Thoughts on "Social Justice Warrior" Branding

[Kreekakon]

Hello everyone. I mainly am making this thread because this has been a small issue that has been lingering on my mind for some time now but I hadn't really came out and put it into text form. Doing it now though, so sit back and enjoy! (Hopefully)

The main thing I want to talk about today are my thoughts on the phenomenon of "Social Justice Warriors" that has been seemingly dominating the internet for the past year or so.

I will spread my thoughts into several sections tidied up in spoiler boxes as not to cluster up the forum page. Still, try to read everything though!

Social Justice Warrior Definition

Spoiler below!

To do a quick recap for people who are not in the know: A "Social Justice Warrior" or sjw for short is a name that some users of the internet give to another person on the internet who they think are complaining about issues that hold no real weight. The reason the more ill-intented sjws do this is just to hopefully raise their reputation in a community for "fighting for morale values" or is just trolling.

For example, a person who may be branded a sjw may be a person who goes onto a forum about a movie and complains about misogyny undertones he believed was displayed in the movie. Most likely the other users of the forum would brand him as a sjw and run him away.

Justified, or wrongful branding of Social Justice Warriors?

Spoiler below!

Now that we have the recap and definitions out of the way I want to get into my real thoughts on the matter.

It is true that sjws may very well be a problem. There are certainly people who overreact to certain things when those things may very well be minor issues.

But my main concern lies not with the sjws but instead the people who throw out the brand on people they "believe" are sjws. Are they really sjws who are just trying to seek attention? Or are they simply people who are really genuinely concerned about an issue?

Very often I get a sinking feeling in my gut that sometimes people who brand other people as sjws are only doing it because they dislike what they believe to not be offensive being called out on. I mentioned earlier that ill-intented sjws can try to twist an issue to make it seem bigger than it is. I think that this can also work the other way around where the other side is dismissing a person's genuine claims by brushing them off as sjws.

An example: Say there are three people A, B, and C. A makes a joke about cancer. B has lost family to cancer and is offended by this joke and tells A this. A thinks that his joke was just a joke and that there was nothing wrong with it at all. C comes in and tries to explain to A in a reasonable fashion why cancer jokes can be offensive for certain people. A still firmly believes that he was not wrong in making the joke and calls C a "social justice warrior".

It's examples like the above that mainly worry me how easily someone can brush aside moral criticism just by dismissing the person giving it as a sjw who is just overreacting.

Of course with that said, don't forget that I mentioned it can still go the other way around. Where an issue is not really an issue but someone still tries to make it into one for the sake of it.

What is an issue worth worrying about and what isn't?

Spoiler below!

That's where things begin getting a bit tricky though. HOW do you determine what is a legitimate issue worth getting worried about or just something that's getting overreacted about?

The way I see this there are two categories that issues usually fall into, and I'll talk a bit about both of them: Real-life Issues, and Personal Issues.

(The two issues may sometimes also co-exist in some cases)

Real-Life Issues: This refers to issues which are happening in the real world life and does not have any strong connection to the people taking place in the discussion. Mostly in this case the person being branded as a sjw will be a person who is trying to voice his thoughts on something from a neutral standpoint but is considered by others to be overreacting.

In these sort of issues I would say the best thing to do would definitely be for both parties to take a step back and discuss things like civilized people. The two parties obviously have differing beliefs on the issue and through discussion it can be made much more clearer is something is really a problem to be worried about or is just a very minor one not caring about.

Personal Issues: This refers to a happening which personally offends a person. Mostly in these cases the offended person will in some way try to express that their feelings have been hurt. The ensuing reaction will be much like the cancer example I posted above.

The appropriate response to this will be MUCH less logical than the "real-life issues" because these sort of cases concern a person's personal feelings, which are not at all logical. In these sort of cases I would say what a person should do is to not push the issue of who is right or wrong in a issue mattering or not. I don't think it matters in this case because regardless of what is right or wrong the truth stands that it offends someone. The best I think that can be done here as a decent person is to not push the issue an apologize for being insensitive.

This ties into another belief I hold that I formed a little while back: Being offended is not a choice. It is much like any other reaction in our bodies which is a reaction to stimuli. You could know 100% sure that the other person is correct but that would not change the fact that you have felt offended by a matter.

This is why that while I think saying that it's because you're "offended" does not hold up AT ALL in a logical discussion/debate, it is a good enough reason for people to show some courtesy and be considerate of your feelings as long as you're being honest and reasonable about it.

Conclusion

Spoiler below!

So essentially to sum up the whole thing I feel that while there are indeed people who do wrong on both sides of the "Social Justice Warrior" branding issue it is much more healthy for communities as a whole to treat the whole thing in a much more healthy light and not just throw around the tag lightly without thorough thought put into it.

That's basically all I have to say on the matter, would love to see your thoughts below

[Nice]

I havent really seen much of that being thrown around at all but that's probably because I generally just dont spend much time on internet places. I don't check reddit, dont check 4chan, dont check imgur, there's barely any forums which I check -and when I do it's not frequent at all.

And the thing about being offended and such is a very delicate thing, from my experience the loudest people to throw a gigantic fit that they have been offended by something, usually come off quite the hypocrit by joking about a different issue which is just as serious as the one they suffer from or even worse.

Should potentially offensive jokes be "banned"? Hell no but I think every person should have the common decency to stop when someone tells him that the joke is very uncomfortable/offending. Stop, say sorry - didn't know and move on.

Refusing to be hurtful to another person does not make you "SJW" it makes you a proper human being.

so according to the example above, not being a dick makes you a proper decent person - so I guess in my books someone who is "SJW" is just taking it too far with the intention to cause drama where it is not needed. "Curiosity killed the cat" --- OH MY GOD YOU SICK SON OF A BITCH, MY CAT DIED FIVE MONTHS AGO!!!111

How do you know whether the person is just stretching out the issue for the sake of his own benefit rather than being seriously affected by it? You can't know for sure but in most of the cases it's quite obvious and guess I'll rely on my "reading people" instinct.

[i3670]

[Kreekakon]

[video]

Well of my whole view on it hinges on people actually trying to be decent. If they weren't trying to be genuine in the first place (Either side) then they're not really worth trying to communicate with anyways...

[Red]

I've been in this kind of situation actually. I made a little a joke regarding the jews in a way or another - just a bad simile - so of course there was one that got offended. My methods to settle this were: I told it was a joke, no insults intended; then I adviced to consider his way of riposte: although one might get offended, it's better to settle things with a more rational way. Especially In this case, the insults were uneccessary. Now it wasn't only him who was hurt, but it was me; those words were genuine, coming from the bottom of his heart. Last thing was that I told him to learn perceive where the lines of joking and mockery go. It's not a good thing, if one gets deeply insulted from a simple misunderstanding. I do not know did he forgive me - he just stopped posting. But my apology got a lot of thumbs up, so I presume I did the right thing.

[Mudbill]

sjws are funneh i laugh now cri me no likey

[J.R.S.S.]

This issue confuses me in the way that I don't see how people are "offended". I don't get offended. I don't, and I suppose can't, take anything personally (I suppose that's the way to put it).

Example: I've been vegetarian now for eight years and I would very much like to see the eating of animals be done with. At the very least, the unnecessary torture in animal farms that most meat comes from. So lets say one day I'm eating lunch when someone comes over to me and they begin eating a ham sandwich, and then they start talking about the deer they shot the other day. No, I won't get angry and start telling him how "immoral" that is and why it needs to stop. That's his lifestyle and I have no intentions of changing it. Do I agree with it? No. But that doesn't mean I become offended because he is different minded then myself.

That outcome would occur in any situation. If someone tells me that I'll fail in everything I'm doing, that's fine. I could care less what others may think and know, or in most cases, think to know.

“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”
Basically how I view everything. This is exactly how I would view the example I gave above.

As a thinker, feelings hold very little ground for me. There is just no place for such things as being offended.

[Kreekakon]

This issue confuses me in the way that I don't see how people are "offended". I don't get offended. I don't, and I suppose can't, take anything personally (I suppose that's the way to put it).

Example: I've been vegetarian now for eight years and I would very much like to see the eating of animals be done with. At the very least, the unnecessary torture in animal farms that most meat comes from. So lets say one day I'm eating lunch when someone comes over to me and they begin eating a ham sandwich, and then they start talking about the deer they shot the other day. No, I won't get angry and start telling him how "immoral" that is and why it needs to stop. That's his lifestyle and I have no intentions of changing it. Do I agree with it? No. But that doesn't mean I become offended because he is different minded then myself.

That outcome would occur in any situation. If someone tells me that I'll fail in everything I'm doing, that's fine. I could care less what others may think and know, or in most cases, think to know.

“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”
Basically how I view everything. This is exactly how I would view the example I gave above.

As a thinker, feelings hold very little ground for me. There is just no place for such things as being offended.

I think I need to make a clarification on what I truly meant by "being offended". What I mean by being offended takes the shape of a spontaneous feeling that swells up inside you when certain out-world conditions are met. It is much like feeling happy, sad, or angry.

Being a spontaneous thing I don't think it can be avoided. When someone is offended they will be offended regardless of whether they like it or not, or if they even agree with their own logical stance on the issue they are offended by or not.

HOWEVER beyond that though, after you have been offended it is then up to you whether or not to act on that feeling of being offended. This is where a more logical sense of mind comes into play and you can choose to act in a reasonable fashion even if it may contradict your feelings.

So in short what I'm trying to say is that being offended is not something that can be avoided since it is a spontaneous emotion, but one can choose whether or not it is a good idea or not to act on it.

[VaeVictis]

I didn't think my kind were welcome here ^^; Having been branded one by a few people here, I'm contented to lurk around the SOMA thread and not venture from there.

[i3670]

I didn't think my kind were welcome here ^^; Having been branded one by a few people here, I'm contented to lurk around the SOMA thread and not venture from there.

OOOOH! Your kind!? What are you some kind of higher level internet race? Fucking racist! And you're unaware of what's going on around the rest of the forum. Instead you keep your mind occupied with the development of a game whereas the rest of us toil away in the murky depths of the development support subforum. You entitled piece of shit!

You're welcome ^^

Edit: damn so many you're/your typos