Social justice warrior

Without getting into judgments or name-calling, I'm fascinated by this apparent ideological phenomenon that's grown in the past half decade or so. Do I have this timing right? Where did it come from? What defines it? Is there a sociological reason it's attractive to young people on the left?

Some define SJWs to be internet-exclusive activists. But do they not espouse a reasonably coherent ideology? And is this ideology not reflected in the real world? Herein I use SJW mostly to refer to the ideology, not its mode.

I don't mean to use a pejorative, and the status of "Social Justice Warrior" seems unclear to derogatory. But there's no apparent alternative. Is there a more neutral term? Maybe cultural progressive? I'll use SJW for consistency with the title, with no insult intended.

One problem is defining it properly. From my impressions the following kinds of issues and activism are at least hazily associated with "SJWs". If I've mistakenly associated a viewpoint with SJWs, or left something important out, it is out of ignorance, so please if you're more informed than myself have your way with my list.

• Focus on institutional racism/sexism/"rape culture".

• An apparent desire to explicitly overcorrect for historical wrongs against minority demographic groups.

• Concern about "triggers", especially with regard to sexual assault.

• Opposition to "cultural appropriation".

• Significant overlap with "third wave feminism", which is generally focused on changing language and stereotypes associated with gender or LGBTQ people more broadly.

• Invocations of "privilege"/"white privilege", perhaps linked to a belief that racial/sexual/gender identities fundamentally divide society.

• Defining an array of new gender pronouns and terminology, demanding their broader acceptance.

• Theorizing about gender/racial/sexual power structures and how to displace them.

• Scrutinizing all elements of society and culture for the ways it upholds existing power structures.

• Defining racism and sexism in terms of a power dynamic, so that it's not possible to be racist against whites or sexist against men.

• Defining frameworks of oppression so that every instance of injustice is a data point in a society-wide pattern that encompasses all of us, or merely whites/men/heterosexuals.

• The latter point inspires critical introspection. For instance, the author of this blog post seems to be operating from the premise it's not enough to take a stance on injustice. There's also an obligation to identify and atone for the subtle ways oneself is embedded in the systemic pattern of oppression, no matter how slight or incidental. In the linked posting the author ties the events in Ferguson to her own shocked realization that 90% of her Facebook friends are white.

• Also exhibited in the previous link, the implicit premise that those who don't expressly share passion and outrage about injustices are insensitive or cowardly.

• Based on personal experiences with acquaintances who post this kind of material on FB (so take it with a grain of salt), a tendency to write off questioners as irrevocably lost souls. Like it's not an ideology for proselytizing.

• Efforts to exclude and censor rather than engage and challenge controversial views, particularly on college campuses.

• Sensitivity to the manner in which whites/men align with their cause.

• On the more extreme end (?) claims that racial minorities or nontraditional gender identifications are explicitly superior to whites/males/heterosexuals.

• On the more extreme end (?) equating all heterosexual intercourse with rape of women by men.

Other questions:

Is there a foundational principle at work here, tying these disparate strands together? For instance, conservatism largely stems from trust in and respect for traditions and authority figures combined with a pessimistic view of man's nature. SJWs seem to come from an oppressive interpretation of modern society coupled with an exasperated exhaustion with all perceived sources of oppression. But that's just a hazy guess at this point.

This is an ideology that doesn't seem to fit on a conventional Nolan chart. The southwest quadrant tends to be associated with socialism while the northwest is left-libertarianism. Then again, the chart doesn't really have a place for social conservatives either, and it's at least tempting to regard SJWs as a leftist mirror image of social conservatives. How do SJWs fit into the broader scheme of political ideologies?

Is there a policy agenda associated with SJWs? If they somehow got themselves elected to office what kind of local/state/national agenda would they advocate? Or is it intrinsically an ideology that rejects the usual political process?

Is there any indication of how prevalent these views are, or whether they're getting more popular? Maybe we're just seeing the same group get more exposure, or more vocal, without actually growing?

From what I'm able to discern this is an ideology that has next to zero representation among anyone over the age of 40. How could this be? Are SJWs intrinsic to the internet age?

Is it possible this is a phenomenon of young people in a "Web 2.0" world who are the first generation able to readily piece together from internet resources an ideology/political identity before acquiring much in the way of life experiences? Historically other ideologies needed "manifestos" or tomes or newsletters to propagate, and prevailing conditions need to inspire sympathy towards certain ideas before most people would want to read about politics and thus become an adherent. Naively, this seems to be how the more self-righteous kinds of ideologies formed. Perhaps easily accessible online social networks can work as a catalyst for forming ideologies based on social ties, personal anecdotes, offenses, outrages, prolific role models espousing mind-blowing ideas, etc. This is loosely based on an apparent strength in numbers and interrelations of SJWs on Tumblr. Maybe it's an ideology that piggybacks on our immense cognitive capacity for social relationships to spread and sustain. Just a thought.

Thanks for reading.