Reality check: SJWs don't want to help only persecute

[nac386]

I guess if the SJW's weren't making their own assumptions regarding intent when they try to brand people as racist, homophobe, etc., nobody would be peering into their psyche. What goes around comes around.

Virtue-signaling seldom involves any argument. Just shaming based on a knee-jerk PC reaction.

This post kind of reinforces what I mean though. Why is "virtue signaling" reserved for virtues being signaled by left wingers? Is it not virtue signaling when right wing virtues are being signaled? It is the same exact thing.

I think there is a silly hypocrisy in the term. Somehow, it only applies to left wingers that are deemed phony by right wingers. Meanwhile, the same right wingers who accuse leftists of virtue signaling spend most of their time signaling their own side's virtues.

Does this not seem silly to anyone else? I feel like our country is entirely dumbed down to spouting off catch phrases and buzz words instead of really putting any thought into what others say, and what they say.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Does this not seem silly to anyone else? I feel like our country is entirely dumbed down to spouting off catch phrases and buzz words instead of really putting any thought into what others say, and what they say.

Yes, it is a buzzword designed to shut down thought (or at least that is the effect). It's depressing how people kind of herd like that. And that one is particularly bad as it gets used to discredit any sense of morality or discussion about right and wrong.

 

[Daverisimo]

I see where you are coming from here, but people that lean left, have to put a stop to this stuff. It isn't OK to use the words in a way that is crying wolf. It makes those words meaningless.

I don't view SJW's as allies because of this damage they are doing.

Calling trump a Nazi is a good example of this. What happens if trump actually does something really dangerous, and no one is listening because he has already been called Hitler over and over?

Ugh, there's a lot to unpack here, so I'm probably going to end up coming back to this post and editing/adding to it quite a bit.

First off, you seem to be making two assumptions here (and please correct me if I'm wrong):
Firstly, you seem to be assuming that the majority of people advocating for social justice issues are, well...

Spoiler

Second, you seem to be under the assumption that there aren't any critics of this on the left.

The problem is that both of these assumptions are faulty. There's a term that I've come to really like called "nutpicking", which is the act of taking the most extreme example of the other side and then using that to represent the whole. Admittedly, the Trigglypuffs of the world make this easy, but has it occurred to you that reactionary groups and their devotees might have a vested interest in making sure examples like that float to the top (and I'm sure she's pretty buoyant)? And beyond that, there are critics of that sort of shit who are VERY far left. Here's a literal Communist criticizing political correctness


That being said, I think it's important to recognize the fact that as a (fucking) white male it's easier for me to be dispassionate about these sorts of things. I'm not likely to be harassed or assaulted on account of my skin color, or gender/gender expression, or sexual orientation, or religion. While it's inaccurate (and lazy) to call Trump a Nazi (which is why nobody important is doing that), it's equally dishonest to pretend that what can be considered a proto-fascist movement has sprung up around him (note: I am ABSOLUTELY NOT saying that applies to all, or even most people who voted for Trump). I think it's perfectly understandable that some people would be angry and scared.

 

[Gregolian]

This post kind of reinforces what I mean though. Why is "virtue signaling" reserved for virtues being signaled by left wingers? Is it not virtue signaling when right wing virtues are being signaled? It is the same exact thing.

I think there is a silly hypocrisy in the term. Somehow, it only applies to left wingers that are deemed phony by right wingers. Meanwhile, the same right wingers who accuse leftists of virtue signaling spend most of their time signaling their own side's virtues.

Does this not seem silly to anyone else? I feel like our country is entirely dumbed down to spouting off catch phrases and buzz words instead of really putting any thought into what others say, and what they say.

See, I always use "virtu signaling" for when people do the bullshit "flag overlays" and "pray for" shit.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Ugh, there's a lot to unpack here, so I'm probably going to end up coming back to this post and editing/adding to it quite a bit.

First off, you seem to be making two assumptions here (and please correct me if I'm wrong):
Firstly, you seem to be assuming that the majority of people advocating for social justice issues are, well...

Spoiler

Second, you seem to be under the assumption that there aren't any critics of this on the left.

The problem is that both of these assumptions are faulty. There's a term that I've come to really like called "nutpicking", which is the act of taking the most extreme example of the other side and then using that to represent the whole. Admittedly, the Trigglypuffs of the world make this easy, but has it occurred to you that reactionary groups and their devotees might have a vested interest in making sure examples like that float to the top (and I'm sure she's pretty buoyant)? And beyond that, there are critics of that sort of shit who are VERY far left. Here's a literal Communist criticizing political correctness


That being said, I think it's important to recognize the fact that as a (fucking) white male it's easier for me to be dispassionate about these sorts of things. I'm not likely to be harassed or assaulted on account of my skin color, or gender/gender expression, or sexual orientation, or religion. While it's inaccurate (and lazy) to call Trump a Nazi (which is why nobody important is doing that), it's equally dishonest to pretend that what can be considered a proto-fascist movement has sprung up around him (note: I am ABSOLUTELY NOT saying that applies to all, or even most people who voted for Trump). I think it's perfectly understandable that some people would be angry and scared.

Look, I'm fine with what you are saying here, and there is a lot of truth to it.

There are politicians and media that publicly state this stuff openly. It's not just some well intentioned stupid people with no power that can be ignored.

 

[Jack V Savage]

See, I always use "virtu signaling" for when people do the bullshit "flag overlays" and "pray for" shit.

Some people really believe prayers do something. And asking for them is also a way to communicate sympathy with victims. Is that bad? I don't see how. To me, the use of the buzzword is an attempt to signal an assumption of bad faith (which is fatal to any attempt at a reasonable discussion and mutual understanding) and an unintentional communication of a lack of independent thought (because it is a buzzword).

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

This post kind of reinforces what I mean though. Why is "virtue signaling" reserved for virtues being signaled by left wingers? Is it not virtue signaling when right wing virtues are being signaled? It is the same exact thing.

I think there is a silly hypocrisy in the term. Somehow, it only applies to left wingers that are deemed phony by right wingers. Meanwhile, the same right wingers who accuse leftists of virtue signaling spend most of their time signaling their own side's virtues.

Does this not seem silly to anyone else? I feel like our country is entirely dumbed down to spouting off catch phrases and buzz words instead of really putting any thought into what others say, and what they say.

I Didn't say it happened only on one side. But it's most heavily associated with SJW's since the "correcting" of people in front of others is a big part of what defines the term.

There's always hypocrisy. That doesn't mean that a large part of the SJW craze isn't them just trying to look good by making others look bad. Or thinking that labeling others as the enemy will bolster their own group status.

 

[nac386]

See, I always use "virtu signaling" for when people do the bullshit "flag overlays" and "pray for" shit.

And those people, who are publicly sending prayers (Does God require that you tell everyone on Facebook that you are praying?) and doing flag overlays, are the same people who attack "SJWs" for being vocal about issues that mean something to them. Maybe people just really care about prayer, and some really care about racism. Maybe that's not virtue signaling, just voicing your opinion.

That is the hypocrisy of the situation. It's blatant. Somebody would have to be completely oblivious to miss it.

 

[Gregolian]

Some people really believe prayers do something. And asking for them is also a way to communicate sympathy with victims. Is that bad? I don't see how. To me, the use of the buzzword is an attempt to signal an assumption of bad faith (which is fatal to any attempt at a reasonable discussion and mutual understanding) and an unintentional communication of a lack of independent thought (because it is a buzzword).

See, my thing though is the people doing the "#prayfor*insertcityhere*" are the SAME people (at least in my personal life) that the last week were talking shit about Catholics believing in (as they put it) magical wizard in the sky.

There's nothing wrong with doing something to show sympathy but it reeks of this to me especially when it's on like Facebook and someone has a France flag overlay and then their very next post is food.

I have the same eye roll reaction to that shit or the invariable "WE MUST DO SOMETHING" when a gun is used to do something heinous that I have when a conservative does the "THINK OF THE CHIRREN!" about gay marriage.

And those people, who are publicly sending prayers (Does God require that you tell everyone on Facebook that you are praying?) and doing flag overlays, are the same people who attack "SJWs" for being vocal about issues that mean something to them. Maybe people just really care about prayer, and really care about racism. Maybe that's not virtue signaling, just voicing your opinion.

That is the hypocrisy of the situation. It's blatant. Somebody would have to be completely oblivious to miss it.

I explained it above some to Jack but where I live and the people I know... the same person that would be called an SJW for having the fucking painted hair and being overweight as fuck with a button pin that says "being fat is ok" and rants about Catholics believing in the Bible are the same people doing the "pray for" shtick.

 

[nac386]

I Didn't say it happened only on one side. But it's most heavily associated with SJW's since the "correcting" of people in front of others is a big part of what defines the term.

There's always hypocrisy. That doesn't mean that a large part of the SJW craze isn't them just trying to look good by making others look bad. Or thinking that labeling others as the enemy will bolster their own group status.

You could easily replace "SJWs" with right-wingers and it would be the exact same statement with the exact same amount of truth.

 

[Jack V Savage]

See, my thing though is the people doing the "#prayfor*insertcityhere*" are the SAME people (at least in my personal life) that the last week were talking shit about Catholics believing in (as they put it) magical wizard in the sky.

There's nothing wrong with doing something to show sympathy but it reeks of this to me especially when it's on like Facebook and someone has a France flag overlay and then their very next post is food.

I have the same eye roll reaction to that shit or the invariable "WE MUST DO SOMETHING" when a gun is used to do something heinous that I have when a conservative does the "THINK OF THE CHIRREN!" about gay marriage.

OK. In my experience, it's religious people using the "pray for" thing. I'm totally OK with it. The flag overlay is a way to publicly express sympathy. I don't deny that one can plausibly accuse people who use it of trying to show that they're people who care about stuff, but I don't think that that's bad. I wish more people made an effort to A) do the right thing and B) show that they're doing the right thing. I think there's way too much cynicism in the discourse these days, and I think there are bad results that come from that. People who believe the worst about others all the time feel less motivation to strive for the best in themselves.

 

[Gregolian]

OK. In my experience, it's religious people using the "pray for" thing. I'm totally OK with it. The flag overlay is a way to publicly express sympathy. I don't deny that one can plausibly accuse people who use it of trying to show that they're people who care about stuff, but I don't think that that's bad. I wish more people made an effort to A) do the right thing and B) show that they're doing the right thing. I think there's way too much cynicism in the discourse these days, and I think there are bad results that come from that. People who believe the worst about others all the time feel less motivation to strive for the best in themselves.

I disagree completely with B. If you're doing the right thing for the sake of doing the right thing it shouldn't matter if people see or not.

Just in personal experience, when someone does "the right thing" just to show they're doing the right thing it takes away a ton of the "right thing" aspect from it for me. It comes from personally getting burned where someone helped me and my folks out moving shit around and then I overheard them later saying they only did it so people saw them helping. Pissed me off.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I disagree completely with B. If you're doing the right thing for the sake of doing the right thing it shouldn't matter if people see or not.

Just in personal experience, when someone does "the right thing" just to show they're doing the right thing it takes away a ton of the "right thing" aspect from it for me. It comes from personally getting burned where someone helped me and my folks out moving shit around and then I overheard them later saying they only did it so people saw them helping. Pissed me off.

The reason for B is that people respond to social cues. If you think everyone else is a dipshit, you're more likely to be one yourself. If you think everyone else is a decent person, you're going to probably try to be better.

 

[VivaRevolution]

This post kind of reinforces what I mean though. Why is "virtue signaling" reserved for virtues being signaled by left wingers? Is it not virtue signaling when right wing virtues are being signaled? It is the same exact thing.

I think there is a silly hypocrisy in the term. Somehow, it only applies to left wingers that are deemed phony by right wingers. Meanwhile, the same right wingers who accuse leftists of virtue signaling spend most of their time signaling their own side's virtues.

Does this not seem silly to anyone else? I feel like our country is entirely dumbed down to spouting off catch phrases and buzz words instead of really putting any thought into what others say, and what they say.

That is branding though. You are hearing that, without it being said.

You have to separate low info people, from those that arent. Identity politics and virtue signaling were far worse on the right, prior to Obama. That isn't true today.

 

[Jack V Savage]

That is branding though. You are hearing that, without it being said.

You have to separate low info people, from those that arent. Identity politics and virtue signaling were far worse on the right, prior to Obama. That isn't true today.

I think post-Obama, we're seeing a lot of negative virtue-signalling. People want to show how un-PC they are by expressing "ironically" racist views. But that encourages the real sleazes to come out of the wordwork, and moves the first group to be more genuinely accepting those views.

 

[Gregolian]

The reason for B is that people respond to social cues. If you think everyone else is a dipshit, you're more likely to be one yourself. If you think everyone else is a decent person, you're going to probably try to be better.

I can get that but, like I said, personal experience I've been "burned" so I'm a cynic cause of that and I don't see that going away really.

 

[Beastman09]

First, TS generalizes all people who express sympathy for the kid as being a "SJW"
Then, TS generalizes all people who called out the kid's mom for rebel-flag love, as a "SJW".


Maybe, TS is the true SJW

 

[Jack V Savage]

I can get that but, like I said, personal experience I've been "burned" so I'm a cynic cause of that and I don't see that going away really.

Fair enough, I guess.

Anyway, to sum up:

1. We shouldn't assume that expressions of virtue are "virtue signalling;"
2. Actual virtue-signalling serves a positive social function; and
3. The use of the buzzword does more to prevent good discussion than "virtue-signalling" does.

 

[VivaRevolution]

I think post-Obama, we're seeing a lot of negative virtue-signalling. People want to show how un-PC they are by expressing "ironically" racist views. But that encourages the real sleazes to come out of the wordwork, and moves the first group to more genuinely accepting those views.

The real sleaze's aren't racists, the real sleaze's have power.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The real sleaze's aren't racists, the real sleaze's have power.

There are lots of "real" sleazes. I think people like Spencer or Milo are real sleazes, and they have more power than the average person (because they have patrons and followers).