Are SJWs a danger to music?
We've seen legends like Bill Cosby shamed for something that isn't even proven. Despite the fact that his "victims" waited 40+ years to try to sue him and make some money, SJWs are campaigning to get him removed from positions and for his shows to be cancelled. Or look at how SJWs pressured firefox to fire their CEO for having an opinion they don't like.
I was just thinking recently with SJWs like Grimes and that Perfect Pussy whore who are trying to find sexism where it doesn't exist. And now pitchfork is giving these fringe musicians a platform to share their propaganda.
It's only a matter of time before SJWs gather to try to censor Ariel Pink and other great male musicians. Is there anything we can do to stop this? I don't want MUH PRIVILEGE to pussify music.
look, i grew up liking bill cosby too and obviously it's very unpleasant to think of him as a rapist, but why would all these women accuse him for absolutely no reason? one, maybe, but there's at least 10 now
as for the other crap in this post, no one cares except for 4chan and some small subsections of tumblr/reddit
As long as there are people for censorship, there will be people doing the things they want censored, uncensored.
There is no way to say "you can't do this in music." To even attempt to try to do something like that would only create hordes of artists doing that very thing.
Who is for censorship though?
That's not what I asked though. You said they tried and failed. Failed what?
Like it or not, "SJWs" are much more influential outside of 4chan or reddit.
>why would all these women accuse him for absolutely no reason?
attention and money. there's a lawsuit now, these women are literally money grabbing. they know he's a rich male and feminists will have a shit storm and declare him guilty for being a man.
sorry, if you were really raped you wouldn't keep it in for 40 years. deciding you regret it 40 years later when you can make money just makes you a common whore.
>Who is for censorship though?
That's the question I'm wanting answered from OP. SJW's have no power in this matter, so I want to know what he's ranting about.
>You said they tried and failed.
No I didn't. I'm not the poster you replied to.
>Like it or not, "SJWs" are much more influential outside of 4chan or reddit.
Want to give me an example? Until then, this is all just paranoia.
>No I didn't. I'm not the poster you replied to.
>Want to give me an example? Until then, this is all just paranoia.
I'm not paranoid of "SJWs." I think you haven't been paying attention to the whole GamerGate thing. The media has overwhelmingly come in support of those "SJWs" and GamerGate is almost universally condemned. If you talk to the average person, not a poster on /v/ or KIA, you're gonna find that they're very much in support of those "SJWs." In fact, if you used that term you'd likely get a lot of flak.
If you want proof just look at any major publication not name briebart.
>You said they tried and failed. Failed what?
So you weren't pretending to be retarded, and literally could not pick up on what I was implying? Okay. They wanted artists to stop portraying women in a sexual manner, because those portrayals were sexist. They never got artists to stop doing what artists do. Musicians still have sexy women in their music videos. They have for a long time, and will continue to do so. SJWs can voice their opinion all they want, it just hasn't changed anything.
>Or look at how SJWs pressured firefox to fire their CEO for having an opinion they don't like
Whoa whoa whoa. I was with you up until this point. There's a difference between people coming out of the woodwork to sue some has-been comedian and foregoing innocent until proven guilty and donating money to an organization that has an enormous boner for taking rights away from gay people. One may or may not be a good person and the other most certainly is not and does not deserve to be a CEO and make money off the backs of people he's already kicked in the gut. Check your priv.
>attacks on Sarkeesian because she talked about portraying women more as competent heroes and less like two tits on a stick
This was something blown way out of proportion than it should have been. Media only picked up on it because it was popular, and you can't honestly think they're going to go against feminists. That's ACTUAL feminists, not tumblr extremists.
SJW's as they appear on tumblr as extremists have no pull anywhere. You're not going to see musicians or game publishers supporting unique pronouns anytime soon. Probably never.
Dude. I disagree with the guy too, but you can't just demand that people lose their job because of it. Unless he was breaking the law, there's no reason that the orthodoxy should have the right to determine who does, and does not deserve to hold a position in business.
>If you talk to the average person, not a poster on /v/ or KIA, you're gonna find that they're very much in support of those "SJWs."
>And more numbers: women over 65 (28 percent), Gen X women ages 30-44 (32 percent) and Millennials ages 18-29 (42 percent).
Even in the most prominent age group of SJW's, most women aren't feminists. Of the 42% of millennials who do call themselves feminists, how many of them actually know a thing about modern feminism? It would be like thinking that 75 or so percent of Americans abstain from pre marital sex because of Christianity.
I know that feminism and SJW aren't synonymous, but it's pretty much a given that any SJW is a feminist. They're not as prominent as you may think.
In the context of the original post, I thought you were implying that they tried to censor musicians and failed. In that case, obviously, I'd call bullshit.
The rest of your post is a whole lot of bullshit. You speak in a lot of generalizations and give absolutely no context. Who are they, who are these artists they want to change, and which artists rejected this? If you're going to bring up a specific situation like Grimes and Ariel Pink or Tegan & Sara and Tyler, then yes, those artists didn't change their ways. I don't think those "SJWs" need Tyler to stop being an edgy teenager for their point to be any more or less valid. In the grand scheme of things, things are definitely become more progressive.
The riot grrrl movement is inherently flawed and shows the hypocrisy of internet slacktivists. they are quick to cite Kathleen Hanna as an important figure but completely ignore the fact that her and many other members of the scene are transphobic (important to note most people citing her are extreme trans rights activists) not only this but they compromise to an system made by white males that they are so against by getting into major labels.
You sound like a butthurt sjw. The funny thing is, sane people are getting annoyed at the sjw's thinking their butthurt is actually important enough to fuck up everything they touch.
Honestly, your post confuses me. Are you saying that Sarkeesian is an actual feminist? That's surprising to me because the vast majority of people who use SJW/tumblr as a pejorative would also call Sarkeesian a SJW.
In a sense, you're right. Extremists on any corner of the internet are not likely to influence anything or anyone. OP doesn't mention any of these extremists though, just Grimes and the "Perfect Pussy whore."
Do you have a citation for Kathleen Hanna being transphobic? All I can find is that she played at a festival for women that excluded trans women, but the same article said that the band (Le Tigre) had an official stance of "trans women are women."
So, aside from poor judgement, do you have an actual citation of her transphobic politics, or transphobia in the riot grrrl scene for that matter?
First of all, he resigned and was not fired. He took that action voluntarily.
Secondly, why shouldn't a business be able to decide who they want to represent their company? He wasn't pushed out of the job on the basis of his race, orientation, or else wise. He left his job because he actively and financially supported an ideology that denied the rights of an entire group of people.
sorry whats the flavor of the month terminology? cultural marxism vs dark enlightenment? degeneracy vs ancap? feel free to dump your confusing mspaint political spectrum charts while you're at it
You're not wrong but I'm not going to pretend that I'm disappointed with the outcome. He got what was coming to him. If you're an asshole to other people and step on everyone to get to the top, it's going to come back and bite you in the ass. And it should.
>I know that feminism and SJW aren't synonymous, but it's pretty much a given that any SJW is a feminist.
This isn't true, actually. I've seen the label SJW thrown on anyone who even, simply, defends a feminist from harassment. That does not make you a feminist per say.
The funny thing is that feminism is a dirty word, but the majority of people hold feminist beliefs. Though the term is becoming more and more acceptable, I think.
This poll doesn't really sway me because the stigma that the word feminism has. You're kidding yourself if you think this means that people are "anti-SJWs" though, that's a huge difference. These people come from the fringes of the internet, /pol/, /v/, r/KIA, r/MRA.
>being this butthurt over the phrase "sjw"
Sarkeesian is one of the few people that begin to sometimes lean on the "extremist" side that is actually competent and aware of what she's saying.
It doesn't matter what anyone else considers her. Her actions make what she is.
>I've seen the label SJW thrown on anyone who even, simply, defends a feminist from harassment
I'm talking about the people who actually are SJW's not people who might have the label wrongly thrown at them.
Most people don't have feminist beliefs. Most people don't believe that women are inherently superior to men. Most people don't think that heterosexual sex is inherently harmful to women. Most people don't think that women should be given a significant amount of favor over men in education and employment.
Both WOC and trans people were excluded from the riotgrrl scene. Notably le tigres playing in a festival that alienates trans women...
I have an actual citation of those dubs...
Now anyways. I'm on mobile and its not letting me link it but off the top of my head I'd name the NYU essay women and performance or "Riot Grrrl, Race and revival"
feminism is really only for white college girls who live in gated communities and think they're oppressed or that gender roles are bad and or forced on them by an imaginary system of white males who want to oppress women.
SJWs are a huge problem, because people take their ridiculous agenda seriously. There are some good aspects of certain SJW causes, but ultimately an SJW mind frame is appealing to many because it excuses a lack of accountability.
Many people latch onto it due to the "feel good" rationalization: YOU aren't the problem, people not accepting your lifestyle is the problem. It turns a persons "difference" into their defining trait, and idea which can be applied to justify all other aspects of someones lifestyle.
That's why so many guys get on board with "male feminism" despite the fact that it works directly against their best interest. Instead of "focus and improve myself to get what I want" it's "find a safe comfort group that says I don't need too"
All actions can be excused and justified through the SJW experience, except the ones that promote genuine self improvement.
>First of all, he resigned and was not fired. He took that action voluntarily.
Well that changes everything. I stand by my position that your political and ideological belief, no matter how rotten I, or others, believe it to be, should not jeopardize your business life.
(not true, by the way)
My ex girlfriend grew up in a neighborhood that was just a slight step up from a trailer park (and lived very close to a trailer park), broke as fuck, and is a feminist. She is white, if that means anything, but she's not a gated community kid in the slightest.
No. There's literally no danger at present, nor in the likely future. Everyone is legally free to express themselves artistically, to a certain degree. To understand some of the present limits on free speech, please at least do everyone the courtesy of reading a wikipedia article, if not something a little more scholarly.
In all the cases you cited, people were able to speak freely, no one is being censored. Censorship is when the government suppresses or makes punishable by law certain kinds of 'speech.' You know where censorship is really taking place? China, North Korea, Russia, etc. Not America. People's feelings can get hurt, they'll complain, and there might even be a shitstorm. But Ariel Pink and others who run their mouth like him won't be fined, thrown in jail, or killed.
If a company that you're employed by doesn't like the fact that you are a KKK member, fuck children on the weekends or cannibalize homeless people they have every right to fire your ass.
Provided it wasn't derailed into SJ-baiting like #GamerGate was, I'd love to see a #GamerGate-style consumer revolt against Pitchfork. I mean, they cover the same artists they sign and promote for a festival that makes them more money than their actual coverage does. Now that's a REAL conflict of interest.
It makes sense for women to be feminists. It makes no sense for men to be feminists.
People argue that "feminism helps men too" and I find it frustrating guys latch onto that belief. Feminism "helping" men is the same as "helping" an animal by pulling him out of nature, away from his family, and putting him in a cage. His life is better because he has food being given to him, and sometimes you take him for walks, but his life is only good on YOUR terms, not his own.
Could you name one extremist quality that Sarkeesian has?
I have no idea what an "actual" SJW is, because it's not a meaningful word. It's almost exclusively used as a snarl work that's meant, quite simply, to silence and other dissenting opinions. I know that you'll likely have vague some definition about "slacktivists" on "tumblr," "extremists" or some other buzzwords, and perhaps you have one or two blogs to link me to. These bloggers, however, are likely not mainstream in any sense of the word. They're likely fringe radfems that exist in their own fringe circles, but have no exposure outside of them, so I'm never sure who exactly these "SJWs" that everyone is worried about are.
>Most people don't have feminist beliefs. Most people don't believe that women are inherently superior to men. Most people don't think that heterosexual sex is inherently harmful to women. Most people don't think that women should be given a significant amount of favor over men in education and employment.
None of those are feminist beliefs. You'd save yourself a lot of time by saying that you don't know what feminism is.
Hey guy. take a look at this https://files.nyu.edu/es544/public/WP-PA22.2-3.pdf
also this a related article that cites it and is good:
And despite attempts to get an explanation the usually outspoken Hanna has remained silent on the Michigan Womyn's festival. Which is really odd... Especially considering its reputation for a "womyn born womyn" policy
>None of those are feminist beliefs. You'd save yourself a lot of time by saying that you don't know what feminism is.
They are beliefs by people who identify as feminist. By your logic, most self identified feminists are not feminists, while most people who don't identify as feminists are feminists.
I don't have any time to make any arguments or link to anything, because I should have left for work five minutes ago.
But if you don't think the feminist/SJW agenda gets taken seriously in the media, you aren't paying enough attention. Stuff about gender pronouns being taken seriously? I'm sure there is something, but that isn't what i am talking about specifically.
The point is: your job can fire you if you do something that they don't like. Literally anything. Wanting to take rights away from a group of people does not make you a good person or someone that a company like Mozilla would want to associate themselves with.
>What's next a beta discussion about the friendzone and "I'm such a nice guy!"
I know you're mocking people who are against SJW ideas, but promoting feminism will only lead to more whiny "beta" males lead by women.
The visual effects on this video are nice
>The point is: your job can fire you if you do something that they don't like. Literally anything
So, imagine I own my own business, and one of my employes takes some money she's earned, and decides to donate it to a group that advocates gay's rights. I fire her because of that. Is that okay?
>People label themselves
>there proud of it
>I'm a indecisive bastard if I don't the same
Life is too short for this shit