On social justice and social justice warriors

Split from 'Television Shows you're currently Enjoying'

Anything that doesn't fit anywhere else.

Moderators: Blip, The_Metatron

On social justice and social justice warriors

#1  Postby Animavore » Jul 02, 2020 6:22 pm

MattHunX wrote:I'm easily annoyed, but not easily offended, like social justice warriors


Thos is a curiously irrelevant sentence. :ask:
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 44673
Age: 42
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#2  Postby MattHunX » Jul 02, 2020 6:55 pm

Animavore wrote:
MattHunX wrote:I'm easily annoyed, but not easily offended, like social justice warriors


Thos is a curiously irrelevant sentence. :ask:

They've simply become much more of an annoyance than even the religious sort used to be. :nono:
User avatar
MattHunX
 
Posts: 10947

Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#3  Postby felltoearth » Jul 02, 2020 7:04 pm

tenor.gif
tenor.gif (138.28 KiB) Viewed 1194 times
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 14004
Age: 53

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#4  Postby Animavore » Jul 02, 2020 7:13 pm

MattHunX wrote:
Animavore wrote:
MattHunX wrote:I'm easily annoyed, but not easily offended, like social justice warriors


Thos is a curiously irrelevant sentence. :ask:

They've simply become much more of an annoyance than even the religious sort used to be. :nono:


Not near as much as an annoying as the anti-SJWs. No one cries, moans, gripes, complains, and throws tantrums as much as them. No one pollutes YouTube, Reddit, Facebook, Twiiter, and the comment section of every popular gaming site as the wannabe edgelords having another meltdown because their favourite franchise from when they were a child now has women and black people in it or a game features some marginalised group. In fact, I don't even hear much any more from SJWs since the knee-jerk reaction manbabies have taken over. And as annoying as SJWs might have been, they were never any real danger. They didn't harass and threaten people with rape and death. And lets not forget about the direct line from Gamergate over-reacting fuckwits to Neo Nazis, Trumo supporting Proud Boys, white-nationalists, and these idiots not wear facemasks because it's 'PC'.

I'm not really worried about so-called SJWs at all if 'annoying' is the worst thing you can say about them.
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 44673
Age: 42
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#5  Postby arugula2 » Jul 02, 2020 7:47 pm

I'm hazarding a guess, that in the previous response MattHunX may actually be referring to 'atheists'. :P The sjw comment (even in the original post) was sort of incidental... but I'm only guessing, based on word count and such.

To your initial response - my own reaction was that 'annoyed' and 'offended' mean basically the same thing when used like this, so it seemed like an incoherent point to be making anyway, so I did one of these:

:dunno:
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1973

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#6  Postby MattHunX » Jul 03, 2020 7:52 am

arugula2 wrote:I'm hazarding a guess, that in the previous response MattHunX may actually be referring to 'atheists'. :P The sjw comment (even in the original post) was sort of incidental... but I'm only guessing, based on word count and such.

To your initial response - my own reaction was that 'annoyed' and 'offended' mean basically the same thing when used like this, so it seemed like an incoherent point to be making anyway, so I did one of these:

:dunno:


Oh, but I am referring to social justice warriors and the offense/woke culture they had spawned, that not only did not disappear, it became even more prevalent in the past few years and they became just as divisive as the things they claim to fight (and by the "they" it usually is white-saviors claiming acting in the name of others to try and be woke).

And I make a distinction between being annoyed and being offended.

Annoyed is when something grates on my nerves, because something might be tiring, nonsensical, inconsistent or stupid, like some behavior or some writing in some movie or show.

Offended is what social justice warriors do when they get up in arms, screaming labels at e.g.: a stand-up comedian whom they've already decided (in their echo-chamber) is everything they say, never mind reality.
User avatar
MattHunX
 
Posts: 10947

Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#7  Postby Animavore » Jul 03, 2020 9:01 am

MattHunX wrote:Oh, but I am referring to social justice warriors and the offense/woke culture they had spawned, that not only did not disappear, it became even more prevalent in the past few years and they became just as divisive as the things they claim to fight.


Utter garbage. How are those in the woke culture more divisive than Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, incels, transphobic and homophobic bigots, Proud Boys, Trump supporters, Gamergaters who want women and minorities off their 'patch', the grown men who threw a fit over She-Ra, Ghostbusters, Star Wars, The Last of Us 2, Battlefield V, Black Panther, Captain Marvel, writing vile, disgusting comments all over social media to the extent many platforms have had to bring in extra moderation and some, like IMdB, had to close their forum altogether, some going as far as sending death and rape threats and forcing female stars off Twitter and the like? Some of these groups have already killed and many others put on FBI watch lists.

There's literally no comparison.

MattHunX wrote:Offended is what social justice warriors do when they get up in arms, screaming labels at e.g.: a stand-up comedian whom they've already decided (in their echo-chamber) is everything they say, never mind reality.


I've had to give up going to some gaming sites I used to frequent because every week there's another shit storm over some minor issue because the offended brigade, and it's not SJWs, can't control themselves. It's gotten to the point I'm almost embarrassed to call myself a gamer any more because this hivemind of manbabies (and they almost exclusively are white men) who call other people 'NPCs' without irony while they all regurgitate the exact same racist, sexist, homophobic, and trans jokes ("Unless I can create a lesbian Panda in a man's body this game doesn't represent me. Hurr-hurr") have shat all over everything I and many others enjoy by acting as gate-keepers who've decided that they get to pick and choose who gets to enjoy things (thankfully they don't in reality) to the exclusion of all else.

But do go on and tell us how SJWs are the 'offended' ones.

:coffee:
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 44673
Age: 42
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#8  Postby MattHunX » Jul 03, 2020 9:16 am

Animavore wrote:
MattHunX wrote:
Animavore wrote:
MattHunX wrote:I'm easily annoyed, but not easily offended, like social justice warriors


Thos is a curiously irrelevant sentence. :ask:

They've simply become much more of an annoyance than even the religious sort used to be. :nono:


Not near as much as an annoying as the anti-SJWs. No one cries, moans, gripes, complains, and throws tantrums as much as them. No one pollutes YouTube, Reddit, Facebook, Twiiter, and the comment section of every popular gaming site as the wannabe edgelords having another meltdown because their favourite franchise from when they were a child now has women and black people in it or a game features some marginalised group. In fact, I don't even hear much any more from SJWs since the knee-jerk reaction manbabies have taken over. And as annoying as SJWs might have been, they were never any real danger. They didn't harass and threaten people with rape and death. And lets not forget about the direct line from Gamergate over-reacting fuckwits to Neo Nazis, Trumo supporting Proud Boys, white-nationalists, and these idiots not wear facemasks because it's 'PC'.

I'm not really worried about so-called SJWs at all if 'annoying' is the worst thing you can say about them.


I have to start by first acknowledging, from my side, that in the same way feminists can spawn feminazis and the equally well-intentioned fight for social justice have given rise to offense and "woke" culture, the side I find myself on these days also had a negative, detrimental and divisive off-shoot and those I consider the "wannabe edgelords", who often go out of their way to pretend to be offended and want to be offended, just to fit into a certain group, just because within those ranks it is trendy and edgy to do so. An example...is the trailer for the Batwoman series. The series itself wasn't bad. Not very good, either. But, the trailer didn't do it justice, because to many it gave the impression that it'll über-feminist, constantly woke, overly political and on the nose about everything. Which it luckily wasn't. But, I watched a few reviews where people rightly called out those who didn't even watch the series and yet they were agreeing with every criticism, based solely in the trailer. And they kept writing off the series as everything they thought it'd be, while watching none or little of it. Now, those are the kind of anti-SJWs who are an unfortunate branch of a side who have legitimate criticism for the entertainment industry.

Since the gaming world was brought up...

There were those SJWs who were screaming at the developers of Cyberpunk 2077 for being (insert whatever)phobic or racist, simply because the game-world itself has elements of a fictitious society in it that are like that. But, to them, to a lot of social justice warriors that actually equates to the game and the developers themselves being those things, because a lot of them are so far up their high-horse's ass and into their own, that they cannot even understand how context works. And this is no exaggeration, since such reactions from them are evidence of this. And those kind of SJWs are still very much a problem.

Not entirely in contrast, yes, there are those anti-SJWs who e.g.: attack Idris Elba for the possibility of him becoming te next 007 and for many of them, their problem with him is just the color of his skin, because they are the fuckwit and neo-nazi-types.

However, there are those who consider e.g.: Elba becoming Bond to be nothing more than just another example of tokenization, a phenomenon that's been spreading all over the entertainment industry, because writers, producers and much of their target audience is convinced that by simply changing a well-established, famous, loved character's skin color automatically makes the whole thing progressive, woke and inclusive and that it somehow promotes diversity, when past that thin surface, it is nothing more than unimaginative, weak writing, a weak and ultimately token gesture that is an insult to creative writing and is merely a handout to placate the crowd. I'd also say it is an insult to the intelligence of the people it is aimed at, but, as it is the case, a lot of social justice warriors still lap it up, because they think it is a victory when it happens. And when some point all of this out to them, their immediate, knee-jerk reaction is rabid and toxic, as they cuss out and label anyone who disagrees with them, even those who try to be on their side. And when their reaction isn't rabid, it's just simply condescending, with an air of superiority and certainty, with which they tell others to "educate" themselves if they want to be better allies, because they fail to understand what their issue even is. To them, if someone has a problem with e.g.: a non-white character, then, it is automatically about race. It doesn't matter to them if it is actually has nothing to do with it, because they've already made up their minds about it and no matter how the person tries to explain what their issues is, they're being "racist." End of "argument."

And that is how many on the woke side perceive those who are critical of some things. They cannot see past their own biases and passions and make everything out to be about those same issues, even when they're not, not listening to explanation, the nuances of things, because all they want is the chance to scream labels at their perceived enemy, tell them off, high-five and then be in the comfortable belief they're fighting social injustice.

And of course, anyone who points out these negative elements and their unreasonable behavior (which most of them refuse to even admit exist) is written of as an edgelord or an incel or any of the other labels their quick to assign people who they're looking at through their red-tinted lenses. They're go-to words that signify their side is done listening to even reasonable dissections of certain issues, because they simply don't like hearing that they're letting their own biases affect the way they approach certain topics, issues and people that is preventing them from seeing where they're coming from.

In case of e.g.: racists, those who are blatantly as such, it is easy to see where they're coming from. There's no nuance, there's no other perspective to see, there's no argument to be considered. Problem is, because of THEM, everyone else who has an issue with the same thing is automatically perceived in the same way, even if their issue is different. And that wide brush smears even those with legitimate and potentially eye-opening concerns. Eye-opening, because even those who think they fight for social justice have their blind-spots that they refuse to acknowledge and those that want to point this out are not welcomed.
User avatar
MattHunX
 
Posts: 10947

Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#9  Postby Animavore » Jul 03, 2020 9:51 am

MattHunX wrote:feminists can spawn feminazis


No. Just no. Nothing compared to actual Nazis.

MattHunX wrote:But, the trailer didn't do it justice, because to many it gave the impression that it'll über-feminist, constantly woke, overly political and on the nose about everything.


There's that equation of feminists with Nazis, a group of people who actually existed who slaughtered millions of people, again. This type of hyperbole doesn't help, even undermines the point you think you're making.

And so what if Batwoman had've turned out that to be a feminist icon? Is it such a big deal in the scheme of things? Do you have to watch it?

MattHunX wrote:In case of e.g.: racists, those who are blatantly as such, it is easy to see where they're coming from. There's no nuance, there's no other perspective to see, there's no argument to be considered. Problem is, because of THEM, everyone else who has an issue with the same thing is automatically perceived in the same way, even if their issue is different.


Well you see, you talk about having legitimate problems but you undermine your whole argument when you used loaded words like feminazis, woke-culture, SJWs, PC-culture, and so on, which paints you as being on a "side", and at this moment in time a rather ugly and increasingly dangerous reactionary side, of a bullshit culture war. I never use such words when I make criticisms of things. They're completely irrelevant. I talk about the movies themselves on their own terms, not with reference to who they are aimed at or any political motivations real or imagined behind them (these companies only want to increase ticket sales). You complain about "divisiveness" but you use deliberately provocative phrasing which signals to others that you are one of us and not with them.

Also, in my experience, a lot of these more "rational" arguments against media that comes under attack come after the fact. After the initial anger burst some people, realising that's not going to wash, then come out with other reasons to mask their real reason. A good example is Battlefield V. After the initial outrage that women and POCs were included some tried to back-peddle and say no, it wasn't because of women and non-whites in-and-of itself, it was because it was insulting to the men who fought in the actual war to make light of the subject. Never mind that's there's historical precedence for this type of stylised version of WW2 in movies like Kelly's Heroes, and they were never bothered by Wolfenstein, or that MW:WWII's Rambo-style head-popping, gore-fest trailer did way more to sully the very serious nature of the war. No, we were supposed to believe these people really cared about the memory of their grandfathers and that somehow any deviation from how it really went down desecrates that memory. Boo-hoo!

Not buying it.
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 44673
Age: 42
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#10  Postby arugula2 » Jul 03, 2020 11:32 am

MattHunX wrote:And I make a distinction between being annoyed and being offended.

Annoyed is when something grates on my nerves, because something might be tiring, nonsensical, inconsistent or stupid, like some behavior or some writing in some movie or show.

Offended is what social justice warriors do when they get up in arms, screaming labels at e.g.: a stand-up comedian whom they've already decided (in their echo-chamber) is everything they say, never mind reality.

I hate to be "that guy"... no, that's a lie... nvm. I am that guy. :P It's of course not a major point you were making - I just love language, so it draws me in. The two words could be used interchangeably in what you're describing. There's maybe a general expectation in many places, that when someone says "offended" it's followed by something "serious", and "annoyed" is followed by something "not serious", but... thankfully, for now, the variety isn't completely washed out to the point that each word can claim exclusive domain. For example, one often talks about an "offensive odour" (or sight or sound) etc. To be offended by a smell (or sight or sound), and to be annoyed by a smell (or sight or sound), are generally acceptable uses of both words. I, for one, am glad that this is so, because it reminds me that language constantly changes, and is constantly 'becoming' something - which is in a way a metaphor for the more serious topic...

...that yours & Animavore's frigates are engaged in... to which I'm now catching up.

Image
Last edited by arugula2 on Jul 03, 2020 11:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1973

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#11  Postby MattHunX » Jul 03, 2020 11:33 am

Animavore wrote:
MattHunX wrote:feminists can spawn feminazis


MattHunX wrote:But, the trailer didn't do it justice, because to many it gave the impression that it'll über-feminist, constantly woke, overly political and on the nose about everything.


There's that equation of feminists with Nazis, a group of people who actually existed who slaughtered millions of people, again. This type of hyperbole doesn't help, even undermines the point you think you're making.



You...do know that when I use the term "feminazi" I don't, at all, equate any of them to nazis, it is simply a short-hand for feminists who, in their struggle to fight male toxicity become so doggedly mired in their own hate for it they don't noticed when they become just as toxic and hateful. It's why I say that such groups are unfortunate offshoots of otherwise perfectly justified and well-intentioned movements. And obviously nobody who hears or uses the term "feminazi", as a shorthand, is seriously ever likening them to actual nazis. Come on. You know this. We both know this.


Animavore wrote:And so what if Batwoman had've turned out that to be a feminist icon? Is it such a big deal in the scheme of things? Do you have to watch it?

Of course, there's nothing wrong with a feminist icon. The problem with many shows today, however, is that writers rarely bother to be creative with how they weave their social and political commentary into their work. It's fine if they make references and represent current social and political issues, when the characters and the dialogue they convey it through are more than just props and two-dimensional mouth-pieces, sometimes delivering lines that come off as though it could've been a speech spoken from a podium. Often it's on the nose, practically bashing the viewer over the head, outright telling them what is already obvious. Rarely are they ever subtle or clever about their message. When they could be. And watching shows and movies in fictitious universe is, among other things, about escapism. The very point of escapism is to not have real world issues shoved into one's face, when all they want is to temporarily immerse themselves in another world and briefly forget the shit that is in the real world, but that can still happen, mind you, if those references are well-written and measured. Now, Batwoman didn't really have any issues there. Anyone who says it did, is trying way too hard to be an edgelord, really. Personally, my problem with Batwoman, by the end of it, was the she didn't turn out to be different from all other characters in superhero shows.

Animavore wrote:
MattHunX wrote:In case of e.g.: racists, those who are blatantly as such, it is easy to see where they're coming from. There's no nuance, there's no other perspective to see, there's no argument to be considered. Problem is, because of THEM, everyone else who has an issue with the same thing is automatically perceived in the same way, even if their issue is different.


Well you see, you talk about having legitimate problems but you undermine your whole argument when you used loaded words like feminazis, woke-culture, SJWs, PC-culture, and so on, which paints you as being on a "side", and at this moment in time a rather ugly and increasingly dangerous reactionary side, of a bullshit culture war. I never use such words when I make criticisms of things. They're completely irrelevant. I talk about the movies themselves on their own terms, not with reference to who they are aimed at or any political motivations real or imagined behind them (these companies only want to increase ticket sales). You complain about "divisiveness" but you use deliberately provocative phrasing which signals to others that you are one of us and not with them.


While I admit it is contributing to the war some, it is difficult to talk about certain spades and not call them spades with whatever widely-understood shorthand there is for them. The intent, from me personally, isn't provocation, but to not be roundabout in describing who and what I have an issue with, because even though I am trying, I am still wasting a lot more time than I want (or should) on in-fighting. In the case of "feminazis", it is a simple shorthand for several sentences worth of an explanation one would otherwise need to make, every time, in order to explain that it's not feminists they have a problem with but their offshoot. It's easier to call the toxic elements a widely known shorthand and when it is still misunderstood and the ones using it are still perceived as anti-feminists and such, it's not on them to keep explaining themselves, anymore. It's on the other side to actually listen and acknowledge the existence of certain rotten elements. Same within "woke-culture" of "SJWs". The two might as well be considered the same thing, as the former came from and is populated by the latter. "PC-culture" predates that and one might say woke-culture is a product or an offshoot of it. But, just as they had negative offshoots that caused further schism in the culture war, so did the anti-all-that side and their offshoot, for a lack of a better term, is the "wannabe edgelords" who are often conflated with actual racists, bigots and whatnot. And because they are, the anti-side is made to look reactionary with no merit to their arguments. It's WHY we're arguing about this right now.

Animavore wrote:Also, in my experience, a lot of these more "rational" arguments against media that comes under attack come after the fact. After the initial anger burst some people, realising that's not going to wash, then come out with other reasons to mask their real reason. A good example is Battlefield V. After the initial outrage that women and POCs were included some tried to back-peddle and say no, it wasn't because of women and non-whites in-and-of itself, it was because it was insulting to the men who fought in the actual war to make light of the subject. Never mind that's there's historical precedence for this type of stylised version of WW2 in movies like Kelly's Heroes, and they were never bothered by Wolfenstein, or that MW:WWII's Rambo-style head-popping, gore-fest trailer did way more to sully the very serious nature of the war. No, we were supposed to believe these people really cared about the memory of their grandfathers and that somehow any deviation from how it really went down desecrates that memory. Boo-hoo!

Not buying it.


I don't even know what to call THAT. That sounds like another offshoot. Those that backpedal and try to explain their previous reactions, as though there was considerably more to it than plain racism or bigotry (likely in order to save face, whether they have a high-profile or not). That's a different breed, yet again. That's actually the more energy-wasting and spineless sort, because they're jumping through hoops to explain themselves, for damage control. Those who are blatantly racist and bigoted in their criticism of something don't pretend they have noble or moral objections and are unapologetic.
User avatar
MattHunX
 
Posts: 10947

Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#12  Postby arugula2 » Jul 03, 2020 11:43 am

MattHunX wrote:And obviously nobody who hears or uses the term "feminazi", as a shorthand, is seriously ever likening them to actual nazis. Come on. You know this. We both know this.

I intend to pick up with the discussion, but I had to comment quickly on this. This is off the mark, by a lot. Equating social justice movements with actual fascism (ie, "actual nazis") is a ubiquitous talking point. For the moment, I'm surprised that you (or anyone) seem not just unaware of this, but even to the point of expecting that everyone "knows" this isn't so. There is a canyon between your expectation here and the reality. I'm sure Maybe it's a one-off thing. But I'm going back to catch-up now.
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1973

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#13  Postby MattHunX » Jul 03, 2020 11:47 am

arugula2 wrote:
MattHunX wrote:And I make a distinction between being annoyed and being offended.

Annoyed is when something grates on my nerves, because something might be tiring, nonsensical, inconsistent or stupid, like some behavior or some writing in some movie or show.

Offended is what social justice warriors do when they get up in arms, screaming labels at e.g.: a stand-up comedian whom they've already decided (in their echo-chamber) is everything they say, never mind reality.

I hate to be "that guy"... no, that's a lie... nvm. I am that guy. :P It's of course not a major point you were making - I just love language, so it draws me in. The two words could be used interchangeably in what you're describing. There's maybe a general expectation in many places, that when someone says "offended" it's followed by something "serious", and "annoyed" is followed by something "not serious", but... thankfully, for now, the variety isn't completely washed out to the point that each word can claim exclusive domain. For example, one often talks about an "offensive odour" (or sight or sound) etc. To be offended by a smell (or sight or sound), and to be annoyed by a smell (or sight or sound), are generally acceptable uses of both words. I, for one, am glad that this is so, because it reminds me that language constantly changes, and is constantly 'becoming' something - which is in a way a metaphor for the more serious topic...

...that yours & Animavore's frigates are engaged in... to which I'm now catching up.

Image


Though my first language isn't English, I cannot and will never try to give excuses that my command of the language is somehow lacking in a way that it is limiting me in expressing myself clearly enough. With that said, our potentially perilous meandering in semantics isn't lost on me.
User avatar
MattHunX
 
Posts: 10947

Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#14  Postby arugula2 » Jul 03, 2020 12:04 pm

I acknowledge that it was a minor point (hence "semantics"), but actually much of the meat of the discussion has been about semantics, and the example of "offended" & "annoyed" provides not only an exact parallel there, but in the broader sense that language is a thing much more diverse in everyday usage than its users often realize. I'd already commented on this coincidence (ie, it's "always 'becoming'" something), so I'm underlining it now because I think it's relevant to the thinking in discussions like this.

But anyway... also distilling & responding more broadly soon.
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1973

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#15  Postby MattHunX » Jul 03, 2020 12:14 pm

arugula2 wrote:
MattHunX wrote:And obviously nobody who hears or uses the term "feminazi", as a shorthand, is seriously ever likening them to actual nazis. Come on. You know this. We both know this.

I intend to pick up with the discussion, but I had to comment quickly on this. This is off the mark, by a lot. Equating social justice movements with actual fascism (ie, "actual nazis") is a ubiquitous talking point. For the moment, I'm surprised that you (or anyone) seem not just unaware of this, but even to the point of expecting that everyone "knows" this isn't so. There is a canyon between your expectation here and the reality. I'm sure Maybe it's a one-off thing. But I'm going back to catch-up now.


Well, my apologies for grossly overestimating the general intelligence of people, then.

If anyone really has to explain their use of "feminazi", in this day and age of on and offline discussion and waste several sentences, every time the shorthand is used in a discussion, clarifying what it is a shorthand for and that they are obviously not equating even the toxic elements of e.g.: the feminist movement with real nazis, then, we're barely going to get to square one, here.

To be offensively frank, it's pathetic that it even needs to be explained. People who need that explanation weren't even paying enough attention to any discussion on the matter, in the past few years, or they're too new to it all, if they still misinterpret a simple shorthand. Sure, it's also a buzzword, but in my experience with SJWs, they love to throw their own buzzwords around at others they disagree with, whether the vitriol is warranted and their label is even applicable or not. But, they are rarely given criticism for it, because, oh snap, if one does dare try and hold up a mirror and show them they're behaving the same way as those they're arguing with, well...how dare they.
User avatar
MattHunX
 
Posts: 10947

Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#16  Postby arugula2 » Jul 03, 2020 1:31 pm

Edit: the only sane way I can think to contribute is to identify the major points as I absorb them, and distill them as best I can, with sparse quotes; and then add my own questions/thoughts in a way that's hopefully not an exact rehash of other posts.
Edit #2: changed the screenshot.

Link
MattHunX wrote:
Batwoman...

[in that, people judged the content prematurely, based on a preview]

Pinning this point, because it pertains to the Idris Elba point below.

Cyberpunk 2077

Inserting my own examples here, because you left it broad. In the broad sense, I think you are spot-on about the backlash (insofar as I'm aware of it). For example, an in-game billboard purports to advertise to queer, non-binary (in-game) onlookers. It depicts someone dressed in what most of us would call a "glam" and "feminine" style. And the character seems to have a boner. The slogan reads "mix it up". I think the ad is cheeky & visually arresting. It's not pejorative in any obvious way that I can see. And I haven't read the backlash yet, which I expect is semantically fraught & morally bankrupt - but I haven't been interested enough to test this.

Image

Then there's a gang called The Animals, and it's primarily made up of brown people. This is an instance of culture clash, most likely. For example, the game's director is a brown-skinned Frenchman. The development house is Polish. European pop culture is generally more nuanced than American, and has a more mature outlook. It doesn't surprise me that a lot of Americans are projecting their own specific connotations with the word "animal" (never mind that it's just as often a term of empowerment that conveys noblesse) and not curious about how the gang members themselves are depicted specifically. I have very limited sympathy for such attitudes - quick to dismiss, quick to generalize. But I'm in the same boat, of knowing very little about what the gang members are like. In my mind, it could go either way. If I had to guess, I'd guess that an artsy Frenchman and a team of European video game designers, will probably spawn an interesting, self-aware world with interesting characters, and it'll have nuance. The "sjw's" here are obtuse & premature, unless they know something I don't about the project.

Idris Elba

"...it is nothing more than unimaginative, weak writing, a weak and ultimately token gesture..."

"To them, if someone has a problem with e.g.: a non-white character, then, it is automatically about race."

This is exactly the issue, though. We don't know if Idris Elba's 007 qualifies as "nothing more than unimaginative, weak writing" etc. It doesn't exist yet. Ergo, anyone who feels the need to vocally dismiss the work as merely-pandering is committing the same fallacy as people who'd dismiss The Animals in Cyberpunk 2077 (see above) before seeing how the idea is really executed.

This point will probably come up a lot: it is almost never about the claims of the argument itself, it is usually about the mindset of the one making it. (Some of the discussion in this other thread touches on this point.) In the instance of Elba as Bond, or Donald Glover as Spider-Man for example, the backlash cannot be honestly depicted as a defense of good art. The very notion that what Bond fans (or Spider fans) are broadly defending is artistic quality is ridiculous. This is what they claim and often think they're railing about. It takes a certain amount of cynicism & distance to see through the ruse.

(This is also why language use matters - since people don't generally contextualize language use. People, similarly, don't contextualize the stances they're passionate about. It doesn't take much to realize that the average modern Bond fan doesn't have a stake in the artistic merits of Bond movies. Modern Bond movies are a mildly-diverting pile of garbage. So in this real-world context when the rabble rails against an Elba, it is indeed doing it because he's brown.)

In case of e.g.: racists, those who are blatantly as such, it is easy to see where they're coming from. There's no nuance, there's no other perspective to see, there's no argument to be considered. Problem is, because of THEM, everyone else who...

It's not about the individual - it never was, even for your position. You have not been defending an individual's argument (see Elba example above) but a broad backlash/reaction to something. This parsing, then, doesn't work (ie, that because interspersed within the rabble is the wisp of a legitimate artistic concern, ergo the rabble is misunderstood). The broadstrokes dismissal of such rabble is usually on-point, meaning the supposed "sjw" backlash generally has them dead to rights. This is also why your word "blatantly" is key here. (I can make a half-decent argument for why glorifying Confederate generals isn't "blatantly" racist.) The "blatant" racists are just the ones whose reaction to Elba as 007 is expressed in language that is obvious. The non-blatant racists are going to far outnumber them, of course, and most of them don't even realize they're being racist. The only metric that should matter to a dispassionate observer is how big the anti-Elba backlash is, in the context of typical backlash defending the artistic integrity of the Bond movie franchise.
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1973

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#17  Postby Animavore » Jul 03, 2020 2:26 pm

MattHunX wrote:You...do know that when I use the term "feminazi" I don't, at all, equate any of them to nazis, it is simply a short-hand for feminists who, in their struggle to fight male toxicity become so doggedly mired in their own hate for it they don't noticed when they become just as toxic and hateful. It's why I say that such groups are unfortunate offshoots of otherwise perfectly justified and well-intentioned movements. And obviously nobody who hears or uses the term "feminazi", as a shorthand, is seriously ever likening them to actual nazis. Come on. You know this. We both know this.


Even if I accept this rather weak explanation you still do yourself no favours. You complain that being smeared with the same brush as the sexist, women-hating, MRA, incel, reationary right etc. people, but you're using their language. It's like many Republicans in the US saying, "It's not fair people are equating us with Nazis and KKK" and then using the same dog-whistle words, words like 'degenerates', 'undesirables', 'Make America Great Again', or throw one armed salutes, and post anti-Semitic memes aimed at Soros. You can't expect to not be smeared with the same brush as someone who mindlessly chants on the comments on IGN "Get woke go broke" when you use similar catchphrases, ones that would even make said commentator reading you think, "Hey! He's one of us." This is similar to the problem with Donald Trump and why the likes of white supremacist groups like the KKK can listen to him and say, "I hear ye, Mr. President, loud and clear" [wink. wink. click. click.]".

MattHunX wrote:While I admit it is contributing to the war some, it is difficult to talk about certain spades and not call them spades with whatever widely-understood shorthand there is for them. The intent, from me personally, isn't provocation, but to not be roundabout in describing who and what I have an issue with, because even though I am trying, I am still wasting a lot more time than I want (or should) on in-fighting. In the case of "feminazis", it is a simple shorthand for several sentences worth of an explanation one would otherwise need to make, every time, in order to explain that it's not feminists they have a problem with but their offshoot. It's easier to call the toxic elements a widely known shorthand and when it is still misunderstood and the ones using it are still perceived as anti-feminists and such, it's not on them to keep explaining themselves, anymore. It's on the other side to actually listen and acknowledge the existence of certain rotten elements. Same within "woke-culture" of "SJWs". The two might as well be considered the same thing, as the former came from and is populated by the latter. "PC-culture" predates that and one might say woke-culture is a product or an offshoot of it. But, just as they had negative offshoots that caused further schism in the culture war, so did the anti-all-that side and their offshoot, for a lack of a better term, is the "wannabe edgelords" who are often conflated with actual racists, bigots and whatnot. And because they are, the anti-side is made to look reactionary with no merit to their arguments. It's WHY we're arguing about this right now.


Except you're not calling a spade a spade. SJW is a derogative term. No one self-identifies as an SJW, except ironically. This is not like calling the Alt-Right the Alt-Right, or incels incels. These guys identify as such. They are real groups with their own websites and everything. The term 'SJW' is practically meaningless. It has become a catch-all term for the far-right to mean "anyone I don't like" and has been applied to everyone from Democrats in general to ISIS(!).

Also I reject the comparison of some of the more zealous members of the PC left with those on the border fascist right as if they are the same thing just on opposite sides until they start deliberately endangering lives by not taking medical precautions, driving cars over protesters, start trying to roll back civil rights, start attacking marginalised groups, and generally committing acts of terrorism. There's no comparison with an 'SJW' with a (apparently, but this needs to be argued for) misguided opinion and Neo-fucking-Nazis.

If you feel the need to attack arguments made by individuals or groups it's those arguments you should attack. Otherwise all you are doing is ad hom-ing and straw-manning.
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 44673
Age: 42
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#18  Postby Animavore » Jul 03, 2020 2:37 pm

Here's what a genuine critique of Captain Marvel from one of the most progressive left YouTubers out there. One who gets called SJW a lot.



Here's the usual take-down from the same guy of the usual "critiques" from the anti-SJW crowds out there.



These are not people I would want to align with and would distance myself as far from as possibe. I certainly wouldn't using similar phrases to them and risk getting lumped in with them.
A most evolved electron.
User avatar
Animavore
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: The Scribbler
Posts: 44673
Age: 42
Male

Ireland (ie)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#19  Postby arugula2 » Jul 03, 2020 2:56 pm

The untangling is necessary, because it often escapes people who are reacting emotionally to something (this is what we are, it's human): you can't jump selectively between individual perspectives and popular trends. That's how every fascistic movement is built & propped up, via syllogistic fallacies that our brains are very bad at detecting. The only worthwhile observations here are concerned purely with trends. So if you can think of a "legitimate reason" why "someone" (even yourself) should rail against an artistic choice in a movie or show, etc, you can't then extend this to the trend, and you also can't assume that people know why the fuck they're railing most of the time, even individually. A statistician's coldness is a necessary ingredient, or the observation is probably not worth shit.
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1973

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Re: Television Shows you're currently Enjoying

#20  Postby arugula2 » Jul 03, 2020 3:10 pm

"Sjw" here (I guess anyone who's progressive, feminist, or recognizes the outsize role of white supremacy in American pop culture qualifies at some point). Captain Marvel was a nothing-movie with some (brief) good special effects. The central character is plastic & every other character & action seemed inconsequential. Even in the MCU, I'd rank it near the bottom in rewatchability, and for me that means I'll probably never watch it again unless I'm forced to, and I'll definitely be wearing earbuds. :snooty:
arugula

Podrán cortar todas las flores, pero no podrán detener la primavera.
User avatar
arugula2
 
Posts: 1973

Antarctica (aq)
Print view this post

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest