shredingskin wrote: There has been a lot of speakers that were not allowed in different colleges for being "too risque" (most funnilly Seinfeld, that is as tart as... tart I guess). What does it has to do ? That two random people just rambling around can have a more open conversation than people who should be open to debate and new ideas.
The things about policing language instead of saying "grow the fuck up",
And yeah, I'm condescending and a troll, but I'm not the one that has a flag of not being that. I might be a troll, but SJW are hypocrites (or just ignorant, I try not to input malice were things could be just caused by stupidity).
BTW, if you looked at the video (that you ignorantly supposed I didn't watch), they talk about how racist SJW, condescending to every culture, language police, hate for women that are sexual, that ties with pretty much what I said.
Things like "cultural appropiation" it's just hilarious, culture doesn't belongs to anybody (well, IP does, but this is not the case). And is always changing, the latest bloom of culture was when african americans got their hands on european instruments. Imagine how sad would have been if people said "don't mix cultures".
And you get just condescending people that say "you can't use a kimono" and "we can't have tacos" because it's racist while mexicans and japanese don't give a shit. The only "empowerment" there is in that is for the idiots that trip thinking they're the saviours of the lesser (that's what they think, infered from their actions).
Again if this joke it's THAT offensive to people:
Then you need to reevaluate how weakminded are you.
Probably are not gays that give a shit about the joke, just some random people thinking they should protect "the inferior" gays. They do that to feel good about themselves, nothing more.
You want to be offended ?
Oh btw if you need to be "proud" of something you didn't have anything to do (like being born in X place, or have X race), you better start doing something with your live, because you are looking too far out of yourself to have something to be proud of.
1. You say that Jerry Seinfeld and the people not invited to colleges means that the people who don't want them aren't open to debate and new ideas, while at the same time post a video of Jerry Seinfeld complaining about how people are too pc, showing he's not open to new ideas or even debate. Since people have different ideas than Jerry, apparently that means they're "too pc" rather than considering their viewpoint. In any case, both sides are equally incapable of going at this tunnel visioned and not trying to understand one another. Such is human nature. Plus, you're not even American, as far as I know, so I'm not sure why American colleges doing this even remotely concerns you.
2. Not all "SJW's" are the same. You talked about earlier how people are willing to group different people in different categories and place societal hierarchies, and discriminate, when you're perfectly willing to label anything that resembles social justice as a bad thing by labeling them "SJW's" because you disagree with them. Somehow, social justice is a bad thing now, in your eyes. Yet you talk of hypocrisy. You openly admit to being a troll, but bemoan a lack of transparency and open debate, and perfectly fine with throwing anyone who disagrees with you as an SJW. The hypocrite is you.
3. I am not going to use the term SJW going forward. I only use it ironically. I think anyone who labels people who, with good intentions for making things better for others, as an inherently bad thing, are on the wrong foot. In any case, some people definitely take it too far. But everyone always takes things too far. Does this mean that this makes all causes not worth fighting for, because there are hypocrites and extremists in the fringes? No. That's ludicrous. That said, it's quite true that there are some troublesome people who do this. The other day I volunteered for an equality Ordinance in my city and some guy gave off the idea that the only reason I should be around is because it allows them to tick off boxes for diversity and that I'm just a number. Did that color my opinion of him? Yes. Did it color my opinion of the entire Equality Ordinance volunteer team? Hell no. It's just one guy, and it would be highly foolish to think that.
4. I didn't watch the video. I'm not being hypocritical at all. I don't give a fuck about that video. I don't even know who the hell they are. Why should I dedicate my two hours to people I don't know and I don't know what subject they're discussing?
5. Your idea of cultural appropriation is quite incorrect. Cultural appropriation is when the dominant culture steals culture from others and claims it to be their culture or their creation. It's a problematic occurrence because it has deep roots in colonialism. It's problematic because it has people making jokes at other peoples expense. It's problematic because it erases peoples experiences and culture. I've experienced a lot of this, for instance, in the Buddhist scene, which has a lot of people dismissing Asian Buddhists as inferior because they practice Buddhism differently, without the recognition that they're practicing an Asian religion. They now claim Buddhism as there's and there's alone. Wearing kimonos are not inherently bad. But going to a Japanese Buddhist Zen Center, where mostly white people are in attendance, and a bunch of white women wearing kimonos and dressed like geisha, think that something that's something related to Zen - when it doesn't - simply because Zen is Japanese created, yeah, that's a problem. Whoever said that someone can't have taco's is being silly, though. You say Mexicans and Japanese don't give a shit, when Japanese have and many Asians have historically said there's a huge problem with treating their culture as a costume. Japanese definitely give a shit when random white women wear kimonos like it's a costume.
6. I agree that a lot of socially conscious white people have a problem with "saving the helpless minority" thing. It's quite sad and insulting. Right now in the USA we've got Bernie Sanders and a lot of white people are telling us Black folks to vote for him because "he's the best for you". It's quite condescending, and factors into that thing I talked about earlier where many only see racial minorities as just numbers to flex their agenda. But there's also many caring socially conscious white people. The problem with what you're doing is that you have filed all people who believe one way under an entire category, and think they all behave the same. It's quite regressive and adds nothing to bridging human communication. Still, many of us Black people and other minorities in America already recognize the hypocrisy, and don't need help pointing it out. We talk about it all the time. Pretty old news, but that doesn't mean it's fair to judge all people the same. Instead you should do so on a case by case basis.
But yeah, what you're referring to as the Great Progressive Hypocrisy, is nothing new, as you can read here:
http://rhrealitycheck.org/ablc/2015/08/ ... ogressive/But it shouldn't color your feelings of ALL people who lean in that direction.
In general though, I find the bulk of your talking points to be nothing more than projection and a lot of large assumptions.
You would do a lot better talking and attempting to understand than making those assumptions.