Having opinions about things doesn’t make someone “as bad as SJWs”

0
472

This article has been a long time coming. Its in response to an observation I’ve made in the “anti-sjw”/ “anti-Feminist” communities, in YouTube comment sections, here on our blog, and on our Facebook page. After writing an article criticizing Neil DeGrasse Tyson┬átoday, I was accused of advocating for censorship, being offended and being “as bad as the SJWs I make fun of”

This type of argument isn’t an exclusively “anti-sjw” phenomenon, it happens in pretty much every group. In SJW circles, being accused of being “just as bad as conservatives” is the worst thing someone could possibly say to you. When Neo-Nazis want to criticize each other, they accuse them of being “Just as bad as Jews”. No one likes being told that he is just as bad as people he finds disgusting.

Of course, there are people in every group who are just as bad as the people they claim to oppose; Its called the horseshoe theory. No doubt, there are lots of anti-feminists who behave just like Feminists. However, you can’t just accuse everyone who disagrees with you as being as bad as Sjws. To tell whether someone is just as bad as Sjws or not, we first have to define what makes an Sjw an sjw.

An SJW is not an SJW because he/she has views, he’s an SJW because he wants to force those views on others and to silence opposing ones. Its important to note this distinction, because its the difference between an authoritarian and someone who is exercising free speech. This simple concept is something a lot of people can’t seem grasp.

Take this comment for example:

ryan-1

The comment is suggesting that because I wrote a blog post about Neil Tyson, he must have somehow offended me with his opinions and the fact that I wrote “a whole blog” about it (which according to him, is something an SJW would do.) makes me an Sjw.

Note how he says “a whole blog” as if to make the blog-post I wrote a bigger deal than it is. How is writing a blog-post about a topic something only an Sjw would do?

I am not upset that Neil Tyson expressed an opinion. If that was the impression you got after reading my article today, you need your head checked. Neil has the right to say whatever he wants online. I have a right to write an article about it. He has a right to write an article criticizing my article. I have a right to write an article about his article about my article about his tweets.

So long as neither of us is advocating for the other to be censored or banned, no one has drifted into Sjw-dom yet. Calling either of us “just as bad as Sjw” only demonstrates your idiocy.

The next stage of this type of argument is to suggest that dissent is somehow a sign of offense, as demonstrated in this comment:

ryan

Lower down in the comments, when I asked Ryan to show me where in my article I called for, or even gave the impression, that I wanted Neil to have his Twitter banned, he failed to do so.

Since when does writing an article about someone mean he hurt my feelings? He didn’t. In fact, there was nothing even remotely “offensive” about anything he has said in the first place.

Dissent is not offense. People don’t need to be offended by something to disagree with or criticize it.

When Ryan reads this article today or tomorrow, there’s a chance he’ll see the reason in what i’m saying and see where he was wrong. There’s also the chance he’ll say something along the lines of

“Hah The admin got offended by my comments so hard that he wrote an entire article about it. I triggered him hard”.

I see arguments like this all the time. Its a classic tale of KafkaTrapping. Here’s how it works:

>Someone comments on one of my Facebook posts telling me I am just as bad as the Sjws I oppose.

> I reply to his comment explaining to him that I am not offended by anything.

> He says the fact that I took the time to reply to him means that he has offended me.

> I tell him that I am not offended

> He says the fact that I replied again means I am even more offended, and the more I reply, then the more offended I am.

This is how children argue. You can’t express an opinion and demand that no one disagree or oppose it, because doing so would mean they are offended by your opinion. Think of all the things I could have done instead of reply to his comment:

  1. I could have deleted his comment.
  2. I could have blocked him
  3. I could have banned him from my page.

I didn’t do any of these, instead, I chose to give my view on why i thought it was wrong. If this sounds like the actions of an Sjw to you, then you must have a very high view of them.

Now, here’s the real irony of the whole thing:

If me writing an article about Neil DeGrasse Tyson means he has hurt my feelings, then what does that say about those who are disagreeing with my article and writing their criticism in the comment section? does that mean they too, are offended by my article. If someone criticizes their criticism of my article, does that mean that person is also offended.

If having a viewpoint about someone or something means you are offended by it, then literally everyone on this planet is an offended snowflake who is “Just as bad as Sjws”.

Moral of the story: Have any opinion you want. Criticize and disagree with anything and anyone you want. So long as you’re not trying to get opposing views banned or trying to force your views on others, you are not an Sjw.

Comments

comments