What is a Social Justice Warrior, really?

[AceRagz]

Shrugs My family all calls ourselves Mexican because Hispanic just sounds weird and my Mom had something against being called latino. Though due to some researcdh done by my Dad I now know I'm also partial Italian.

[LordVincent]

By that logic about the power dinamic, people would not have professors or experts in anything giving talks about anything. Also, if they go "actually, you are wrong" they are expected to explain the why.

But if the people who disagrees storms off in such a petty way, they are undermining their own credibility, and unintentionally, the credibility of the people they say they support. They close their own chance to debate.

There is a certain power imbalance there though. The person with the microphone automatically has more power over the other, and for this reason there should be more responsibility expected from them. With power comes responsibility. Responsibility to make sure, to your best abilities, that the things you say are factually sound and will not harm the people you're talking about to an unfair extent. Especially if the scenario is like you describe and the person with the microphone is supposed to be an expert or professor. This woman absolutely did not do this! The thing she's arguing is incredibly infactual, when it's very easy for her in this modern age to educate herself and prove her own points wrong before even going on stage to make them in the first place. If she was passionate enough about these points to bring them up in front of a large audience of impressionable youths where most would just take what she said as fact without questioning her, she should have also been passionate enough about it to keep herself up to date on what's actually true. But she wasn't.

Why are people expecting more patience and more responsibility out of young audience members belonging to a community that already gets hurt on the regular, than they expect out of a "professor" who has been put in the spotlight with the sole purpose of providing a supposedly professional opinion? Why is the takeaway from this clip that "they should have just sat down and calmly pointed out the faults in her argument as their entire community was being actively attacked" rather than "she should have made sure her professional statement was actually professional"?

[punkarsenic]

By that logic about the power dinamic, people would not have professors or experts in anything giving talks about anything. Also, if they go "actually, you are wrong" they are expected to explain the why.

im not saying the power dynamic is bad, dude, just pointing out that it exists and means its not actually that easy for the protesters to make their counterargument. of course if they had made a counter argument they would have had to make.... an argument....

But if the people who disagrees storms off in such a petty way, they are undermining their own credibility, and unintentionally, the credibility of the people they say they support. They close their own chance to debate.

no, i agree. this was a bad act of protest. it was enacted by naive kids who dont know any better.

i feel like your responses jump around my points instead of addressing them. im just saying that theyre kids and while what they did was weird and silly, they dont know what theyre doing and we cant trust the video to not be edited in a way that makes them look a lot worse. i cant really think of a way to make the weird nazi comments make sense, but i can imagine it being the worst bit of a slightly less incoherent point made - again - by a kid.

[Leverance]

Exactly, Mexico was one of the first international nations. We're a mix of European, Asian, Native etc and so on. I didn't speak up to her though, I could see she genuinely believed what she was saying was true. My boyfriend, however, spoke what you said against her and she insisted all Mexicans were brown-skinned. The problem with SJWs is that they're toxic for minorities, even though, they claim they're for their rights.

[Leverance]

My family in Mexico also call themselves Mexcians. It isn't unsual for some Mexcians to have European decent, because of our history with the Spainards etc. What bothers me though, it's how SJWs are pushing the word 'Latinx' for Lations. I had Latin a few years ago and asked the teacher if it was any credit to that and she said that word is non-exsistent in Latin which Spanish comes from.

Also by using the word Latinx they're erasing our cultural history and heritage. That says how much they 'care' about us, dosen't it?

[burginlewis]

I thought about this thread when I read this article last night: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oberlin-college-and-gibsons-bakery-a-protest-against-racism-and-a-31-5-million-dollar-defamation-award/

[DiegoPalacios]

Why is the takeaway from this clip that "they should have just sat down and calmly pointed out the faults in her argument as their entire community was being actively attacked" rather than "she should have made sure her professional statement was actually professional"?

Both things are not mutually exclusive. Of course it`s expected for the people presenting to research on the topic and to stay civic while presenting and debating said points. If a professor behaved that way, they would logically become ridiculed by the field and lose their credibility. I agree that professors have a higher responsibility.

It's expected from all the people going to a discussion to...have a discussion. And that includes the ones who agree AND the ones who disagree with the professors. (and of course, the professors themselves)

Even if the youth doesn`t know how to counter these arguments they can still get something out of it. For example, understanding why the opposition think a certain way.

The reason it`s expected from the youth to be civic when joining an open discussion is because they are the future . While it can be expected from some of them to get emotional, they need to be able to channel these emotions into something constructive, specially the ones who are the most politically active.

Society will not progress if debates devolve into shouting matches and an ego war instead of a search for solutions of people`s problems.

[DiegoPalacios]

im not saying the power dynamic is bad, dude, just pointing out that it exists and means its not actually that easy for the protesters to make their counterargument. of course if they had made a counter argument they would have had to make.... an argument....

I agree it is harder to argue with an expert, but by storming of before the speaker ends their point stopped them from the possibility of making a counterargument. Not because there wasn`t one, but because they didnt took the time to listen to the speech due to their rushed decision.

We both agree it was a bad act of protest, and while there are right moments where protesting can be good and necessary, an open debate where they have the chance to be listened and to show their points is the worst moment to do it.

If we want to progress as a society, it is our duty to encourage civic conversation and open debates are a great tool for it. The youth are the future, and we need to educate them in how to approach debates, how to argument and how to channel their energy and convictions into something constructive, specially with the ones who are the most politically active.

Society will not progress if debates devolve into shouting matches and an ego war instead of a search for solutions of people`s problems.

[punkarsenic]

I agree it is harder to argue with an expert, but by storming of before the speaker ends their point stopped them from the possibility of making a counterargument. Not because there wasn`t one, but because they didnt took the time to listen to the speech due to their rushed decision.

i mean i still disagree with this. the chances that they would actually have the opportunity to state a proper counter argument and be listened to and respected is very unlikely, youre really underestimating the power dynamic at play

their decision looked rushed and petty to us - and certainly, i wouldnt encourage anyone to act like that - but A: we don't know what that speaker was saying before, or what they're known for, and B: we don't know what those young people have gone through before that point. people who've faced more discrimination, especially as young people, can have less patience for smaller cases of discrimination, and there'll be currents of anger underneath their decision that aren't visible from the surface, valid as they are.

again, it was sloppy and the optics were awful, but i wont condemn or judge those young activists without knowing the full situation. we should be sympathetic to distressed young people like those, not dismiss them as crazy SJWs or something.

[AceRagz]

I swear the older I get the dumber some things just sound XD Growing up we just identified as Mexican or also Tejano (my family was among the original Mexican settlers of Texas) then people (mostly white people) started saying well you shouldn't calll yourselves Mexican you are not in Mexico so people started saying Mexican-American much like also the move for African-American and so on began. Then in the 90's this whole latino thing started with teens and up shouting things like Latinos forever! I was eeeeh. Then the push to be called hispanic came around too. I recall one comedian had this joke which was pretty much I will call myself Mexican even if I'm not in Mexico because I hate to break it to you but Hispania doesn't exist! It's not a real country! I think that was George Lopez. Now as an adult it has all come back to people calling themselves Mexican again. All this time my family has gone just by that instead of all these crazy titles

[KRWright]

All this talk on debate relies on the fact that the market place of ideas actually works as a concept, and that only the best and most factual ideas rise to the top. And that those ideas that do rise are the ones that are the most logical and fact driven. Well, that's not really the case, otherwise we wouldn't still be waiting for trickle-down economics to happen. Debate is sometimes not the medium to enact social change, because the power balance doesn't actually allow for ideas to be exchanged in a way that benefits a marginalised group.

Not calling anyone out here, just saying that it's a bit more complicated than just optics and tone in debate regardless of who is taking part and what the ideas presented are.

[Leverance]

I think is mostly because of how the world is changing (whatever one likes it or not). I wouldn't mind you calling yourself Mexicans if you have a background of the original settlers from Mexico. That's just my opinion, though.

Some teenagers follow the crowd instead of thinking for themselves. Also, how many rather have a 'facade' of who they're online/offline with certain opinions.

I recall one comedian had this joke which was pretty much I will call myself Mexican even if I'm not in Mexico because I hate to break it to you but Hispania doesn't exist! It's not a real country! I think that was George Lopez.

That's kinda confusing, I think Hispania was one the older names of Spain, though memory is hazy. Then again, I find most American news/comedians odd. But then again, it isn't directed to my background, etc.

That's good though! That things are returning to the norm.

[TAMAnnoying]

I mean I think we might be at an impasse at this point of the discussion, some people will always believe in a pacifist or lawful way of changing the world while some people will always believe in a more violent or chaotic of changing the world.

The fact is once you start rising your voice and braking things people tend to take you less seriously and prefer to just not interact with you in general.

[KRWright]

I wasn't talking about peaceful means or non-peaceful means of changing the world though. I wasn't talking about protest movements, petitions, lobbying etc. I was just talking about how the structure of a debate itself doesn't lend itself towards the 100% academically correct views rising to the top. Debate itself is an antagonistic method of coming to a conclusion (otherwise it would be called 'discussion'), so it's kind of a moot point anyway.

Also, the idea that the marginalised should have to keep their voices down and tone police themselves in order to have their views heard is something I don't really agree with. There are limits, of course, and there is a time and a place. But I don't think emotionality makes anyone 'wrong' in that sense. Raising your voice when defending something you're passionate about - especially when the political is personal to you - is just part of being human. There is nothing inherently more superior about someone's argument if it's delivered coldly and logically, or if they deliver the same argument while shouting and crying. It's just different optics.

[burginlewis]

I'd go one step further and say there is a thousand-year-old bias toward arguments delivered in a classical, Aristotelian fashion. And while I have every intention of teaching my sons this technique, that is our background, it's not everyone's, and it's worth pointing out that other cultures begin at other equally valuable starting points for arguments.

[DiegoPalacios]

people who've faced more discrimination, especially as young people, can have less patience for smaller cases of discrimination, and there'll be currents of anger underneath their decision that aren't visible from the surface, valid as they are.

While is understandable that their experiences can make them more sensitive to certain topics and arguments that doesn't justify their actions (like destroying their sound equipment).

There is a huge difference between understanding why they may commit some actions and justifying said actions.

Understanding and justifying doesn`t always come together.

again, it was sloppy and the optics were awful, but i wont condemn or judge those young activists without knowing the full situation. we should be sympathetic to distressed young people like those, not dismiss them as crazy SJWs or something.

Unfortunately, wether we like it or not, their behavior unintentionally promotes a stereotype that makes dialoguing harder. This is one of the reasons i discourage said behavior. Nobody told them to storm of, to break the sound equipment or to do a hitler comparation. It was their own choices, and all choices have consequences for better or worse.

Also, if we keep lowering our standards for the youth`s rational AND emotional intelligence, we may risk making a tragic self fulfilling prophecy.

Hope they grow out of that behavior, not only for themselves, but also for the people they want to represent.

[punkarsenic]

Understanding and justifying doesn`t always come together.

EXACTLY! IM ASKING FOR UNDERSTANDING, IM NOT JUSTIFYING THEIR ACTIONS. I HAVE SAID THAT AGAIN AND AGAIN. YOU KEEP DISAGREEING WITH THINGS IM NOT SAYING

in short i really just want people to understand that kids like this dont deserve to be mocked or condemned, they deserve to be picked up by more experienced activists to help them understand how to do their work. we should always remain critical of how activists are framed, bc many people have a vested interest in making even skilled and careful activists look like idiots, extremists, or terrorists

we keep going in circles, so im muting the thread. im not mad, but i am irritated by your refusal to grapple with my actual point.

[davidjenkins7473]

ooh i guess i gotta come in early on this one

DokiDokiTsuna:
What is an SJW?

it is essentially an insult, but as a pejorative it refers to people who are really into identity politics, and has come to carry connotations of cancel culture, individualism, and identity reductionism - while also carrying connotations of just living while female, a poc, or lgbt.

DokiDokiTsuna:
Have you ever actually met one...?

yyyyyyyyyyeaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhh???

there was a brief period on tumblr where ppl identified as SJWs unironically, around 2013-14, but quickly it became only smth the right used against us them. the SJW is a stereotype through and through, so people dont exist at that level of unnuanced bad faith exaggeration, but ive certainly met the fire that caused the smoke. tumblr around 2015 was a very very strange place where even small slights were acts of war and people used their marginalised identities and social capital to get away with literally abusing other marginalised people. it was a pretty horrific place - tumblr is really not that anymore, for the record. theres still exciteable wankers, but its way chiller than twitter.

the issue is of course at its core a lot of arguments dubbed 'SJW' are right, and very important. black lives do matter. trans rights are human rights. but it gets diluted in a tonne of infighting and losing the forest for the trees among mostly sheltered young people online who havent yet developed a foundation of real world experience to back up their ideology. and also lack class consciousness.

you cant end white supremacy without ending capitalism, folks.

Well said. SJW started as a real label but turned into a caricature. Tumblr back then was wild lots of valid points lost in messy infighting. The core issues still matter, but the way they're handled online can get really distorted.

[ratique]

[ratique]