3 ms·

> Work is for working; it's not a debating society, and especially not when the debating is done in bad faith. If this were actually true of the current milieu

> Work is for working; it's not a debating society, and especially not when the debating is done in bad faith. If this were actually true of the current milieu of tech employment in the bay area, I'd likely still be a willing and active participant in that workforce. Substantial energy is wasted discussing ideologies and arranging/having meetings on what are fundamentally social issues we're not realistically fixing in the short-term at the workplace from the bottom-up. The reasons appeared largely focused on satisfying the expectations of a vocal minority of SJW-types bringing this crap into the workplace with HR departments jumping at the opportunity to appear busy and influential. Edit: Maybe my experiences were unique, though my social circles were complaining of similar things at their respective startups.

spookthesunset 9y ago
> SJW Ah the SJW boogyman. A quick way to get anybody with a functioning brain to dismiss everything you say.
- lkerrekfjk 9y ago
  > Ah the SJW boogyman. A quick way to get anybody with a functioning brain to dismiss everything you say. lol, this stuff is real: > Concerning White Fragility > All white people are racist and, far from absolving them, this places an urgent burden on each and all. https://np.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/7asxk7/concerning_white_fragility/ https://np.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/7asxk7/concernin... You can dismiss the problem all you want and act like these crazies don't exist, but they do and they are actively trying to kick out anybody that doesn't fall in line with their ideology from different circles where they operate.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  It's just the counterpart of the "racist" boogyman. Why is it terrible to dismiss people by calling them SJWs, but not calling them racist.
  - abusoufiyan 9y ago
    I guess for a few reasons: 1) SJW isn't a bad thing, like racism. social justice (the literal term) is what all people want in their society. It's preached by nearly every religion (the idea that the poor are equal to the rich, the black people equal to the white, etc). 2) Racist is an adjective but SJW is a group affiliation often attributed to people who don't wish to be affiliated that way. A person can say a racist thing, but no one can do an SJW thing. We can qualify certain things and statements as racist or not. We cannot do the same with SJW. SJW will always be used to denigrate someone. Racist, however, can be used analytically and without malice.
    - Chris2048 9y ago
      Thanks for responding. wrt point #1, SJW and Social-Justice Advocate are different terms. Justice is a subjective term, the word itself may have a positive implication, but the implication of "SJW" is that their brand of social justice is neither just nor good. I disagree with point #2 though: the word "racist" is used to denigrate (label people who do not accept the label) more than otherwise. A person can absolutely say an "SJW thing" - the kind of thing an SJW would say. This may be ambiguous, but so is racist; it depends on a personal definition of what constitutes racism just as mush as SJW does. In fact, willfully creeping the scope of words such as "racist" to include e.g. microaggressions is partly what differentiates SJWs.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    To clarify: Why is use of the term 'SJW' to dismiss viewpoints not ok - but use of the word 'racist' for the same purpose is rife.

spookthesunset 9y ago

> SJW Ah the SJW boogyman. A quick way to get anybody with a functioning brain to dismiss everything you say.

lkerrekfjk 9y ago
> Ah the SJW boogyman. A quick way to get anybody with a functioning brain to dismiss everything you say. lol, this stuff is real: > Concerning White Fragility > All white people are racist and, far from absolving them, this places an urgent burden on each and all. https://np.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/7asxk7/concerning_white_fragility/ https://np.reddit.com/r/GamerGhazi/comments/7asxk7/concernin... You can dismiss the problem all you want and act like these crazies don't exist, but they do and they are actively trying to kick out anybody that doesn't fall in line with their ideology from different circles where they operate.
Chris2048 9y ago
It's just the counterpart of the "racist" boogyman. Why is it terrible to dismiss people by calling them SJWs, but not calling them racist.
- abusoufiyan 9y ago
  I guess for a few reasons: 1) SJW isn't a bad thing, like racism. social justice (the literal term) is what all people want in their society. It's preached by nearly every religion (the idea that the poor are equal to the rich, the black people equal to the white, etc). 2) Racist is an adjective but SJW is a group affiliation often attributed to people who don't wish to be affiliated that way. A person can say a racist thing, but no one can do an SJW thing. We can qualify certain things and statements as racist or not. We cannot do the same with SJW. SJW will always be used to denigrate someone. Racist, however, can be used analytically and without malice.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    Thanks for responding. wrt point #1, SJW and Social-Justice Advocate are different terms. Justice is a subjective term, the word itself may have a positive implication, but the implication of "SJW" is that their brand of social justice is neither just nor good. I disagree with point #2 though: the word "racist" is used to denigrate (label people who do not accept the label) more than otherwise. A person can absolutely say an "SJW thing" - the kind of thing an SJW would say. This may be ambiguous, but so is racist; it depends on a personal definition of what constitutes racism just as mush as SJW does. In fact, willfully creeping the scope of words such as "racist" to include e.g. microaggressions is partly what differentiates SJWs.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  To clarify: Why is use of the term 'SJW' to dismiss viewpoints not ok - but use of the word 'racist' for the same purpose is rife.