LogFAQs > #957377793

I think where a lot of the anti-SJW rhetoric stems from a fundamental misunderstanding (or perhaps for some a deliberate misrepresentation) of the most basic principles of intersectional critique and analysis.

You can always spot this misunderstanding because the person making the argument almost always centers it around the claim that something has been found objectionable by SJWs due to it being offensive, and that because what is offensive is completely subjective from person to person, it is therefore hypocritical for anyone to object to something based on its offensiveness. This is a common argument put forward by self-described moderates, libertarians, free speech advocates, and vaguely right-wing comedians. Its also completely missing the point.

The SJW crowd does not object to anything because it is offensive. There are plenty of things that they enjoy specifically because they are offensive. They dont care about what is offensive or what isnt. Their objection lies not in the offensiveness of the object of critique, but rather how that object (be it media representation, cultural appropriation, casual racism/sexism/whatever) contributes to the harm of groups of people who are marginalized. The objection to using homophobic slurs isnt because they are offensive - its because the attitudes they engender and foster are actually harmful to gay people.

Now you might disagree that telling rape jokes is actually harmful to victims of rape - and youre more than welcome to make that argument. But trying to reframe the argument as being about what is a matter of subjective opinion (i.e. its offensiveness) is not a valid critique, and is missing the point to such a degree as to inspire some suspicion as to whether or not its being done intentionally.

---

An Injury to One is an Injury to All
https://iww.org/