Not The Bees said:
[small]Here goes nothing...[/small]
I am of the recently labelled Social Justice Warrior variety, although I would much prefer to be a Bard. I'm much more verbose, I write, and my diplomacy is great. I have no upper body strength to speak of, and I'm a pacifist. So... Warrior just doesn't sit well with me. But that's mostly semantics, we can cover that later.
I game as well. Lots of them. Can't say whether I'd be a hardcore gamer (I've been told I'm not because I don't do X or don't do Y, or that I am because I do do X and do do Y (heh, do do). The point is, I fall into both those categories.
But can I for a moment get out my dusty old soapbox? I can? Thank you.
I really hate labels. I mean it. There are certain things I can't avoid, woman being one of them, the vagina between my legs kind of seals that deal. Pacifist is also locked in, can't stand fighting at all. Also, baker, I do make a lot of baked goods. But really, when it comes down to it, I don't fit into any one type of style of anything. None of us do. Humans aren't meant to be turned into black and white, yes and no, circle and squares. They're beautiful and intrinsic and that's why this world is so amazing every single day we wake up. Today I woke up and it's gross outside, I feel like ass, but I'm smiling because it's okay, I know that I'm going to come along someone today that's not me, that's different and interesting, who will have another opinion and I may not agree with them, but at least I can respect them and learn from them.
Every time we stick someone in a box to fit some preconceived notion we have about the world, we make the earth a little less colourful and infinitely duller. Perhaps it's a natural need to make everything tidy? I don't know. But just assuming that anyone who stands up for rights, despite perhaps never having those rights taken away, is some sort of social warrior, is ridiculous. We needed people like that all through history, and we will always need people like that. And, we need people that will call out the idiots who just drone on about all the good things they do, because those guys are assholes. No one likes standing next to them at parties, because they're pretentious, with their tweed sweaters and their Cosby glasses, and their Glenfidditch scotch.
The point is, we need each other. Putting each other in boxes and then ignoring each other isn't a way to fix the world, it's a way to make it worse. So, to everyone who has been suspended, or warned, or (holy crap!) banned because of this thread (seriously, wow) just take a moment to remember we're all humans. We're all wonderful in our own ways, even the sides of us that are complete idiots and dicks. Because we all have them, those shades of burnt umber that are ugly and gross, we just have to start looking for that nicer shade of lilac or salmon (it's not a bad colour) that's buried under there.
Now then, I'm taking my soap box, my orators stuff, and I'm going to social justice bard my way to the kingdom of... social justice... um... this analogy is going nowhere.
Well, as I said, the issue is less with you, so much than a lack of representation from the other side. Basically the way things stand now there is no real freedom of speech on the internet. Simply put all the platforms are privately owned, and the right to free speech was designed at a time when it was believed only the government would be powerful enough to quiet voices and silence dissent. Today it's a case where your typical website wields more power over free speech than elected officials. This is not likely to change soon, but it's created an environment where when one political point of view dominates most of the platforms they can effectively silence the other side. On a big issue like gay rights for example, someone can make all kinds of pro-gay comments, and even attack those who don't like gays, but say the opposite and someone can run up and whack you with a ban hammer for being intolerant. That's fine I suppose if it happens to support your point of view, and you won't see protests from people who disliked what was being said to begin with, but it's very one sided. What's more when you start trivializing the opinions of, and suppressing views held by millions of people... well, eventually that floodgate is going to burst. Just because you whack someone with a ban hammer does not mean that person disappeared, and just because people have to remain silent about disagreeing with you out of fear and a desire to speak on other subjects does not mean they disappeared. Right now your seeing a situation on geek culture sites where pretty much the only group you have the right to be discriminatory and offensive to are social conservatives and Republicans, and gee, despite claims they are trivial and about to die out any second now, there sure seems to be a lot of them now that the hornets nest got riled up, and imagine that, they are counter-attacking the other side and going after SJWs. I mean it's only one of the major political parties in the US (where both have been forecasting the imminant demise of the other pretty much forever, either saying the scared old men will die up, or the hippies will mature and face reality), geez I wonder if there might be a lot of them.
Basically my attitude at least is not so much that I want to see SJWs die, so much as I want to see balance and free speech on both sides. For example you can say your pro-gay stuff, the other side can say anti-gay stuff, if gays happen to get "scared and offended" oh well, it's a major political and social issue. Likewise people should reap what they sow so to speak, someone wants to talk liberal trash they should get the backlash and live with it, I do things from the other end despite the environment and don't exactly go crying every time someone disagrees with me or is a bit mean.
That said, being a SJW or Bard or whatever you want to be called generally comes from the fact that especially in this environment the people claiming to speak for various groups have no real experience or knowledge of the subjects they claim to be talking about. You basically wind up with a bunch of ivory tower idealists, hunched over keyboards, parroting political positions they have heard and read about, with no real knowledge of the subject matter or personal experience. They have been told specific things, feel guilty, and then run out as champions of people and causes they have no experience with. What's more most of them are tubby white guys who are sheltered in the suburbs and such, and in this environment are on these sites because they have immersed themselves in video games and geek culture to a huge degree. This is especially true of a lot of the people with platforms who use them for politics as much as gaming. Given what say Bob Chipman has said about his life experiences and what makes him qualified to discuss geek culture, make him qualified to say some of the things he does on social issues? This is a guy who produces shows for the internet and attends film screenings, and plays enough games to be an expert on them to do shows on it, he claims to have been doing this forever, pretty much having been doing this since he was a kid and getting picked on for the stuff he liked in school. How the heck does Bob know anything about the groups he champions? The same can be said of most SJWs. I mean you get some dude who will tell you they have 30 years experience as a hard core nerd and have spend all their money on video games and warhammer figures, while working full time in a cubicle on the east coast, and yet this guy is going to tell you what you should think about say the border crisis and the illegal immigrants flooding the southern states. Like he'll likely have to deal with the fallout from that, and is somehow more capable of judging the problem and what those people are like than the people who live there and deal with them. See, at least in my case I've explained why I think some of the things I do, and point it out constantly to explain why I have the knowledge I do and on what I base my opinions. Your typical SJW can't do that, any experience he might claim to have is from very controlled circumstances, or due to a particular political philosophy. What's more to be frank being tolerant is easier than not nowadays, because if your tolerant it means not having to actually do anything, and reduces the chance of your own life being disturbed. If say the US decides to eject what is it... 50 million illegals, and those people object, well that might actually spill over into your neighborhood or force you to do something.
In closing I'll say that it's possible some people labeled SJWs can justify their attitudes, but one can only call it like they see it. For example at some point Bob Chipman could justify his attitudes and experience, and say reveal he somehow actually spend 20 years in the peace corps. or something and travelled all over the place and prove it by putting up photos of his travels in one of his videos. Of course I very much doubt that's going to happen, and for every one SJW that might be able to justify having an opinion, there are probably going to be 50 who have no practical real world experience with what they are talking about. Idealists as opposed to realists... and frankly my experience has been the more you actually deal with these issues the more socially conservative you become. It's like when I was taking criminal justice, when you become a cop (which I never was) or something similar it changes your perspective entirely because you see things you never did. See someone like Martin Luthor King Jr. who was pointed out before wouldn't be considered a SJW even if he was very socially liberal (obviously) because he was out there dealing with all sides of the issue he represented, even if you disagreed with him, he's someone you had to acknowledge had the right to have an opinion on the matters he represented because he experienced them. In comparison someone like Bob (whom I pick on because he's become the infamous example, I actually like him and his shows, even if he likely doesn't feel the same) likes to sound off about black culture, white washing, and all kinds of other things, but I doubt he has experience with many of the black people he's talking about in doing episodes of "Game Overthinker" and attending movie viewings. Sure I'm sure he meets black people, probably even has some friends and colleagues, but the people he meets in the context of the life he has presents are not part of the culture that has become the center of socio-political discussions. It's doubtful many of them would say have much in common with the people of an inner city ghetto, or even the people of Ferguson simply on the merits of being someone Bob would run into in the course of attending movie pre-screenings, playing video games to comment on, and taping internet shows.
At least that's the best I can explain it, as unpopular as what I have to say might be.
