Social Justice and Equality

I don't think you will find too many people who would openly admit to being against social justice and equality, except maybe outright fascists and Nazis. (Of course that doesn't that there isn't a large segment of the population that is against social justice and equality.)

 

Tumblr social justice folks make me cringe so hard, generally because they just flat attack everyone except for their own little niche group.

 

I am against social justice of the tumblr kind, where people post GIFs and posts about wanting to make a difference. However, I am very open to true social justice and equality based on actions and not lip service.

 

Exactly. They'll agree in principle, but actively try to prevent any practical implementation or the (accurate) allocation of blame. You can campaign against sexism, racism, ableism and so on, but God forbid you say who's sexist, racist, and ableist. I place them along with the cookie-seeking "allies" of various movements and men who try to take leading positions in feminist movements. They're the moderates who think they're being sensible when they oppose outlawing Fascism and think racism should be protected under freedom of speech.

On the other side, there are plenty of people who apparently are the most fervent social-justice warriors around who don't fully get it; those who wish rape on rapists are a pretty good example of the self-contradictory egalitarians. I won't even be kind enough to say they mean well; they clearly do not understand what they advocate, and that makes them unpredictable and untrustworthy.

Although Tumblr contains a hell of a lot of really stupid "pro-justice" idiocy, it's important in the way it quickly spreads information about issues. It isn't "effective" in the sense that it stops people from racist murders, but it does educate people and helps reduce smaller aggressive behaviour and helps people learn about sexualities and other ideas they haven't previously been introduced to. I find it disturbing that people are so openly opposed to misguided social justice bloggers while they don't care that there are so many white-supremacists, Holocaust-deniers, Fascists, and Leninists and Stalinists on Tumblr.

 

I don't know why any reasonable person would be against social justic and equality, personally, I'm all for it, but the people who dismiss it or are outright against it are the ones who want to keep a privileged status and consider themselves superior or, as one poster pointed out, fascists/nazis.

 

Sorry but I have to disagree here. You can be all for social justice and equality without making baseless assumptions that some people are sexist, racist, etc. There is nothing wrong with being a moderate, most moderates don't think they are great for opposing fascism nor do all of them think any hate speech should be included in freedom of speech amendment. Honestly it seems like on here, if you are a white male from a middle class family, you are considered automatically racist, sexist etc. These generalizations are just outwardly wrong and it's time to stop pointing a finger unless these people are actually doing something that goes against equality and justice or are speaking against it

 

Thank you for your passionate defence of the oh-so-oppressed white cis-males.

I don't point fingers at individuals until I have proof of their racism/sexism/homophobia etc. I point fingers at general groups with the largest statistical and logical tendency to those behaviours.

Here's a hint; a white cis-male from a middle-class family does not inherently dislike white cis-males from middle-class families. It's just that as we benefit from most forms of oppression, it logically follows that we support these forms of oppression. Someone needs to be sexist and racist for there to be sexism and racism. As these problems are extremely common, it follows that lots of people believe in them. This isn't a difficult concept.

By moderate, it would be best to say "thinly-disguised social conservative." In this context, it means the spineless "support" for something until it actually becomes difficult. I am a moderate overall, but I can not find a single reason not to have a go at someone who spends more time justifying the right for people who benefit from oppression to do nothing than opposing said oppression.

 

And it's the finger pointing that gets old and why I've severely considered leaving the site in the past.

 

I agree most people won't openly say they're against social justice, but I severely disagree that Tumblr activism is worthless. Tumblr has educated me more than any other place on the internet.

Activism starts as education. I didn't realize racism is systematic and something people of color have to deal with every day.
Activists on Tumblr gave me words to describe my experiences and feelings about my sexuality and gender.
Activists on Tumblr give me thoughtful critiques on the media I consume and encourage me to be mindful of its problems.
Activists on Tumblr taught me about ableism, fat phobia, trans phobia, rape culture, representation in the media and its importance.
It's changed me for the better, showed me the humanity of those different than myself, showed me my place of privilege and how I can use it to help others. If you take Tumblr social justice seriously you can learn a lot from it.

 

I don't think you will find people who out right say they don't believe in social justice or equality, but it's not to hard for me to imagine reasons. If your someone with privilege, it's a enjoyable thing. For you that is anyway. Embracing equality means giving up your privilege or at the least feeling guilty about it.

 

I'm pro being a decent human being. That means when someone is getting crap they don't deserve I'll usually try to say something about it, even if it costs me a little, because I've been on the other side of that fence.

But since this thread needs a devil's advocate, I'm against broad brushes, and words like "social justice" and "equality" are just those. I am very much in support of them, if you also throw another $10 word into the mix: intersectionality. That is to say, different groups experience some of the same oppressions.

Example: I grew up with white privilege. That means for instance, that if I were say a kid that wanted to be a politician or entrepreneur or anything and I wanted to study someone's story to see how they did it, it'd be way easier for me to do it than a black person. I may not have had as much of it as some people since my stepdad and little brother were black, but it was there.

But some things that are thought of as white privilege, really aren't. Like being chased around the store and treated like a criminal because you are black. That's class privilege. The same thing happened to me when I was growing up, because my family was dirt poor. There is a lot of overlap with white privilege and class privilege, because a lot of black people are pushed into poverty still, enough that the two get confused. But anyone with the wrong parents can be profiled.

Same thing with male privilege, it exists, and once I started walking the walk I did have it, but it is conditional, and the second people figure out you are queer they will take it away. And other aspects of male privilege were denied to me because I am trans, see what I said earlier about being able to find role models for instance.

What I'm saying is, every single person alive is part of one or more groups that have unfair disadvantages and unfair advantages. Leveling the playing field is always a good thing. I am 100% for wheelchair accessible busses. What is not okay though is using the fact that things were harder for you than they should have been to make other people feel bad, and that is exactly what the phrase "check your privilege" is designed to do. Which is why I won't use that phrase unless there's no better way.

If someone cis is talking to me about trans stuff, and it's clear they don't know what the hell they are on about, me reminding them they are cis isn't going to solve the problem. The problem is, they don't understand. My telling them they will never understand is the opposite of helping. They can understand, but only if they genuinely want to. The goal is getting them to the point where they genuinely want to. And usually, that's as simple as making someone feel like their rant was listened to. It's a bit like that old zen story where someone was pouring tea into an overfull cup; people won't listen to what you have to say until they are done talking and took a sip of their own words.

So I guess, in that sense, I can be against "social justice" sometimes. I'm pro gay marriage, anti discrimination, pro wheelchair access, pro everything social justice is supposed to mean. But I'm against using the term. You can do any old thing and call it social justice if you're good with rhetoric.

 

This!

 

Pointing your finger around at everyone is not helping oppressed people in any way. And maybe I do benefit from some sort of oppression and you probably do as well. But it doesn't mean that I like it.

And another again another baseless assumption that I am stop supporting stuff once it becomes difficult. Again, not true at all. Ou shouldn't assume things about people before you get to know them. It just makes you look foolosh

 

idd criticize the idea that there exists an objective standard or a universal understanding of what social justice is. to be honest more often than not when i hear someone use the term its use seems more rhetoric than substance.even if they are fighting for a cause i agree with.

 

I haven't really said anything about you until now, but if you identify with what I'm complaining about then feel free to do so; it's entirely of your own accord.

And as for pointing the finger, I and a lot of others find that to be very helpful. I find it amusing that in situations of oppression you find it "unhelpful" to mention the oppressors. Changing viewpoints is very helpful, and that can't happen if you don't point fingers and educate people. Conversations about privilege and oppression can't happen if you're not willing to identify the privileged and the oppressors.

 

Well you basically called me a thinly disguised social conservative and then giving "spineless support until something becomes difficult"

And there is also a difference between identifying an oppressor and assuming that someone is an oppressor due to little or no evidence and generalizations. Instead of walking around pointing fingers at everyone, better time could be spent actually helping those people who don't have anything.

 

I actually expanded on what I meant when I originally said "moderate." Identify with it if you will.

As for the rest, I see this "go out into the real world and do something" stuff a lot. With nothing about what this "real stuff" and "something" should be. By the way, I'm actively involved in multiple charity groups (mostly to do with disaster relief, disabilities, local homelessness, and rural development in South-East Asia) and I'm part of an Australian young people's educative group based on promoting analytical education, multi-lateral discussion, national and international human rights, diversity, and universal education. Is that "real" enough for you?

And as for "little to no evidence," I hardly see copious statistics and obvious facts (wealth distribution, power distribution etc. by race, gender, sex, sexuality) as lacking in evidence. I find it irritating that you clearly have no interest in this stuff until you decide to try to silence people because the conversation makes you uncomfortable.

 

Aussie, the problem isn' so much what you are saying, it's how you are saying it.