malonish wrote:Love how the SJWs are all against stuff like this. I recognized one of the SJW twitter handles in the article immediately as one of the worst offenders.
Sjw?
Social Justice Warriors. Typically pampered white millennials with a robust online presence who preach tolerance, but re-wrote the definition of tolerance to mean "you must agree with everything I say and think, and if you don't, you're a Nazi, xenophobe, misogynist, homophobe, and racist."
And they usually have a hash tag like "#istandwith_____" and if you don't stand with them, you are a ____ophobe.
malonish wrote:Love how the SJWs are all against stuff like this. I recognized one of the SJW twitter handles in the article immediately as one of the worst offenders.
Sjw?
Social Justice Warriors. Typically pampered white millennials with a robust online presence who preach tolerance, but re-wrote the definition of tolerance to mean "you must agree with everything I say and think, and if you don't, you're a Nazi, xenophobe, misogynist, homophobe, and racist."
Nice try and I don't disagree with you but in this case you have it backwards. If the highschooler in question would in fact tweet something that could be interpreted xenophobic, misogynist, homophobic or racist, it would be SMU dishing out the consequences (and rightfully so). The liberal rag you rage against are advocating consequence free - freedom of speech.
Yeah, I'm not raging against the magazine or even weighing in on the issue here. An individual asked what a term meant, and I helped him out with a definition.
Stlhockeyguy02 wrote:Yeah, I'm not raging against the magazine or even weighing in on the issue here. An individual asked what a term meant, and I helped him out with a definition.
Oh, I see now. I should have read the whole thread.
malonish wrote:Love how the SJWs are all against stuff like this. I recognized one of the SJW twitter handles in the article immediately as one of the worst offenders.
Sjw?
Social Justice Warriors. Typically pampered white millennials with a robust online presence who preach tolerance, but re-wrote the definition of tolerance to mean "you must agree with everything I say and think, and if you don't, you're a Nazi, xenophobe, misogynist, homophobe, and racist."
West Coast Johnny wrote: Nice try and I don't disagree with you but in this case you have it backwards. If the highschooler in question would in fact tweet something that could be interpreted xenophobic, misogynist, homophobic or racist, it would be SMU dishing out the consequences (and rightfully so). The liberal rag you rage against are advocating consequence free - freedom of speech.
Just to be clear, not saying the crap article was by sjw, the people quoted in the article are. I recognized one right off the bat as an "internet famous" one. Defends a pedophile and her (illegal) actions only because they agree on politics.
A friend who works for Merrill Lynch has told me when Merrill is interviewing someone, Merrill has people whose only job is to dig thru the Internet to make sure the person being interviewed has not posted sexually explicit photos of themselves or others, racist comments, anything that could come back and cause problems for the person or ML. He interviewed one graduate who had a MBA from Stanford Business school, top of his class, the person you would want to hire. When they started digging thru the Internet, they found nude photos of him and some girl plus a video of the two having sex. The kid had thought it had been erased. He was not hired.
malonish wrote:Love how the SJWs are all against stuff like this. I recognized one of the SJW twitter handles in the article immediately as one of the worst offenders.
Sjw?
Social Justice Warrior I believe.
Since JJ never recruited the Observer has no idea how it's done.
An atheist is a guy who watches a Notre Dame-SMU football game and doesn't care who wins. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
