‘Emotional First Aid Kits’ for Social Justice Warriors

[civman110]

SJWs can thank their savior James O'Keefe!

"James O’Keefe introduced the new “must-have” campus accessory at the University of Houston, ahead of a sold-out appearance on Monday evening by Breitbart News tech editor Milo Yiannopoulous, who is already “triggering” the politically intolerant."

The emotional first aid kits are designed to address the trauma of any “microaggressions” a student or professor might encounter if they cannot reach a “safe space” in time, and include a “genderless” baby blanket, earplugs, and Hershey’s Kisses (though the Project Veritas team ran into a serious snag when the chosen candies came prepared in American flag wrappers).


Link to video.

O’Keefe and his team, representing the “99.99 percent,” pitched the emotional first aid kits to an academic adviser in the University of Houston’s philosophy department, who thought it was such a good idea that she offered to help assemble them.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...efe-milo-introduces-emotional-first-aid-kits/

Does anyone think the SJW's demanding to be coddled and the universities agreeing to treat their students in this infantile manner and has tuned the whole liberal establishment into one giant laughing stock? Does anyone actually think this ridiculous behavior fosters anything slightly intellectual? They've created the perpetually offended generation of triggered babies.

Personally, I'm surprised these people are able to dress themselves in the morning.

Moderator Action: This is an example of the kind of thread that is inevitably going to go downhill, and seems designed to do so from the beginning. Your OP consists only of an attack on people with a particular ideology, with the intent of goading them into arguing angrily with you. Making a post that is intended to bring out hostile responses is the definition of trolling, so it's impossible for me not to see this as a troll thread.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Lexicus]

Do you know who James O'Keefe is?

 

[civman110]

Do you know who James O'Keefe is?

Yes.

He is making fun of the SJW's and the universities are way too regressive to realize their own ridiculousness.

pitched the emotional first aid kits to an academic adviser in the University of Houston’s philosophy department, who thought it was such a good idea that she offered to help assemble them!

The emotional first aid kits are designed to address the trauma of any “microaggressions” a student or professor might encounter if they cannot reach a “safe space” in time...

It's honestly pathetic that the head of a university department thought this was a "good idea," so much so, that she decided to help!

 

[Mydeadgayson]

I think what is more pathetic is how you seem so annoyed by their very existence, you know, annoyed by people who have next to no impact on others. I guess you could say they "trigger you", mhm?

Also in what way are they "regressive"? What are the universities or the students regressing to? What previous state in either's history are they regressing too, or much like "social justice warrior" has that term lost all it's meaning and now means "bad thing that i don't ideologically agree with"?

 

[civman110]

I think what is more pathetic is how you seem so annoyed by their very existence, you know, annoyed by people who have next to no impact on others. I guess you could say they "trigger you", mhm?

They make me laugh honestly. They're like clowns to me, but they're dead serious which makes it just that much funnier. I also know they are fighting a losing battle (which is once again hilarious), so I don't see why I'd be bothered by them. Their behavior is quite pathetic actually.

Also in what way are they "regressive"? What are the universities or the students regressing to? What previous state in either's history are they regressing too, or much like "social justice warrior" has that term lost all it's meaning and now means "bad thing that i don't ideologically agree with"?

Hug boxes and group think never produces anything intellectual, especially when alternate opinions and information that conflicts with their ideology is seen as something they need to be "protected" from with "safe-spaces" and "trigger warnings." It's verboten.

 

[Mydeadgayson]

They make me laugh honestly. They're like clowns to me, but they're dead serious which makes it just that much funnier. I also know they are fighting a losing battle, so I don't see why I'd be bothered by them. They are quite pathetic actually.

You're certainly bothered though, you see normal people who believe they are nothing serious or are just clowns usually just dismiss these people as such, you've (from what i have seen from your posts) spend a decent amount of time discussing and bringing them up.

The more i see of it, the more im convinced it's less "SJWs vs everyone" and more "Anti-SJWs vs any and everyone they consider to be SJWs". The term is so loose it could apply to anyone. Believe in gay rights? Well, you're an SJW! Believe woman should be allowed to vote? You SJW, you.

If you acknowledge that, fair enough, but i've met and seen so many Anti-SJWs who are just as thin-skinned, non-sensical, looking to be offended, hypocritical, moralising, infantile and who hold frankly strange opinions on modern beliefs and discourse that it's difficult to take them seriously at all.

Hug boxes and group think never produces anything intellectual, especially when alternate opinions and information that conflicts with their ideology is seen as something they need to be "protected" from with "safe-spaces" and "trigger warnings." It's verboten.

It seems to me you are just as guilty of violating that then, you seem pretty anti-anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly agree with your stance on SJWs, why that's pretty hug-boxy and regressive of you. [Insert quote about he who fights dragons will become a dragon here].

 

[yung.carl.jung]

If I wanted to read a Breitbart article I would go to Breitbart.com. Please tell me they're at least paying you for this..

 

[civman110]

You're certainly bothered though, you see normal people who believe they are nothing serious or are just clowns usually just dismiss these people as such, you've (from what i have seen from your posts) spend a decent amount of time discussing and bringing them up.

I'm a proponent of free-speech. SJW's hate free-speech and feel they need to be protected from it. They have set a precedent that free-speech can be taken away for political reasons. That's the only thing about them that bothers me.

However, I don't even care anymore because in the end it will be their speech that gets taken away and the trashy left who supported them because it was benefiting them in the short-term, but now they've turned into the left's Frankenstein and is eating them from the inside out. So they can have at it. Fill their boots.

 

[Mydeadgayson]

If I wanted to read a Breitbart article I would go to Breitbart.com. Please tell me they're at least paying you for this..

This. No one has even started delving into Breitbart's attempts to become the #1 site for the alt-right, which includes it's own fair share of virulent racists (think the sort of people who believe america should literally only be white) or O'Keefes history of being a known liar, scam-artist and fraud, but i guess he totally must be a good guy, as long as he hates the SJW!

 

[Mydeadgayson]

I'm a proponent of free-speech. SJW's hate free-speech and feel they need to be protected from it. They have set a precedent that free-speech can be taken away for political reasons. That's the only thing about them that bothers me.

However, I don't even care anymore because in the end it will be their speech that gets taken away and the trashy left who supported them because it benefited them in the short-term, but now they've turned into the left's Frankenstein and is eating them from the inside out. So they can have at it. Fill their boots.

A proponent of free-speech that has issues when SJW's use their own right to free-speech. Also, the precedent was set WAY before SJW's even became a thing. There are certain things, legally, you cannot say, be it on the internet or otherwise, that have nothing to do with SJWs, conveniantly of course you seem to be silent on those.

 

[civman110]

This. No one has even started delving into Breitbart's attempts to become the #1 site for the alt-right

They already are worldwide, well them and The Drudge Report.

A proponent of free-speech that has issues when SJW's use their own right to free-speech.

They don't use free speech they create witch hunts to shut-down others free speech.

There are certain things, legally, you cannot say, be it on the internet or otherwise, that have nothing to do with SJWs, conveniantly of course you seem to be silent on those.

Hate speech and inciting of violence.

SJW's will throw hissy fits to get certain speakers banned from campus for example. It has nothing to do with anything illegal being said. They want their hug box. Trying to conflate this with banning hate speech is disingenuous. These babies like to scream about hate speech, but to them it's simply anything they disagree with.

 

[Mydeadgayson]

And you see no problem with this? That doesn't worry you in the slightest, that you are linking to a site that is a favourite amongst virulent bigots?

 

[Lexicus]

A proponent of free-speech that has issues when SJW's use their own right to free-speech. Also, the precedent was set WAY before SJW's even became a thing. There are certain things, legally, you cannot say, be it on the internet or otherwise, that have nothing to do with SJWs, conveniantly of course you seem to be silent on those.

It's not even a matter of free speech. Anyone with rudimentary social skills understands that you shouldn't intentionally say things that you know will offend other people.

 

[civman110]

And you see no problem with this? That doesn't worry you in the slightest, that you are linking to a site that is a favourite amongst virulent bigots?

Nope. I don't care what's the left's opinion of the site is.

It's not even a matter of free speech. Anyone with rudimentary social skills understands that you shouldn't intentionally say things that you know will offend other people.

And who gets to decide what's offensive? The left and their SJW babies?

 

[Lexicus]

And you see no problem with this? That doesn't worry you in the slightest, that you are linking to a site that is a favourite amongst virulent bigots?

Civman is a "race realist." Not only does it not worry him, it's why he likes the site himself.

 

[Mydeadgayson]

SJW's will throw hissy fits to get certain speakers banned from campus for example. It has nothing to do with anything illegal being said. They want their hug box. Trying to conflate this with banning hate speech is disingenuous. These babies like to scream about hate speech, but to them it's simply anything they disagree with.

Wait, i thought you were for free speech, but now that someone is protesting someone you like (or whatever) it's wrong? It's a witch hunt? What? Protesting, voicing objection is a valuable part of free speech, which you seem all to happy to curtail for people you dislike.

You really lack consistancy in your beliefs here...

 

[civman110]

Wait, i thought you were for free speech, but now that someone is protesting someone you like (or whatever) it's wrong? It's a witch hunt? What? Protesting, voicing objection is a valuable part of free speech, which you seem all to happy to curtail for people you dislike.

You really lack consistancy in your beliefs here...

Only an SJW could support denying others free-speech while simultaneously claiming it's their right to free-speech to do so.

If that's the rules the regressives want to play by. Go ahead. That can work both ways.

 

[Mydeadgayson]

Nope. I don't care what's the left's opinion of the site is.

It has as much veracity as quoting Stormfront on racial issues and is just as happy to lie for political gain.

This is the same site that called Bill Kristol a and i quote "A renegade Jew".

 

[civman110]

It has as much veracity as quoting Stormfront on racial issues and is just as happy to lie for political gain.

Quoting Stormfront. You don't know what you're talking about.

This is the same site that called Bill Kristol a and i quote "A renegade Jew".

So what?

 

[Mydeadgayson]

Only an SJW could support banning free-speech while simultaneously claiming it's their right to free-speech to do so.

If that's the rules the regressives want to play by. Go ahead. That can work both ways.

Protesting isn't banning free-speech, it's a big part of free speech! If i go to a David Duke rally and yell at him how much of an idiot and bigot he is, I am not preventing him from voicing his opinions.

Also again, what are we regressing to? You keep using "regressives" but you at no point say to what state they wish to regress to.