Define SJW please

[Arctish]

We've had several threads lately in which the term 'social justice warrior' has been bandied about, but the definition appears to vary from poster to poster. Some people are using it in the most literal sense: a person who fights for social justice. But others are using it as a kind of political dog whistle that carries an unspoken connotation only members of their political in-group can hear.

So what does it mean? Can we define it in a way that everyone can agree upon, and use it to identify the SJWs among us?

 

[zorq]

We've had several threads lately in which the term 'social justice warrior' has been bandied about, but the definition appears to vary from poster to poster. Some people are using it in the most literal sense: a person who fights for social justice. But others are using it as a kind of political dog whistle that carries an unspoken connotation only members of their political in-group can hear.

So what does it mean? Can we define it in a way that everyone can agree upon, and use it to identify the SJWs among us?

No. Of course not.

We'll never agree on any terms that are used as dog whistles as long as those who like to use them must be part of the agreement. Dog whistles are used deliberately to convey secret meanings. Once a dog whistle term establishes a firm definition, it can no longer function as a dog whistle. And dog whistle enthusiasts will never stand for that!

(Of course, I don't mind the dog-whistlers who insist that only liberals can be SJWs. It delights me to no end that their opposition to social justice warriors implies they blatantly stand in favor social injustice. It's just one more reason for me to score secret chuckles at their expense.)

 

[bigfield]

Thread from last month:
http://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?7650-What-is-a-Social-Justice-Warrior

My answer to that thread:

I understand the term 'social justice warrior' to refer to people who publish obnoxious attention-seeking blogs, videos, tweets etc. about popular liberal movements such as third-wave feminism. They are transparently motived by personal gain. Their arguments are extraordinarily poor, and often fail to develop beyond bald assertions. By broadcasting their hate mail, which they are guaranteed to receive, they also show their supporters that they are in danger, just like a warrior. Calling them warriors is mocking the image they are trying to create for themselves.

They are a completely different group of people than the scientists who study social problems and search for solutions and the political agents who thanklessly and selflessly pour their time and energy into actualising those solutions.

It didn't occur to me that some people out there might actually use the term 'social justice warrior' without irony.

 

[Nexus]

Some people are using it in the most literal sense: a person who fights for social justice. But others are using it as a kind of political dog whistle that carries an unspoken connotation only members of their political in-group can hear.

Nice false dilemma you decided to frame the op with. Here's a third option, SJWs are people that fight against stupid shit like the portrayal of video game characters in the name of social justice. They are quintessential first world problems crybabies. When you're reduced to complaining about video games, TV and movies then your life situation is actually very good.

 

[untermensche]

As we are just starting to see.

It is a term with no objective meaning, just individual interpretations based on individual prejudices.

 

[Arctish]

As we are just starting to see.

It is a term with no objective meaning, just individual interpretations based on individual prejudices.

If true, that would mean the term 'social justice warrior' is utterly meaningless. Anyone and anything could be one.

 

[untermensche]

As we are just starting to see.

It is a term with no objective meaning, just individual interpretations based on individual prejudices.

If true, that would mean the term 'social justice warrior' is utterly meaningless. Anyone and anything could be one.

Anyone could be called one.

The mother complaining about school lunches with poor nutritional value.

The man complaining about a lack of a wall between the US and Mexico.

There is no end.

Any human reaction to any problem can be classified by some as "Social Justice Warfare".

 

[whichphilosophy]

We've had several threads lately in which the term 'social justice warrior' has been bandied about, but the definition appears to vary from poster to poster. Some people are using it in the most literal sense: a person who fights for social justice. But others are using it as a kind of political dog whistle that carries an unspoken connotation only members of their political in-group can hear.

So what does it mean? Can we define it in a way that everyone can agree upon, and use it to identify the SJWs among us?

You can look in the dictionary to get the correct definition. An English language one would be best.

 

[Axulus]

I liken it to a liberal/progressive who is obsessed about social justice in areas that already are pretty clean. It's like a maid obsessed about cleaning the last little microscopic smudge in the corner of a room while there are piles of shit everywhere else.

 

[Arctish]

We've had several threads lately in which the term 'social justice warrior' has been bandied about, but the definition appears to vary from poster to poster. Some people are using it in the most literal sense: a person who fights for social justice. But others are using it as a kind of political dog whistle that carries an unspoken connotation only members of their political in-group can hear.

So what does it mean? Can we define it in a way that everyone can agree upon, and use it to identify the SJWs among us?

You can look in the dictionary to get the correct definition. An English language one would be best.

"Social justice warrior" (commonly abbreviated "SJW") is a pejorative term for a person expressing or promoting socially progressive views, including advocacy for women's rights and civil rights.[1][2][3] The phrase originated as a laudatory term for those engaged in social justice.

Head of U.S. dictionaries for Oxford University Press Katherine Martin said the term was previously used as a compliment.[3] She observed: "All of the examples I've seen until quite recently are lionizing the person."[3] Martin noted the phrase had mostly positive usage in the 1990s through 2000s.[3] The Washington Post gave examples of its earlier positive connotation as well as examples from pop culture that illustrated the recent debate surrounding its negative connotation.[3]

During the Gamergate controversy the negative connotation gained increased use, and was particularly aimed at those espousing views adhering to social liberalism, political correctness or feminism.[1][3] Vice reported that the accusation of being an SJW implied a person was engaged in disingenuous social justice arguments or activism to raise their personal reputation.[4] Vice assessed the problematic use of the term: "The problem is, that's not a real category of people. It's simply a way to dismiss anyone who brings up social justice—and often those people are feminists."[4]
<link>

So 'social justice warrior' refers to someone engaged in the fight for social justice, but we only call them a SJW if we don't like their cause or their tactics?

Well, then, what do we call someone engaged in a fight for social justice that we meets with our approval? For example, what should we call someone who fights for the rights of fathers in custody disputes, or the rights of citizens to seek relief from unlawful imprisonment via habeus corpus? If they aren't social justice warriors, what are they?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

So the connotation was changed by right-wingers or masculinists or someone very anti-left. I think that's funny because they refuse to allow anyone to move to a more objective interpretation of the phrase. It's especially funny when you consider this came out of GamerGate...those are the kinds of people from the Underseer op about feminazis destroying Star Wars. If anyone out there are SJWs, it's them.

 

[Juma]

MLK was a SJW

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

MLK was obsessed with gender portrayal in video games?

 

[beero1000]

MLK was obsessed with gender portrayal in video games?

No, but people like you belittled him anyway. Should no one have complained about segregated water fountains because they were a 'first world problem'? No, they were a bellwether of deeper injustices. Focusing on the least damaging topic related to a cause to discredit it is not an original idea, and it hasn't ceased to be a ridiculously transparent attempt to discredit protest. Using an originally laudatory phrase as a pejorative isn't clever either - social justice is a universally positive concept and EVERYONE should be pro social justice.

 

[bigfield]

Well, then, what do we call someone engaged in a fight for social justice that we meets with our approval? For example, what should we call someone who fights for the rights of fathers in custody disputes, or the rights of citizens to seek relief from unlawful imprisonment via habeus corpus? If they aren't social justice warriors, what are they?

You could call someone who 'someone who fights for the rights of fathers in custody disputes' a men's rights activist, but like SJW, that term also has negative connotations due to it's application, despite the fact that there is nothing sinister implied by the words in the label itself.

 

[laughing dog]

MLK was a SJW

And so is Ron Paul.

 

[laughing dog]

Some people are using it in the most literal sense: a person who fights for social justice. But others are using it as a kind of political dog whistle that carries an unspoken connotation only members of their political in-group can hear.

Nice false dilemma you decided to frame the op with. Here's a third option, SJWs are people that fight against stupid shit like the portrayal of video game characters in the name of social justice. They are quintessential first world problems crybabies.

The perfect example of a social justice warrior complaining about different SJWs.

When you're reduced to complaining about video games, TV and movies then your life situation is actually very good.

What does that have to do with any form of social justice? Really, people are not supposed or allowed to fight for justice for others?

A social justice warrior is someone who works towards moving society to their view of social justice.

 

[ronburgundy]

So the connotation was changed by right-wingers or masculinists or someone very anti-left. I think that's funny because they refuse to allow anyone to move to a more objective interpretation of the phrase. It's especially funny when you consider this came out of GamerGate...those are the kinds of people from the Underseer op about feminazis destroying Star Wars. If anyone out there are SJWs, it's them.

What's funny is that your use of "right-winger" and "masculinist" is identical in its biased judgmental intent and rhetorical motive as their use of SJW.

 

[ronburgundy]

The negative connotation of SJW refers to people for whom being identified as a warrior for social justice is their primary motive behind their various outrages rather than actually advancing real social justice. It is a game of self-righteous oneupmanship with little more nobility that people who try to get out in front of the latest fashions for the self-serving benefits to their identity and feelings of superiority.

They are the people who try to be among the first to cry "injustice" and share the latest contrived outrage on Twitter and Facebook. Evidence of their lack of sincere concern for justice lies in the transparent lack of evidence and validity of their claims and dogmatic refusal to even consider alternative explanations. Since falsely accusing a person of a grave injustice is itself a grave injustice, willingness to make such an accusation prior to a careful examination of all evidence needed for a fair determination is itself strong evidence that the accuser has no real commitment to justice and merely has selfish interest in claiming the kind of injustices they focus upon. This doesn't mean they don't also have real concern for actual injustices, but rather that they go beyond that and also use the cause of "social justice" to recklessly and irrationally express outrages about some things or some particular claimed instances of things for the personal psychological and social advantages.

Note that this definition of the negative meaning of SJW does not presume where one is on the political spectrum. One could decry manufactured injustices against Christians and religion as most of the GOP base does and be a type of SJW.
However, conservatives tend to be on the side of the most politically and socially powerful groups (whites, the rich, Christians, men), and injustices against the very powerful are objectively uncommon and much harder to manufacture. Also, sincere concern for injustices against the less powerful is a widespread trait among liberals. This makes it far easier and more socially rewarding for liberals and those trying to win liberals' approval to don the cape of an SJW even when their is no good evidence of an injustice. For example, blacks are disproportionately victims of actual injustice, due to their race. So, when an event leads to a negative outcome for a black person, it is easier to manufacture outrage over the presumption that racism was the cause, even when the evidence suggest something else at work in that situation. In sum, leftists (true liberals care about destroying the liberty of innocently accused people of all races) have more opportunities to personally gain from immediate unreasoned outrages over events that at least have the superficial plausibility of a potential injustice.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

So the connotation was changed by right-wingers or masculinists or someone very anti-left. I think that's funny because they refuse to allow anyone to move to a more objective interpretation of the phrase. It's especially funny when you consider this came out of GamerGate...those are the kinds of people from the Underseer op about feminazis destroying Star Wars. If anyone out there are SJWs, it's them.

What's funny is that your use of "right-winger" and "masculinist" is identical in its biased judgmental intent and rhetorical motive as their use of SJW.

Not really. Both third-wave feminists and masculinists can be SJWs. See I am fair about it.