Viewing last 25 versions of comment by xRei on image #2117785

"[@CommanderLuna":](/images/2117785#comment_8412400
[bq])  

> If you want your rights, be normal about it.[/bq]

 
I don't _*think_* you meant this is a bad way, but again it comes off as privileged. Your analogy about religion doesn't really support your argument. It's a bit of a straw man of every person who is being 'normal' about it. Whatever 'normal' means in the context of fighting for social rights.


 
There is no _*direct_* dichotomy between logic and feelings/emotions. You can be argumentative, loud and angry **and also** logical/correct all at the same time. Dismissing someone's passion in this way is just a lazy attempt to gainsay. This image being portrayed of 'SJWs' as frothing at the mouth is often just a parody of the truth.


 
As to the issue... Back when the US still had Jim Crow Laws, social justice wasn't won by people sitting around and chilling out and waiting for the government, and society at large, to throw black minorities a bone. It'd be wonderful if all positive and meaningful change could occur through calm and civil means. But sometimes it can't. And there is a limit to how much patience and reservation we should expect from disenfranchised minority groups when there is an existential problem that needs addressing.
 
If someone telling another person off is all it takes for us to be so offended and incensed that we won't even listen if there's a valid reason for that anger, then we've apparently become a world full of snowflakes. Which is ironic, because it'd be the impassioned one who normally gets the label.

"@CommanderLuna":/images/2117785#comment_8412400
[bq]If you want your rights, be normal about it.[/bq]
I don't _think_ you meant this is a bad way, but again it comes off as privileged. Your analogy about religion doesn't really support your argument. It's a bit of a straw man of every person who is being 'normal' about it. Whatever 'normal' means in the context of fighting for social rights.

There is no _direct_ dichotomy between logic and feelings/emotions. You can be both argumentative, loud and angry *and also* logical/correct all at the same time. Dismissing someone's passion in this way is just a lazy attempt to gainsay. This image being portrayed of 'SJWs' as frothing at the mouth is often just a parody of the truth.

As to the issue... Back when the US still had Jim Crow Laws, social justice wasn't won by people sitting around and chilling out and waiting for the government, and society at large, to throw black minorities a bone. It'd be wonderful if all positive and meaningful change could occur through calm and civil means. But sometimes it can't. And there is a limit to how much patience and reservation we should expect from disenfranchised minority groups when there is an existential problem that needs addressing.

"@CommanderLuna":/images/2117785#comment_8412400
[bq]If you want your rights, be normal about it.[/bq]
I don't _think_ you meant this is a bad way, but again it comes off as privileged. Your analogy about religion doesn't really support your argument. It's a bit of a straw man of every person who is being 'normal' about it. Whatever 'normal' means in the context of fighting for social rights.

There is no _direct_ dichotomy between logic and feelings/emotions. You can be both argumentative, loud and angry *and* logical/correct all at the same time. Dismissing someone's passion in this way is just a lazy attempt to gainsay. This image being portrayed of 'SJWs' as frothing at the mouth is often just a parody of the truth.

As to the issue... Back when the US still had Jim Crow Laws, social justice wasn't won by people sitting around and chilling out and waiting for the government, and society at large, to throw black minorities a bone. It'd be wonderful if all positive and meaningful change could occur through calm and civil means. But sometimes it can't. And there is a limit to how much patience and reservation we should expect from disenfranchised minority groups when there is an existential problem that needs addressing.

"@CommanderLuna":/images/2117785#comment_8412400
[bq]If you want your rights, be normal about it.[/bq]
I don't _think_ you meant this is a bad way, but again it comes off as privileged. Your analogy about religion doesn't really support your argument. It's a bit of a straw man of every person who is being 'normal' about it. Whatever 'normal' means in the context of fighting for social rights. There is no direct dichotomy between logic and feelings/emotions. You can be both argumentative, loud and angry *and* logical/correct all at the same time. Dismissing someone's passion in this way is just a lazy attempt to gainsay. This image being portrayed of 'SJWs' as frothing at the mouth is often just a parody of the truth.

As to the issue... Back when the US still had Jim Crow Laws, social justice wasn't won by people sitting around and chilling out and waiting for the government, and society at large, to throw black minorities a bone. It'd be wonderful if all positive and meaningful change could occur through calm and civil means. But sometimes it can't. And there is a limit to how much patience and reservation we should expect from disenfranchised minority groups when there is an existential problem that needs addressing.

"@CommanderLuna":/images/2117785#comment_8412400
[bq]If you want your rights, be normal about it.[/bq]
I don't [i]_think[/i]_ you meant this is a bad way, but again it comes off as privileged. Your analogy about religion doesn't really support your argument. It's a bit of a straw man of every person who is being 'normal' about it. Whatever 'normal' means in the context of fighting for social rights. There is no direct dichotomy between logic and feelings/emotions. You can be both argumentative, loud and angry [b]*and[/b]* logical all at the same time. Dismissing someone's passion in this way is just a lazy attempt to gainsay. This image being portrayed of 'SJWs' as frothing at the mouth is often just a parody of the truth.

As to the issue... Back when the US still had Jim Crow Laws, social justice wasn't won by people sitting around and chilling out and waiting for the government, and society at large, to throw black minorities a bone. It'd be wonderful if all positive and meaningful change could occur through calm and civil means. But sometimes it can't. And there is a limit to how much patience and reservation we should expect from disenfranchised minority groups when there is an existential problem that needs addressing.

"@CommanderLuna":/images/2117785#comment_8412400
[bq]If you want your rights, be normal about it.[/bq]
I don't [i]think[/i] you meant this is a bad way, but again it comes off as privileged. Your analogy about religion doesn't really support your argument. It's a bit of a straw man of every person who is being 'normal' about it. Whatever 'normal' means in the context of fighting for social rights. There is no direct dichotomy between logic and feelings/emotions. You can be both argumentative, loud and angry [b]and[/b] logical all at the same time. Dismissing someone's passion in this way is just a lazy attempt to gainsay.

As to the issue... Back when the US still had Jim Crow Laws, social justice wasn't won by people sitting around and chilling out and waiting for the government, and society at large, to throw black minorities a bone. It'd be wonderful if all positive and meaningful change could occur through calm and civil means. But sometimes it can't. And there is a limit to how much patience and reservation we should expect from disenfranchised minority groups when there is an existential problem that needs addressing.