The Off Topic Topic

[Martinus]

SIW, maybe?  Social Injustice Warrior?

I am thinking of people who are apathetic in general.  A SJW is someone who presumably takes action.  What I am thinking of is someone who doesn't take action and quietly accepts reality.

No, SJW is someone who, for example, is besides himself or herself in outrage about a potentially antisemitic internet meme, but then supports Palestinians who want to push Jews into the sea; or someone who organises a boycott of a mom-and-pop store which refuses to cater to a gay wedding but then thinks it's racist to criticise Muslims for throwing gays off a roof.

There is a distinct element of detachment from reality that differentiates a SJW from an actual activist.

[Capetan Mihali]

Seeing how you are a textbook example of a kind and sensitive person, I am not surprised by your reaction. But let's QQ for Palestinians.

  How exactly am I a "kind and sensitive person"?  (To the extent this incredibly overused alt-right coinage has any meaning beyond a generic insult,)  I'm certainly not a "cuckservative," which seem to be Milo's preferred taunt.

This is a man who hates himself for being gay, would change his sexual orientation (which he analogizes to a disability) in an instant if he could, and would keep all homosexuals, including himself, away from children so they don't have to walk the lonesome, painful path of the invert.  All the while having a "non-white bedroom policy" of having one-night stands with black men.  Yet he's your hero for making short speeches at universities saying "Feminism is cancer" and waiting for the angry backlash he so desires.

After his pathetic failures at launching media companies in the UK -- and deriding video game players as fat basement-dwelling losers, prior to "Gamergate," of course, when he abruptly shifted to take up their cause-- it seems he's found his niche as a profession a troll. 

Given that he's described himself as "hav[ing] no feelings" (other than a profound sense of self-importance, it seems, I can see your affinity with him.

And, yes, unlike a passive "kind and sensitive person," I stand up for what I believe in, including the situation of the Palestinians.  While we're at it, let's QQ that some folks can't hit up a sex shop in Luton, or QQ over those gay Iranians hanging from nooses, right, you kind and sensitive person?  Maybe some "Daddy" Trump tweets will dry those eyes.

I doubt you really have much conception of my political beliefs, other than that I am somewhere on the left.  While we all, much to our chagrin, have a very vivid conception of yours.

[Capetan Mihali]

SIW, maybe?  Social Injustice Warrior?

I am thinking of people who are apathetic in general.  A SJW is someone who presumably takes action.  What I am thinking of is someone who doesn't take action and quietly accepts reality.

Status Quo Samurai?

[Monoriu]

SIW, maybe?  Social Injustice Warrior?

I am thinking of people who are apathetic in general.  A SJW is someone who presumably takes action.  What I am thinking of is someone who doesn't take action and quietly accepts reality.

Status Quo Samurai?

Samurai is too strong, I think. 

[Jaron]

The problem I have with SJW isn't that they strive for change and equality. These are good things. The problem is I think they skip over legitimate issues of equality and focus on things that are superficial.

Its a waste of their energy and it diminishes the importance of legitimate social issues because they get lumped in with all this nonsense.

[Capetan Mihali]

Samurai is too strong, I think.

SQS?  Status Quo Sclub?

[Martinus]

This is a man who hates himself for being gay, would change his sexual orientation (which he analogizes to a disability) in an instant if he could, and would keep all homosexuals, including himself, away from children so they don't have to walk the lonesome, painful path of the invert.  All the while having a "non-white bedroom policy" of having one-night stands with black men.

I don't really feel like spending time defending him (he is doing quite well on his own) but his views are much more nuanced than this.

He never said he would change his homosexuality if he could right now, but he said that if it was possible back when he was a teen and could be done in a way that is not psychologically harmful (which, he acknowledges, is not possible at the moment), he would have - why not? I mean, homosexuality is a handicap - it makes one's life more difficult and generally closes (or at least limits) a number of options for you. It's not a disability but it is an anomaly and one that cannot be fully neutralised by removing prejudice.

I also don't think you have to be a "self-hating homophobe" to have concerns about gay adoptions - I support right to adopt on balance but I am much more comfortable with that when you have kids being adopted by a same sex partner of a biological parent than the other situation.

As for his "bedroom policy" only a bigot judges someone based on who he or she fucks.

The rest of your post is a typical regressive left mixture of emotional nonsense and character attacks, so I will refrain from gratifying it with a response.

[Jaron]

I wish I could have been a professional troll.

[garbon]

He never said he would change his homosexuality if he could right now, but he said that if it was possible back when he was a teen and could be done in a way that is not psychologically harmful (which, he acknowledges, is not possible at the moment), he would have - why not? I mean, homosexuality is a handicap - it makes one's life more difficult and generally closes (or at least limits) a number of options for you. It's not a disability but it is an anomaly and one that cannot be fully neutralised by removing prejudice.

Sounds pretty self-hating.

[Monoriu]

Samurai is too strong, I think.

SQS?  Status Quo Sclub?

Politically-shy everyman?

[Martinus]

He never said he would change his homosexuality if he could right now, but he said that if it was possible back when he was a teen and could be done in a way that is not psychologically harmful (which, he acknowledges, is not possible at the moment), he would have - why not? I mean, homosexuality is a handicap - it makes one's life more difficult and generally closes (or at least limits) a number of options for you. It's not a disability but it is an anomaly and one that cannot be fully neutralised by removing prejudice.

Sounds pretty self-hating.

I guess it's self hating in the same way it is hate speech to quote certain statistics...

[garbon]

He never said he would change his homosexuality if he could right now, but he said that if it was possible back when he was a teen and could be done in a way that is not psychologically harmful (which, he acknowledges, is not possible at the moment), he would have - why not? I mean, homosexuality is a handicap - it makes one's life more difficult and generally closes (or at least limits) a number of options for you. It's not a disability but it is an anomaly and one that cannot be fully neutralised by removing prejudice.

Sounds pretty self-hating.

I guess it's self hating in the same way it is hate speech to quote certain statistics...

I've no idea what you are on about.

[Martinus]

Acknowledging facts - whether about oneself or others - is not hateful.

[Capetan Mihali]

The rest of your post is a typical regressive left mixture of emotional nonsense and character attacks, so I will refrain from gratifying it with a response.

[garbon]

Acknowledging facts - whether about oneself or others - is not hateful.

What's true in that explanation is very subjective. It also points to a person who is dissatisfied with themselves just like it would be if I were to sit around chatting about how if it had been possible to change my race, I would have done so.