I can't find a good definition from credible sources but WikiPedia and the cited references (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_justice_warrior) refer to it as a pejorative term for an individual who promotes socially progressive views, not

> someone who is oversensitive, unable to accept other people have different viewpoints, and retreats to their safe space whenever someone disagrees with their world view

But the article does mention:

> they are pursuing personal validation rather than any deep-seated conviction, and engaging in disingenuous arguments

and

> unreasonable, sanctimonious, biased, and self-aggrandizing

which does seen to have plenty overlap with the general definition and notion of someone who would exhibit toxic behaviour.

Ironically, it seems to be a term (SJW as well as 'toxic') that was invented (SJW) or re-applied (toxic) just to have one group of people label another group of people. Which is double-ironic because neither the labeling nor the behaviour validates ones own point or invalidates the other's point, yet doesn't further any conversation or discussion. It's practically just inflammatory filler.

(by the way, no, it didn't sound mean and I do like to review the popular labels and circular discussions from time to time -- much healthier for me than to be in the middle of it all the time)

>>In reply to child post by oneplane

Hey welcome to the culture war :D The trick is not to take it too seriously. Also South park is an amazing resource / commentary on it... :D

If you have so little skin in the game that you can maintain that attitude, you should probably stay out of the discussion.