>read the great gatsby
>go on reddit for people's thoughts on it and analysis'
>upboats on comment that says that Gatsby was misogynistic and viewed daisy as a thing to possess
>Saying Daisy is a badly written character
>Found the Great Gatsby to be boring
>hated all the characters
Seriously I hate /poltards/ as much as SJW' but damn both sides piss me off to the extreme.
I bet there's a whole group of people calling Romeo an sexist asshole.
This is why I primarliy go on 4chan because /pol/ are mostly contained in /pol/ and sometimes leak out into other boards, but in reddit it's mixed in all over.
>inb4 going on reddit?
Why is social justice seen as a bad thing again?
>>7861068
Because the people that push it behave terribly (getting people fired from their jobs for disagreeing, being extremely agressive, ect...). Also, many points brought up by neo-progressives (aka SJWs) do not reflect reality (gender wage gap, 1-in-5 myth...). Many of them are also complete ideologues who would never (ever) change their opinion on the subject, even when presented substential evidence. Many of them only support "equality" for one side. You'll rarely see Feminists, for example, demanding a change of child custody law, which is currently unfairly biased towards women.
I think that most SJWs have good intentions but the way they act doesn't reflect those.
>>7861068
Because it's not actually social justice, but a cult engineered to distract us from real issues such as overpopulation, climate change, food security and Muslim extremism. It's a threat to humanity.
>engineers division along racial, socioeconomic and sexual lines
>teaches people to avoid thinking critically
>teaches people ignore history and the wisdom of their elders
>isolates its followers from those who would otherwise be their allies and friends
>pushes the notion that the colour of someone's skin ultimately matters more than their ideas and who they are as a person
>trains people to ignore statistical trends/data that could be used to solve social issues, which would make the world a better place
>engages in historical revisionism (the people involved in the Stonewall Riots were primary transgendered women of color)
>tells people that it's ok to be a lazy morbidly obese cunt, and that healthcare professionals are shitlords for worrying about your physical and mental health
>destroys the family unit, which will lead to increased crime rates as children grow up without fathers
This is only the tip of the fucking iceberg here, social justice is a cancer that must be stamped out before it destroys the planet.
>>7861162
*primarily trans women of color
The only things misogynist about TGG are obviously Tom, and more tenuously, Fitzgerale's portrayal of Daisy
>>7861057
i mentally substitute any instance of the term SJW for Reasonable Empathetic Human Being
>>7861162
>social justice is a cancer that must be stamped out before it destroys the planet
Jeez, I'm not really fond of SJWs myself but this is literally paranoia.
Go seek help, please.
>>7861068
because every social justice advocate also support political correctness, which may be the most retarded concept ever
>>7861172
Most SJWs are many things but 'reasonable' isn't one of them.
>>7861171
I mean Daisy is just a bad person, how is that misogynistic?
>>7861172
>not understading an entry level novel like the great gatsby
>good
pick one
>>7861191
Depicting women as anything but strong, noble people is considered problemaric/misogynistic by neo-progressives.
>>7861057
My friend claimed gatsby was black and that was the only reason the "new money" thing made sense
But yeah, gatsby did view daisy as something to possess. He also didn't understand what was actually going on because of his autism. I felt the movie got at that
>>7861179
>ad homiem
>le fallacy fallacy
Wew lad
>>7861057
>if I inb4 it, it will make me less of a redditor
Fuck off.
>>7861216
lol wut
>>7861197
On this topic, I saw an article published by the "feminist" column of Vice; It said Albert Einstein was a misogynist asshole because he wanted to divorce his first wife but for the sake of their children offered an ultimatum that was compromising if she would only prepare all his meals and hardly speak to him (so, obviously he hated the woman for some reason). But, during that time, he was also having an affair, and because of those two things, this journalist bitch said he was a misogynist (as if he hated all women) and said he was a selfish human (as if his dedication to science wasn't more rewarding to the scope of humanity than him being a "family man"); so, the trend today is to rush to generalities and labeling as long as you're on the left-side and you're cool with the mainstream.
>>7861057
I often think SJW's are a ploy by the right wing to subvert the radical left and set them at each others throats, but then I remember that they probably aren't that clever.
there was a time when being a radical actually meant something in this country.
There was a time when the peace movement actually wanted peace
There was a time when feminists actually wanted equality
When socialists actually represented the working class
What the hell happened to us? When did it all fall apart?
>>7861264
>the radical left
ded
Also, you fucking right wing motherfuckers are delusional. You wanted fascism, then act disappointed that its not what you envisioned.
You blame everything on the left even though you are the ones in power.
>>7861264
It's just the natural result of deindustrialization and middle class posturing radicalism
>>7861126
>Because the people that push it behave terribly
How do you know you aren't just seeing cherry picked examples of someones twitter rant as opposed to the ones that keep quiet?
>>7861285
>you are the ones in power.
pls
>>7861285
>even though you are the ones in power
Maybe true in Burgerland, here in Europe leftists are the establishment. Also, few people who oppose neo-progressivism are facists.
>>7861276
when people started using sweeping generalizations
>>7861285
because the left wants to destroy tradition which is the foundation of western civilization. there are examples everywhere of the millennial generation being absolute cancer in the name of liberalism and social justice
>>7861300
People always used sweeping generalisations though.
What's really strange is this new wave of collectivism which has emerged with the rise of the social justice movement. bell hooks is to blame for this btw.
>>7861057
Its scientifically proven that you can't "inb4 reddit"
>>7861276
Internet and television let people stay in their homes and see only opinions they agree with and discuss things only with people they agree with. This has led to extreme views on both sides, rather than the kinds of nuanced, moderate views which are so important for democracy.
>>7861292
Because these things happen regularly. I don't use Twitter. I deal with these people a lot since my uni's filled with them. There are lots of videos on YouTube of SJWs behaving like shit, usually in large groups. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that, at least on college campuses, it's not just a small minority doing this stuff.
And even if these are just cherry-picked examples, the other points in my original post still stand.
Also, your argument sounds a bit (not) Scotish to me (if you get my drift).
>>7861172
Hi tranny
>>7861191
That's why I said tenuously. I'm sure somebody could make the argument. It'd be a stretch.
>>7861264
i always fall into thoughts like this when i am high.
I once thought about a plot focusing on that theme and when i read my draft sober i realised that I was either really on to something or becoming a conspiracy theorist.
>>7861276
>there was a time when being a radical actually meant something in this country.
rad = cool. thats ameaning
>There was a time when the peace movement actually wanted peace
like the gandhi people? the ones that killed about 2 millions in northern india when they became independent?
>There was a time when feminists actually wanted equality
yes, but most saw equality as the first step to a matriarchy. And i mean, living as a male in a patriarchy, i can fully understand that they would like to have the power for once (doesnt mean i would like it tho).
>When socialists actually represented the working class
like lenin? whose first act as leader for the "revolution" was the establishment of a secret police to find unloaly workers?
> When did it all fall apart?
it was never together. maybe some people did some good stuff here and there, but no system or ideology is without viloent asshole who tear everything to shreds bc they get drunk on power.
>>7861322
this is particularily facebooks fault. I wonder when zuckerberg is going to get lynched by two angry mobs that fight for the right to kill him
>>7861068
the problem is primarily that they believe in the primacy of protecting "feelings" over everything else. But what they don't understand is that feelings are a product of the person as much as whatever it is they're offended about. That's why two people can react to the same thing a different way. Feelings are malleable and changeable and controllable to a much larger degree than we like to admit.
SJWs want to protect feelings, and all that does is promote whoever can cry the loudest. It's self-sabotaging because all the effort goes into crying loudly, when the effort would be better placed into actually making changes, putting in the effort to make the world a better place, etc. It also encourages outrage and anger (note that this also makes it morally evil) and divisions/accusations/social unrest. It's perfectly fine to point out when wrongs have been committed; but hurting someone's feelings can never be a wrong in and of itself.
