SJW - Revision history

2d4fag: Protected "SJW" ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))

2025-01-31T16:07:37Z

Protected "SJW" ([Edit=Allow only administrators] (indefinite) [Move=Allow only administrators] (indefinite))

← Older revision	Revision as of 16:07, 31 January 2025
(No difference)

imported>Administrator: 494 revisions imported

2023-06-22T15:47:45Z

494 revisions imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 15:47, 22 June 2023
(No difference)

imported>Administrator: 1 revision imported

2023-06-19T03:25:45Z

1 revision imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 03:25, 19 June 2023
(No difference)

1d4chan>Flufflion: /* See Also */

2023-02-18T01:57:24Z

1d4chan>Flufflion: /* Description */

2023-02-18T01:53:43Z

Description

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:53, 18 February 2023
Line 38:		Line 38:
	On that note, feel free to play a drinking game where you take a shot each time [[Nazi\|Godwin's Law]] is invoked, and be sure to bid your liver farewell beforehand.		On that note, feel free to play a drinking game where you take a shot each time [[Nazi\|Godwin's Law]] is invoked, and be sure to bid your liver farewell beforehand.

	This is not to say that criticality of media to try to identify problematic elements or to work out ways that things can be improved upon going forward is in of itself bad. Books, movies and TV shows from the 1950s were much more prone to casual racism and sexism than media made in recent years and that process is still ongoing. Though there are complexities and stumbling blocks, in general positive representation of marginalized groups is a good thing. Problems arise over defining which group is marginalized or whether they still are, for while marginalized groups definitely exist the label has been misused often enough to create a lot of cynicism around it (such as by those who claim "marginalized groups" in Western society is "everyone who's not a straight, white Christian boy or man").		This is not to say that criticality of media to try to identify problematic elements or to work out ways that things can be improved upon going forward is in of itself bad. Books, movies and TV shows from the 1950s were much more prone to casual racism and sexism than media made in recent years and that process is still ongoing. Though there are complexities and stumbling blocks, in general positive representation of marginalized groups is a good thing. Problems arise over defining which group is marginalized or whether they still are, for while marginalized groups definitely exist, the label has been misused often enough to create a lot of cynicism around it (such as by those who claim "marginalized groups" in Western society is "everyone who's not a straight, white Christian boy or man").

	What is important is that the newly about-to-be represented minorities need to be given their spots in a way that doesn't disrupt the context of said media/entertainment/story so that the fruit of progress looks still enjoyable. This is not helped by the fact that the SJW will invariably attempt to correct all of these issues in the most deliberately intrusive and obnoxious way possible in order to draw the maximum amount of attention towards themselves.		What is important is that the newly about-to-be represented minorities need to be given their spots in a way that doesn't disrupt the context of said media/entertainment/story so that the fruit of progress looks still enjoyable. This is not helped by the fact that the SJW will invariably attempt to correct all of these issues in the most deliberately intrusive and obnoxious way possible in order to draw the maximum amount of attention towards themselves.

1d4chan>Flufflion at 01:52, 18 February 2023

2023-02-18T01:52:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:52, 18 February 2023
Line 12:		Line 12:
	Skub's final form.		Skub's final form.

	'''SJW''' stands for '''Social Justice Warrior''', a term for ardently outspoken advocates of social change. The term has seen a lot of use. One use is a snarl word against anyone perceived to be further left on the political spectrum than the speaker (or /pol/, if the current user belongs there, though at that point it's basically everyone). The other common use is a catch-all term for Marxists, far-lefties, edgy contrarians, anarchists, radical feminists and other colorful characters who rant on men, Christians, conservatives, Westerners, Japanese people, capitalists, past status quos and every sexuality depending on the time of day. ~~However, especially according~~ to many leftists themselves, most "SJWs" ~~that~~ are ~~often mocked and torn apart across the internet end up usually being~~ merely Bleeding Heart Liberals with thin skin trying to earn brownie points by being outraged at whatever perceived injustice will get more attention. Apart from that, SJWs can also be invoked when something comes up when something is seen to either be A: Pandering to them or B: something that some people object to and discussion degenerates into a massive clusterfuck		'''SJW''' stands for '''Social Justice Warrior''', a term for ardently outspoken advocates of social change. The term has seen a lot of use. One use is a snarl word against anyone perceived to be further left on the political spectrum than the speaker (or /pol/, if the current user belongs there, though at that point it's basically everyone). The other common use is a catch-all term for Marxists, far-lefties, edgy contrarians, anarchists, radical feminists and other colorful characters who rant on men, Christians, conservatives, Westerners, Japanese people, capitalists, past status quos and every sexuality depending on the time of day.

			According to many leftists themselves, most "SJWs" are merely Bleeding Heart Liberals with thin skin trying to earn brownie points by being outraged at whatever perceived injustice will get more attention. Apart from that, SJWs can also be invoked when something comes up when something is seen to either be A: Pandering to them or B: something that some people object to and discussion degenerates into a massive clusterfuck.

	== History ==		== History ==
Line 22:		Line 24:
	== Description ==		== Description ==
	[[File:239337802 134880565514651 8911369165924328197 n.png\|thumb\|More or less like this (though we'd say Hobbits are more like fantasy Irish except for the Harfoots who ''were'' literal black people)]]		[[File:239337802 134880565514651 8911369165924328197 n.png\|thumb\|More or less like this (though we'd say Hobbits are more like fantasy Irish except for the Harfoots who ''were'' literal black people)]]
	The modern usage of SJW refers largely to the (usually but not always) left wing-group of people who demand that media and society be inclusive and inoffensive before all else - in practice, mostly just to groups said SJW is part of and whose beliefs align with them. The extreme ones even attempt to police all media to influence the course of the rest of society~~, and both~~ variants [[Edgy\|risk becoming - or getting weaponized by - bigoted subversives or malcontents attacking majority groups]].		The modern usage of SJW refers largely to the (usually but not always) left wing-group of people who demand that media and society be inclusive and inoffensive before all else - in practice, mostly just to groups said SJW is part of and whose beliefs align with them. The extreme ones even attempt to police or control the production ([[Communism\|if the latter sounds familiar, you're paying attention]]) of all media to influence the course of the rest of society. Both variants [[Edgy\|risk becoming - or getting weaponized by - bigoted subversives or malcontents attacking majority groups]].

	In short, it's associated with iconoclastic activists that advocate a view of progressive societal change that non-progressives and sometimes even progressive groups, like feminists and minority activists, perceive to be ostracizing, harmful or unnecessary. This being mostly subjective is why the definition is so [[skub\|contentious]] to begin with. Be especially cautious if someone brings the term up in matters beyond the discussion of video games or movies.		In short, it's associated with iconoclastic activists that advocate a view of progressive societal change that non-progressives and sometimes even progressive groups, like feminists and minority activists, perceive to be ostracizing, harmful or unnecessary. This being mostly subjective is why the definition is so [[skub\|contentious]] to begin with. Be especially cautious if someone brings the term up in matters beyond the discussion of video games or movies.
Line 36:		Line 38:
	On that note, feel free to play a drinking game where you take a shot each time [[Nazi\|Godwin's Law]] is invoked, and be sure to bid your liver farewell beforehand.		On that note, feel free to play a drinking game where you take a shot each time [[Nazi\|Godwin's Law]] is invoked, and be sure to bid your liver farewell beforehand.

	This is not to say that criticality of media to try to identify problematic elements or to work out ways that things can be improved upon going forward is in of itself bad. Books, movies and TV shows from the 1950s were much more prone to casual racism and sexism than media made in recent years and that process is still ongoing. Though there are complexities and stumbling blocks, in general positive representation of marginalized groups is a good thing. What is important is that the newly about-to-be represented minorities need to be given their spots in a way that doesn't disrupt the context of said media/entertainment/story so that the fruit of progress looks still enjoyable. This is not helped by the fact that the SJW will invariably attempt to correct all of these issues in the most deliberately intrusive and obnoxious way possible in order to draw the maximum amount of attention towards themselves.		This is not to say that criticality of media to try to identify problematic elements or to work out ways that things can be improved upon going forward is in of itself bad. Books, movies and TV shows from the 1950s were much more prone to casual racism and sexism than media made in recent years and that process is still ongoing. Though there are complexities and stumbling blocks, in general positive representation of marginalized groups is a good thing. Problems arise over defining which group is marginalized or whether they still are, for while marginalized groups definitely exist the label has been misused often enough to create a lot of cynicism around it (such as by those who claim "marginalized groups" in Western society is "everyone who's not a straight, white Christian boy or man").

			What is important is that the newly about-to-be represented minorities need to be given their spots in a way that doesn't disrupt the context of said media/entertainment/story so that the fruit of progress looks still enjoyable. This is not helped by the fact that the SJW will invariably attempt to correct all of these issues in the most deliberately intrusive and obnoxious way possible in order to draw the maximum amount of attention towards themselves.

	Expect the affected thread and any other nearby discussion to be derailed in short order; this is becoming more and more frequent on /tg/ lately as hobbies like [[Magic: The Gathering\|MTG]], [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and [[Warhammer 40k]] are being subjected to changes that are viewed as "progressive" and generate unholy waves of skub (see [[Erda]] for a particularly egregious example). This often appears in the forms of users being accused of bigotry for either not checking off enough "oppressed minority" checkboxes in character creation, or else portraying certain groups too positively. They'd rather spend billions to rewrite history or have black elves, hobbits and mermaids on TV instead of help struggling communities reach the same level of prosperity. Or just create new properties that are good enough for people to want to watch them on their own merits rather than destroying properties which already exist.		Expect the affected thread and any other nearby discussion to be derailed in short order; this is becoming more and more frequent on /tg/ lately as hobbies like [[Magic: The Gathering\|MTG]], [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and [[Warhammer 40k]] are being subjected to changes that are viewed as "progressive" and generate unholy waves of skub (see [[Erda]] for a particularly egregious example). This often appears in the forms of users being accused of bigotry for either not checking off enough "oppressed minority" checkboxes in character creation, or else portraying certain groups too positively. They'd rather spend billions to rewrite history or have black elves, hobbits and mermaids on TV instead of help struggling communities reach the same level of prosperity. Or just create new properties that are good enough for people to want to watch them on their own merits rather than destroying properties which already exist.

1d4chan>Lord Of The Lemmings: I edited this because I don't see how to corporatization of internet slang is relevant to the history of SJW as a term and as a type of person.

2023-01-30T15:51:52Z

I edited this because I don't see how to corporatization of internet slang is relevant to the history of SJW as a term and as a type of person.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:51, 30 January 2023
Line 12:		Line 12:
	Skub's final form.		Skub's final form.

	'''SJW''' stands for '''Social Justice Warrior''', a term for ardently outspoken advocates of social change. The term has seen a lot of use. One use is a snarl word against anyone perceived to be further left on the political spectrum than the speaker (or /pol/, if the current user belongs there, though at that point it's basically everyone). The other common use is a catch-all term for Marxists ~~(including off-shoots like Stalinists/Maoists/all the rest)~~, far-lefties, edgy contrarians, anarchists, radical feminists and other colorful characters who rant on men, Christians, conservatives, Westerners, Japanese people, capitalists, past status quos and every sexuality depending on the time of day. However, especially according to many leftists themselves, most "SJWs" that are often mocked and torn apart across the internet end up usually being merely Bleeding Heart Liberals with thin skin trying to earn brownie points by being outraged at whatever perceived injustice will get more attention. Apart from that, SJWs can also be invoked when something comes up when something is seen to either be A: Pandering to them or B: something that some people object to and discussion degenerates into a massive clusterfuck		'''SJW''' stands for '''Social Justice Warrior''', a term for ardently outspoken advocates of social change. The term has seen a lot of use. One use is a snarl word against anyone perceived to be further left on the political spectrum than the speaker (or /pol/, if the current user belongs there, though at that point it's basically everyone). The other common use is a catch-all term for Marxists, far-lefties, edgy contrarians, anarchists, radical feminists and other colorful characters who rant on men, Christians, conservatives, Westerners, Japanese people, capitalists, past status quos and every sexuality depending on the time of day. However, especially according to many leftists themselves, most "SJWs" that are often mocked and torn apart across the internet end up usually being merely Bleeding Heart Liberals with thin skin trying to earn brownie points by being outraged at whatever perceived injustice will get more attention. Apart from that, SJWs can also be invoked when something comes up when something is seen to either be A: Pandering to them or B: something that some people object to and discussion degenerates into a massive clusterfuck

	== History ==		== History ==
Line 19:		Line 19:
	Nowadays, it has unsavory connotations to most people who browse the internet. This began in the early 2010's and has become almost universally negative ever since. This went fully mainstream in 2014 as a by-product of Gamergate, as popularized on websites such as Reddit, Twitter and 4chan - most of all those on [[/pol/]] and /v/.		Nowadays, it has unsavory connotations to most people who browse the internet. This began in the early 2010's and has become almost universally negative ever since. This went fully mainstream in 2014 as a by-product of Gamergate, as popularized on websites such as Reddit, Twitter and 4chan - most of all those on [[/pol/]] and /v/.

	Most internet lingo lives and dies on the internet: emerging, catching on, enjoys it's brief heyday and eventually fades away. If the normies begin to use it and especially when corporate types begin slapping it onto ads, usually that's it's death knell. SJW (along with a few other similar lines) have proven somewhat exceptional, and have been adopted as a snarl word by the established Right Wing media, with groups such as Fox News throwing it around like "Mazel Tov" at a jewish wedding since the end of the Obama administration.

	== Description ==		== Description ==
Line 39:		Line 38:
	This is not to say that criticality of media to try to identify problematic elements or to work out ways that things can be improved upon going forward is in of itself bad. Books, movies and TV shows from the 1950s were much more prone to casual racism and sexism than media made in recent years and that process is still ongoing. Though there are complexities and stumbling blocks, in general positive representation of marginalized groups is a good thing. What is important is that the newly about-to-be represented minorities need to be given their spots in a way that doesn't disrupt the context of said media/entertainment/story so that the fruit of progress looks still enjoyable. This is not helped by the fact that the SJW will invariably attempt to correct all of these issues in the most deliberately intrusive and obnoxious way possible in order to draw the maximum amount of attention towards themselves.		This is not to say that criticality of media to try to identify problematic elements or to work out ways that things can be improved upon going forward is in of itself bad. Books, movies and TV shows from the 1950s were much more prone to casual racism and sexism than media made in recent years and that process is still ongoing. Though there are complexities and stumbling blocks, in general positive representation of marginalized groups is a good thing. What is important is that the newly about-to-be represented minorities need to be given their spots in a way that doesn't disrupt the context of said media/entertainment/story so that the fruit of progress looks still enjoyable. This is not helped by the fact that the SJW will invariably attempt to correct all of these issues in the most deliberately intrusive and obnoxious way possible in order to draw the maximum amount of attention towards themselves.

	Expect the affected thread and any other nearby discussion to be derailed in short order; this is becoming more and more frequent on /tg/ lately as hobbies like [[Magic: The Gathering\|MTG]], [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and [[Warhammer 40k]] are being subjected to changes that are viewed as "progressive" and generate unholy waves of skub (see [[Erda]] for a particularly egregious example). This often appears in the forms of users being accused of bigotry for either not checking off enough "oppressed minority" checkboxes in character creation, or else portraying certain groups too positively. ~~Because in their virtue signaling, they~~'d rather spend billions to rewrite history or have black elves, hobbits and mermaids on TV instead of help struggling communities reach the same level of prosperity. Or just create new properties that are good enough for people to want to watch them on their own merits rather than destroying properties which already exist.		Expect the affected thread and any other nearby discussion to be derailed in short order; this is becoming more and more frequent on /tg/ lately as hobbies like [[Magic: The Gathering\|MTG]], [[Dungeons and Dragons]] and [[Warhammer 40k]] are being subjected to changes that are viewed as "progressive" and generate unholy waves of skub (see [[Erda]] for a particularly egregious example). This often appears in the forms of users being accused of bigotry for either not checking off enough "oppressed minority" checkboxes in character creation, or else portraying certain groups too positively. They'd rather spend billions to rewrite history or have black elves, hobbits and mermaids on TV instead of help struggling communities reach the same level of prosperity. Or just create new properties that are good enough for people to want to watch them on their own merits rather than destroying properties which already exist.

	The sources are generally the usual crowd of trolls, malcontents or people who miss the point of their ideals by virtue signaling - trying to look good in front of others by endorsing an idea or attacking anything that seems contrary to it. Naturally, most people who hold similar views prefer to voice them only when appropriate to do so, and outside of the radical fringe, they differ from the average fa/tg/uy only by the presence of a few things they think tabletop games could be better at doing.		The sources are generally the usual crowd of trolls, malcontents or people who miss the point of their ideals by virtue signaling - trying to look good in front of others by endorsing an idea or attacking anything that seems contrary to it. Naturally, most people who hold similar views prefer to voice them only when appropriate to do so, and outside of the radical fringe, they differ from the average fa/tg/uy only by the presence of a few things they think tabletop games could be better at doing.

	This can and does often lead to rifts in communities, fanbases and franchises, with creators (most often independent ones) facing harassment and death threats. Despite this, even the largest companies and fandoms aren't immune (as all sides of the [[Star Wars]] fandom can attest). Any legitimate criticisms are almost immediately lost in the mix of mob mentality - just like most of the internet - and identity politics.		This can and does often lead to rifts in communities, fanbases and franchises, with creators (most often independent ones) facing harassment and death threats. Despite this, even the largest companies and fandoms aren't immune (as all sides of the [[Star Wars]] fandom can attest). Any legitimate criticisms are almost immediately lost in the mix of mob mentality - just like most of the internet - and identity politics.

1d4chan>A Walrus: /* History */

2023-01-30T09:55:55Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:55, 30 January 2023
Line 19:		Line 19:
	Nowadays, it has unsavory connotations to most people who browse the internet. This began in the early 2010's and has become almost universally negative ever since. This went fully mainstream in 2014 as a by-product of Gamergate, as popularized on websites such as Reddit, Twitter and 4chan - most of all those on [[/pol/]] and /v/.		Nowadays, it has unsavory connotations to most people who browse the internet. This began in the early 2010's and has become almost universally negative ever since. This went fully mainstream in 2014 as a by-product of Gamergate, as popularized on websites such as Reddit, Twitter and 4chan - most of all those on [[/pol/]] and /v/.

	Most internet lingo lives and dies on the internet: emerging, catching on, enjoys it's heyday and eventually fades away. If the normies begin to use it and especially when corporate types begin slapping it onto ads, usually that's it's death knell. SJW (along with a few other similar lines) have proven somewhat exceptional, and have been adopted as a snarl word by the established Right Wing media, with groups such as Fox News throwing it around like "Mazel Tov" at a jewish wedding since the end of the Obama administration.		Most internet lingo lives and dies on the internet: emerging, catching on, enjoys it's brief heyday and eventually fades away. If the normies begin to use it and especially when corporate types begin slapping it onto ads, usually that's it's death knell. SJW (along with a few other similar lines) have proven somewhat exceptional, and have been adopted as a snarl word by the established Right Wing media, with groups such as Fox News throwing it around like "Mazel Tov" at a jewish wedding since the end of the Obama administration.

	== Description ==		== Description ==

1d4chan>A Walrus: /* History */

2023-01-30T09:55:01Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:55, 30 January 2023
Line 19:		Line 19:
	Nowadays, it has unsavory connotations to most people who browse the internet. This began in the early 2010's and has become almost universally negative ever since. This went fully mainstream in 2014 as a by-product of Gamergate, as popularized on websites such as Reddit, Twitter and 4chan - most of all those on [[/pol/]] and /v/.		Nowadays, it has unsavory connotations to most people who browse the internet. This began in the early 2010's and has become almost universally negative ever since. This went fully mainstream in 2014 as a by-product of Gamergate, as popularized on websites such as Reddit, Twitter and 4chan - most of all those on [[/pol/]] and /v/.

	Most internet lingo lives and dies on the internet: emerging, catching on and eventually ~~fading~~ away. If the normies begin to use it and especially when corporate types begin slapping it onto ads, usually that's it's death knell. SJW (along with a few other similar lines) have proven somewhat exceptional, and have been adopted as a snarl word by the established Right Wing media, with groups such as Fox News throwing it around like "Mazel Tov" at a jewish wedding since the end of the Obama administration.		Most internet lingo lives and dies on the internet: emerging, catching on, enjoys it's heyday and eventually fades away. If the normies begin to use it and especially when corporate types begin slapping it onto ads, usually that's it's death knell. SJW (along with a few other similar lines) have proven somewhat exceptional, and have been adopted as a snarl word by the established Right Wing media, with groups such as Fox News throwing it around like "Mazel Tov" at a jewish wedding since the end of the Obama administration.

	== Description ==		== Description ==

1d4chan>A Walrus: /* History */

2023-01-30T09:49:26Z

History

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:49, 30 January 2023
Line 19:		Line 19:
	Nowadays, it has unsavory connotations to most people who browse the internet. This began in the early 2010's and has become almost universally negative ever since. This went fully mainstream in 2014 as a by-product of Gamergate, as popularized on websites such as Reddit, Twitter and 4chan - most of all those on [[/pol/]] and /v/.		Nowadays, it has unsavory connotations to most people who browse the internet. This began in the early 2010's and has become almost universally negative ever since. This went fully mainstream in 2014 as a by-product of Gamergate, as popularized on websites such as Reddit, Twitter and 4chan - most of all those on [[/pol/]] and /v/.

	Most internet lingo lives and dies on the internet: emerging, catching on and eventually fading away. If the normies begin to use it and especially when corporate types begin slapping it onto ads, usually that's it's death knell. SJW (along with a few other similar lines) have proven somewhat exceptional, and have been adopted as a snarl word by the established Right Wing media, with groups such as Fox News throwing it around like Mazel Tov at a jewish wedding since the end of the Obama administration.		Most internet lingo lives and dies on the internet: emerging, catching on and eventually fading away. If the normies begin to use it and especially when corporate types begin slapping it onto ads, usually that's it's death knell. SJW (along with a few other similar lines) have proven somewhat exceptional, and have been adopted as a snarl word by the established Right Wing media, with groups such as Fox News throwing it around like "Mazel Tov" at a jewish wedding since the end of the Obama administration.

	== Description ==		== Description ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:57, 18 February 2023
Line 51:		Line 51:

	==See Also==		==See Also==
	*[[/pol/]] - /pol/ is the largest visible face of the "alt-right", the yang to the SJW's left-leaning yin... if the analogy works when one side has a worse track record and without at least the excuse of having a good cause to hide behind. SJW's regularly give ammunition to them by their needless antics, and /pol/ likewise gives ammunition to SJWs by their heinous threats.		*[[/pol/]] - /pol/ is the largest visible face of the "alt-right", the yang to the SJW's left-leaning yin... if the analogy works when one side has a worse track record and without at least the excuse of having a good cause to hide behind. SJW's regularly give ammunition to them by their needless antics and heinous threats, and /pol/ likewise gives ammunition to SJWs by their vitriol and heinous threats.
	*[[Nazi]] - SJW's ultimate boogeyman. Though gone for decades and despite everything, they still have [[/pol/\|a few sympathizers]]. As a result, it's often used by SJWs to describe people they don't like, regardless of those people's actual views or morality.		*[[Nazi]] - SJW's ultimate boogeyman. Though gone for decades and despite everything, they still have [[/pol/\|a few sympathizers]]. As a result, it's often used by SJWs to describe people they don't like, regardless of those people's actual views or morality.
	*[[Communism]] - The ideology that some SJWs adhere to or endorse. Which one and to what degree can vary widely.		*[[Communism]] - The ideology that some SJWs adhere to or endorse. Which one and to what degree can vary widely.