Tag Archives: radicalism

The SJW Cult – Recruiting Renfields

Before I comment on this article , which I am told to properly quote and will do, I must mention I think parts of it are ludic (definitely the part about requiring celebrity signatures). However, the inclusion of a small joke does not make the overall concept less disturbing.

Briefly, it lists a series of expectations under the guise of a “friendship contract” meant to define the exact terms of a “fully loving relationship”.

They are clearly meant to define a decent individual in today’s western societies – a radical SJW determined to overturn the system by any means.

To start with, one would see the dreaming up of such a contract as a sad, desperate result of friendlessness turning someone so egotistical they resort to believing they are alone because they are too special and thus must demand more from others. One would also see it as a loner shooting themselves in the foot, looking all the more ridiculous and spiteful. Yet coming from a popular (as I understand) social justice activist, there might be some cause for concern of this being taken seriously.

The author is telling others that in order to befriend a social justice activist like himself, people should not only behave like complete nutcases but actually become that way. Anything less is unacceptable. This cause demands your entire life, your mind and your soul.

I hope to see the day one of them comes up with an idea that is so far fetched literally no one supports it, and their own crowd starts howling this is too much; we want our fucking lives back.

And I don’t use the term nutcases lightly as I have a very broad acceptance of whatever people choose to believe in, unless they are actually harming others as a result (and by harming I don’t mean expressing a different opinion). However, it’s easy to identify some attempts to replace natural human interaction, such as friendship, with an artificial travesty designed for political purposes. 

And calling the recruitment of political activists friendship is particularly slimy.

I’ve written hundreds of letters of recommendations, given countless formal and informal references, provided education on social justice topics via my unpaid and severely undervalued labor. I have often played life coach to people with oozing amounts of privilege, subjecting myself to well-intentioned yet willful violence. 

Did all of this not count for something? Is this what friendship is? A relationship of faux empathy, niceties, and unchecked violence through unacknowledged privilege. Is that what it’s always been?

Quite obviously, the one turning friendship into a mercantile affair is the author and not those seeking effortless help (such as a letter of recommendation), those “taking advantage” of the “education” given by the author of his own volition, or the people he “played life coach to” (advised on personal matters I assume) despite his hidden contempt for them due to their supposed privilege (which can be as simple as a different skin pigmentation as far as SJWs are concerned).

Unchecked violence through unacknowledged privilege insinuates that those people were carrying out an act of violence by simply existing in the conditions life had provided them with. Which is a really disturbing perspective but explains the mentality of the “oppressed” of the day.

Folks feel betrayed by my growth and exertion of self, as they feel betrayed by my evolution. How dare I demand their unnecessary evolution as well? I can feel the tension in current relationships, as folk creatively tell me that they don’t want to learn about the plight of undocumented peoples, challenge the ableist language they use, or think critically on how they engage fat people from a place of deficit.

Folks feel annoyed and despaired by anyone who will not let them exhale, let alone speak, without “pointing out” that they are guilty of unspeakable crimes simply by not taking on social justice crusades every bastard second of the day. When their every other word is “problematic” and they end up in situations like the uneducated snob making threats against a taxi driver for having a Hawaiian dancer doll on his dashboard:

When you hear the arrogance and entitlement, not to mention self-righteousness oozing out of this type of twat, you just about give up on part of the young generation.

No one in their right mind can stand these people. Their inability to make friends is not a surprise in the slightest.

Apparently, it becomes too exhausting to hang out with me. Which is to say, I have to be better in your presence or I have to deal with guilt when you’re around. Why can’t things go back to normal? Which is to say, let’s thrive in the violence of status quo together – we’ve got each other, even if my heel is at your neck.

He expects to befriend people he considers guilty by default of their “heel being at his neck”. That’s a hell of a start right there.

As I embrace this new and in many ways unrecognizable being, I am motivated to explore the meaning of a healthy and loving friendship.

Can you imagine fighting for liberation with a squad – the folks that love you in your fullness, and you love them in theirs? What does that feel like? Look like?

It would look a lot like Jonestown, judging by what is written below, which is anything but loving or healthy, but rather an attempt to control and manipulate someone. A healthy friendship involves respect and boundaries. None of that can be found in this article.

I want this list of expectations to speak to the well-intentioned people in my life — the folk that mean well but often render themselves unhelpful. The price of friendship has gone up and the only acceptable payment is risk taking and radical love.

Good luck on that one. He must think he’s pretty fucking special (as all snowflakes do) and that applicants will be queuing at the door for the great honour. I know this might sound needlessly derisive and sharp-tongued, but the tone of the article is really annoying.

Here is my working Friendship Contract:

Do you want to be my friend?

(YES) (NO) (*MAYBE) 

Please circle one.

*Maybe will be coded as a “No.” I’m hot stuff. This should not be difficult.

If the answer is yes, there are just ten expectations.

Everyone loves a confident fellow; however, there is a definite line between confidence and laughable arrogance. But anyway. The silliness is the least important issue.

Though it’s useful to point out that many presentations made by these activists on serious subject infantilise the reader (I recall nursery-style cartoons accompanied by text which seemed to be written for very simple people).

This can be reworded as hi, I want to be your best buddy; how would you like to overthrow the state with me?

Expectation #1: We Must Toughen Our Skin

We must be able to use language such as: white supremacy, anti-blackness, transphobia, and marginalization in our day-to-day vocabulary without someone getting into their feelings. Heck, I just used three of the four words in a conversation with my bank teller.

Our language should not be deemed taboo or provocative in nature. Having conversations about justice, equity, this murderous system, and our collective liberation should be as frequent as police brutality and as normal as black folk clinging to the paradox of resiliency.

We must have these critical conversations in the open and move beyond the emotions that immobilize us. Our fragility cannot be prioritized. We must get to the actual work. 

In other words, we must pester unsuspecting, innocent people by constantly throwing their so-called privilege in their faces, until we sound like we’ve either smoked something dodgy, taken cocaine too early in the morning or might need psychiatric help.

I understand that religious groups such as Jehovah’s Witnesses also practice door-to-door conversion attempts, but at least they are frank about their intentions and create a separate context for these attempts. And you are more than entitled to shut the door in their faces. Whereas forcing these conversations on people who have no choice but to deal with you as a customer, patient, co-worker etc (you name it) is incredibly inappropriate.

And asking someone to partake in this relentless activism is basically asking them to look like a nutter, day in and day out, risking isolation in the best case scenario (and potentially other consequences).

All I can think of is the twat hassling a taxi driver about a doll on his dashboard. This guy is asking others to be that contemptible twat.

SJWs, “Gaslighted” By Common Sense

Although 99.9% of articles written by (and for) social justice crusaders are off this planet, some manage to take reason into an even deeper black hole, never to be recovered again.

This is one of them. “Six unhelpful comments that gaslight people in conversations about social justice.” Leaving aside the nonsensical notion of unintentional gaslighting, which appears later in the article, the piece proves beyond doubt that SJWs are allergic to debate and to being questioned.

This would be a summary:

The result of this repeated questioning and doubting is that people start feeling like their observations of their oppression are wrong, they don’t have the right to talk about it, and it’s not real. (…)

Even if it feels like you’re just playing the devil’s advocate, providing food for thought, or helping people understand the other side, what seems like friendly debate to you can be deeply hurtful to someone else.

So, instead of invalidating someone’s experiences, thank them for teaching you. That can take a lot of mental and emotional energy.

And let them know you believe them. That’s something people who talk about their oppression unfortunately don’t hear enough.

That’s right. If anybody claims oppression, it must be real and your duty is to believe every word they say, in spite of any objection your brain matter or instincts might raise.

What seems like a friendly debate to you could just be a callous put-down and mockery, able to cause someone actual trauma. You’re so stupid you have no awareness of your own tone, vocabulary and manners; you can’t possibly determine the dynamics of this discussion with the judgement you use in your everyday life.

So you’d better shut up and thank them for teaching you, like the brainwashed little cultist that you are, because they are correct by default and whatever they say goes.

“This is a first world problem”

“How can you talk about microaggressions when girls in the Middle East are killed for trying to get an education?”

“Eating disorders are a first-world problem. Some people don’t even have food.”

This argument frequently comes up when people talk about issues faced by relatively privileged groups. It can have racist undertones, since the people with “real problems” are often from a different culture that the speaker doesn’t really understand.

There’s nothing racist about mentioning human rights abuses and the barbaric treatment some people face in other parts of the world. A different culture that the speaker doesn’t really understand can be subject to criticism regardless. I don’t need to “understand” why women are being stoned to death in order to know it’s horrific and undeserved. But for lack of better arguments, let’s just throw racism in to shut people up.

There is no logical comparison between eating disorders, which can cause serious health problems or even death, and are proper medical conditions, and the perceived microaggressions which twist a word or look or any minutia into a serious act of oppression.

Since we’re on this subject, here are a few relevant headlines from the same website, covering “issues” I’m sure would never occur to anyone with a real disadvantage in life (I’m not putting even more of their links here but you can find them by using the search bar):

  • “Why these toys need a body image make-over”
  • “Where are you from? How a seemingly innocent question is racist”
  • “5 ways to avoid sexism in your kid’s Halloween costumes”
  • “How to explore your gender when you’re a person who was assigned male at birth”

Adding to that numerous exposes of how you oppress others by eating foreign dishes without knowing the culture you’re “borrowing” from and so forth. These “problems” are not only demoted by tragedies from abroad but also by any other real issue anyone can come across.

It’s also dangerous because it implies that we should be grateful for being less oppressed than some people, rather than demand not to be oppressed at all.

No, it’s simply stating a fact. Prioritisation is a matter of mere logic. You don’t scream for medical attention for a scratch while someone next to you needs CPR. Whatever these middle class feminists claim to be enduring is not nearly as serious as facing beatings, maimings, executions or imprisonment for idiotic reasons. That is fact and mentioning it, whilst uncomfortable, is no less true.

As a woman, a person of color, or another member of an oppressed group, it’s easy to feel lucky when a man doesn’t rape you or a white person listens to you or anyone treats you like a human being.

This almost sounds like people of colour are being treated awfully in the western world, which is generally multicultural and has been for decades (if not centuries in some places) as to be grateful “when a white person listens to them”. It’s easy to feel lucky when a man doesn’t rape you? Do you expect every man to potentially do so, every day?

But as Susan B. Antony said, “Our [j]ob is not to make young women grateful. It is to make them ungrateful so they keep going. Gratitude never radicalized anybody.”

Pardon me again but since when is radicalisation anything to aspire to, as opposed to measured and rational thinking? What good has ever come out of extremism lately? Or ever?

Knowing that some people get third-degree burns doesn’t make first-degree burns hurt less. And bringing up more severe injuries is totally inappropriate when someone needs medical attention.

When is a crucial word here. Fortunately, no medical attention is needed by these activists – although some people might disagree! – but simply attention. Turning every displeasure into an injury to your psyche is not in itself healthy.

“We all bleed the same color” 

Feminism and other social justice movements are sometimes accused of being divisive, as if the divisions they’re calling attention to didn’t already exist. (…)

But here’s the thing: For a long time, people haven’t acknowledged that we’re all human and that commonalities between groups are stronger than the differences. And as a consequence, different groups of people have different experiences.

For a long time. Human history has indeed been long, filled with bloodshed and intolerance. But by and large, they do acknowledge that now – so why the hell sabotage that concept, so long fought for? Why emphasise the differences when at last there is a better way on the horizon? What makes SJWs better – or different – than the average skinhead, who is obsessed with these differences and cannot look past them?

Once, a man told me he understood what it was like to self-objectify because he often worried about how professional he looked. When I tried to explain that I was talking about something entirely different, he claimed that we’re all humans, so we should be able to understand one another’s emotions.

“Pain is pain,” his friend agreed.

But there are many different kinds of pain. And if it seems to you like a distinct form of pain someone else describes does not actually exist, maybe that’s because you’re too privileged to have experienced it.

The last paragraph is a fine example of projection. The man in question was not refusing to acknowledge the author’s experience but merely adding to the conversation by describing his own, albeit different. The author could not stand the focus being shifted or someone perceiving these internal struggles as similar.

I have a question – why insist on describing an experience or a feeling to someone you think is incapable of relating to it? It seems attempts to understand it by comparison are met with a door slammed in the face. It’s like saying you will never ever understand me, so just shut up and listen to me instead, just for the sake of it; any comments you make should be a direct recitation from my words; anything else is unacceptable.

 “Don’t let it get to you”

But even if we were all robots who could decide not to mind when others mistreated us, that wouldn’t change the fact that they were mistreating us. It would just make us really good at handling mistreatment.

Sorry to be the bringer of bad news when real (but not systemic) mistreatment is involved: you will never change an asshole. What you can do is get away from them and find a different environment. There is no way to escape nastiness completely, unless you live in self-imposed isolation. Assholes will be assholes and no amount of coercion to behave differently will have an impact on them (aside from making them covert and devious, which also makes them more dangerous). The only impact the PC brigade is having is on innocent people targeted for unintended trifles or differences of opinion, such as opposing this trend.

Political correctness is really just being a good person. By making it sound like some formal code of conduct, people demonize basic efforts to make others feel comfortable and included.

To members of a privileged group, expectations like using gender-inclusive language and avoiding ableist expressions can feel like arbitrary rules. But for the people personally affected by political incorrectness, this behavior makes a huge difference.

Sorry to be a bad person, but you’re not going to shove down my throat language which was literally invented yesterday to please groups of the same recent formation, of which some are merely trends. I’m not going to learn a whole dictionary of 300 gender identities, 20 preferred pronouns and 50 different types of sexual preferences. You’re not going to turn my entire life into a tireless, neurotic attempt to not offend anyone around me, which is impossible anyway.

Even if we don’t fully understand how certain ways of speaking or acting affect groups we don’t belong to, it takes very little out of us when we accommodate them, while it takes a lot out of them when we don’t.

To those who have lost their jobs or have been fined or imprisoned for not being PC, I believe this is a far more serious and dangerous matter than just “being nice”. And when something is demanded in such a radical, poisonous and intolerant way, you can be sure that most will either reject it or claim to embrace it out of fear, which will in turn cause seething hatred for the groups making these demands, whether they are at fault or simply being used by Marxist radicals. Either way, nothing good comes out of it. I doubt those people would rather be secretly hated or feared than hearing the “wrong pronouns” beings used when others refer to them.

Political correctness isn’t hurting anyone. Political incorrectness is. No brainer. Next.

Political correctness gets capable people fired, gets innocent people treated as criminals and puts society into a state of paranoia. No brain. Next.

But sometimes, we’re not trying to attract positivity into our lives. Social injustice isn’t about individual lives. And we won’t get rid of it by doing yoga or taking baths or doing whatever people suggest with this advice.

Being positive doesn’t help when there are issues that need addressing.

Nope. Being negative every second of your life, about everything you or others experience, is entirely healthy and realistic; so is the goal of not resting until you solve every problem on this planet, down to petty nastiness, real or imagined (irony intended).

Maybe the rest of society just doesn’t want to become this.

Maybe others do care about their own wellbeing, refuse to soak themselves in your constant negativity and aggressiveness.

It’s funny how SJWs (feminists in particular) always extrapolate their feelings to exemplify worldwide issues, and then claim their fight is not about individual lives but something far greater. When their grievances are related to very personal experiences and all of a sudden they are forms oppression many are suffering from daily.

We’re allowed to feel what we feel, and we shouldn’t have to hide or mute our feelings just to reward someone for meaning well.

You don’t have to reward anyone. But you can leave them the hell alone.

On that note, people who say these things don’t always intend to gaslight. They’re often just operating off a false idea of what the other person wants.

No rational person knows what social justice warriors actually want. One day they complain about racism, the next day they invent cultural appropriation to make sure groups become voluntarily segregated. One day they claim they are vulnerable, the next day they complain others are treating them as weak and thus disrespecting them. One day they want “allies”, the next day they turn on them for “benevolent” this-and-that, when they get the unnatural praises they had asked for.

There is no way to please them. End of story.