Social justice warriors

Post Reply New Topic

Fact activists have used arguments like "If it costs more to make bigger sizes, then sizes small, medium, and large, wouldn't be prices all the same."

"Doctors ignore all my symptoms and blame it on my size and try and put me on a diet but they wouldn't do that with thin people."

"I am fat and I am still healthy and have no medical problems."

And they think there is a conspiracy that places deliberately refuse to make bigger seats, refuse to sell bigger sizes, refuse to make bigger sizes, etc. as a way to get rid of fat people. No it's supply and demand. No stores are not keeping plus sizes in the back or keeping them online only as a way to get rid of fat people, the demand is just not high enough for them to have them out in the store. They have limited space and want to save room for high demand. No hospitals are not refusing to operate on fat people because they hate fat people, it's because it's a safety risk and body fat being wrapped around body organs makes it very dangerous for operations. No they are not putting you on a diet because they are fatphobic, it's about safety risk when you need surgery. No doctors are not refusing you medication because they are fatphobic, it's about them not being able to give you the right dosage because of your size, giving you the dosage you would need for your weight would also be very dangerous if you took that much medicine in high dose. No, hospitals not having equipment for 600 plus pounds is not because they don't want to work with fat people, it's because they never have gotten any patients that are that big and no one is going to spend money on equipment when they don't even get patients that heavy. If they get a heavy patient, they then have to transport them to a hospital that has heavy equipment for them and specialists that know how to work with their weight. No, fire men are not leaving fat people to die in fires because they hate fat people, it's because they have no way of saving a 500 pound person because it takes them several hours to get them out and requires other equipment and and the fire does not give them enough time. There is no way they can get a 500 lb person out of there in time.

They are really this stupid I question their intelligence and this is why I would never see a therapist that is a fat activist and believes in this BS. I would question their competence as a therapist and I want to see a smart therapist, not a stupid one who doesn't understand reality and falls for BS and I would wonder what other things are they telling me that are legitimate and not stupid.

Yes I am a fatphobic and a bigot and so prejudiced because I am not stupid enough to buy their BS and believe in their conspiracies and because of science out there proving what excessive body fat does to your body. There have been documentaries out there too to prove it. How can that all be dismissed? Obviously having a little big of extra body fat is not going to affect your health. I have fat family members and I don't hate them. All of them have said they are fat because they don't get enough exercise, because they don't eat right, my husband said it was because he ate for happiness and he always hid in his room from the world as a child. They don't make excuses for why they are fat. Even my mom has admitted she doesn't really want to use her time to work out in the gym. No, I don't expect everyone to have model bodies and I believe people can do whatever they want with their body. But I will never buy into the fatlogic stuff and the BS fat activists make about 400 pounds or 300 pounds and 500 pounds and up. No I will never be convinced that if you are breathing hard from walking or if you are sitting in a scooter because you can't walk far is healthy and if you find simple things many of us take for granted is a work out for you and makes you sweat.

So there you have it, if you buy into their delusion, you are not a bigot or a phobic nor prejudice if you ignore science. This is what activism is now, this is what SJW is. They lie and try and get others to believe it too, they have a mighty victim complex. Sadly some people do fall for their BS so I also question their intelligence. Autistic people who fall for it too, I always think "I thought autistic people were supposed to be logical but I guess not."

What about the part where they rip the heart out from their enemy's chest and devour it to gain their opponent's strength?

Just how completely f****d up do you have to be in order to consider "social justice warrior" a disparaging epithet?

I'd love to have a "SJW" T-shirt, but only if it's printed in 'Antifa' colors!

The wage gap is not a "myth", nor are many other ideas that are shot down because people think they have it cracked when they don't. The term "social justice warrior" dismisses beliefs that are legitimate concerns because conservatives and the apologetics can't stand seeing a world that thinks about anybody other than them.

I really need a hard definition of what this means because I'm fairly allergic to garbage artificial terms like these. With that in mind, it would also be nice to see some sources cited here and there because I'm starting to get the impression that people are getting riled up over perceived and untrue beliefs.

As for activism in general, the idea of progressing forward with solutions to abhorrent problems is a necessity in a modern society that no longer has a voice left and allows idiocy to reign. People like to get their "facts" from sites that are often objectively false about 99% of the time and pseudointellectuals absolutely lap it up because they do little to no research themselves, from quote mining to sources that don't even claim what is being supported (but often anti SJWs and antifems either don't check or can't read, so what's the point?).

Ultimately, a movement of the blind leading the blind and the classical scenario of, "Yeah, but what if we're making the world a better place for no reason?"

Also, the irony behind, "Why are you all so thin skinned??", shouted the anti SJW angrily.

It's just the world that we live in now. A woman in a game? SJW conspiracy. A lesbian kiss in a game? Forced politics, I say. A female Doctor Who? What a mad world! A black character in Star Wars? 1984!

This is about as ridiculous as it gets, and can go even further oftentimes. Nobody with a level head should get frustrated at, say, African Americans fighting in WWI (as they actually did) but there you go. I know that sometimes there can be insanity as well but it's usually exaggerated by those with an agenda to stamp out those who hope to progress social justice and the left in general.

By the way, I'd like one that says, "Social Justice Mage".

Just look up fat activists and see their arguments. I have already posted a couple in the other SJW thread. I linked to Sofie Hagen's Twitter page where she whined about that obesity health ad and I posted a screen shot to someone's blog post for dumping her "toxic" friend just because she decided to lose weight so she said her friend was fatphobic.

I came across Mobility Mary and I have been watching her videos now.

https://www.odometer.com/lifestyle/2452 ... n-youtube/

She could be a SJW because of how whiny she is. She has plenty of room to get around. She can just ride up to the True Value door and knock. Many people ignore her or get snarky because of her attitude. She can say excuse me or wait for people to move out of the way. She is known as "crazy lady" by viewers and people who have reposted her videos.

Accepting that being overweight is healthy is not the best course for action, as many I'm sure would accept. With that in mind, fat activism as far as I can tell is the acceptance that some people are overweight, and will struggle to get over weight gain because of any number of reasons (not all of them just regarding overeating; stress, anxiety, depression, maybe more obscure factors such as agarophobia, could all lead to obesity).

From my understanding, being proud of oneself even if you have some flaws is typical human nature. Some people don't care about being overweight anymore because they have more focus in life. Health for some people is a massive thing, as it should be for those hoping to lead long lives without any of the struggles. For others, they're more interested in education, occupation, relationships, and general satisfaction.

In other senses, the idea of extra fat being unappealing is not entirely true either; some people do like a little extra weight, whilst a particular set don't like skin and bones types atop this (myself included). Perhaps some people don't like the focus being on extra fat being unhealthy whilst lacking it is also pretty deadly (albeit likely not as bad). Perhaps people who are anorexic or bulemic don't like focus being placed on organisations designed to fight extra weight whilst those who attempt to correct lack of it are undermined and trivialised.

Beyond this, fat activism being another component to an "SJW" agenda is questionable. I have to wonder, if this is part of it, couldn't thin activism be equally part of the SJW agenda? I mean, it's technically social justice in a sense. With that said, this is one minute sect of a large movement of progressivism designed to move forward the rights of women, minorities, the disabled and the poor or otherwise marginalised. Criticism of this one aspect, as small as it is, begins to be regarded as a large and influential point in the social justice movement. One or two crazies blogging on Tumblr does not undermine this gargantuan movement that strives to bring together the forgotten, ignored and trampled sects of a society gone mad.

It is likely that many of the people you are referring to as "radical liberals" do not identify as "liberal" at all, but only as "leftist" or "progressive."

An example of a staunchly liberal organization, here in the U.S.A., is the ACLU. More "radical" leftists/progressives dislike the way that the ACLU and other liberals uphold free speech for everyone including even neo-Nazis.

Here in the U.S.A., popular right-wing news commentators have chosen to conflate "liberal" and "progressive"/"leftist," which are in fact distinct (though overlapping, at least in the U.S.A.) categories. Most likely their aim in conflating them is to taint liberalism via guilt-by-association with the most extreme leftists.

In most other parts of the world, if I'm not mistaken, "liberals" are considered to be moderately right-wing. In the U.K., the Liberal party is the middle-of-the-road party, between Labour (left-wing) and Conservative (right-wing).