I recently wrote a blog post about how SJWs oftentimes change their opinion to the complete opposite, if this opposite narrative suits better their agenda and gives them more tools to attack people and grab power. They don't care if the new opinion is completely contradictory to their past opinion. They don't care if it makes sense. For example, a mere 5 years ago they advocated for "safe spaces" for women where men have no business entering, yet today they are attacking and deplatforming their own people who still keep pushing that narrative (because now that's "transphobic" apparently). The reason for this is that pushing for sex-segregated spaces does not give them weapons to attack society, while advocating for the opposite does. It's all a power-grab.
It goes beyond that, however. It's one thing to have a strong opinion 5 years ago and the exact opposite opinion today. A rather different thing is holding opposite opinions at the same time, freely switching between the two, choosing whichever suits the current situation better.
For example, SJWs have been shouting for years how it's a horrendous crime to "slut-shame" women, to shame them for what they are wearing, to accuse them of being too revealing, showing too much skin, being too provocative. "Don't tell me what to wear. Teach men not to rape." Women should be free to wear whatever they want, or nothing at all, without them being harassed, assaulted or condemned in any way.
They have gone with this narrative so far as to regularly organize so-called "slut walks" in protest, where women will organize a protest march topless or even completely naked. They have the right to wear whatever they want, or nothing at all if they so choose, dammit! Society should just learn and accept this!
At the same time the same SJWs want scantily clad women in movies and video games censored. If a female character in a video game wears a costume that's too revealing, too sexy, it must be censored. If a woman behaves in some kind of titillating sexy way, it must be censored. SJWs will berate, attack and criticize movies, TV series and video games that show women wearing too little, showing too much, and being too titillating and provocative. Heaven forbid they show a nipple!
They don't give a flying fuck that in most cases those sexy costumes, both in movies and video games, are usually designed and created by women (not by sex-starved pervert men). These artists have never shown any kind of sign that they have been forced or coerced into it. (Quite often these artists are in fact fashion designers and dressmakers who design these sexy costumes on their own accord, for women by women.)
The so-called gridgirls of Formula racing were slut-shamed out of the business, and fired from their jobs, against their will. Not by puritanical religious Christians. By SJWs.
SJWs have also for years heavily promoted the idea that "gender expression" is the right of every person, and may be wildly different from person to person, and there's nothing shameful or objectionable about it. A woman, for example, could dress and act extremely archetypically girly, or like a butch macho man, and that's just fine. Whatever "gender expression" a person has or decides to show, that's their business, and nobody has any say on it. Don't you dare criticize someone for showing whatever gender expression they want!
Then you have SJWs, like Anita Sarkeesian, complaining when a female video game character walks and sits down in a very feminine way, "like a delicate flower". Because, apparently, there's something wrong with that.
All this is quite literally Orwellian doublethink: Holding two contradictory positions at the same time. Switching between the two freely whenever it suits the narrative, completely disregarding the contradiction and the mental gymnastics required to do so.
If there is one thing that you cannot rely on a SJW to have, it's consistency. They will swing their opinions freely and wildly to whatever allows them to grab the most amount of power.
It goes beyond that, however. It's one thing to have a strong opinion 5 years ago and the exact opposite opinion today. A rather different thing is holding opposite opinions at the same time, freely switching between the two, choosing whichever suits the current situation better.
For example, SJWs have been shouting for years how it's a horrendous crime to "slut-shame" women, to shame them for what they are wearing, to accuse them of being too revealing, showing too much skin, being too provocative. "Don't tell me what to wear. Teach men not to rape." Women should be free to wear whatever they want, or nothing at all, without them being harassed, assaulted or condemned in any way.
They have gone with this narrative so far as to regularly organize so-called "slut walks" in protest, where women will organize a protest march topless or even completely naked. They have the right to wear whatever they want, or nothing at all if they so choose, dammit! Society should just learn and accept this!
At the same time the same SJWs want scantily clad women in movies and video games censored. If a female character in a video game wears a costume that's too revealing, too sexy, it must be censored. If a woman behaves in some kind of titillating sexy way, it must be censored. SJWs will berate, attack and criticize movies, TV series and video games that show women wearing too little, showing too much, and being too titillating and provocative. Heaven forbid they show a nipple!
They don't give a flying fuck that in most cases those sexy costumes, both in movies and video games, are usually designed and created by women (not by sex-starved pervert men). These artists have never shown any kind of sign that they have been forced or coerced into it. (Quite often these artists are in fact fashion designers and dressmakers who design these sexy costumes on their own accord, for women by women.)
The so-called gridgirls of Formula racing were slut-shamed out of the business, and fired from their jobs, against their will. Not by puritanical religious Christians. By SJWs.
SJWs have also for years heavily promoted the idea that "gender expression" is the right of every person, and may be wildly different from person to person, and there's nothing shameful or objectionable about it. A woman, for example, could dress and act extremely archetypically girly, or like a butch macho man, and that's just fine. Whatever "gender expression" a person has or decides to show, that's their business, and nobody has any say on it. Don't you dare criticize someone for showing whatever gender expression they want!
Then you have SJWs, like Anita Sarkeesian, complaining when a female video game character walks and sits down in a very feminine way, "like a delicate flower". Because, apparently, there's something wrong with that.
All this is quite literally Orwellian doublethink: Holding two contradictory positions at the same time. Switching between the two freely whenever it suits the narrative, completely disregarding the contradiction and the mental gymnastics required to do so.
If there is one thing that you cannot rely on a SJW to have, it's consistency. They will swing their opinions freely and wildly to whatever allows them to grab the most amount of power.
Comments
Post a Comment