0
2

[–] gramman74 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

What was your redpill moment

0
2

[–] the_spectre [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Nothing in particular. Like I said in the post, it was a series of things. Probably when my future (now ex) girlfriend, who was black, simply laughed when I told her she had "internalized racism."

Also, when an SJW "friend" decided to tell me, after Russia pressed its anti-LGBT policies, that they absolutely hated all Russians. When I said that was racist, he got offended and told me to fuck off (and to "piss bleach forever." SJWs are such nice people.)

0
1

[–] mqrmqr 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

What was people's reactions to your far-left ideologies. Also, were you ever a HAES/pro-obesity person?

0
1

[–] incoming- 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

What is your opinion about Black on White violence and "flash mobs", pre-enlightenment and post?

0
0

[–] the_spectre [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Before: Completely justified.

After: Violence is rarely justified and the flash mobs and riots are a horrible way to motivate any sort of positive change. The BLM movement is also myopic because the problem is police brutality not blackness.

0
1

[–] AzureNova 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I've got a couple. 1) What factors led you to becoming a SJW - purely social osmosis, ideological attraction? And 2) As we seem to be of similar opinions of the SJW ideology, would you have any advice on getting current SJW-oriented people to see logic?

0
1

[–] the_spectre [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

  1. Probably a combination. I was already leaning left, but the fact that I was exposed to so many SJW ideas and saw them win debates so often made me believe that they were true, in some way.

  2. Like I said in another comment, rational arguments that explicitly avoid the -isms that SJWs campaign against and try to navigate their minefield a little bit will have quite a bit of traction. Reasonable minority voices (like in #notyourshield) are also invaluable. Further, for me, ridicule of SJW ideas--exposing their bad reasoning and faulty basis in reality--went a long way to making me reconsider my position. In the end, it's very similar to a religion; people can't be convinced by just one thing or just another--they must be convinced to reconsider their position in its entirety on their own, likely by a lot of things.

0
1

[–] bbartokk 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Can you expand on the policy debate being a high concentration of SJW? Is this due to particular high school you attended? How long where you part of the debate team to get to point of being an "SJW"?

0
1

[–] the_spectre [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

No, this seems to be on the national levels. (In fact, my high school was fairly conservative.) It probably took me a year and a half before I was leaning strongly SJW.

The highest-level competitors in both high school and college tend to push far-left academic SJWism. They are in stark contrast with the traditional policy debaters, who discuss, well, policy issues. It's probably about half-and-half, which, from my experience, is a much more dense concentration than in the general population.

I think it has a lot to do with a good number of policy debaters going into critical theory/continental philosophy, English, sociology, film, gender studies, and other such fields in college. You get a trickle-down effect where these debaters teach the younger debaters their ideologies and vote for one another, in a masturbatory cycle, that makes younger debaters think that the SJW positions hold water.

Essentially, these positions win because they are so radical. The authors have a fairly high degree of rhetorical prowess (in particular Wilderson, who was one of two American members of the ANC during South African apartheid). They are very negative, which, unsurprisingly, makes them conducive to winning on the negative side of the debate.

What you've got to understand is that policy debate is a game, and the person with the biggest impact (i.e., bad thing that happens if their particular proposed action were not taken) tends to win. Before the introduction of the "kritik" in the mid-80s, this was primarily nuclear war impacts (which are still enormously popular). The kritik was introduced as an alternative to this form of debate, and it's widely believed that it was first derived from the work of the philosopher Martin Heidegger (thus the word "kritik," from the German for critique, distinguishing it's abbreviation -- K -- from that of a "counterplan," which could be "C" or "CP.")

High school debate prioritizes speed and large impacts (in fact, the best debaters speak faster than you could likely understand as a layperson, and practice specifically so that they can do this). Essentially, the speed allows them to forward more arguments in less time.

So, basically, you get this circle of SocJus radicals that vote for one another, and younger debaters have a hard time distinguishing, in my experience, between a true argument and a winning argument. So they see these positions win frequently, and they end up thinking that they have truth to them.

Aside from that, they read the literature over and over again. It's not intentional, but this has something of a brainwashing effect.

Tl;dr: Older debaters with SJW degrees vote for SJW positions and younger debaters can't tell that a winning argument isn't necessarily a true argument, so they tend to lap it up. Boom, SJW.

0
1

[–] Spinstrike21 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Looking back, what would you say was your stupidest and/or most regretable moment as an SJW? Something you said, did, wrote, thought, etc.

0
1

[–] the_spectre [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Well, I told my future girlfriend that she had "internalized racism" because she didn't realize that "antiblackness was institutionalized in the U.S. and that the U.S. was built on the Black body." Several times. She laughed.

I also told one of my childhood friends, who is 100% Seminole, that he had internalized racism for a similar reason. He got pissed, and was relieved when I returned to sanity.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] the_spectre [S] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Unsure. I think that presenting reasoned arguments that are not inflammatory or overtly -ist in any way is the best way. Also, ridicule may work, in moderation -- though I say this because it worked for me.

It's really a baseless religion for atheists who have refused to accept the consequences of their atheism -- in particular, that moralism cannot be maintained without a foundation (God).

e: although it is by no means exclusive to atheists; I just say this because I found that many, many SJWs were also moralistic atheists like I was. (Still an atheist, not a moralist.)

0
0

[–] Dingolicious 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

How did you get a girlfriend? Asking for a friend...

0
1

[–] the_spectre [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Don't know. Surprised she went for me. Stick in there, buddy.

Mostly, relax. A relaxed, confident guy is more appealing to women than a desperate guy. Get hobbies, work out, etc. Don't put all your eggs in one basket, either.

Also, get fit. Eat healthy. Go to the gym or start running and doing calisthenics if you can't afford a membership. If you can afford it, a physical trainer may do you good if you let them kick your butt into gear. You can increase your attractiveness this way. It'll also make you feel better (physically and mentally--i.e., more confidence).

load more comments ▼ (1 remaining)