Like, that’s why I am a Democrat rather than an SJer and why I normally don’t even say “progressive”

It’s a lot less glamorous and means I very angrily disagree with other people who use the same label very often

But it also does not require me to pretzel my brain into agreeing with things I don’t just to still qualify as a member in good standing

also, yes yes yes to @earlgraytay on “the people you’re trying to help are problematic.”

A depressingly noticeable number of poor white disabled people bemoan their lot by yelling about “illegals,” “terrorists,” miscellaneous brown people, and shudder shudder SPANISH SPEAKERS who they don’t understand and who thus must be PLOTTING NEFARIOUS THINGS. Who, they claim loudly and often, steal all the public housing, and act worse than anyone else. Should I refuse to help these bigots when they have serious medical issues, on the grounds that racists deserve to DIAF LOL?

A depressingly noticeable number of the same people, though now let’s include some POC, whee!, think that gay people are horrible and disgusting. Should I refuse to help them when they have been trapped languishing in a nursing facility for years because not even their own family cares about them any more, on the grounds that when they rant like that they are actually unknowingly telling me to my face that I deserve to DIAF LOL?

When you SJers whose activism is all online “call someone out” for “being problematic,” please just recognize that the problematic you are seeing and picking at? Is really minor. Most people who are not wealthy, or well educated, or marinating in a certain academic environment are far, far more problematic than Joss Whedon, or Michael Bay, or even, gaspy gaspy gasp, Steven Moffat.

If you want to make the world better, you need to realize that some of the people you need to make the world better for are going to be people whose views fundamentally horrify you.

Y’all are picking at low hanging fruit and acting like you’re saving the world.

Antifeminism and Anti-SJ Explained Nicely

Dear Feminists and SJers,

I know we’re not exactly the best of friends right now, but I’m going to try to be nice. So here’s the thing:

Absolutely none of us anti-you people disapprove of the idea of equality; every single last one of us is all for it. But the problem is that you don’t see it that way: you perceive it to be that, because we disagree with you, we must disagree with everything you stand for, but that’s just faulty reasoning – something I like to call the “disassociated fallacy”, because you reason that two opinions cannot share any properties if they are at least slightly opposed. Just because you go by the title of an SJer doesn’t mean we disagree with social justice.

Like I said, we completely agree with you that social equality is a good and righteous thing to pursue, but we find ourselves incapable of siding with you because of one thing: your methodology. This can be for many reasons:

  • We believe that, by focusing on fringe groups and social minorities, you are missing the bigger picture: that we are all being oppressed, in one way or another, and that the answer isn’t to level the playing field so that all are equally oppressed, but to remove that oppression. Rather than squabble amongst our multicoloured, many-gendered selves, we must unite against the common enemy.
  • That by concentrating on race and gender discrimination, you are failing to see that these are actually just forms of classism.
  • By appealing to the mercy of your government to legislate all of your inequality woes, you are simply submitting to oppression. You fail to realise that all forms of oppression benefit the ruling class, and that making enough noise that they appease your petty squabbles will simply result in more uniform oppression.
  • You blame society (your “kyriarchy”), not the ruling class, for the inequalities you observe, but fail to see that all forms of oppression are forced upon society by the governing class, not by society itself.

So in short, we see your efforts as futile because you’re entirely missing the bigger, grander picture and failing to see, therefore, the glaringly obvious answer:

  • That in order to produce social justice, we must remove class oppression.

But we’re not the united front that you seem to think us to be. We antifeminists and anti-SJers hold a vast array of beliefs as to what the answer to social injustice might be; the only thing that united us is our insistence that you see the bigger picture. You could also probably say, but don’t hold me to it, that we’re all also anti-democratic. What I can say for certain is that we’re all anti this government, but our views vary. Here are but a few examples:

  • Socialists believe that what we need is a new, fairer government whose goal is to uphold social equality, maintain the economy and dissolve corporate power.
  • Libertarians believe that the government has no business at all in economics, but libertarian views vary so widely that they would be insulted by any summary that I can give.
  • Anarchists believe that we’d all be happier if we just scrapped the government to see what happens.

I’d not like to call myself a socialist because my views predate socialism (don’t ask how that’s possible), but it’s the closest you’ll find out of those three. But anyway, SJers and feminists, I hope that has helped you to understand why we hate you so much.

Yours with love,

Your friendly neighbourhood Captain Jack.

I feel like a horrible person by Tumblr standards for this, but I’ve never actually had this strong feeling most SJers do that actors playing a minority character have to be members of that group. I don’t really feel, for example, that a straight actress playing a lesbian is an affront.

I do absolutely think more minority actors should get work. I absolutely think they don’t seem to even be considered in many cases, and that absolutely worries me.

But I also think the point of acting is to pretend to be something you’re not, to get inside the head of someone who is not like you in all kinds of ways.

So I don’t get this idea that it will always and ever be wrong for an actor to not be like the person they are playing.

If my life story is ever interesting enough to anyone to make a movie out of, I’ll think it’s great if an actor with my disability plays me, but I… don’t share this feeling of abject horror that maybe the person who does won’t have it too.

If you’d ever like to pretend to be me, don’t worry that you’ve got the wrong legs/brain for it. Worry about whether or not you can get deep enough into what matters to me.

I think my biggest problem with callout culture is that it tells those who subscribe to it that asking why is giving in.

It’s not just that people are being unrealistic about apologies, demanding that people not go into what they actually meant because that’s “insincere” or “oppressive” or “privileged.”

It’s that callout culture primes the OPPRESSED person not to be curious. Not to ask questions. Not to assume good faith – but since good faith is probably the thing opponents of this view don’t think they should assume, I’m going to try not to go there.

If you think your job as an SJer is to make callouts, you predispose yourself to say the biting and sarcastic thing, rather than to say something like:

Hey, I noticed you made a post about [thing] and in it you said [stuff.] What did you mean by that? Because I’m a member of [group], and a lot of people say [stuff] based in hurtful stereotypes about us. When I read your post, I felt [upset/hurt/triggered], but a lot of people I respect seem to think you’re cool. Would you mind my asking what exactly you meant?

And then if the person says “haha I don’t believe in triggers fuck you all [group] are whiny shits,” then you can be mean. But you’ve given the person a chance to see that they’ve hurt you without interacting in a way that’s pretty much destined to make them respond defensively no matter what (a callout, which is throwing the first punch in a verbal fight. And then expecting your opponent to be well-trained enough to take it on the chin and immediately stand down. Huh?)

Ask people things. I have friends I often disagree with, and sometimes I have really visceral hurt feelings about some things they say. But usually, when I Ask them (often privately, sometimes not) what they meant or even just tell them I’m hurt, they respond with respect and kindness. I may or may not change their mind and they may or may not reword or delete a post (which I generally don’t want anyway. I like honest people who realize I’m not the center of the universe), but I know that how I feel matters to them and that they’ll probably give the issue some extra thought next time.

Callout culture literally trains people out of doing this. It trains people that it’s a waste of time at best and a moral failing at worst.

I’m not okay with that, so I’m not okay with defenses of callout culture that claim that only privileged people are bullied by it. Even if that were true (and I think it very clearly and demonstrably isn’t), I’d still think training people to shut off inquisitiveness about other people was a moral wrong.

I really don’t like the “don’t explain what you meant” bit of SJ-style directions on how to apologize.

Because if you actually meant something different from what people assumed, and you follow the SJ-directions so you don’t get blasted, then

Anyone who comes across the whole kerfuffle later is highly likely to assume you actually said what the SJers think you said, since there’s no evidence but your original statement, post, tweet, etc. to the contrary.

And that original statement may be brief or vague because you may not have realized that it would look wrong out of context until AFTER the kerfuffle showed you people might misunderstand. And then your apology, if made the SJ way, only reinforces the idea that you did something terrible for no apparent reason because humans are irrational and mean.

So right now?

I feel this way:

If someone demands your apology for something you think they misunderstood, and orders you to focus on “how you hurt them,” saying that this means you can’t explain yourself…

Politely explain your understanding of their point of view, apologize for anything you feel you did that was hurtful, and then politely explain that you’re going to say what you meant. Down below the apology, so people can avoid it if they want.

Put it behind a cut. Tell people that they’re under no obligation to read it. That you understand if they’re not ready to do that, and maybe even if they’ll never be.

But that you have a right to express what you meant to express, and so you’re going to do it, and their assessment of your sincerity is on them, not you.