ICD F40 - a bucking definition)

 

A phobia is a type of anxiety disorder. It is a strong, irrational fear of something that poses little or no actual danger. People with phobias try to avoid what they are afraid of. If they cannot, they may experience panic and fear, rapid heartbeat, shortness of breath, trembling, a strong desire to get away. Treatment helps most people with phobias. Options include medicines, therapy or both.

 

The way you are using phobia is to discredit and attack people who express their dislike of something you feel very strongly about. You often don't even try to explain why they shouldn't be so adversarial. You just lash out at them with labels like phobe or racist. Maybe they don't like trans people and maybe that's shitty. They should be free to feel however they like without being harassed or suffering legal consequences.

 

I take that some people with PTSD might feel offended my internet's humorous utilization of the word "triggered". I am guilty of doing that myself. However, I do believe that they would be even more offended by those who have hijacked this word and have been using it to block conversations by feigning PTSD. That was not a right wing tactic. At the end of the day you can feel however you like about the use of this word, but do not expect to be believed or acknowledged. That's that.

 

The last time I checked, we, the animals, still tend to form hierarchical structures based on our attributes. There are alphas and there are betas. Nature is cruel.

 

Now it's my turn: define shitty things. Am I doing shitty things by writing this? Are others doing shitty things by interacting positively with me? Should there be consequences? Please, tell me where does the buck stop.

Well the way you define it sounds like a fancier way of saying circle jerking, or preaching to the choir. The way I most often hear it used is against people who are really preachy about their virtuousness, and as obnoxious as that sounds, you actually would be wrong in assuming that the average person knows a great deal more about intersectionality or marxism or whatever the hell else it is that that person is "virtue signaling" about. I feel like calling it "virtue signaling" when everyone does it is a little dishonest, because to be honest, you're right that there are "virtue signalers" on the alt right, but there's nothing virtuous about denying the holocaust and wishing it had happened.

 

Also, humans aren't strictly individualistic, that isn't how we function socially. You can politicize and preach individualism as much as you want but that just isn't how things work. I'm a very individualistic person just because of how I view myself as a character, but I also have a really strong socially collectivist attitude when I feel like something core to what or who I am that I have little to no control over is being threatened, be it my religion, my gender, or whatever have you. Saying collectivism is purely ideological is a really reductionist viewpoint. Saying "there is no trans community, only trans individuals" completely ignores the fact that, first of all, trans CULTURE exists, and wouldn't without a community. Second, the trans community has social power which is too great of an advantage to trans people as individuals for the community to just not exist. Take this as an example, if an individual or a collective of people hold anti-trans sentiments, well first of all that collective isn't going anywhere and those individuals CERTAINLY aren't going anywhere, and second of all, an attitude that targets innocent individuals is inherently morally wrong and you can't really argue to the contrary. This is where a lot of people start to get a sour taste for collectivism. The trans community is a particularly marginalized one, they're more often victims of violent crimes including rape and murder than their cis counterparts, so trans people very often have little patience and little tolerance for anything that can even be remotely perceived as "transphobic". When H3 made that joke a few months ago about cutting his dick off there was outrage, and the reason why I didn't side with him on that whole issue was, I found the joke to be mostly harmless, but in addressing it he totally ignored the entire reason why people found it harmful in the first place. Should he have to apologize for what seemed like a harmless joke? It would've been appreciated but I don't necessarily think so, what he ended up DOING though was going on this tirade about how people are too easily offended. That's the sour side of collectivist attitude that people don't like, because they get targeted for something they perceive as harmless and feel hopeless, like they're constantly being forced to adapt or accommodate for something that they shouldn't. If you get accused of being racist, or sexist, or x-phobic, the worst thing you can do is have a fight-or-flight reaction like that, the best thing you can do is just try to talk it out.

 

Also, just a quick round to address a few things:
Phobia can be used in a colloquial context instead of a medical one, people most often use phobia in that context because many of the more popular phobias out there aren't officially medically recognized. In a colloquial context it also means aversion. Calling somebody a homophobe isn't a matter of lashing out against somebody who simply disagrees with a common talking point in the gay community or whatever have you, it's a matter of calling somebody out who has a harmful opinion of gay people. (Keep in mind I said harmful, not illegal, don't jump to any conclusions.)

Saying "PTSD sufferers would be more offended by people who self diagnose" is a red herring, you can't speak on behalf of everyone who suffers from a trauma-related disorder. Triggers and safe spaces aren't laughing matters, it's simple enough to just not treat them as such.

The concept of social heirarchies is nothing new, but humans are a little more socially advanced than other animals. This is really just an appeal to nature.

And I think I've already addressed everything in your question so, I'm done here.