ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

Disrupted wrote:

Candace owens was banned (temporarily thanks to supporters) from twitter for reposting sarah jeong twits (who never got banned) while swapping the word "white" for "jewish". very telling

She was also and attacked/harassed by a large group of white liberals for eating at a diner in Philly today for having opinions that they do not approve a black person to have.

When you turn the images black and white it could be straight out of deep south in the early 1960's:

Here is a racist with a megaphone screaming into her ear:

"

Disrupted wrote:

Candace owens was banned (temporarily thanks to supporters) from twitter for reposting sarah jeong twits (who never got banned) while swapping the word "white" for "jewish". very telling

I wouldn't have banned either set of tweets if I was in charge. There is a double standard.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Disrupted wrote:

Candace owens was banned (temporarily thanks to supporters) from twitter for reposting sarah jeong twits (who never got banned) while swapping the word "white" for "jewish". very telling

I wouldn't have banned either set of tweets if I was in charge. There is a double standard.

yes, you either ban both or keep both, their actions made her point pretty well. (personally I prefer the "keep" side unless its a "family site", doesnt mean I agree with either, as Im sure its the same case for you)

I wouldn't ever censor Jeong's tweets. I would want a permanent, publicly available record of her bigotry.

"

Manocean wrote:

Here is a racist with a megaphone screaming into her ear:

Democrats trying to get her back onto the plantation lmao

"

Disrupted wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Disrupted wrote:

Candace owens was banned (temporarily thanks to supporters) from twitter for reposting sarah jeong twits (who never got banned) while swapping the word "white" for "jewish". very telling

I wouldn't have banned either set of tweets if I was in charge. There is a double standard.

yes, you either ban both or keep both, their actions made her point pretty well. (personally I prefer the "keep" side unless its a "family site", doesnt mean I agree with either, as Im sure its the same case for you)

Twitter should ban them both. It isn't not double standard, it is constantly breaking their own rules and not uphold them, letting them both off reflect that. It is triple hypocrisy, when all three side think it is ok nobody is getting banned.

"

CanHasPants wrote:

SJW stands for Social Justice Warrior. Social justice is like regular justice, except beholden to no logic or philosophy. Rather, it is reactionary to whatever manufactured emotional outrage happens to be the flavor of the week, often drawn across lines of identity oppression. Its woke warriors are nihilists and fascists, eager to incite violence against anybody they’re able to isolate.

SJP stands for Sarah Jessica Parker, an actress best known for her role on Sex and the City.

I guess an explanation may be in order. SJP was used on the first page of this thread. Not sure what was meant but here's some other possibilities. https://www.acronymfinder.com/SJP.html Or maybe even something like Social Justice Putz?

So, I take it that SJW is primarily a pejorative term.

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

CanHasPants wrote:

SJW stands for Social Justice Warrior. Social justice is like regular justice, except beholden to no logic or philosophy. Rather, it is reactionary to whatever manufactured emotional outrage happens to be the flavor of the week, often drawn across lines of identity oppression. Its woke warriors are nihilists and fascists, eager to incite violence against anybody they’re able to isolate.

SJP stands for Sarah Jessica Parker, an actress best known for her role on Sex and the City.

I guess an explanation may be in order. SJP was used on the first page of this thread. Not sure what was meant but here's some other possibilities. https://www.acronymfinder.com/SJP.html Or maybe even something like Social Justice Putz?

So, I take it that SJW is primarily a pejorative term.

Its meaning has changed several times, and even now depends on context. SJW is rarely used by the accused, but a negative connotation used by your enemies.

Originally the pejorative term was used to described figures such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi. People with deep conviction and obsession with their ideology and refuses to waive or deviate from them. Pretty clear example of an ad hominem attack that backfired.

It is now used to describe people who were overly sensitive and quick to insult anyone; People who say things without having to think about them at all; People pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction.

Edited: For punctuation...

"

deathflower wrote:

Its meaning has changed several times, and even now depends on context. SJW is rarely used by the accused, but a negative connotation used by your enemies.

Originally the pejorative term was used to described figures such as Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi. People with deep conviction and obsession with their ideology and refuses to waive or deviate from them. Pretty clear example of an ad hominem attack that backfired.

It is now used to describe people who were overly sensitive and quick to insult anyone. People say things without having to think about them at all. People pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction.

Yes, I could imagine Martin Luther King's assassin ranting about King's awful social justice warrior activities trying to gain some equality for blacks as he's planning King's murder. You know King wanting to sit in bus seats anywhere in the bus or drinking out of public water fountains clearly marked as whites only or even worse wanting to be black and not be shot by the police for being black.

Not sure if plain anti-white racism or some ingenious promo for a new show.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6m0oMrMUiWQ

(I think this is on topic because it explains the toxic culture we live in right now)