A good portion of the left is going full marxist. Its already here even if most people dont actively say they are marxist.
Actions speak louder than words. Everything about feminism and SJW's looks and sounds like marxism. The normal leftists are either agreeing or completely oblivious to what's happening.

What's exactly that one word you were talking about?

Society allowed for the cutting of Democrat Party history and pasting it to the Republican Party. Go look up the Party support for the 14th, 15th, and 16th amendment. Further, look up Planned Parenthood, the KKK, and The Civil Rights acts in the 1960's. Democrats and Liberals often make me laugh but it is sad that much of their views are destroying America.

It's not cool if people are joking to your face about you being a terrorist. I'm not sure why you have talked yourself into that being ok, but I suspect you're having some issues with that. 

The reason why a person would be an "asshole" in some of those examples is because it's not cool to pick on people who are commonly discriminated against. Piling on or being hostile to gays, fat people, regular Muslims, etc. does make one seem like an asshole because they are not exactly advantaged groups. 

It's like saying "well why is it ok to poke fun at Brad Pitt, but not the retarded kid? I want to make fun of retards because it's free speech" ... because one is a privileged person, if you're making fun of the other, you probably are an asshole. It's the same zip code as being a bully basically. 

Just like you CAN point at someone who has a facial deformity and say "oh wow, your face is fucked up", but doing so means you don't have any social tact. It's why we have a thing called a filter. 

You can say things, you just don't have the right to be popular because you say them or to be thought as not an asshole. That's not part of free speech either.

And you know what, I'm NOT a millenial, I'm older, but I have to say generally speaking things are better. People just complain about everything, but when I was in high school I was basically a "jock", and if someone dared to even hint at being gay at my school the bullying would've been unmerciful and unrelentless and saying things like "hey don't be such a fucking f*ggot" was commonplace. 

When I see teenagers today, they are much more evolved on that issue (and many others) in just 10-15 years, and honestly that is a good thing.

Oh so now you want to put in some context? Why didn't you put that context in in the first place? Is it because it's easier to make simplistic statements to try to justify an invalid point?

Context is everything when shit goes down. There is a big difference between getting stabbed because you are trying to stop someone from being assaulted or raped in a seedy bar, and walking into a seedy bar telling someone their an asshole and get the hell out of my seat or I'll shove the stool up your arse and then getting stabbed. Can you see that in one situation you would receive a whole lot more sympathy and praise for your actions leading up to being stabbed than the other? Or do you think the situations are more or less the same?

How about the situation where you stab someone who is trying to assault another person? Is the stabee a victim of your hateful and malicious crime or are you righteously coming to the defence of another? Would it be OK if you saw someone being assaulted and instead of stabbing them you raped them? The societal norms would say that there are situations where violence that causes severe injury is acceptable and even praiseworthy. But there is never a situation where force sex is acceptable or praiseworthy. That's why the crime of rape does not have degrees of badness but only aggrivating factors, like whether there were other forms of assault involved, or if the victinm was a minor. Whereas assault and homocide have degrees and even exhoneration on the grounds of self defence or defence of others, because society recognises there are mitigating factors, and indeed sometimes the wounded (or dead) person is at fault.

So, a guy goes to a seedy bar and gets stabbed lacks sufficient information to be able to judge the situation as to whether he was a victim of a crime. A woman goes to a seedy bar and gets raped, you don't need any other information to judge the situation, she was raped, she is therefore the victim of a crime.

Also how many instances have you heard of where a seedy bar is known to be the site of a few rapes in the past and is frequented by single women? I'm thinking women who know the history of the bar are not ever going to that bar without tagging along with a big tough guy who they trust who has a knife of them. So in the real world women don't need to be told to avoid rapey bars, they just do. And if someone new comes to town and she says "hey, lets go to this bar." And you say, "no, don't go to that bar because people have been raped there." Are you expecting her to respond with "I'll go to that damned bar and no one better rape me, and I don't care what you say." Or is a more likely response, "Man, thanks for telling me, I'm never going there. You're cool, here's my number, call me some time."

And more seriously, if you warned a woman not to go to a rapey bar, and she went by herself and ended up being raped and you said to some people, "I told her not to go there, why would she go there after I told her it was a rapey bar?" that they would say you are an asshole victim blamer? No people would not say that. People would be surprised that she went there after being warned, but they would still say "doesn't mean she deserved it." At least that's how I would expect the conversation to go with everyone I know IRL, which includes several feminists. And everyone would certainly say she's taking a big and unnecessary risk if she went back to the same bar where she got recently raped.

I think you're overracting to a perceived "political correctness" or "SJW" takeover of the public conversation which doesn't actually exist, although I'm sure there are some people out there as bad as what you are imagining.  (I have witnessed people demanding trigger warnings for trigger warnings.) 

Look at your examples.  It's not considered absolutely fine to say "men are horrible" any more than it is to say "women are horrible" ... although there are assholes that will say otherwise for both sides.  I've seen it coming from both genders. 

"White people need to stop doing crimes" Has anyone actually said this? 

"I don't enjoy/prefer fat/skinny people" is just a statement of personal taste, I guess that would be talking about in personal relationships?  Like, "I prefer women with breasts within cup size range B to D"?  If it's a judgmental thing like "fat/skinny people are bad people" then both are asshole things to say but it is far far more common to be said against fat people which is why there is more anger against it. 

Religion:  Both are definitely wrong.  One of the biggest reasons they are wrong is that the major religions are spread out among many denominations and populations, e.g. Catholics vs. Lutherans vs. many other Protestant groups; Arabic Muslims, African Muslims, East Asian Muslims; and so on.  Aside from whether these groups can be fairly accused of needing to clean up their act, it's certainly wrong to ignorantly mix them together and claim they all have the same internal problems.  Catholic sex scandals vs. for-profit megachurches vs. televangelist scam artists. 

Gay/hetero:  let me just point out that when you were asked to give a joke about heterosexuals, the example you gave was actually a joke on the subject of gays, changing "gay-bashing" to "straight-bashing" for the purpose of creating an allegedly humorous effect.  I'm not entirely sure where the humor is supposed to be found, but in any case it's not really a joke about heterosexuality. 

Liberals/conservatives:  Ah, the big one.  Idiots on both sides accuse the other side of idiotic things, of course, but what about this supports your claim that "society" deems calling all conservatives stupid "absolutely fine"?  Maybe you are only noticing the injuries that hurt you.  You can't feel the other guy's wound. 

Where are the articles about this?:

https://i.sli.mg/68k7eh.jpg

That fact that there was no differentiating context given is the point.  That is to say, even without that context, you made up your own rationalizations based entirely on your own agenda.  You twisted the information given one way for one quote then twisted the information the other way for the other quote.  You are the exact and real example of what I'm talking about.  You apply your preconceptions right off the bat with no regard for the actual context you pretend to care about.  

Really, the only purpose was to show that being an idiot and a victim are by no means mutually exclusive, regardless of what type of victim, yet you're making up all these convoluted suppositions to support your own narratives.  It's like those cartoons where the scientist builds an elaborate and expensive contraption just a crack and egg.

Oh, and just a bit of reality, teenage girls and boys both are often drawn to dangerous areas and circumstances they've been warned about.

But you see, that isn't about the gender, it's about the act involved.

"She was at that seedy bar downtown and got stabbed. She really needs to stop hanging out with those people." -- Common sense.

"He was at that seedy bar downtown and got raped. He really needs to stop hanging out with those people." -- Victim blaming.

Of course, that's following YOUR assertion. I would describe both cases as victim blaming, but with rape being a worse case of victim blaming. Why? Because stabbing isn't an act of subjugation, it's an act of violence. Rape is an act of subjugation (which isn't to say that rape can't be violent - just that the intent with rape isn't generally violence).

On the topic in general, I would say that it's being misrepresented in the same way - confusing "not quite as bad" with "acceptable". Saying that all white people are criminals is wrong, just as saying all black people are criminals is wrong. But saying it about black people is worse, not because it's any more false, but because it perpetuates existing stereotypes and reinforces attitudes that harm the disadvantaged.

Besides which, most uses of the "reverse" cases are intended either as a way to demonstrate the hypocrisy of those who would use the "typical" cases, or as humour playing off the "typical" case being reversed. And the exceptions are usually said by the kinds of people who believe in "an eye for an eye" - it's being said as a kind of retribution.

On the other hand, most of the "typical" cases are being stated by people who are simply prejudiced/racist/etc. There are exceptions for that, too. And sometimes, it's considered acceptable to make those statements.

And incidentally, "I don't prefer skinny people" would be considered just as unacceptable as "I don't enjoy fat people" because they're both body-shaming. Saying that you personally find thinner or fatter people more attractive is fine, but saying that they are inherently less or more attractive would be unacceptable.

Also note that the last example, of "conservatives are stupid", would be considered unacceptable by the same people who say "liberals are stupid" (and usually throw around phrases like "libtard" - which really just demonstrates the stupidity of the person using the phrase, given that it's not even a clever portmanteau, and unoriginal to boot - note that this is about the specific people using these phrases, not conservatives in general).

EDIT:

The point Binary Solo is making is that people may use a knife to defend themselves - it is possible that the stabbing was done in self-defense. The stabbing could potentially be an unfortunate end result of someone doing something justifiable - defending themselves.

Can you think of any situation in which rape is justifiable?

Strawman fallacy. You assign "society" opinions that you can easily argument against. Just because you pretend like society only objects to one of those statements doesn't make it true, and given that the entire basis for this thread is what you pretend society thinks, there's not much to discuss here.

Some people might be like that, but the vast majority aren't. Most people will object to all of those statements, not just one or the other. Ironically, you are complaining about an issue that isn't there, much like how the few SJW-extremists (that you pretend are in the majority) you are complaining about do.