Another SJW hoax.
-
@dkf
The Montauban region is nice but I prefer to drive further south. Above Toulouse the hills are more rough and once South of Toulouse the Pyrenees start looming.
-
@Luhmann said in Another SJW hoax.:
The Montauban region is nice but I prefer to drive further south.
I don't know it at all. My picture's from quite a bit further north. (I've been to Toulouse, but only to the city itself. Meetings… meh.)
-
@dkf said in Another SJW hoax.:
My picture's from quite a bit further north.
Uh ...
then because I figured that out and started rambling about a different Tarn.
-
https://thesuflyer.com/2016/04/20/su reacts-to-racial-blackwell-drawing/
And then, if you've been paying attention, you probably knew this was coming:
http://college.usatoday.com/2016/04/27/black-students-connected-in-su-racist-drawing/
-
#whitepower
Jesus, are these future rocket scientists so deep in their hugbox that they really think anyone except them and brainless corporate marketers use hashtags outside Twatter?
-
@asdf said in Another SJW hoax.:
I'm not convinced that this was his motivation. SJWs do different stuff, this guy is just an asshole who hates Whole Foods for some reason.
I think someone needs to start a topic about how some Anti-SJW fool has his panties in a wad about construing some random malicious action a guy made towards a company as an SJW campaign. "Another Anti-SJW Hoax".
I want my 5 minutes back.
-
I've never met a True Scotsman.
-
@xaade look forward to the explanation of how faking a slur on a cake is somehow a campaign for social justice. What is it Social Justice against... companies that don't write slurs on cakes? This isn't some misconstrued micro-aggression that nobody else finds offensive but him. Either the cake is a lie or it isn't. If there was a slur on the cake, it really was offensive; and if there was no slur, then he's just a liar looking for fame and/or money.
-
@darkmatter Like nobodies ever harmed themselves and tried to blame another person for it...
He gets.
- The attention of being a victim.
- Bad mouthing the company.
- More evidence that everyone participates in -ism.
The problem is he chose the least likely company to do it.
But... you know what...
I bet you can find someone that believes in God and faked a miracle, and I wouldn't argue that such a thing is impossible.
-
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
I wouldn't argue that such a thing is impossible.
nor do I ever recall saying such.
My opinion is that this isn't so much an SJW hoax as it is a dumbass that faked a cake for fame, sympathy, and/or money. But if you're so deluded that everything you see is SJW, I can see how you'd be incapable of understanding the things that I typed.
-
-
-
@darkmatter said in Another SJW hoax.:
But if you're so deluded that everything you see is SJW, I can see how you'd be incapable of understanding the things that I typed.
At minimum he's jumping on the SJW bandwagon. I'm sure that the various hate hoaxes have had a variety of motives and goals.
-
-
@FrostCat said in Another SJW hoax.:
your waitress
That's a girl??? I would have sworn it was a dude.
-
@darkmatter said in Another SJW hoax.:
But if you're so deluded that everything you see is SJW
I have to.
Everything is racist, everything is sexist, everything is homophobic and you have to point it out.
Therefore, when I see someone trying to fake a scenario demonstrating sexism, racism, or homophobia, I have to conclude that they are participating in SJW. If I don't conclude that, then I'm accepting that such a community is build of No-True-Scotsman, and therefore any action that is disreputable, is not a true SJW, giving me no way to criticize their thoughts or actions.
This is such a group that says they are for equality, then want special rights to censor ideas they don't like. Then, if called out, they point to the "definition of feminism" and say, nahuh.... we didn't. So, faking a cake is totally within character. It will allow them to "point out -ism" and call for more censorship.
Even if the person who did this didn't identify as SJW, they are benefiting from it. And if Trump is benefitting from the KKK and therefore is racist. SJWs are benefiting from fake cakes and are therefore slanderers.
They, the SJW, have created these illogical paradoxes, so they'll at least have to put up with them when they break their own rules.
@darkmatter said in Another SJW hoax.:
for fame, sympathy, and/or money
Then, I'll say that every person using the gamergate hashtag to issue death threats is not a true gamergate, and we're back at square one.
You see, we're at an impasse here.
There are some valid ideas and criticisms that feminists have and are useful in pointing them out.
But they do so in the most destructive ways to the rights and freedoms of others, and then want to cry in their safe-space box when they face the criticism they leverage on others.
While there are important issues to solve.
The current generation of SJ champions are themselves incorrect and unethical, even if SOME of their dictionary definition values, which they don't see to hold, are valid in a vacuum apart from SJW tactics and actions.
Do I want to see more women in STEM? Yes.
Do I want a bunch of unprofessionals dictating how this is accomplished? No.I mean, from this group comes the idea of locking up all men in a man-library that women and children can check out of the library for play dates.
-
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
I have to conclude that they are participating in SJW.
There is an alternative. You could do what I do and not give a fuck.
Not giving a fuck is clinically proven to greatly reduce the number of SJWs in your bloodstream with no* side effects.
*this word was inserted by accident and cannot be removed due to a printing error.
Side effects include: bacon foot, fart smell, toadsilitus, bonetrousle, sometimes giving a fuck, and the inescapable release of death.
-
Not giving a fuck is what created SJWs.
I leave it up to your creativity to interpret that as you wish. The above statement is purposefully ambiguous.
-
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
Not giving a fuck is what created SJWs.
I leave it up to your creativity to interpret that as you wish. The above statement is purposefully ambiguous.
So you're saying that SJWs need to give more fucks?
-
@ben_lubar It's your interpretation.
Someone else might enjoy thinking that SJWs exist because they haven't been fucked.
Someone else might take it seriously as society not caring about important issues is what generated the need for SJW.
It's whatever you want to think.
The purpose of my satire is to create a playground for you to enjoy your own ideas. If it happens to make you think twice about something, better still.
-
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
Everything is racist, everything is sexist, everything is homophobic and you have to point it out.
Paranoia paranoia paranoia
-
@aliceif That's a quote, actually. Maybe you knew that, but just pointing it out for anyone who might not. And no, not linking to the source, it's by someone who already got enough money generating outrage and spouting bullshit online. Google should do fine for anyone really interested though.
-
@aliceif When people live in a mentality of paranoia, they do things that paranoid people do.... like writing messages on a cake because they're sure everything is out to get them, and they have to prove it.
-
@ben_lubar said in Another SJW hoax.:
Not giving a fuck is clinically proven to temporarily greatly reduce the number of SJWs in your bloodstream
As far as they are concerned, they'll get around to you eventually. Why do you think people bother to argue with them now? Because you will be doing it later, otherwise...or else just meekly accepting what they say.
-
@FrostCat I like Crowder's response.
Laugh them the fuck down, along with your entire audience, and watch them stammer while their humiliation tactics do nothing, because it's so fucking tired by now...
-
@boomzilla said in Another SJW hoax.:
At minimum he's jumping on the SJW bandwagon
Transgendered burns flag because the attention trans are getting brings unwanted suspicion on herself...
As more and more hoaxes are caught, people will stop taking these cases seriously.
"Oh, it was probably a [oppressed group member] that did it and is going to let [privileged group] take the blame. Ignore it.
These groups are undermining themselves.
-
-
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
I like Crowder's response.
That was a pretty good beatdown. I wonder if Mx Baby-face McTantrum had to retreat to a safe space afterwards.
I would LOVE to be a fly on the wall when she enters the real world.
-
-
@boomzilla #FWP
-
This just in... he admits: it was a hoax.
-
-
Whoa, wait, there was a LAWSUIT?!? It's one thing to shitpost for lulz and PR-- but to do it with the intention of involving a court of law is whole other layers of idiotic. He'll be lucky if they don't countersue.
-
Just because he admitted it's a hoax doesn't mean it's true. The hoax claim is just a counter-consipiracy by the anti-PC cartel.
-
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Another SJW hoax.:
He'll be lucky if they don't countersue.
They did countersue...and they dropped that suit when he dropped his.
BTW from what I read he didn't actually admit it was a hoax, just that the person he'd tried to be his scapegoat didn't do it.
-
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
I bet you can find someone that believes in God and faked a miracle, and I wouldn't argue that such a thing is impossible.
Would you argue that they're wrong, a moron, and that obviously they only have to fake evidence because God doesn't really exist? Because that's the parallel argument to the one you're making here.
-
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
Therefore, when I see someone
Who?
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
trying to fake a scenario demonstrating sexism, racism, or homophobia, I have to conclude that they are participating in SJW
What does SJW mean to you? Because I still haven't worked out what you clowns mean by the term other than some subset of "people who disagree with me" and a way to dismiss people because of other people who may or may not believe and promote the same ideas but are arbitrarily associated with them by you.
Hmm... looks like I @xaade'd a whole sentence.
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
If I don't conclude that, then I'm accepting that such a community is build of No-True-Scotsman, and therefore any action that is disreputable, is not a true SJW, giving me no way to criticize their thoughts or actions.
Oh noes, you might have to treat individuals as individuals instead of lumping them all in the same "others" box! The horror!
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
they point to the "definition of feminism"
Hang on, are you talking to me? I do that to you nutjobs all the time because in your eagerness to label all the "others" you fucked up. If you're talking to me, then the first part of the previous sentence "says they are for equality" is true, but the second part "want special rights to censor ideas they don't like" certainly isn't. So... "nahuh.... we didn't". You sure nailed that one.
-
It goes that, just because someone fakes evidence, doesn't mean they don't happen to produce fake evidence for something that is real. And it also goes that, some company, could very well have produced such a cake on their own. But that doesn't mean that the faker (cake or miracle) isn't a liar.
A good example is in the last book of the Narnia series, where a character poses as the metaphorical antichrist. It didn't mean that Aslan wasn't real just because someone pretended to be Aslan and wore a lion suit. However, the character was a liar.
@another_sam said in Another SJW hoax.:
Who?
Pointless question. Even if I had many more scenarios like this, you'd still say "Who?" as if none of them happened.
@another_sam said in Another SJW hoax.:
What does SJW mean to you?
I don't want to get into this again. It makes you froth at the mouth.
From now on I'm going to use "advocate for social justice".
@another_sam said in Another SJW hoax.:
than some subset of "people who disagree with me" and a way to dismiss people because of other people who may or may not believe and promote the same ideas but are arbitrarily associated with them by you.
It's a fucking mirror.... and it's talking.
@another_sam said in Another SJW hoax.:
Oh noes, you might have to treat individuals as individuals instead of lumping them all in the same "others" box! The horror!
GamerGate.
Feel free to unwind what you just said.
Maybe not, you're not blakeyrat... I apologize. But I'm curious how you'll respond.
@another_sam said in Another SJW hoax.:
Hang on, are you talking to me?
No.
Not everything I say is directed at you.
It must be unusual having the world not revolve around you for once.
@another_sam said in Another SJW hoax.:
"says they are for equality" is true, but the second part "want special rights to censor ideas they don't like" certainly isn't
That statement is pointless, because you agreed to treat individuals as individuals. You can define social justice as "advocates for equality". But that doesn't mean that what they practice and the political solutions they advocate actually line up with "equality".
This is my problem with the "definition for social justice". It's either a lie or a useless tautology, and that varies from individual to individual who participates in such activism.
On occasion, the person actually believes in true social justice. Often these are the people that become aware of the seesaw being advocated by other activists, and they accept a reasonable compromise as a solution. They understand that, just because someone starts from a position of disadvantage, doesn't mean you make their lot better by shaming or stealing advantages that others have.
There's nothing wrong with a ramp for disabled people. But often times suggestions that I hear would be equivalent to making the door shorter because disabled people are in a wheelchair, and therefore everyone else should have to take a disadvantage like bending down to get under the door. Inevitably, such ideologies make it just easier to live in a wheelchair. See testing for school and college as a real life example.
-
So, either he just did it for attention, or he's not a true-scotsman for social justice.
Because people arguing for social justice cannot do wrong. If they do wrong, they are not part of the group that argues for social justice.
It must be so convenient to be the soapbox group in today's generation. However, the rest of us have to accept that Hitler was a conservative Christian, in a bid to make conservative Christians EEEEVIIILLLLL.... even though if you read what the guy wrote and his speeches, he was so obviously socialistic and a multi-religion-dabbler that he'd probably laugh at or slap you if you mentioned capitalism around him. On the other hand, he advocated for traditional family roles, but did so under a collectivist's context. It was an odd brand of socialism, but not surprising for it's period of time.
Hopefully this will be the end of "justified slander" that activists seem to find appealing lately.
-
@xaade said in Another SJW hoax.:
From now on I'm going to use "advocate for social justice".
Did you call?
-
-
@dkf corrected in Another SJW hoax.:
not a true-scotsper
sonchild for social justiceGet it right, FFS...
-
@another_sam said in Another SJW hoax.:
What does SJW mean to you? Because I still haven't worked out what you clowns mean by the term other than some subset of "people who disagree with me" and a way to dismiss people because of other people who may or may not believe and promote the same ideas but are arbitrarily associated with them by you.
Think of the people who tell us that doing yoga or having dreadlocks is cultural appropriation. Or the people who tell us that a museum display where you can view and touch kimonos is racist. Black people can't be racist. Use terms like heteropatriarchy seriously. Think that MLK Jr's I Have A Dream speech was actually a microaggression.
-
@boomzilla said in Another SJW hoax.:
doing yoga or having dreadlocks is cultural appropriation.
Cultural appropriation is the adoption or use of elements of one culture by members of a different culture.
-- WikipediaI mean, you can argue all day about whether or not it's wrong, but that's literally what the phrase means. Using words correctly is apparently just as retarded as "Black people can't be racist" to you?
-
@Yamikuronue This is where the waters get muddy.
People like to use the words and then wash their hands of any hypocrisy they are practicing because, look at the definition.
So, it makes it pretty hard to discuss anything.
See @another_sam alternating back and forth between not-a-true-scotsman, and I-haz-the-definition-of-feminism.
Either we're going to stop categorizing and everyone has their own beliefs.
Or we're going to hold people accountable to the hashtags they use.
Until then.... the definitions are meaningless.
-
@Yamikuronue said in Another SJW hoax.:
I mean, you can argue all day about whether or not it's wrong, but that's literally what the phrase means.
But that's not all it means. It's also about oppression and how unfair it is that "elements are copied from a minority culture by members of the dominant culture."
@Yamikuronue said in Another SJW hoax.:
Using words correctly is apparently just as retarded as "Black people can't be racist" to you?
Yes, because it's the usage of the words themselves that's the problem. It's actually pretty close to "Black people can't be racist."
-
@boomzilla said in Another SJW hoax.:
It's also about oppression and how unfair it is
Right. And if you said "The kind of people who say Yoga is wrong because of cultural appropriation" I'd see your argument. But you didn't say that, did you?
I'mma be blunt here: the way you talk, you give the impression all liberals are SJWs and it's impossible to talk about racism without being one.
-
@Yamikuronue said in Another SJW hoax.:
And if you said "The kind of people who say Yoga is wrong because of cultural appropriation" I'd see your argument
If it was just a dictionary we were looking at, then you're right.
But philosophical arguments go beyond the dictionary definition and adopt the premises and conclusions inferred by them.
So it's intellectually dishonest to say that the definition of cultural-appropriation ends at the dictionary definition in the context of these arguments.
-
@xaade Sure, but the sentence Boomzilla actually said makes it impossible to define cultural appropriation without being an SJW.
-
@Yamikuronue said in Another SJW hoax.:
said makes it impossible to define cultural appropriation without being an SJW
That's why I say the words are meaningless...
For example, in the context of many of the arguments, where the term bigotry ends up being used, bigotry actually means "unethical bigotry". Because bigotry as the dictionary term isn't inherently bad.
If someone had the idea that pedophilia was great!, then it's almost a social responsibility to be discriminatory against them (for the purposes of safety).
But that's not what they do. They choose to use the "dictionary definition" of feminism as equality when:
- "Feminism" as a term inherently implies bias.
- Their actions are very important, and the associated beliefs are very important.
Being able to drop the context when questioned to give the dictionary definition, makes the term meaningless. Because it means that the person using the term isn't actually a feminist at all, giving the word no meaning when they use it.
-
@xaade Okay, but you're not following my point.
If someone asked me "What does 'cultural appropriation' mean?" and I replied "It's when one culture copies elements of another culture, like white people with dreadlocks", now I'm an SJW without ever having said dreads are bad.
(FWIW, white dreadlocks are stupid and often done for racist reasons, but Yoga's pretty much cool in my book, as it's usually just done for exercise)
-
@xaade Also, look, I'm not getting into this with you. I'm arguing a very specific point here, and I'm not going to get dragged into a larger argument right now.
