>"If I create a character who's part of a group

why not just make a south park general?

>>77601441
>If I create a character who's part of a group and have them express my particular views, it'll seem like that particular minority agrees with me

>If I see people as monoliths and assume one speaks for all, with no regard for the character's actions being consistent with the personal code they've evinced on this show for years, I'll have stupid opinions like this

>>77601473
I don't want to be forced to interact with cancerous general regulars to discuss the weekly episode. Besides, South Park discussion is dead during hiatuses.

>>77601617
What the fuck is the matter with you?

>>77601540

>SP Characters
>consistent

Topkek.mp5

>>77601648
What the fuck is the matter with you?

I just don't get what this arc is supposed to be saying. Okay, PC people are all self righteous privileged people who just want to get laid? Okay, but that's not the reality. The people who talk about micro aggressions and marginalized groups are the people /co/ calls tumblerwhales and shit.

I'm not defending SJW stuff, I'm just wondering what the hell the message is. The appeal to audacity normally works but it's gone off the rails here.

>>77601718
>>77601648
What the fuck is the matter with the both of you?

>>77601782
Generals are among one of the worst aspects of /co/.

Jimmy's a parody of the retarded stand-up comedian from Facts of Life, you twit.

>>77601680
Except it is. There was already a previous episode about journalism where Jimmy was the one who kept going "actually it's about ethics in journalism" when everyone else just wanted ratings.

>I remember when we all made an oath to each other, way back when started playing news reporter, that we would never let anything jeopardize our integrity! Well our integrity is jeopardized! And if we can't report news the honest way, what good is n-news reporting?

It made complete sense for Jimmy to be the one defying PC Principal.

File: 1447824219857.jpg (50KB, 519x533px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 519x533px

>>77601852
They even mention crab people in that episode!

>>77601743
>I'm not defending SJW stuff, I'm just wondering what the hell the message is.
Trey and Matt won't aim at the rainbow-haired Tumblrinas straight on. They're putting that obnoxiousness in other obnoxious people (the PC frat bros) to get the message across.

>>77601743

The frat bros are a visual shorthand for the privileged narcissistic bullied a lot of SJWs are.

>>77601743
I didn't take it as wanting to get laid specifically or literally, but rather that an abundant number of PC/SJW people feel superior and/or that they deserve a pat on the back for their views and actions. Or mostly just their views because like many online SJWs, the PC frat boys don't actually help any under privileged groups, and only "support" them by language policing and attacking people who make innocent 'micro aggressions'.

>>77601743
Yeah I still have no clue why frat chads are PC. Seems like a wasted opportunity. And PC principal's voice is shit if he's supposed to be a chad.

>>77601743
>I just don't get what this arc is supposed to be saying. Okay, PC people are all self righteous privileged people who just want to get laid? Okay, but that's not the reality.

Are PC people doing it to get laid? Some of them, sure. But they are all doing it for what the episode uses getting laid as shorthand for - social status.

>>77601949
>Yeah I still have no clue why frat chads are PC
it's essentially a way to merge "White Knights on the hunt for m'lady" with a homogenized group of people with a similar goal

>>77601743
They've been characterizing liberals as self-interested, bourgeois, hypocritical phonies for years. Same way they show conservatives as insane brutes.

That's the extent of South Park's lazy, cynical "insight". Of course, now that it' about internet stuff, the edgy crowd here goes wild.

>>77601473
Because generals are a cancer that needs to be eradicated.

>>77601743
You seem to be one of those people that confuse SJ with SJWs. The W has meaning, and is an important distinction.

>>77602178
Social Justice has been corrupted to no end by the third-wave feminists.

>>77602178
The distinction is worthless, everyone can draw the line wherever they want.

>>77602206
Case in point.

>>77601441

Nah, they're just poking fun at white knighting, man.

Like how it's every straight white girl's job to get mad when someone calls me a faggot.

Not everyone's as thin-skinned as the SJW crowd wants to believe.

okay, but what if you are handicapped and have a problem with the word "retarded"?

This episode felt like abled people acting like white people who say why they should be able to say "nigger"

Kind of like what PC principal did with that retarded kid in that episode right?

>>77602497
>This episode felt like abled people acting like white people who say why they should be able to say "nigger"
It's not the same by any means, retard. Also, South Park already did a whole episode on the word "nigger".

This argument really sounds like something an SJW would say. Hmm...

>>77602497
What if you're handicapped and don't have a problem with the word "retarded"?

The point was never that Jimmy thinks people should say retarded, it was that he wanted to report the news as accurately as possible and PC Principal wanted to censor an event that actually happened just because he didn't like the words someone used to describe it.

>>77601441
>SJW posters mad as hell
Cry more retards

>>77602541
>"Are you now or have you ever been a SJW?"

>>77602553
>What if you're handicapped and don't have a problem with the word "retarded"?
Who gives a fuck if you personally don't have a problem with it? That's like saying cops should be able to shove their baton up people's ass because it happens to be your fetish.

>>77602541

I'm a disabled person and I'm telling you I have a problem with it? It's not just because my feelings get hurt. I get treated differently in general because people lump this shit together.

>>77602553

He's not censoring the event though. He's censoring the words people use to express themselves. There's different ways to say you think something is idiotic than "retarded"

Like "idiotic" for instance

>>77602653
>Who gives a fuck if you personally don't have a problem with it?
That argument cuts both ways, retard.

>That's like saying cops should be able to shove their baton up people's ass because it happens to be your fetish.
Typical SJW argument: lumping together words and actions. (eg. "digital lynching").

>>77601852

In an earlier episode he was a shill for microtransaction games

>>77601949
I think it serves a couple purposes.

Part of it is a simple joke about how dudebros and PC people are complete opposites, and so PC dudebros are silly.

I think the other might be a way of getting across that SJWs, despite their appearances, are really just a bunch of bullies trying to fit in with each other.

>>77602653
>thinking that physical violence and a word you don't like are comparative

How about you turn off the TV if you don't like something you hear

>>77602497
>okay, but what if you are handicapped and have a problem with the word "retarded"?
Then you're double retarded.

>>77602676
Jimmy was reporting what a student said, and the student said the lunch thing was "retarded". Once you start distorting the meanings of words because you don't like them, you wind up with news channels reporting crime rising among "urban youth".

>>77602653
>Who gives a fuck if you personally don't have a problem with it? That's like saying cops should be able to shove their baton up people's ass because it happens to be your fetish.

Sure, that sounds like exactly the same thing.

>>77602676
People using "retarded" to mean "stupid" aren't using the word wrong.

>>77602774
>I'm a disabled person and I'm telling you I have a problem with it?
>It's not just because my feelings get hurt.
And you want what, retard? Special treatment? Oh, I can think of some "special treatment" you really need. The sonderbehandlung kind.

>I get treated differently in general because people lump this shit together.
What shit gets lumped together? What are you talking about?

>There's different ways to say you think something is idiotic than "retarded"
>Like "idiotic" for instance
Saying you cannot use this or that word, for any reason whatsoever, is still a form of censorship.

>>77602653
>Who gives a fuck if you personally don't have a problem with it? That's like saying cops should be able to shove their baton up people's ass because it happens to be your fetish.
Uh, no. That would be causing tangible harm to someone. You can't use feelings as a measure of what is and isn't allowed because you'd immediately have to call one person's feeling more important than someone else's.

>>77602944
>>77602772

Okay, let's talk about this shit because you don't seem to realize. It's more than my feelings get hurt. People who have mental disabilities receive particular preconceptions about them, and saying "retarded" reinforces it. You're expected to fall in line with a certain kind of behavior. People expect you to act either inspirationally disadvantaged, or in a way they can talk over you. When you're what they decide is smart enough to "realize" how you're being treated, they act indignant while chastising you for not showing humility like a proper disabled person. Social services either treat you with kid gloves or decide if you have a certain amount of aptitude, you can "take care of yourself". Either way people cling to the notion you're someone they can treat like a second class of citizen, deny opportunities or services to, or say anything about.

I work as hard as anyone else does to get employment. I've been passed over, ignored, and harassed in all areas over it. Most of the claims of on the job harassment I've made have been rejected by management and I've been once fired for creating a hostile work environment because I asked for some common fucking courtesy on the job.

But yes. It doesn't hurt anyone. My skin is too thin. I got it now.

>>77602083
Not really they're libertarians whose idea is to live and let live to an extent.
They're not right but most of the time both sides are also wrong.
And everyone is self interested and as such hypocritical.

>>77602258
But if people aren't allowed to call people out for being dicks, why do you think it's okay for you to call them dicks, seems kind of like a double standard.

>>77603240
>I work as hard as anyone else does to get employment. I've been passed over, ignored, and harassed in all areas over it. Most of the claims of on the job harassment I've made have been rejected by management and I've been once fired for creating a hostile work environment because I asked for some common fucking courtesy on the job.

You sound like you have a major chip on the shoulder.

I can see why someone would fire you.

>>77603480

Yes sir I'll take it again and again yes sir please sir I'm humble sir please fuck me in the ass some more sir

>>77602921
You act like people calling you out for using certain language is the equivalent of censorship. Newsflash, it's not. The first amendment doesn't protect you from facing social scorn for being inconsiderate.

File: waiter.png (107KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 640x480px

>>77603515
one retard extra salt coming right up!

>>77603515
>Is accused of having a chip on his shoulder
>this reply
kek

>>77603515
Being a passive-aggressive little bitch probably hasn't helped endear you to colleagues and bosses either, huh?

>>77602832
Wasn't it an Op-ed piece written by a different student? The point is that Jimmy is a shit editor who should invest in a thesaurus.

>>77603515
im starting to see why people havent wanted to deal with you or treat you like a person

>>77603515

You seem very upset. Did you forget to take your meds?

>>77603750
Because the disabled remind them of their own mortality?

>>77603535

>telling people to stop using words you don't like isn't censorship

>>77601441
I realized last night that Jimmy essentially has lost almost all of his stutter. He did have a lot of shit to say in that episode though.

>>77603240
>When you're what they decide is smart enough to "realize" how you're being treated, they act indignant while chastising you for not showing humility like a proper disabled person.
What?

I've never met a single person in person or online who thinks this way.

>>77603791
>hey man can you not use the word "cunt" to describe my baby daughter
>WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM OF SPEECH

>>77603819

Nice strawman.

>>77603535
Newsflash, freedom of speech isn't just a law. It's a philosophy that undergirds western societies and is aimed at keeping them free. The First Amendment only mentions the state because the Constitution is a contract between the state and citizens.

So while you can face social scorn for being "inconsiderate", lobbying and applying pressure to get people fired because you don't like private speech and opinions they've held is contrary to the concept of free speech.

>>77603535
>You act like people calling you out for using certain language is the equivalent of censorship.
People telling you you can't is.

>>77603819
>I will make my side use polite wording and lowercase letters
>The opposition will be in all caps and be as confrontational as possible

>>77603661
He was direct, you're being passive agressive in this your post.

>>77603900
Maybe, but I get along just fine at work.

>>77603846
Man I don't give a fuck if it is a strawman. The freedom of speech is not your unbreakable shield that allows you to throw out slurs like candy in Halloween.

>>77603480
I'm amazed that you've garnered enough insight to be able to tell a man's life story and behavioral patterns by a paragraph and a few lines.

I should give you a gold star.

>>77603889
IS THIS BETTER? I WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS IS OKAY WITH YOU BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A SERIOUS DISCUSSION.

>>77603937
What can I say? Retards are all the same.

>>77603928

>Man I don't give a fuck if it is a strawman

Typical SJW "argument" everyone

>>77603914
That's not an accomplishment.

>>77603964
In the sense that they're all on 4chan.

>>77603964
Takes one to know one, right?

File: 1446576042017.jpg (84KB, 508x504px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 508x504px

>>77604008
>>77603997
>RIDF

Keep going like this and you'll drown before the nurse comes to wipe the froth from your lips.

>>77603928

So you're for censorship then.

and to think people call this board /co/mblr when this thread is just an excuse for us all to say retard as much as possible

>>77601743
>Okay, PC people are all self righteous privileged people who just want to get laid?
No, PC people claim to be fighting for the oppressed, but most of the time they're just using it as an excuse to remove people from their lives or make themselves look better in social circles. Basically, their PC for their own benefits as opposed to others outside their specific peer groups.
For example, I was on facebook (yeah, I know, facebook is shit, but when I was working at Sears it was the only way to avoid doing actual work) and this girl was posting about how Google was offering free coding lessons for women and minorities. I pointed out how that sounded stupid because in a way, they already do by giving you the ability to search for it with their search engine, making the whole thing seem like an obvious stunt to make themselves look good. So, rather than just disagreeing with me on it like a normal person would, she unfriended me, and she does that with everyone who doesn't agree with her 100%. They're part of a growing population of kids (many of whom are in or just coming out of college) who try to separate themselves from individuals who don't completely agree with them on political and social issues. They have to be as PC as possible in order to avoid being ostracized by their peer groups and that's what the Pussy Crushing gag was all about, showing how PC is more for the individual's benefit than the oppressed groups'
Also, the whole thing with them all having their dates fill out consent forms was kinda funny.

>>77602497
>>77603240
>>77602676
There is no difference between idiocy and mental disability.

Intelligence (not knowledge) is determined by your genes. Some people are born smarter than others. Some people are born WAY stupider than others.

If treating intelligence as a good thing and stupidity as a bad thing is no longer okay, our entire society is doomed.

>>77603857
How? Are they arresting you? have you been fired or violently attacked for saying these things on your own time? if not I think you're the thin skinned one who doesn't like being told that someone doesn't appreciate you being an asshole.

>>77603535

>Censorship literally means removing things you deem unacceptable
>But policing people's words totally isn't censorship you guys!

>>77601782
General fucking fusk

They bleed out discussion and they create self important tripfags. Leaving the generals left to talk about shitty headcannons/fanart/and tripfags.

general threads are cancer.

>>77604215

Jesus, why don't you just go back to tumblr or even reddit. I'm sure you'll find more like minded individuals there. You can even have your own safe space!

>>77603819
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajXAqX9hfHM

>>77604215
>Is the concept that people might have the common decency to want other who are not exactly like them to be treated the same so differently without an ulterior motive?

English motherfucker, speak it.

>>77604258
Wait, so you don't want me "here" because you want this "space" to be "safe" from all these hurtful ideas? The amount of doublethink going on here is staggering.

>>77604041
I'm for you shutting your whore mouth.

>all these pc/sjws
>on 4chan
>on a thread specifically about south park

do you people go out of your way to get triggered?

Jimmy is the hero we need.

Jimmy is the hero we deserve.

>>77604150
So if some guys just started shouting NIGGER and KIKE I can't tell him to shut up because that would policing someone's language which would be censorship which would be bad.

>>77604296
Sorry, what I meant to say was:
Is the concept that people might have the common decency to want others who are not exactly like them, to be treated the same, so alien to you that you cannot conceive they don't have an ulterior motive? By this logic every white abolitionist or civil rights supporter, or every Christian who supports the first amendment's religious freedom clause was lying?

>>77604113
So Where you born with the stupid genes retard?

>>77602178
But 4chan taught me to think everyone left of center wants to kill all white men

>>77604453
If he was obstructing your day or activities by yelling kike and nigger in your face, sure.

If he's not doing anything to infringe on your rights, you can't crash into his house and demand he stop his thought crimes because he's writing that kikes and niggers are destroying American on the internet, or any other platform that he has the rights to.

>>77604462

>stopping slavery and people from literally getting murdered is the same as getting pissy on the internet because someone said a no-no word

>>77604453
You'd be violating his safe-space if you did.

>>77604041
There's nothing wrong with censorship done by reasonable individuals.

>>77604453

Did you ever considered that person yelling nigger and kike could have Tourette's? Stop being so fucking ableist.

>>77604450
Do you not want certain opinions said here? Wasn't all these big bad SJW's not wanting certain things said what you were against? Yet now you seem to be for it.

>>77604589

I assume by "reasonable individuals" you mean "people with the same opinions as me".

>>77604589
>There's nothing wrong with censorship done by reasonable individuals.
B-but censorship is ok when the RIGHT people do it!

>>77603851

but firing someone because they try to stand up for a non hostile workplace, that's perfectly fine.

Fuck off to Tumblr.

>>77604517
Funny, tumblr is the site that taught me that.

>>77604611
Well considering that /co/ wants to ban Steven Universe discussion, then yeah.

>>77604540
Well let's say he was an editor of a hateful extreme right-wing newspaper who had managed to bulid a strong base of supporters and is now running for a mayor in the small town where I live and frequently held hate rallies in public spaces like the park. Are you saying that I can't yell "shut the fuck up" at one his ralloes because doing so would be language policing?

>>77604654
>Steven Universe discussion

Heh

>>77601441
>>"If I create a character who's part of a group and have them express my particular views, it'll seem like that particular minority agrees with me."
Both sides are guilty of this, and even pointing out this idea makes you guilty of it becuase it carries the implication that you believe there's no way a particular minority can hold that view.

So congratulations John, you are the demons.

>>77604543
The fact that slavery and murder are worse has nothing to do with the thrust of the argument, which is that you don't seem to think it;s possible to care about people who are not identical to you without having ulterior motives.

>>77604624
I assume by "people with the same opinions as me" you mean peope with common decency.

>>77604611

That's not the point. I don't go on tumblr and cry about liberals. Why do you go on 4can and cry about slurs? You're here for the SU general aren't you?

>>77604693
Pretty big assumption there.

>>77604661
Your freedom of speech that allows you to say 'shut the fuck up' in a public area without restricting the rights of the others around you like that also protects THEIR free speech to say whatever racist shit you disagree with.

You can't have your freedom of speech without theirs. You can't demand that the law side with you trying to silence them.

They can be as racist and vile as they like and you STILL don't demand free speech more than they do.

>>77604680

It's more that I don't believe that people who don't belong to a group have a leg to stand on when they're talking about/trying to make a point about shit that affects said group. Those are Trey and Matt's experiences, they're what the way THINK people should react to said experiences.

What makes them at all qualified to speak towards what handicapped people do or don't think about?

>>77603819
>Comparing verbal agression to ethics on news reporting
Well done, anon!

>>77601441
This, pretty much.

>>77604716
No villains think themselves as such.

>>77604716
I assume by "pretty big assumption" you mean pretty big dick.

>>77604681

Not true. Everything humans do is for selfish reasons.

>>77604743
"a leg to stand on"
way to go, making fun of jimmy
thats not very PC of you

>>77604698
Never watched it, I'm here for the comics discussion mostly, I find some good news and often some interesting insights on stuff.

>>77602774
Video games aren't news

>>77604635
Depends on what they think "trying to stand up for a non-hostile workplace" means. If he's bitching about nothing to people who can't do anything about it based on just his sense of persecution, then yeah, he's going to get fired if his co-workers are irritated by his behavior.

Remember that gay black guy who shot and killed two reporters on live television? He was also fired for "trying to stand up for a non-hostile workplace". Only in that case, it meant bitching about completely innocent phrases, like filing a complaint against a co-worker who said another reporter was "out in the field" because he thought it was a reference to cotton fields.

>>77604750
Now I definitely don't want to see a newspaper calling my baby daughter a cunt.

>>77603240
Are you disabled due to type 2 diabetes by any chance? Or perhaps you have a rough case of PTSD from viewing horrific bullying on the Internet?

>>77603819
You're baby daughter is a cunt. All women are cunts.

As long as I don't directly restrict your movement and your rights, I am fully entitled to my opinion, no matter the words I use.

>>77604789
Only if you get really really abstract about it. I mean you could say an abolitionist thinks an equal society is a stronger society but at that point were getting so long-term and abstract that to say their being "selfish" is laughable.

>>77601743
>Okay, but that's not the reality
It is, though.

>>77604105
tl:dr

>>77604836
i guess in a way youre right, but im pretty sure part of the ethics of news reporting is not to directly attack a person

>>77604743
Here's the thing man. Matt and Trey are saying that Jimmy, this ONE particular character, has no problem with a word. You're the one saying it's representative of all disabled characters.

And it's true. Law of averages means that yes, there IS going to be a portion of any minority that holds views you might not expect them to. There are women that are pro abortion. There are blacks that vote republican. And yes, there are mentally handicapped people that have no problem with the word "Retarded".

Are Matt and Trey being disrespectful? Let's go way, way back to when I was a kid and they did that first episode about Timmy with Phil Collins and he was doing this same white knighting deal where you can't treat the handicapped kid like a person and joke around with him and have fun...why? Because it made HIM uncomfortable.

What makes them qualified? What makes them NEED to be? Maybe they have friends that qualify. You don't know. I personally do have a lot of people that qualify in my life, and I can refer to them on this stuff, and many of them don't give a shit.

And for the record, are you demanding that same level of qualification when someone like Dave Willis starts talking through a brown woman mouthpiece about how everything is sexist?

This idea that you've gotta be a part of a group to hold an opinion or to somehow "count" is that same cult of personality politics bullshit that got us in these messes in the first place.

>>77604795

that expression comes from tables and chairs, but nice try.

>>77604743

Their point wasn't "all handicapped people think this" or "it's ok to say the word retarded to a handicapped person's face". The point was that censoring someone's opinion in a newspaper when you're trying to report actual facts is not good journalism.

>>77604892
Well it also just might be an objective fact that the baby daughter is a cunt so you never know.

>>77603240
Do you have assburgers?

That shit makes fucking annoying fucking cunts and you probably deserved to be fired.

Source: grew up with assburger sibling.

File: image.jpg (1MB, 3888x2592px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3888x2592px

>>77603515
How much for your rare salts, spice merchant?

>>77604910
Why would you stand on a table?

>>77604912
Asking someone to use a different word than retarded isn't censoring speech. There is a lot of different words to use that can still properly express someone's opinion.

>In another significant revision, "mentally retarded" is no longer the preferred term, replaced by "mentally disabled."

lrn 2 AP Stylebook

>>77604915
yeah i guess so, it all depends on the context of the situation

>>77601949
Because, going for the dyed hair, fat girl look would be too typical, and it points out that PC people in general are bullies and if you see a big frat dude telling you what to say, you'd think that.

>>77603240
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqiGWd0-0Os

>>77604956
It's called a table dance and it's a living.

>>77604956
Hey man, if he wants to stand on a table, let him
Are opressing him?
thats not very PC of you

>>77604898

it's not about it "counting". When abled people talk about disabilities, they're coming from a position of privilege. And in this case, they're expressing a view that conveniently absolves abled people of all responsibility in a matter that many people find offensive, while using a disabled character to make that opinion seem more legitimate.

Why does their opinion matter more than people who actually live with this shit? Because they don't deal with the consequences of having to live with this in their lives, they can talk about it without as much fear of backlash in their lives.

What good does an opinion on this matter that's not informed by life experience do anyone?

>>77604482
Can't tell if all the typos are on purpose as some kind of meta-joke or not.

>>77604964

At that point you might as well not report anything at all or just make it up yourself if you're making people have to reword their opinions

>>77605011
And what do you have that makes you qualified?

>>77604642
misconstruing everyone as the shit you see on r/tumblrinaction is your problem

>>77604453
You can tell him to shut up, as you also have free speech. However, he is not in any way obligated to listen to you.

>>77605047
>r/tumblrinaction

I have no clue what that is.

>>77601441
Are you retarded? Seriously are you retarded?

The show does what's funny, it doesnt express anyones real views. Can you not read the disclaimer at the beginning of every fucking episode

Goddamn youre an idiot

>>77605087
It's literally Reddit.

>>77605087
its probably where what you see comes from

>>77605011
>position of priveilege
Oh boy, you must be wild at parties

File: Someone Mentions Tumblr In A Thread.gif (206KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 200x200px

>>77605011
>they're coming from a position of privilege

>>77605028
How small is your vocabulary that your go to word is retarded?

File: becauseyoudon'tread.png (34KB, 156x255px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 156x255px

>>77601441
>"If I create a character who's part of a group and have them express my particular views, it'll seem like that particular minority agrees with me."
I don't have a picture of Anita but this is the next best thing.

>>77605100
>>77605107
Well I don't use reddit, so there you go.

>>77605094
>it doesnt express anyones real views.
I think OP is an idiot but saying South Park doesn't push any particular messages this is blatantly untrue.

>>77605128
So people with low vocabulary ie THE POOR (or first graders as it was in the episode) don't deserve to have their free speech?

>>77605128

The character in the show that said retarded was a young child, so pretty small.

>>77605109
>>77605116
do mras just pretend privilege doesnt exist

w8 i think thats the definition of privilege

>>77605168
>>77605170

then where the fuck is the editor to fix it?

>>77605175
Do SJWs like to make everything into identity politics?

Oh wait I think that's definition of SJWs.

>>77605168
They deserve to have a thesaurus.

>>77605194

So you missed the entire point of the episode then

>>77605175
>mras
>when no one is talking about sex privilege
>At best, this discussion is about ableism
This is why no one can take you types seriously. You conflate everything in to one big privilege pile in a way that can only be read as bait or stupidity.

Now, because you opened the door on this, tell us what your qualifications are to talk about privilege without being a complete hypocrite. What are you that makes you qualified to hold your and express opinions so openly?

File: 2737107-48_20__20berserk_20lolwut_20puck_20reaction_image.png (107KB, 355x328px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 355x328px

>>77605011
>position of privilege

>>77605011

Since when are jews privileged?

>>77605194
So basically what you're saying is that Donald Trump should be president.
Because think about it. By your logic, reporters have a moral responsibility not to report on the crazy racist shit he says, but to clean up his speech so that it's acceptable.
Which means that, at the end of the day, he comes off a pretty nice and reasonable guy, because otherwise someone might be offended.
So why not vote for him?

Let people be offensive and dig their own graves.

>>77601888
>>77601743
They'll aim at anyone head on if it's funny. They have the very best lawyers. They opted to use frat boys for the juxtaposition. On the one hand, fit boys are very different from fat girls. But frat boys are another group prone to insular thinking and hassling people in packs.

>>77605219
Was the point that jimmy was a shitty editor because seriously he was.

>>77605175
Privilege is a concept that's been appropriated by the lazy and entitled to describe anyone who has a slight advantage over then due to any number of extraneous factors. Boo fucking hoo nobody feels bad for you. Get your shit together and stop being a fucking whiner.

I get it that you tumblr cunts feel bad because everybody's starting to wake up from their 2014 PC high, but could you stop making this same exact thread after every fucking episode this season?

>>77605268

Was the retarded thing a quote from an official?

i haven't seen the episode and i still feel like i'm not in the top 5 shitposters iit

>>77605268
I really don't know how you got that from his post.

>>77605259
Being Jewish is fucking retarded so

You'd think they'd be the right people to speak for retards.

>>77605268
Jimmy wasn't reporting that little kid verbatim. Jimmy gave that little kid Op-ed who then used the word retard than got pissy when PC principal asked him to do a common practice for school newspapers by allowing the head faculty member a chance to screen his paper.

>>77605297
No it was in an editorial and Jimmy definitely failed as an editor when he didn't ask the kid to rewrite his article.

>>77605340
He's reporting on the school, naturally he wouldn't let the school dictact what he could and couldn't print.

That's why he took the paper off-site.

>>77605297
>i haven't seen the episode
It shows And yes, it was.

Basically it goes like this. Jimmy publishes a quote from a kindergartner that said the word "retarded".
PC Principal gets mad because that's a bad word.
Jimmy says "That's a direct quote in an editorial. Censoring it would be dishonest".
PC Principal says "I need to approve everything that's published or you can't publish."

>>77605298
Let's take the same example in the show and apply it to the whole "Mexicans are rapists and drug lords" thing. Only this time, let's do what PC Principal wants.

Trump says "Mexicans are rapists and drug lords"
The editors of the world say "That's offensive material. No one shuld be exposed to it"
Now no one knows Trump is going around saying mexicans are rapists and drug lords.
Is obfuscating the truth like that better, or worse for mexicans? Is it better, or worse for Trump' and his campaign? Who ACTUALLY benefits from hiding something like that?

>>77605268
>that leap in logic
Are you sure you're not donald trump anon?

>>77605340
>Jimmy gave that little kid Op-ed

>Jimmy wasn't reporting that little kid verbatim
Technically doesn't that mean the kid is reporting himself verbatim?

>>77601949
To reinforce the idea that PC folks are tribalistic bullies. That would be lost if they just went down the typical route of portraying them as limp-wrist effete faggots.

>>77605357
Or he valued the honesty of a lower-class first grader opinion even though the language he used.

>>77605357

The little kid didn't write shit. Jimmy was interviewing him and the kid called something retarded. So Jimmy quoted the kid exactly as he said it.

>>77601441
Missed the point/10

>>77605390
No.

>>77605357
...Are you sure you know what editorials are?
Because every time I see an editorial it's got a little disclaimer that says "Anything you read here is this one asshole's opinion and not necessarily that of this network or publication.

That disclaimer, like the W, is there for a reason.

>>77605407
Why even use the quote tho? Jimmy just sounds like he's a shitty journalist.

>>77605175
Because it retardedly assumes that inequal treatment boils down to "Group A is treated better than Group B", instead of the more complex reality.

Sexism is a good example. The idea that women are fragile and innocent while men are tough can hurt both women (who get treated as incompetent and incapable of doing things on their own) and men (who are held to harsher standards).

>>77605428
Yes
Now skip to the part where you "can't even".

>>77605467

Are you baiting because you're doing a pretty good job

>>77605467

So you're saying if you're reporting on people's opinions you shouldn't include opinions you don't like?

I'm glad the PC people are frat boys, if it wasn't it would look like a pleb comic.

How would Randy join them? be a beta man who has white guilt or something. Wouldn't as be entertaining.

>>77605511
Why use the first graders opinion and not just find someone else's opinion?

>>77605492
It's not like journalist use every opinion given to them off the street.

>>77605538

You're really adamant about censoring people's opinions huh

>>77605538
Because that's how you get Fox News.

>>77605472
Can't even what?

>>77605425
I get the joke it just sucks

>>77605580
I'm adamant about how Jimmy is a shitty journalist and editor.
>it's all about the truth man

>>77605580
News isn't about opinions. It's about facts and objectivity.

File: Camel.jpg (22KB, 210x240px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 210x240px

>>77605645

>>77605624
>>77605663
Whelp, he ran out of bait.
Thread's over. Everyone go home.

>>77605645

When you strictly ask people their opinions on a subject then yeah it's about opinions

>>77605680
Jimmy wasn't reporting on the first graders opinion. He was reporting on the cafteria and decided that this random first grader's opinion was crucial for the story even tho that's bullshit.

>>77603792
was jimmies stutter physically based or was it just a confidence thing? he seems to lose his stutter when ever he's pissed or confident?

>>77605677
Journalism isn't bait and it isn't about including everyone's opinion.

>>77605574
No, but direct quotes help enforce the exact meaning of what the interviewed feels. They chose their fucking words to use, and THAT'S what you should respect. People say what they intend to say to express what they think or feel. By censoring or altering a quote you misrepresent them and their case. To change anything that the interviewed stated would miss the entire goddamn point of quoting. You don't have to agree with or respect what they think, but you sure as fuck shouldn't argue about what they said.
>>77605728
The report included a response to the cafeteria's decision. Factually, objectively, someone thinks some way about something. The way they think it is subjective, but them having that stance can be objectively proven, through the fucking interview. Altering any of the speech would detract from the original meaning and misrepresent the interviewed.

>>77605730
He has cerebral palsy, so it's something he was born with.

>>77605769
Then jimmy should've attributed the quote then
>how do you know he didn't
Because PC principal didn't beat up a first grader.

>>77605769
Why use the quote? Was it poignant or something? Sounds like Jimmy was too lazy to go out and ask for a different quote.

>>77605893
>Because PC principal didn't beat up a first grader.
PC Princpal is (barely( a parody of the kind of person that's too busy being outraged to finish reading past what offends him or look for context or details.

Kind of like how there are people out there that insist that you have hardcore criminals in your work of fiction use the word "bitch" it means you, the author, are sexist and need to be taken down a peg.

>>77605893
>Because PC principal didn't beat up a first grader.
PC Principal is A TRIGGER-HAPPY IDIOT. He saw the fucking word and immediately broke, and rather than looking at the paper for the writer, went on the warpath in the school itself.

>>77605910
>Was it poignant or something?
It certainly emphasized the ludicrous new cafeteria policy and some students' discontent with it. Jimmy even says "the word he used to best describe the new policy was 'retarded'". Just because someone's feelings would get hurt doesn't mean you shouldn't tell the truth.
>oh but he didn't have to tell the whole truth
To accurately report on how the student was feeling, yes, yes does. There are lies of commission, and lies of omission. Never let what others will feel prevent you from saying what you feel.

You faggot.

>>77601441
As someone who is disabled, I did agree with Jimmy.

>>77605972
That first grader opinion isn't the whole truth. It's just an opinion.

>>77606063
And it was located in op-ed. Yknow. Where the opinions on the editorial are published.

>>77605609
>joke

So this is a joke to you?

BOY SURE IS A BUNCH OF UNCLE ABLES AROUND HERE!

>>77601441
>minorities all think the same and if one doesn't they're a sockpuppet.
Hi Anita.

>>77603819
Well if her parent is any indication she'll likely be one eventually.

>>77604964
There's a difference between asking and forcing.

>>77606414
You should told that hypothetical parent.

>>77604453

As old Moot said, I'm a fan of ignoring it. Because that person is being an attention whore or lazy b8.

>>77605128
There's nothing wrong with the word retarded. It was applied to the handicapped originally as a nicer word to refer to them then the alternatives. Then school children took it as an insult for a generation or two and now it's base?

Fuck that.

>>77606624
deal with it, grandpa.

sure is /reddit/ in here

>>77601441
>I'll get offended on behalf of other people
/co/mblr pls

>>77602676
Words can have multiple meanings with different intents. It's the evolution of the english language. When they say something is retarded, they mean stupid, they're not literally equating it to a disabled person. Like when someone on 4chan says you have autism, it's not because they literally think you have autism but rather that you're obsessive and can't let little things go.

This was basically a #notyourshield episode

PC principal only listened to minorities that shared his worldview and marginalized others

File: opinion comics are shit.png (34KB, 255x252px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 255x252px

>>77603819
Comic related, it's literally every equivalence you've used.

>>77607026
Do you have the one for non-ants?

>>77605175
You literally have no idea what they look like at all, you have literally no idea who these people who disagree with you are.

You are assuming they're a boogeyman who's privileged to discount their arguments. You know, Hotwheels aka the owner of literallyredditchan is a massive faggot but I can guarantee he doesn't agree with you and is fine with someone using the word retard despite being disabled himself. So how are you going to discredit his argument for free speech? You can't just say "Oh, he's saying it from a position of privilege" because he isn't.

You see why this argument doesn't work m8? You don't speak for all handicapped people just because you can sit here and tell sob stories about your experiences. You don't even know if any of the people disagreeing with you aren't disabled yet you assume they're straight (on /co/ kek), white, able bodied males to suit disregard their arguments in favor of your personal experiences and feelings which are things that are never relevant in an argument.

>>77601441
Whether or not Jimmy believes the word "retarded" is acceptable is irrelevant. The point is free speech and journalistic integrity.

It was a first grader who used the word to begin with. In other words, a 6 year old and not someone who is particularly intelligent, cultured, or mature. But that 6 year old has the right to say what he wants in an essay or op ed.

>>77605340
>Have an independent party's newspaper be screened (read censured) by the institution they're meant to be reporting on.
>brush it off as 'common decency'

Ithink reading some worthwhile philosophers who've written at length on this issue , like Popper would be more helpful than spouting this privilege and micro-aggression rhetoric malarkey ad nauseam

>>77605200
wtf it's not like i started it. and don't call me a sjw
>>77605237
i don't think i'm qualified but that doesn't mean i should just ignore it and continue with business-as-usual because it doesn't affect me. did you ever think about what "check your privilege" means beyond ironic 4chan memes?
>>77605273
"just shut up and do it" isn't helping anybody. all this is telling me is you truly don't understand what privilege (moreso lack thereof) implies.
>>77605470
no i think it assumes that inequal treatment stems from a majority culture that inherently marginalized minority groups. youre boiling it down to "group a is treated better than group b" to avoid responsibility.
>>77607251
not that other anon btw

>>77607437
Look buddy, nobody's going to listen to your spiel here. Nobody wants your kool-aid. You're wasting time and effort.

>>77607437
>no i think it assumes that inequal treatment stems from a majority culture that inherently marginalized minority groups
It doesn't, though. Women aren't a minority at all.

>to avoid responsibility.
What responsibility?

>>77607437
This has to be elaborate trolling. Nobody is this fucking retarded.

File: 1428682880284.gif (2MB, 406x422px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 406x422px

Why the fuck would I care about a cripple who was butthurt and not cool?

Stephen Hawking got it: no one likes a little bitch.

>>77602258
Fucking this. It is extremely annoying when a straight white girl gets offended for me, by me, for calling myself a faggot. It's mind boggling the mental gymnastics these people will do.

>>77604890
Nigga this ain't Reddit

>>77603240
As someone who is, by the dictionary definition, retarded...son, you're a retard in the slang sense.

Granted, I happen to be lucky enough that I was born in a time before a lot of mental problems were considered "okay" so they worked with me to make me some semblance of normal. My general memory is shitty unless it's involving something I want (for example, ask me to pick you up something from the store and I'll have forgotten what you wanted by the time I arrive, but that video game coming out next year I won't shut the fuck about how I can't wait for) and it's really hard to sense sarcasm (so I end up taking a lot of things seriously that I probably shouldn't) but I'm empathic as shit, being able to tell when someone's feeling crappy no matter how much they try to hide it from the world and nobody else has any idea. I'm book-smart but have no common sense. I can't dish it out, but you can attempt to insult me all day if you like and I can shrug it off like it's nothing, and sometimes I've even laughed when being insulted because what was said was so spot on it was funny. That in particular seems to piss people off and I hate hurting people, even unintentionally. Finally, I've got the benefits of "retard strength" but I'm functional enough that I won't go all Lenny on someone accidentally.

>>77604964
>There is a lot of different words to use that can still properly express someone's opinion.
I think that the point was that if that's the word they feel necessary to express their opinion, that's the word they should use, even if they face backlash.

Which is why Jimmy took the paper off-site. He actually plays by PC principals rules.

>>77607652
ok. you can keep indulging yourself in narcissistic /pol/ culture. all i'm saying is maybe think for yourself
>>77607661
ok? i wasn't really talking about white girls

>What responsibility?
"responsibility" as in simple acknowledgment
>>77607682
dont shame me to excuse yourself from thinking about where you stand for a second

File: image.jpg (52KB, 555x644px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 555x644px

>>77601441
Almost all of his episodes are shit, the only ok one I can remember is the one when he tried to be in a gang

>>77608480
i liked him in red sleigh down

>>77608467
I agree with you on a fair amount of points, but you type like you're from Tumblr so I'm going to call you a fag and be done with it.

>>77608530
ive never been on tumblr

File: 1 in 3.jpg (119KB, 560x1477px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 560x1477px

>>77608572
I don't believe you.

>>77607661
I'd still like to know what makes you so qualified to talk down to people you know nothing about.

>>77608586
ok.

>>77608480
His steroid episode is hilarious

>>77605645
No it isn't. It never was. That's why there's such a thing as an editorial line to follow.

>>77603466
There's calling someone out on being a dick, then there's berating and trying to outcast them from society like a fucking bully. Which do you feel the PC crowd is going for?

>>77608605
What people? Who am I talking down to?

>>77608467
Are you acknowledging that "male privilege" is not a thing, then?

>>77610552
Not him but it does. As does female privilege.

>>77608467
>ok? i wasn't really talking about white girls
You said that unequal treatment stems from the majority ganging up on the minority. Women are not a minority, so now you're either saying men and women are treated equally, or you're contradicting your previous statement.

>>77610578
You see, this is why "privilege" in this context is a stupid word. It tries to paint something as a nice, easy-to-follow case of "this side gets treated better". But instead, the inequality is much more hazy - Not only are there scenarios in which the usually "underprivileged" side is now the "privileged" one, but many scenarios where it's subjective which side is better off.

For example, American women during WWII were "privileged" from the point of view of women who didn't want to get drafted, but "underprivileged" from the point of view of women who wanted to enlist.

Turning it into a black-and-white issue is extremely harmful.

>>77604105
fuck off retard

>>77601743
The exchange Sharon and Randy share in the latest episode is pretty much the entire message.

>>77610703
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Krq6Bn0hVGM
Link for those who need a refresher

Jimmy represents a minority, all right. The minority of people with conviction and ethics.

>>77601441

Do you know that you're an ad?

>>77601441
Tards are usually pretty chill about their retardation, they own it.

>>77610703
>>77610715
To expand upon this further, they likely used fratbros as a mouthpiece for social justice as they're a more universal representation of bullies.

>>77610727
Are shills an ad?

>>77610657
"Privilege" is a fine word, it's how stupid people use it to oversimplify shit that's an issue. Like many words.

>>77610738
The PC frat said it themselves. They've wrapped it around so much that they're the victims now. That's the same concept behind privilege. Those who are "privileged" are bad, and those "marginalized" are good. Similar to the womb envy reaction to Freud's penis envy theory, it's purely contradictory to reverse the scales of society..

>>77605100
>"literally"
yeah, and so are you.

I'm going to be so disappointed if the final reveal isn't Crab People. There's way too many coincidences.

>>77611110
I'm going to be disappointed if it is. A reveal you see a mile away isn't much of a reveal

>>77603665
The point of editing op-eds isn't to change anything. Because if you do then it becomes different from what the person is trying to express. Jimmy never says the word is okay, just that it's how someone feels.

You guys want to hear some dumb shit?
I was having an argument with one of my close friends who has some SJW tendencies and somewhere along the lines he literally said that minorities can't be racist, blacks, hispanics, asians, etc can be racist in the USA because of the power bullshit.

So I asked him, "Okay, you take a white person whose spouting 'chinkchongchang I like to eat cats' in America and this person is racist yes? You put him in China and is he racist?"

And my friend literally said the white person wasn't racist because he was spouting this shit in china. Why the hell are modern SJWs trying to individualize racism and sexism to just one gender/race. It's a joke.

>>77601441
>If I speak for minorities and similar people, I will be seen as good. afterall, they need me to say that its wrong

the swing goes both ways

>>77611325
Because they follow a circular logic established self-serving cunts with no ability to understand human behavior or the effects their ideas would have when implemented.
Also they must believe they can't be racist or sexist because otherwise they would have to admit that they are the biggest offender in most cases.

>>77608480
Only ep of his I didn't like was funnybot.

>>77611110
Crab people reveal would be really dumb.

Besides, they already confirmed that its ad people.

>White, able-bodied, generally from above average socio-economic backgrounds ITT not understanding certain people get marginalized and that feels like shit

>B-but if I was disabled I wouldn't mind, grow some thicker skin faggot!!!!!

How could you possibly know that? You don't know what it feels like because you can never experience it. "Privilege" might have become an overused meme, but it's a real concept.

I don't care what you say and to whom, but it bothers me when people just refuse to recognize that other people might have a different point of view and that that point of view might be just as valid as theirs.

You don't know jack shit about anything, go read a book.

>>77612946
How do you know?
What are your qualifications?

>>77610976
I literally don't know what your problem is.

>>77612946

Are you litterally shaking?

>I don't care what you say and to whom, but it bothers me when people just refuse to recognize that other people might have a different point of view
>proceeds to be bothered by people with a different view.

>>77611266
>the point of editing isn't editing
I guess Journalism has absolutely no standards and just allows rough drafts to be printed.

File: 1399954617396.jpg (83KB, 651x489px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 651x489px

>>77612946
>I don't care what you say and to whom, but it bothers me when people just refuse to recognize that other people might have a different point of view and that that point of view might be just as valid as theirs.
You really don't see the irony there, do you? That's amazing.
This White Man's Burden thing you people do where you run around fighting battles on people's behalf is just as much an exercise of your privilege as any hate speech. It's condescending and infantalizing in a way that does infinitely more harm than good, and you're too busy feeling good about yourselfs to even entertain that thought.

>>77601441
>if I imply things I'll sound more informed than I really am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpxV1lRBp9I

>>77612980
What are you qualifications?

>>77612946
Brown-skinned child of West Asian parentage raised by poorfag parents who fled to America and sacrificed everything so he could make something good of himself speaking.

Fuck off. Not everyone crumbles as easily as you do.

>>77613032
>>77613015
What's your point of view again? That people's feelings don't matter at all and that people can't react negatively to what you say or else it's censorship?

>>77613048
You fuck off man. Your singular life experience doesn't invalidate his point of view.

>>77613048
Your background can suck a dick namefag.

>>77613040
Well, I'm black, pretty firmly under the poverty line, and I work with special needs kids on a routine basis because my late sibling had problems that could arguably have fit on the autism spectrum. (I've been told by psychologists that I could also, on the asperger's end, but to be honest I'm a little scared of getting that kind of diagnosis and the stigmas that follow and woulds sooner just deal with my social anxiety without labels.) My mother does similar work in the social services division and I try to follow in her footsteps with my volunteer work.

So yeah, I've got experience. And I've learned that BECAUSE mental disabilities are a spectrum there are plenty of people that would qualify as "retarded" that are communicative enough to say "Hey, I have a problem with that. Don't call me that" and there are others that can't do more than bark and hide under tables. You have to decide on a case by case basis and not treat the mentally disabled or otherwise under-advantaged as a monolithic hivemind. Should you be respectful? Yes. But no more than towards any other person. Because they're people too.

Your turn. What makes YOU so qualified to white knight and treat everyone around you like children that can' possibly be able to defend themselves?

>>77613072
His point of view is that people are monoliths who all perceive reality in pre-defined ways predictable by demographic status. That is, always has been, and always will be a stupid point of view.

>>77613095
Would being a faggot aid the point? Because I'd try it then.

>>77613015
>>77613032

What I'm saying is that I'm bothered by people who can't see that there is more in the world than their own frame of mind. What you do with that information is your own choice.

If you want to call people niggers that's completely fine, it just bothers me when people don't understand or want to understand that it can be hurtful.

>>77613048

>I'm not offended by it so no one can be

Again, I'm not trying to make everyone play nice with eachother. I'm simply saying that just because YOU can't understand people would be offended, that doesn't mean that people who do get offended are somehow wrong.

>>77613062
First off, you're talking to two different people. But given your arguments I can see how that kind of concept is lost on you since this whole time you've been acting like everyone can be lumped into easily defined groups.

My point of view is that people are diverse, and that diversity of opinions and feelings means that just because YOU have a problem with a word doesn't mean someone else will. Even if that someone is also the accepted target of that word. Because again, people are individuals with their own scales as to what is and isnt offensive. Some gays own the word fag, some get offended by it. Some women will flip off at being called a bitch, other's refer to themselves as such gleefully. The whole nigger/nigga thing you could do entire documentaries about.

I think a good rule of thumb is to play it safe and gauge the comfort levels of the individual. Have people you know you can joke around and shoot the shit with, and others you know "I can't say this around them". Don't bother trying to appease the entire group, because doing so requires you to turn that group into a monolith, and turning people into a monolithic hive-mind is wrong. Respect others, but respect the truth as well.

How can Social Justice be good, when its specifically not Justice?

>>77613124
>Again, I'm not trying to make everyone play nice with eachother. I'm simply saying that just because YOU can't understand people would be offended, that doesn't mean that people who do get offended are somehow wrong.

I'm not saying the people who are offended are wrong or that I can't understand why some would be offended, I'm saying its wrong to believe that EVERYONE who fits in that category would naturally be offended by virtue of being in that category. A lot of this stuff tends to be white people taking offense on behalf of the people they believe should be taking offense.

>>77613124
>What I'm saying is that I'm bothered by people who can't see that there is more in the world than their own frame of mind

Okay, let me put it this way.
I'm black. The word nigger doesn't offend me. People can and have used it on me, in jest and in hatred both. At the same time I CERTAINLY want to know if a politician or other person in a position of authority is going around calling people niggers, and the context and reasons for them saying it, and I and wouldn't want a newspaper to censor that.

How does that fit into your little narrative about understanding feelings?

>>77613128
>I think a good rule of thumb is to play it safe and gauge the comfort levels of the individual. Have people you know you can joke around and shoot the shit with, and others you know "I can't say this around them". Don't bother trying to appease the entire group, because doing so requires you to turn that group into a monolith, and turning people into a monolithic hive-mind is wrong. Respect others, but respect the truth as well.

Yeah, this. The kind of language I would use would depend on the audience.

>>77613132
It's Social Just Us, because it's just for their little feel good club.

>>77613101
Can you even read? Has the anti-SJW circlejerk completely destroy your ability to understand words? Go back to that post and point to me where he even begins to talk about monoliths and shit.

>>77613194
He has to actually use the word "monolith" for it to qualify as the concept he's describing?

>>77613205
No but you should be able to point out where in his argument he starts to argue that everyone perceive reality in the same way.

>>77613152

If a politician used the word nigger in an op-ed piece, like with "retarded" in this episode, I think the newspaper should not publish it, but instead write a piece about how a politician (a representative for the people) uses a term which is widely accepted as derogatory to refer to a large portion of said people. That said, I think it should be the newspaper's own choice.

I was going to type up a whole paragraph explaining basic discursive and semiologic theory, but why bother, people are just going to go

>SJW XD

File: ss+(2015-11-21+at+10.51.02).jpg (23KB, 247x409px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 247x409px

I really like PC Principal is that wrong?

>>77613356
He seems sympathetic and wanting to do the right thing but coming across as a MAJOR asshole about it and going way too far about what's right and what's wrong like SJWs
>inb4 stock "Liberal nigger degeneracy lovers are not sympathetic" response

>>77613356
>I really like ads
kill yourself

>>77613356
PC principal is actually the only PC frat bro who actually cares about the cause and not just puss smashing, so yeea like away.

>>77613295
>, I think the newspaper should not publish it, but instead write a piece about how a politician (a representative for the people) uses a term which is widely accepted as derogatory to refer to a large portion of said people.
The ambiguity of that turns it into a big grey area where people can speculate and spin and say he didn't say something as bad as he did in our hypothetical. That benefits the politician more than it does me, the supposed victim.

Let's try another hypothetical. An athlete gets accused of rape. Rather than use the word rape, because that word might offend someone, the newspaper instead writes a piece as to how he was "strongly inappropriate with the woman". Is wording more or less offensive. More importantly, who does it benefit more, the athlete or the victim?

>>77613384
I hate that tiptoe around a word stuff because it's almost exactly like the conversation in 1984 about using vocabulary to control people.

>Bad? We don't need such a thing. Ungood will suffice.

>>77613384
>Already using the word victim when talking about an accusation.
Let's go for 'accuser'.

>>77613476
Fair point.

>>77602774
and that's related to integrity in journalism how? Maybe if he was using Super School News to shill it, but he wasn't.

>>77601441
You mean Kyle the kike or Stan the religiously despodent?

>>77613384

What the hell are you on about, how is this relevant to any of my arguments? I'm not saying you should or shouldn't tip toe around anyone's feelings. I'll repeat my actual argument for the 4th time:

Just because you don't understand people get offended, doesn't mean that they can not get offended.

All your hypothetical situations mean jack shit, ESPECIALLY against my argument. The situation is more complicated than to warrant one blanket statement which completely covers it all, who'dda thunk?

>>77605259
Since they can fill out the Caucasian bracket when submitting applications. Yet they still act like an oppressed minority. They think they were persecuted because of their religion rather than their cancerous parasitic ideals.

>>77613384
>>77613476
>>77613562
This is also addressing the 'acceptability' of certain word usage. A bit politically coloured too if you remember the push against 'victim blaming' trying to have men guilty until proven innocent and the popular idea that language shapes thought.

It's a push for making the 'right' word choices in order to instil the right state of mind. So it's something you'd expect on an SJW forum.
But one of the good ones, nobody is claiming the use of the word victim is oppressing them and potentially triggering traumatic episodes.

The helpful suggestion could have been safely ignored and the maker of such would only have embarrassed themselves by pressing the issue further.

File: 1416618557822.jpg (436KB, 960x930px) Image search: [Google]

436KB, 960x930px

Holy shit, this fucking thead is why people call us /co/mblr and treat us as the worst board.

>>77613763

>Jews have cancerous parasitic ideals
>Muslims have cancerous parasitic ideals
>Christian have cancerous parasitic ideals
>White people have cancerous parasitic ideals
>Black people have cancerous parasitic ideals

Hey, bud, culture, religion, race or any social strcutures are not hiveminds. Their belief structures *might* be built upon "cancerous parasitic ideals", but not every individual adhering to those beliefs are "cancerous" or "parasitic". Beliefs do not warrant persecution.

Stay edgy though, my man

>>77604105
This more or less.

Americans are going through a fucked up cultural change.

>>77602497
>This episode felt like abled people acting like white people who say why they should be able to say "nigger"

Nigger and nigga are not the same word. Black people don't say nigger

>>77613732
>Just because you don't understand people get offended, doesn't mean that they can not get offended
The inverse of this is also true though. Why can't you admit that there are people, even minorities, that don't get offended by certain language.

Yes SOME people get offended by some things. Why should they be catered to exclusively?

>>77602653
Because Jimmy is a (10 year old nonwithstanding) is the newspaper's curator and has the right to do so.

>>77614249
It's definitely a bad thing to cater to the loudest complainers.

>>77613853
>Hey, bud, culture, religion, race or any social strcutures are not hiveminds.

Neither they are inconsequntial.

>Their belief structures *might* be built upon "cancerous parasitic ideals", but not every individual adhering to those beliefs are "cancerous" or "parasitic"

No, the rest at best are weak people who enable cancerous parasites through inaction, at worst their supporters who don't have will to act.

>Beliefs do not warrant persecution.

Nazis called, they are rump-rustled about being persecuted for their beliefs.

>>77601441

> If I claim to be fighting on behalf of a particular group, it'll seem like that particular minority agrees with me.

>>77613356
he's a misguided idealist who also looks good and is /fit/, and knows how to approach some problems. Can be sympathized with.

File: ddddddddddddddd.jpg (22KB, 350x328px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 350x328px

>>77614341
wait.... I can't tell if this comment is intended to be against the episode or against the SJWs.....

The lesson appears to be identity should not be used in the calculation of justice! Fair is fair, and percieved oppression should be disregarded!

>>77603535
"calling out" does not mean you are right.
Your retarded opinion that a word is offensive is not objective ok thanks bye.

>>77613853

>Hey, bud, culture, religion, race or any social strcutures are not hiveminds
two thirds of the Muslim population in Britain believe that any criticism of Islam or drawing of Mohammad should be punishable under the LAW with a PRISON SENTENCE.
The population of Muslims in Britain is about 3 million. About 10% of Britain is Muslim.

The same two thirds of Muslims in Britain would like sharia law as it is in place in Saudi Arabia.

I dare you to reconcile this with any first world nation and say those opinions are not fundamentally opposed.

>>77601441
You're a literal nazi, plz die.

>>77614448
Alright but I'm still going to call you out when you use offensive or racist language.

>>77614448
You're not brave or a hero by saying Nigger or Retard anon.

>>77614589
I should add:
5-10% of those 3 million Muslims believe that violence against people who insult or criticize Islam or draw any depiction of the prophet is acceptable.

>>77614623
Why?

>>77614640
What an utterly worthless strawman of a post.

>>77614658
Because I find it offensive and would rather not you use them.

I've always separated being insulted and being offended. Being insulted means being personally attacked, while being offended is kind of just meaningless and being angry at something just because you can. Like being insulted means that there's actual antagonism towards you, but with being offended, you're just breeding your own antagonism to go off on others. Being offended means you need a thicker skin, being insulted means someone is deliberately mocking you. You need a thick skin for both, but being insulted I think is more legitimate than being offended.

>>77614703
But I find them not offensive.
And I would rather use them. So why is your opinion worth more than mine?

>>77614658
Does the idea of someone calling you out on your offensive language trigger you? Are you literally shaking right now and can't even?

>>77614727
Why is your opinion worth more than mine?

>>77614727
Why don't you find it offensive? Is it because of the environment you grew up in?

>>77614737
When did I say it was?
The presumption that I must change my language assumes that your opinion that it is offensive means that your opinion is correct.

The presumption that I don't change it doesn't require either opinion to be right or wrong as it is not enforcing either position.

>>77614749
>Why don't you find it offensive?
Because it's a word.

>>77614737
His opinion isnt worth more than yours, but your opinion isnt grounds to ban anyone rights.
Otherwise your opinion that races should be segregated would have weight on others rights, instead of just being shit being spoken by a shithead.

>77614729
does the idea of calling someone out on not being as correct as you think they should be fill you with glee? Does it make you want to crush some puss? Do you feel like you are a better person over it, considering you have to go so low in order to self validate?

>>77614796
Words can be offensive.

>>77614839
I disagree with your opinion.

>>77614850
It's not really an opinion as more a fact of life. Language can very much be offensive and there are words that are used to demean others.

>>77614886
>It's not really an opinion
It is entirely an opinion. You can't substantiate it, because it's never been objective.

>>77614951

Anon, literally nothing about life, save scientific facts, is objective. Claiming that you need objective proof of someone's opinion in order to make a cultural rule about it is a way to have an indistinct mess of a culture with hardly any rules at all.

>>77614951
are you saying that offensive words never existed? That nobody has ever used slurs like nigger amd faggot?

>>77615056

Bringing this back around to the point:

Offensive is taken, not given.

>>77615056
Not that anon, but why do you get to make the cultural rules? Within my lifetime, the cultural rule was that gays were gross abominations. And it can't just be a matter of who finds something offensive, because I can go outside, right now, and within fifteen minutes probably find as many people that hold that *opinion* still and are offended by two dudes kissing.

>But they're wrong
you'll say, but your own logic, if it can be called that, betrays you. That's the problem with feelings based defenses. You're not special for having feelings. Anyone can do it.

As someone with autism and has been often been called retarded to insult me for my autism, I honestly agree with Jimmy in the latest South Park episode.
As long as people get offended by words, people will always uses those words specifically to insult people.
The best way to counter offensive language is not to fight it, but to change it's meaning. Very few people find the words lame, moron, or cretin particularly offensive when used in their currently most common definition.
Let people use retard as a synonym for for something they don't like. The faster it becomes disassociated from its original meaning, the better.

>>77614886
Words can be offensive and demeaning. Being offended and demeaned is part of a healthy process of maturing as a human being.

Being offended and demeaned (and knowing how to respond to it well) is part of a healthy, balanced adulthood.

>>77614886
>>77615191
Yet treating someone like a child that can't fend for themselves and tell you directly that they have a problem with something isn't demeaning, because reasons.

>>77615112

> Why do you get to make cultural rules?

Well first, I'd like to clarify that I am not actually of the whole "ban offensive words" school, I'm just noting certain things.

> Why do you get to make the cultural rules

Because they have the power to do so. That's literally all it is. Gays are no longer thought of as gross abominations because people who thought they weren't captured enough institutions and focuses of power (or convinced existing ones that they weren't) and then the culture changed. Saying "but, that's just your opinion, and MY opinion is-" is the death cry of the cultural loser.

If enough people who find those words offensive and think their use should be punished capture the centers and institutions of power, they will make it so the use of those words will be punishable. (In fact, they already are, in many ways.) It matters not one bit that you think it's unfair that their opinions get backing and have force behind them and yours don't.

In fact, if we go meta, saying something like "People's opinions shouldn't make cultural rules" is, in itself, a cultural rule. It is, in fact, the very heart of liberalism (in the civilizational sense, not the political sense.) And it's always been a weak rule at that, since of COURSE cultural rules are made out of people's opinions - there is literally nothing else they could be made out of.

>>77614321

>implying nazi's weren't persecuted for acting upon those beliefs