Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Has the Social Justice movement distored itself?
#1
Apparently, even some on the Left side of the political aisle are starting to feel that way.  As it was founded in the spirit of good intentions, is has been evolved into an attacking mindset of anyone that does not fit some sort of criteria that defines oppressed or not having an unfair advantage.


Very interesting read, check it out.



http://observer.com/2015/06/the-pecking-disorder-social-justice-warriors-gone-wild/



The ordeal of Northwestern University film professor Laura Kipnis, hauled before a campus gender equity tribunal for publishing a critique of academia’s current obsession with sexual misconduct, has brought the backlash against “political correctness” to reliably left-of-center venues such as Vox. But this is only the latest incident in the culture wars over “social justice” that have been wreaking havoc in a wide range of communities—including, but not limited to, universities, the literary world, science fiction fandom and the atheist/skeptic movement.

The progressive crusaders driving these wars have been dubbed “social justice warriors,” or “SJWs,” by their Internet foes. Some activists on the left proudly embrace the label, crowing that it says a lot about the other side that it uses “social justice” as a derisive epithet. But in fact, this version of “social justice” is not about social justice at all. It is a cultish, essentially totalitarian ideology deeply inimical—as liberals such as Jonathan Chait warn in New York Magazine—to the traditional values of the liberal left, and not just because of the movement’s hostility to freedom of “harmful” speech.
At the core of social justice dogma is fixation on identity and “privilege.” Some of this discourse touches on real and clear inequities: for instance, the widespread tendency of police and others to treat African-Americans, especially young and male, as potential lawbreakers. Yet even here, the rhetoric of privilege generates far more heat than light. University of California-Merced sociologist Tanya Bolash-Goza, who accepts the social justice left’s view of pervasive structural racism in America, points out that the term “white privilege” turns what should be the norm for all—not being harassed by cops or eyed suspiciously by shop owners—into a special advantage unfairly enjoyed by whites. (Indeed, in its dictionary meaning, “privilege” refers to rights or benefits possessed by the select, not by the majority.) This language speaks not to black betterment but to white guilt. It also erases the fact that the “privilege” extends to many non-white groups, such as Asians.
Privilege rhetoric offers an absurdly simplistic view of complex social dynamics. A widely cited essay by pro-“social justice” sci-fi writer John Scalzi seeks to explain privilege to geeks by arguing that being a straight white male is akin to playing a videogame on “the lowest difficulty setting.” Does the white son of a poor single mother have it easier than the daughter of a wealthy black couple? As a minor afterthought, Scalzi mentions that “players” in other groups may be better off if they start with more “points” in areas such as wealth. But generally, the “social justice” left strenuously avoids the issue of socioeconomic background, which, despite upward mobility, is surely the most tangible and entrenched form of actual privilege in modern American society. Rather, the focus is on racial, sexual, and cultural identities.
While social justice discourse embraces “intersectionality”—the understanding that different forms of social advantage and disadvantage interact with each other—this virtually never works in favor of the “privileged.” Thus, intersectionality may mean recognizing that disabled battered women suffer from both sexism and “ableism.” Recognizing that disabled men may be at greater risk for spousal abuse because disability reverses the usual male advantage in strength? Not so much. To acknowledge advantages enjoyed by the “oppressed”—for instance, gender bias favoring female defendants in criminal cases or mothers in custody suits—is pure heresy. The only moral dilemma is which oppressed identity trumps which: race or gender, sexuality or religion.
This hierarchy of identity politics can lead to some bizarre inversions of progressive values. Thus, because Muslims are classified as “marginalized” and “non-privileged” in the West’s power structures, critics of misogyny and homophobia in fundamentalist Islam risk being chastised for “Islamophobic” prejudice. Charlie Hebdo, the staunchly left-wing French magazine murderously attacked in January in retaliation for its Mohammed cartoons, was denounced by a number of leftist critics who felt that the magazine’s satirical barbs at Islam (along with other organized religions) amounted to “punching down” at the powerless. The men with guns who shot twelve Charlie staffers were presumably punching up.
On the other hand, since Jews in Western society today are seen as more privileged than not, social justice discourse sheepishly sidesteps anti-Semitism—surely one of the most pernicious forms of bigotry in Western history. Salon, more or less the Pravda of today’s social justice left, recently ran a piece arguing that the coming reboot of the X-Men franchise should reinvent its character Magneto, a Jewish Auschwitz survivor, as black in order to “get real about race.”
[Image: screen-shot-2015-06-15-at-10-38-30-am.pn...=300&h=179]<img class="size-medium wp-image-512854" src="https://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/screen-shot-2015-06-15-at-10-38-30-am.png?w=300&h=179" alt="Magnito - X-Men: Rogue Kidnapped. (Photo: Youtube)" width="300" height="179" title="The Pecking Disorder: Social Justice Warriors Gone Wild" />
Magnito – X-Men: Rogue Kidnapped. (Photo: Youtube)
The practical effects of such “social justice” ideology be seen in the communities where it flourishes (mainly on college campuses and online). It is a reverse caste system in which a person’s status and worth depends entirely on their perceived oppression and disadvantage. The nuances of rank can be as rigid as in the most oppressively hierarchical traditional society. A white woman upset by an insulting comment from a white man qualifies for sympathy and support; a white woman distraught at being ripped to shreds by a “woman of color” for an apparent racial faux pas can be ridiculed for “white girl tears.” However, if she turns out to be a rape victim, the mockery probably crosses a line. On the other hand, a straight white male trashed by an online mob for some vague offenses deemed misogynist and racist can invite more vitriol by revealing that he is a sexual abuse survivor suffering from post-traumatic stress.
A recent controversy in the science fiction world illustrates this toxic atmosphere. A few months ago, many sci-fi writers and fans were shaken by the revelation that Benjanun Sriduangkaew, a young Thai female author, not only doubled as a militant “social justice” blogger but had a third identity as a notorious LiveJournal troll known for egregious harassment, including death and rape threats—often toward nonwhite, female, or transgender victims. Yet Sriduangkaew found supporters who saw the scandal as, in the words of a Daily Dot article, “an example of white privilege attempting to silence writers of color.” The article itself approached the question of whether she deserved forgiveness in nakedly political terms: “Sriduangkaew [is] an excellent, well-liked writer whose multicultural voice is an important addition to the sparse population of non-white writers in the world of speculative publishing. On the other hand, her troll voice has often worked to loudly silence other members of marginalized identities.” Some tried to defend Sriduangkaew by pointing out that most of her targets were white males.
In this climate, it is not surprising that a while male poet would write an agonized letter to a literary blog wondering if he should stop writing: he feels guilty about writing from a white male perspective but also worries that if he writes in the voice of women or minorities, he would be “colonizing” their stories.
Working to correct inequities is a noble goal—which explains the appeal of the “social justice” movement to many fair-minded people. But the movement in its current form is not about that. It elevates an extreme and polarizing version of identity politics in which individuals are little more than the sum of their labels. It encourages wallowing in anger and guilt. It promotes intolerance and the politicization of everything. It must be stopped—not only for the sake of freedom, but for the sake of a kinder, fairer society.


Read more at http://observer.com/2015/06/the-pecking-disorder-social-justice-warriors-gone-wild/#ixzz3dSO7z4bd
Follow us: @newyorkobserver on Twitter | newyorkobserver on Facebook
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]

Volson is meh, but I like him, and he has far exceeded my expectations

-Frank Booth 1/9/23
#2
Political opportunists (and really just opportunists in general) have latched on to social justice as a way to divide people so as to create a need for a champion.  This has the added convenience of allowing political opportunists to step in on the other side.


A lot of "movements" today really illustrate how stupid and gullible people are.  It exploits the average person's need to feel special or elite getting fired up over something 99% of the population doesn't care about.  And there's dozens of such issues - it's 50/50 someone you know, perhaps even respect, has some radical bat-shit crazy idea about something.
#3
(06-18-2015, 08:23 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Political opportunists (and really just opportunists in general) have latched on to social justice as a way to divide people so as to create a need for a champion.  This has the added convenience of allowing political opportunists to step in on the other side.


A lot of "movements" today really illustrate how stupid and gullible people are.  It exploits the average person's need to feel special or elite getting fired up over something 99% of the population doesn't care about.  And there's dozens of such issues - it's 50/50 someone you know, perhaps even respect, has some radical bat-shit crazy idea about something.

What I have come to believe is that most of the PC or Social Justice movement had its beginnings, in academia, where liberal professors would interject their political and social view into their lectures.  At first, many laughed it off, (like in the movie PCU) then, as the internet grew and people started finding a way to capitalize on the causes, people started finding ways to become "victims", so that there was some way to make the majority "pay" for it.

What I find oddly ironic, is that now the very liberal professors that initiated this whole movement, are now slowly finding themselves on the wrong side of what the movement has morphed into.  Kind of reminds me of the satires where the once bullied becomes the bully.
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]

Volson is meh, but I like him, and he has far exceeded my expectations

-Frank Booth 1/9/23
#4
(06-18-2015, 07:50 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote:  But generally, the “social justice” left strenuously avoids the issue of socioeconomic background, which, despite upward mobility, is surely the most tangible and entrenched form of actual privilege in modern American society. Rather, the focus is on racial, sexual, and cultural identities.

This just is not true at all.  How could this writer have missed the major protests against the privilege of the "one percenters"?

In fact this author seems to miss a lot of major points.  Maybe he is just a little too obsesses with playing his own victim card.
#5
(06-18-2015, 08:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This just is not true at all.  How could this writer have missed the major protests against the privilege of the "one percenters"?

In fact this author seems to miss a lot of major points.  Maybe he is just a little too obsesses with playing his own victim card.

The author is a female, fred.


*reading skills are paramount  (figured you would know that, being an esteemed attorney and all)
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]

Volson is meh, but I like him, and he has far exceeded my expectations

-Frank Booth 1/9/23
#6
(06-18-2015, 08:38 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote:  people started finding ways to become "victims", so that there was some way to make the majority "pay" for it.

People did not have to "find ways" to become victims.  Racial discrimination is real.  Discrimination against homosexuals is real. The use of terms like "r e t a r d" and "h o m o" as slurs and insults is truly offensive.  Women still face discrimination in some work environments.  Here where I live atheists students have been ridiculed and abused in schools. 
#7
(06-18-2015, 08:41 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: The author is a female, fred.


*reading skills are paramount  (figured you would know that, being an esteemed attorney and all)

I read the entire thing and nothing said that the author was female.

And that does not change my point at all.
#8
(06-18-2015, 07:50 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Some of this discourse touches on real and clear inequities: for instance, the widespread tendency of police and others to treat African-Americans, especially young and male, as potential lawbreakers.

Working to correct inequities is a noble goal—

It must be stopped

So the inequalities are real.

And working to correct inequalities is a noble cause.

But we can't do it if it offends any of the privileged people out there?


This entire article seems to be crying about all the damage that the social justice movement is causing, but in fact there is no damage at all. Seriously, what is the worst damage caused by this horrible movement? Who has been hurt?
#9
(06-18-2015, 08:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I read the entire thing and nothing said that the author was female.

And that does not change my point at all.

Pretty sure that the article was written by Cathy Young.  You obviously did not click the link.  (for all you know, I could have written all of that in the text of my post...)

And what exactly is your point?  All that I ever see you post are little snippets that you choose to find fault with.
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]

Volson is meh, but I like him, and he has far exceeded my expectations

-Frank Booth 1/9/23





Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)