thanks for elaborating. I have two answers. Answer 1 is, ironically, "not all SJWs!"
Conversation
Replying to
2: It is a derogative used by GG/redpill, see rationalwiki.org/wiki/Social_ju - Use without reappropriation implies sharing belief
3
Replying to
Note the positions on free speech, dress codes, self-expression in choice of games, innocence until proven guilty...
2
Replying to
SJW; seems to be mostly 3rd wave feminists with intersectionality extensions, using identity/privilege tropes
1
Replying to
again, using that word is like trying to appear unprejudiced while saying "world jew conspiracy" debating finance ethics
2
Replying to
Please don't pull a Godwin on me. You know that ATTAC has been called antisemitic for criticizing finance ethics?
1
Replying to
Was meant as an Illustration of the unintended effect the usage has, no other comparison intended.
2
Replying to
What is a better term for the same group? (but since I am not a social constructionist, I'm not sure it matters)
2
Replying to
The best I know so far are "internet activist" and "Offended Person". cf.
Quote Tweet
Is there a more succinct term for "Person Who Is Offended On The Internet"?
2
Replying to
I mean what unites both GGers and "SJW"s is that "I am offended" is some sort of moral absolute for them.
Replying to
I am not sure. GGers usually maintain that being offended is not a valid argument.
1
Show replies