Sign In

Episode VIII : The Last Jedi - Discussion * SPOILER THREAD * — Page 161

Author
Time

screams in the void said:

the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !

Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:

The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.

A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

screams in the void said:

yeah . wikipedia is a credible source…

You could use any dictionary. It is usually a derogotary term, that much is clear, and that negative connotation is clearly related to undesirable behaviour (in the eyes of critics of such behaviour).

Collins dictionary:

usually derogatory
a person who campaigns zealously and vociferously for causes associated with social justice

The urban dictionary:

A person who uses the fight for civil rights as an excuse to be rude, condescending, and sometimes violent for the purpose of relieving their frustrations or validating their sense of unwarranted moral superiority. The behaviors of Social justice warriors usually have a negative impact on the civil rights movement, turning away potential allies and fueling the resurgence of bigoted groups that scoop up people who have been burned or turned off by social justice warriors.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

screams in the void said:

the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !

Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:

The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.

A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.

Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.

Author
Time

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

screams in the void said:

the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !

Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:

The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.

A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.

Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.

Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

screams in the void said:

so , how are those goals pursued and what are their methods ?

Well, as I stated it generally involves a lack of respect for other points of view, and an attitude of superiority, that gets on people’s nerves. I would charactarize a SJW as a person who so zealously persues his or her goals, that it even turns off those that generally might favour their point of view. In other words it becomes a counterproductive endeavour, which often devolves into an us versus them mentality, pointing fingers, and passing blame for the ills of society.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

screams in the void said:

the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !

Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:

The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.

A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.

Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.

Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.

Show me a video of some purple haired tumblrina killing 50 people in cold blood. Then we can talk about how both sides are just as bad. One side has done a very tangible harm to society, and the other has, what, made some overzealous blog posts. Throw all the complaints about Antifa you want, it doesn’t change the fact that their opponents stated goals are the discrimination, deportation, or deaths of millions of people.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

screams in the void said:

the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !

Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:

The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.

A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.

Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.

Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.

Show me a video of some purple haired tumblrina killing 50 people in cold blood. Then we can talk about how both sides are just as bad. One side has done a very tangible harm to society, and the other has, what, made some overzealous blog posts. Throw all the complaints about Antifa you want, it doesn’t change the fact that their opponents stated goals are the discrimination, deportation, or deaths of millions of people.

Never heard of the Rote Armee Fraction, I see. For every Hitler, there is a Stalin, and for every Pinochet, a Kim Il Un, or a Castro. Extremism does not discriminate. Genocide has occured in the pursuit of many so called ideal societies, whether they be considered left wing or right wing.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

screams in the void said:

the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !

Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:

The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.

A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.

Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.

Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.

Show me a video of some purple haired tumblrina killing 50 people in cold blood. Then we can talk about how both sides are just as bad. One side has done a very tangible harm to society, and the other has, what, made some overzealous blog posts. Throw all the complaints about Antifa you want, it doesn’t change the fact that their opponents stated goals are the discrimination, deportation, or deaths of millions of people.

Never heard of the Rote Armee Fraction, I see. For every Hitler, there is a Stalin, and for every Pinochet, a Kim Il Un, or a Castro. Extremism does not discriminate. Genocide has occured in the name of many socalled ideals, whether they be considered left or right.

You can point out any number of cold war atrocities on either side. That’s not the point, the point is that today, in the here and now, one side is committing a disproportionate amount of harm, and is a far greater threat than the other. If some Naxalite wannabes start killing people and gain a sizable amount of online clout and sympathy. I’ll be concerned. But so far, all I’ve seen is hostile action on the right and defensive measures on the left. Remember, this entire culture war thing started with some game journalists started getting death threats. And now, for the past couple of years, that online bullshit has started seeping into the real world.

Author
Time

Am I mistaken in believing politics was banned as a topic from this forum?

Regardless, I don’t believe this is the appropriate thread for it.

Help finish ROTJ: Revisited!

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

screams in the void said:

the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !

Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:

The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.

A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.

Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.

Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.

Show me a video of some purple haired tumblrina killing 50 people in cold blood. Then we can talk about how both sides are just as bad. One side has done a very tangible harm to society, and the other has, what, made some overzealous blog posts. Throw all the complaints about Antifa you want, it doesn’t change the fact that their opponents stated goals are the discrimination, deportation, or deaths of millions of people.

Never heard of the Rote Armee Fraction, I see. For every Hitler, there is a Stalin, and for every Pinochet, a Kim Il Un, or a Castro. Extremism does not discriminate. Genocide has occured in the name of many socalled ideals, whether they be considered left or right.

You can point out any number of cold war atrocities on either side. That’s not the point, the point is that today, in the here and now, one side is committing a disproportionate amount of harm, and is a far greater threat than the other. If some Naxalite wannabes start killing people and gain a sizable amount of online clout and sympathy. I’ll be concerned. But so far, all I’ve seen is hostile action on the right and defensive measures on the left. Remember, this entire culture war thing started with some game journalists started getting death threats. And now, for the past couple of years, that online bullshit has started seeping into the real world.

The point is not to focus on sides, but on compassion, and understanding. History tells us, that it is not about sides, and the threat is not in persuing ideals, but how we choose to persue those ideals. It’s always too easy to conflate the ideals with the methods used to persue them.

Author
Time

Tobar said:

Am I mistaken in believing politics was banned as a topic from this forum?

Regardless, I don’t believe this is the appropriate thread for it.

I suppose you’re right. Let’s drop this.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

OutboundFlight said:

If you would prefer me to use: This character is overpowered relative to the other characters I can use that term.

I would actually. It’s a more specific statement that cuts through the bullshit, making it easier to tell you you’re wrong without having to also discuss a whole other topic on top of it.

Not to mention, if we’re talking about sexists or subconscious sexists, it’s a gendered insult (forget the male version which no one ever brings up except in a debate about the term). Again, whether conscious or not, the more you use the term the more some people will simply associate it with “powerful female character” rather than “too powerful female character” and end up writing off the former just because (while the powerful male character gets a pass for a number of reasons, conscious or not, sexist or not, including simply that they are more common and don’t have a term as closely linked to them that will trigger such a response).

Author
Time

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

screams in the void said:

the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !

Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:

The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.

A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.

Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.

Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.

Show me a video of some purple haired tumblrina killing 50 people in cold blood. Then we can talk about how both sides are just as bad. One side has done a very tangible harm to society, and the other has, what, made some overzealous blog posts. Throw all the complaints about Antifa you want, it doesn’t change the fact that their opponents stated goals are the discrimination, deportation, or deaths of millions of people.

Never heard of the Rote Armee Fraction, I see. For every Hitler, there is a Stalin, and for every Pinochet, a Kim Il Un, or a Castro. Extremism does not discriminate. Genocide has occured in the name of many socalled ideals, whether they be considered left or right.

You can point out any number of cold war atrocities on either side. That’s not the point, the point is that today, in the here and now, one side is committing a disproportionate amount of harm, and is a far greater threat than the other. If some Naxalite wannabes start killing people and gain a sizable amount of online clout and sympathy. I’ll be concerned. But so far, all I’ve seen is hostile action on the right and defensive measures on the left. Remember, this entire culture war thing started with some game journalists started getting death threats. And now, for the past couple of years, that online bullshit has started seeping into the real world.

The point is not to focus on sides, but on compassion, and understanding. History tells us, that it is not about sides, and the threat is not in persuing ideals, but how we choose to persue those ideals. It’s always too easy to conflate the ideals with the methods used to persue them.

Isn’t that exactly the issue with using SJW as a pejorative though? Some “SJWs” use methods that annoy (or worse), but now people throw around the term to describe anyone championing those ideals. Rian Johnson is an SJW because his film features more women in it than any other Star Wars film (amongst other things). But that’s an incredibly low bar, so it’s not like he cut all the men out to make it work. The ideal is something any decent person should agree with (better gender parity) and his method is highly innocuous (putting more women in a fantasy movie). But he’s an “SJW.” The term is dogshit.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

Zachary VIII said:

DrDre said:

screams in the void said:

the whole thing of using the term social justice warrior as a pejorative when talking about super heroes is just plain stupid …of course they are social justice warriors …that is the whole damn point of them !

Well like the term Mary Sue, the term SJW has a different connotation now. I’ll quote wiki:

The accusation that somebody is an SJW carries implications that they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments.

A large part of the criticism of SJW’s is not in the goals that are pursued, but how these goals are pursued.

Yeah, I’m sure if you asked the average person who uses SJW pejoratively they would say “I agree with their goals, but not their methods” and not something like “They’re undermining masculinity and western civilization with their cultural marxist agenda”. Ever since people like Sargon started talking about them in 2014-2015, SJWs have been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the left.

Yes, and alt-right has been this nebulous boogieman that can encompass anyone and anything on the right. What’s your point? Left or right it generally involves those with a lack of respect for those with different perspectives.

Show me a video of some purple haired tumblrina killing 50 people in cold blood. Then we can talk about how both sides are just as bad. One side has done a very tangible harm to society, and the other has, what, made some overzealous blog posts. Throw all the complaints about Antifa you want, it doesn’t change the fact that their opponents stated goals are the discrimination, deportation, or deaths of millions of people.

Never heard of the Rote Armee Fraction, I see. For every Hitler, there is a Stalin, and for every Pinochet, a Kim Il Un, or a Castro. Extremism does not discriminate. Genocide has occured in the name of many socalled ideals, whether they be considered left or right.

You can point out any number of cold war atrocities on either side. That’s not the point, the point is that today, in the here and now, one side is committing a disproportionate amount of harm, and is a far greater threat than the other. If some Naxalite wannabes start killing people and gain a sizable amount of online clout and sympathy. I’ll be concerned. But so far, all I’ve seen is hostile action on the right and defensive measures on the left. Remember, this entire culture war thing started with some game journalists started getting death threats. And now, for the past couple of years, that online bullshit has started seeping into the real world.

The point is not to focus on sides, but on compassion, and understanding. History tells us, that it is not about sides, and the threat is not in persuing ideals, but how we choose to persue those ideals. It’s always too easy to conflate the ideals with the methods used to persue them.

Isn’t that exactly the issue with using SJW as a pejorative though? Some “SJWs” use methods that annoy (or worse), but now people throw around the term to describe anyone championing those ideals. Rian Johnson is an SJW because his film features more women in it than any other Star Wars film (amongst other things). But that’s an incredibly low bar, so it’s not like he cut all the men out to make it work. The ideal is something any decent person should agree with (better gender parity) and his method is highly innocuous (putting more women in a fantasy movie). But he’s an “SJW.” The term is dogshit.

The criticisms against TLJ go beyond putting more women in a fantasy movie. It’s directed against what some percieve as the dumbing down of male characters to make the female characters shine by comparison. It’s about what some consider a rather contrived conflict involving the witholding of crucial information to make a point about gender relations. It’s about a protagonist who obtains powers faster than any protagonist before her, and displays a distinct lack of character flaws, as if the creators are afraid to make her too vulnurable, thus making her a boring character to some. The term SJW follows from the assumption, that percieved flaws in the story, and characters follow from a conscious effort to push a political agenda. The pursuit of this agenda in the view of some critics allegedly took precedent over good story and characters. Now, we can debate, whether such flaws exist, or whether the creators were pursuing an agenda, but for the vast majority of TLJ’s critics it is a massive oversimplification to state it’s just a matter of more women in a fantasy movie.

Author
Time

So many of these types of arguments are made in bad faith though, and many misrepresenting the events of the film. It’s not always the case, but many people taking issue with the execution of this perceived agenda are actually taking issue with the agenda itself, whether consciously or not.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

So many of these types of arguments are made in bad faith though, and many misrepresenting the events of the film. It’s not always the case, but many people taking issue with the execution of this perceived agenda are actually taking issue with the agenda itself, whether consciously or not.

It is an assumption, that these arguments are made in bad faith, and whether critics subconsciously take issue with the agenda. It is also a manner to invalidate an opposing opinion, which makes such assumptions suspect.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

So many of these types of arguments are made in bad faith though, and many misrepresenting the events of the film. It’s not always the case, but many people taking issue with the execution of this perceived agenda are actually taking issue with the agenda itself, whether consciously or not.

It is an assumption, that these arguments are made in bad faith, and whether critics subconsciously take issue with the agenda. It is also a manner to invalidate an opposing opinion, which makes such conclusions suspect.

It is not an assumption. It’s a fact many do it. You’ve argued with me enough to know I don’t need to invalidate an opinion to oppose it.

Author
Time

Okay, let’s get back to talking about the movie, please!

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

That shot must’ve looked amazing in 3d Imax.

Speaking of which, I’d be interested in knowing exactly which shots in the movie were actually captured in 15-perf 65mm.

Author
Time

What do you guys think about them announcing episode 10, 11, and 12 today?

I Don’t Even Like Pickles?

Author
Time

Pull the other one! 😛

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?