The Social Justice Movement

Ugh. I’ve wanted to rant about this for a while, but haven’t had the energy to deal with the blowback, but fuck it. I’m offended by the Social Justice Warriors (SJWs). Triggered even. Luckily, I have this safe space to talk about it. So let’s sit back and imagine these precious snowflakes loose their shit, as if any of them actually read this website.

There are many labels that could be applied to me. Liberal, progressive, humanist, atheist, egalitarian, etc. SJWs are the ultra liberal people who make Trump supporters foam at the mouth. Here’s the thing. I agree with almost everything SJWs stand for. I think gays should be allowed to get married and raise children. I do think women should be paid equally. I even think the negro is human. My problem is not ideological. It’s methodological.

I think the SJWs kind of did the same thing that PETA did. They took a reasonable idea, and went batshit insane with it. “Don’t be a dick to animals” is a perfectly understandable position, and I think very few people would have a problem with it. Then PETA started throwing paint on fake fur coats because it “symbolized” animal cruelty. That’s the exact moment when PETA lost it’s credibility. Of course, later, we found out that they either supported or at least encouraged bombings. And also that they kill 90+% of the animals they rescue, because keeping animals in a shelter is “cruel confinement”. Where was I?

Oh yeah. SJWs started off with very reasonable things. “Don’t be a dick to gays… unless they’re into that sort of thing.” “Don’t be racist.” “Don’t be sexist.” Then it spiraled out of control. Soon enough, you had people arguing that pilates was racist because it enforced “white aesthetic”. Oh for fuck’s sake. It’s glorified stretching.

It hasn’t stopped there. At some point, students refused to go to classes, because the course material “triggered” them. Suddenly, all of these buzz words crept out, like “microagression” and “cisgender” and “gluten free”. Over the last few years, there’s been a push for colleges and universities to become “safe spaces” where students should be allowed to be protected from any kind of thought that might bruise their feelings place. Speakers were invited to schools, then banned, because students didn’t like what the speaker MIGHT say.

Which brings me to my main issue with the Social Justice Movement. It eliminates discussion. These people either have no argument to defend their positions, or can’t articulate it clearly. Which is frustrating, because THEY ARE PROBABLY RIGHT. If I were to hear a SJW talking with my parents about a social issue, I’d probably agree with the SJW. The problem is that it wouldn’t be a discussion. The SJW would just call them racists, and drop the mic as if they had won the biggest gladiator match in history. I mean, yes, my parents are racists. Did you change their mind? Did you try to understand why they were racists, so you can poke holes in their logic?

That doesn’t help anyone. If we are on the right side of history, as I think we are, the only way to get to that future, is to convince other people that we are right. Simply giving them a negative label is counter productive. We have to actually explain WHY we believe what we believe and WHY they are wrong. That’s not how it happens though. Remember when Ben Affleck had a cardiac incident on Real Time because Sam Harris said something he didn’t like? You could actually see Ben Affleck get to a point where he didn’t know what was going on. It was as if none of his opinions had ever been questioned in his life.

I posit, that it’s because they haven’t. That’s the environment we have created. All these special unique perfect creatures surround themselves with like minded people. They circle jerk themselves with their moral high ground, and they have gotten intellectually lazy. They haven’t practiced interacting with opposing views, so when they are in a situation with someone who is equally convinced about their opinions, the SJW has a hissy fit.

Look, racism is a real problem with real consequences. Same with sexism and homophobia. We absolutely need to address these issues, and I’m not suggesting that they don’t exist, or aren’t as bad as it seems. I am, however, saying that simply calling someone a “*ist” does nothing. You’re attacking the person, instead of the idea. And I’m not even going to get into the whole “you can’t be racist against white people” or “you can’t be sexist against men” bullshit.

If someone called you a bad person because of an opinion you had, would you want to talk to them? Probably not. That’s what has happened. People are instantly decried as “racists” or “homophobic” or “sexist” yet no one explains to these people why. It’s as if they are playing Pin the Classification on the Villain and that’s all it takes to win their argument. Like a SJW calls them a sexist, and they go “Oh. I had no idea. You must be right. I’m going to reevaluate my life choices.” That’s not how it works. We should be able to explain “Well, actually, it turns out that we share more than a few DNA markers with this so called ‘female’. They are even able to think things, just like us.”

I’ve argued that this was one of the reasons why Trump won. People kept getting called these negative titles, so Joe Hillbilly, just said “fuck it. I’ll vote for the guy who says whatever he wants.”

Side rant: I know this might break your brain, but it’s perfectly possible to like one thing someone has said or done, and not like every little thing they’ve ever said done. Case in point, I love Adam Carolla. Much of my rant style is based on his. I still disagree with him on many social issues. Just because someone voted for Trump, doesn’t mean they must agree with everything that Trump says. It doesn’t mean they are racists or sexists by default. Maybe they like the color orange.

Now we have to deal with the word police. You can’t say certain things. Not because they are wrong. And no one will explain why it’s wrong. You can’t say certain things because you don’t want these defenders of righteousness branding you as evil. I make jokes about all sorts of things. Almost all of them are offensive. At the same time, there are certain jokes I don’t make. Mostly because I don’t think they are funny or smart. I love race jokes. Not RACIST jokes, race jokes. Jokes about race. I have a bit about how black people are more evolved than white people. I even have jokes about the “N” word. None of these jokes are negative about black people. I don’t even actually say “n**ger” in the joke. I can’t stand obvious jokes though. “Herp a derp. Watermellon and KFC.” That shit annoys me, and is racist. It’s racist because it paints a picture based on a stereotype that limits black people to caricatures of themselves. See how I explained it instead of just saying that I didn’t like it? As if not liking something or being offended by something is an argument in itself.

At the same time, I should be ALLOWED to make these jokes. A few years ago, Daniel Tosh got into shit because he made a joke about rape, and the SJWs sharpened their pitchforks. You can make a joke about anything. The joke might not be funny, but the concept that you can’t joke about something or that it’s “too soon” is preposterous. Every joke is at the expense of someone else. We only get offended when it’s about something that matters to US.

Simply silencing those with whom you disagree is getting us nowhere. In fact, it moves us backwards, because people look at this type of mentality, roll their eyes, and stop listening. We need to engage people. We need to stop surrounding ourselves with only people who think like we do. We need to investigate why people disagree with us. Can we prove them wrong? Can we change their minds? I think we can, if we actually talk to them. The only way to talk to them, and have an actual conversation is to drop your preconceptions of who they must be in order to have those opinions. Just because someone has a mullet, doesn’t mean they beat their sister/girlfriends. I mean, it’s a statistical probability, sure, but we can’t jump to assumptions like that. We have to actually talk. Back and forth. Not just proselytizing. I mean, actually listening to their point of view, trying to understand, THEN explaining why they are wrong.