On 11/16/2017 07:38 PM, Eric Light wrote:
Hi Bryan,
The top reasons that SJW carries negative connotations are: Hey okay, that's a really good list of really good reasons to not like the phrase. That was actually great, thank you.
I've ... seen behaviour like that from afar. I understood it more as the original definition: "an individual promoting socially progressive views, including feminism, civil rights, multiculturalism, and identity politics".
A sizeable percentage of my friends meet the Wikipedia definition above - they'd be scandalised by what you've described.
It's pretty stink that you've never experienced it in a positive manner :( But thanks for filling me in on the bad sides.
Not at all, I think I definitely have had. It was normal for me growing up through the 80's, and living through the 90's to present. Egalitarianism is deeply rooted in western society, and we've been doing it and living it. Part of the problem is that each of the ideologies of feminism, civil rights, multiculturalism, identity politics encompass more then their titles necessarily promote in name alone. To then further generalize everything into SJW creates an amalgamation of unstructured, and poorly defined messages and objectives. Any figure purporting to represent any part or all of the above begins a message with, "As a member of ${ideology} I feel.." and then promotes an action based on emotional reasoning, that hasn't been thoroughly examined, and leads to fracturing within their groups, as they discover, the moniker of their ideology has a different, and often conflicting meaning from others who claim to be the same. Eg., Sex-negative feminism vs Sex-positive feminism. Speaking for myself, I must disclaim adherence to virtually any ideology, because it is inevitable that at least one version of any of them won't represent my views, or completely contradict them, or apply a blanket rule on problems that can only be decided appropriately on a case by case basis.