Once again, #AtheismPlus and its #SocialJusticeWarriors ruin something

A couple of weeks ago, a Facebook friend of mine founded a group called "Occupy Skepticism." It was designed to shed a spotlight on how some atheists and some movement skeptics wrongly don't focus enough eyeballs on the problem of poverty, economic justice, and related issues.

I was one of the first seven or eight to join. It's not like I don't have enough other Facebook groups in which I'm moderately to minimally active, but what the hell.

Well, soon thereafter, several Atheism Plus-type social justice warriors also joined. (A couple had been there before me

A day or so later, one of them made her presence quite vocally known. And eventually got an amen chorus of support.

The founder posted a piece written by Chris Hedges. The SJW leader soon thereafter accused Hedges of being a "cis" person and a "mansplainer" who could never really understand social justice issues of non-white males.

The tribalism, jargon and all, of the social justice warriors on full display, along with their martyrology, of how when they're misunderstood, or attacked for a flame war like this, it's all the other side's fault. Wunderbar.

So, I responded. And, of course, came under attack myself. And, was basically told it was all my fault, and that, if I didn't like it, I could leave the group even though I'd been there first.

The facts of the matter are that:

First, ALL of us have unique life experiences of some sort. Many of us have some sort of unique experiences that make us sensitive to some social needs. That includes white males.

Assuming some people don't have such sensitivity is itself a form of stereotyping, first.

Starting your first dialogue with or about people based on such assumptions is itself a form of hostility.

I don't expect true SJWs to accept either idea under this first point; I'm just stating it for the blogging record.

To extend the SJW line of thinking here to its logical conclusion, if I may be so presumptuous as to mention them and logic in the same breath, we should all just become the sociological version of solipsists and claim that nobody else in this whole world will ever be able to understand me, so, when they try and inevitably fail, I can accuse them of #splaining.

Second, and speaking of presumptuousness? These folks strike me as being like the Religious Right on reproductive choice, in their degree of presumptuousness. That's specifically in the presumptuousness of the Religious Right thinking that no woman who has ever had an abortion, or is considering one, ever thinks/thought about the psychological factors of terminating a pregancy, her personal religious, spiritual or philosophical stances, including but not limited to ethical ones, and more.

To riff on the old spiritual, they're singing "Nobody knows the trouble I've seen, nobody but a Pluser." Bullshit.

Third and related to the larger thread, is the old "you catch more flies with honey." Offering an ultimatum to someone and expecting them to respond is a prime example. Oh, and since I know how much the SJW types love the word "privilege," the instigator of this has got a snootful of that to actually think that I, or someone else, would kowtow to such an ultimatum.

Another of the amen chorus, telling the moderator he's running the group wrong, falls into pretty much the same category. Boy, that's rich. If you really don't like it, go start your own Facebook group.

Speaking of that and bullshit, said person, on her own FB page, referenced the old "you catch even more flies with shit" line. If that were true in this case, Pluser-land would be Lord of the Flies, with colonies growing in Rebecca Watson's winking eyelids.

Anyway, the lead chorister of the Plusers in this Facebook group, who started the process, has left the group. So have others, including one that called me part of the Slymepit (a loose grouping of hardcore "men's rights" advocates, scare quotes intended) just for pointing out what I did. Maybe that will lead others from not taking the lead on future jargon-laden assumptions.

Fourth and related to that? Just as the older, in Internet reverse dog years ages, Gnu Atheist movement seems to need the Religious Right as a tar baby (and vice versa), the Plusers seem to need the Slymepit type folks as a tar baby (and vice versa). It's easy to find enemies if you're determined to carry a bushel of belligerence into new situations.

I'm not sure a lot of them are conscious of this. Maybe they were at one time, and now it's faded. However, in many cases, I think there's such a martyrology that they never were fully conscios of their part in creating it. Like Watson and her winks.

I think things are starting to clear out, and it's probably better a dust-up like this happened sooner rather than later. However, at least one new one has come in.

So, I say eff it. Every one that opens their mouths and indicates they're a Social Justice Warrior? Immediate Facebook block. I have no desire to waste any more time or energy on them.

Here's someone who is female and multi-racial who agrees with a lot of the problems of the SJWs.

So? I don't go out of my way to be uncivil to the Plusers, especially when in SJW mode, but I don't go out of my way to be civil, either.

You want civility? Under some conditions, you have to earn it. This is another example of "fool me once ..." or, in biological terms, of reciprocal altruism and tit-for-tat game-theorizing played out.