Welcome to the polling community on imzy - for all your polling and public opinion purposes!
Which activist groups actually value being nice to other people.
Clearly, not the mainstream pro-SJ community. If you tell them to be nice, they'll throw "tone policing" and "respectability politics" at you.
"Anti-SJWs" are definitely out of the question, as well. While they seem to disagree with the pro-SJ side (You don't even have to be an SJ militant to be called an "SJW" by that lot.), they somehow seem to agree with the worst factions of the pro-SJ community that it's cool to ruthlessly belittle other people. If you tell them to be nice, that'll mock you about "rustled jimmies" or being "butthurt" or "triggered".




Sorry, just getting back to the Dashboard (because I was on mobile all weekend and there are issues with it there)... There seems to be some controversy regarding this poll... Some people think it's a "push poll", but it's not, and here's why:
First Option = "I don't know of any activist groups that advocate/value being nice to everyone"
Second Option = "I do know of some activist groups that advocate/value being nice to everyone, and I'll tell you who they are in the comments."
Also, as with every poll here, you can always abstain from answering the poll question.
Thank you so much for being supportive. <3
That being said, I'm gonna abstain from posting here awhile - although I might still respond to polls and stuff.
I think most activists care about obeying social rules and looking after other people, which is basically being nice. They just tend to prioritise their in-groups.
Social justice activist groups are also made up pretty much exclusively of people who have been hurt and are still hurting. Why else would they feel the need to get together with similar people to change something as inflexible as social paradigm?
People have to decide whether they are going to spend their time and effort tending to their community, looking for people who need the community's help or appealing to people who aren't part of the community. There's often not much energy left over to re-conceptualize disagreement with their vision of their community and its ideals as something other than attacks.
Even for people with the emotional energy to spare, a lot of the time, social justice activism looks like a long list of choices about who to be nice to (and who you can afford to be nice to) and a lot of the choices are semi-conscious and the best options non-obvious.
I'm not sure there are any to be honest, because the nature of protesting against something is, by its nature, confrontational. It's inconvenient. It's against the status quo.
That being said, I suppose you could be respectful while you protest. But not much is heard when you whisper. It's not a course of action I'd advise if you want change.
I see what you're saying. I don't expect for people to be nice to, say, Donald Trump. Even if most USians haven't ever met Donald Trump - he has, indirectly, hurt a great many people in many ways. So, yeah, by all means... tell assholes to "fuck off".
When I'm against, though, are generalizations - and "anti-SJWs" are just as guilty of that, as well. I understand that some people have been hurt a lot throughout their life - and I fit into that, as well.
However, unlike plenty of other people (whether they have any interest in activism, or not), I choose not to be one of those type that goes: "Fine! If everyone else wants to be an asshole - then I'll be an asshole, too!" Having that kind of attitude doesn't really help anything.
Sometimes, as a woman, I do get a bit frustrated with men - but I generally try to be mindful to not take my anger out on all men. In fact, there are some men I happen to admire very much. So, even though I am very much a feminist, I really don't have any use for anti-male rhetoric.
Perhaps, it's sort of the same case with "anti-SJWs". Maybe they feel that they've been burnt by activists many times, so they go: "Fine! If SJWs won't be nice to me, then I won't be nice to them!" So then they start to harass anyone they deem an "SJW", even if they aren't the SJ militant type.
It's the whole cycle-of-revenge thing that I have an issue with. I try to be nice to everyone, unless they were mean to me first. Granted, I never met Donald Trump - so he was never directly mean to me. But knowing all the hateful things that come out of his mouth, he was mean to me indirectly - so the concept there still applies. But don't lash out at other people unprovoked.
I think then, if I may read into your response, probably what you are looking for is civility in discourse. I agree that, in principle, a calm measured discussion is the best way to solve a problem. That requires both sides to participate in that manner. In this post-internet age that's becoming more rare.
This was exactly why I became an anti-SJW. It was because I was mistreated by social justice people in the past, and found a welcoming group on TiA that didn't (at least, to my knowledge) harass anyone and had relatively reasonable views. I only turned against them when they did not play respectability politics enough for my tastes - they didn't seem to care that their behavior was just as rude and insulting, even towards their own if they disagree. It became the mirror image of what I ran away from.
The problem is determining what is "provoked". There are some militants out there who think that not agreeing with them is provocation. They think that they are the only ones who are right, and most of society is wrong, and that if you disagree, you're denying the humanity of certain people. They have to understand that society does not change overnight - people have to have positive experiences with someone of a certain demographic group, typically, if they are to have a positive opinion of that group.
So, do I play respectability politics? Absolutely. Why? Because I realize that to some extent, demonizing people drives them straight into the arms of the opposition, where they will be radicalized and eventually be disrespectful towards you.
Those are some very good points. I myself had been made fun of at TIA (before you came along apparently) - so, when I myself have started having issues with the SJ community, I wasn't about to start running towards them.
To be fair, most SJ bloggers probably do agree with you and me that we should be civil - but tend to be the silent majority, possibly out of fear of receiving backlash from the more vitriolic SJ types. That's where I was, for the longest time. Even on my main blog, I'm still kind of afraid to express certain views - so I've created a side blog for that sort of stuff.
That is a very sad fact. People online will even make fun of you for having "shitty taste in music". It doesn't even have to about politics or religion, or any other normally contentious issue.
The reason why I turned to SJ in the first place, though - was because I was hoping they'd be the most likely to share my values in civility. Most of them probably do, but there's a vocal minority that's off-putting.
I should probably just spend more time with neurodiversity and disability activism groups. They're the ones most likely to be compassionate about others mental health issues.
In my experience, "the pro-SJ community" doesn't exist as a monolith. Also, personally, I've had far more good than bad experiences in these contexts in general. As for examples, I don't really know how you would define an "activist group". But I've seen the kindest online structures in neurodivergent and in intersectional anti-racist trans-feminist spaces. As far as offline groups go, various nonbinary-inclusive trans groups and a handful of trans dominated queer feminist groups were my favourites.
I am, in fact, neurodivergent - and I probably should spend more time in that group. I've been tossed from foster homes growing up, and have endured lots of verbal abuse from adults and kids alike. That's why I care very much about people being nice.
Anyway, thank you for your suggestions. You've been very helpful. <3
Glad I was helpful. I wish you luck in finding a space whose communication style works for you :)
Thanks! <3
Oh and I just remembered the captain awkward blog with accompanying forum - while not all advice is great (especially in the comments), everyone generally tries to be very compassionate. I think that could definitely be worth a try.
Thanks! I'll check it out. <3
Thing is - being nice hasn't got us anywhere. The mainstream likes to pretend that activist movements of the past were nice and polite but they got change through disrupting the status quo not playing nice with people who want to shut them up. If you're being told off by pro-SJ people for tone policing and trying to force the movement into something more "respectable" then maybe instead you should be listening to them and accepting they have a reason to be angry at their oppression. Also they probably were nice to the first 20 people who questioned their experiences, but they don't have to keep being patient and hand holding every person who "just wants to learn".
And I really can't stand the "holier than thou" attitude of "pro SJ and anti-SJW people are just as bad as each other" because of the implication that someone who thinks that thinks they themselves are better than both when one is a movement for change and the other is a hate group.
For me, though, being nice is not a "respectability politics" thing. It's a "principle" thing. I happen to oppose bullying, period - whether it fits neatly into an oppressor/oppressed dynamic, or not.
In other words, telling me to stop caring about people being nice is a lot like telling a feminist to stop caring about women having equal rights. I happen to value people being nice. I cared about that long before I cared about social justice.
It's difficult to be nice to people who want to keep you silent.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying "be nice to assholes". I wouldn't expect you to be nice to Donald Trump, for example. However, what I'm against is being mean to people who weren't mean to you first.