Social justice warriors are constantly inventing new terms to help them better describe their causes—and to avoid any potential offense that may result from accidentally appropriating a term, or failing to be as inclusive as possible.
To keep things straight, SJWs have (finally) introduced “SJWiki,” an online Wikipedia-style resource that defines individual social justice terms, documents contributions to social justice movements, and helps social justice warriors better understand the intersectionality of their respective oppressors.
Intersectionality, by the way, is defined as “the phenomenon in which individuals experience oppression or privilege based on a belonging to a plurality of social categories.”
Each entry contains a short history of the defined term, information on who coined it, and modern examples of its use. But the system is quite helpful—defining, for your needs, everything from everyday SJW terms like “trigger warnings,” (“a way of allowing people to view, read, listen to, or otherwise experience something consensually”), to more complex concerns of the perpetually outraged, like “Brocialism” (which, along with “manarchism” is an “umbrella terms for sexists within the radical left”).
There’s even an entry describing how other concepts in other entries are systematically oppressing each other in a complex web of marginalization known as the “Axes of Privilege.”
In some cases, the entries also feature helpful cartoons, illustrative renderings, and complex infographics, that allow you to put yourself in the shoes of an SJW and determine exactly how oppressed you are, particularly in comparison to others who are also oppressed.
The website is careful, however, to note that it is by no means a complete list of all social justice concepts, nor is it by any means exhaustive, because that would imply that the Wiki is exclusionary, and therefore biased, and therefore oppressive.
They do not, however, allow for any open debate, even among contributors, and have a strict application process for anyone interested in actually providing content for the wiki – by definition, a non-inclusive process. They also do not look kindly on any argument that evokes the value of “free speech.”
There is, however, no entry for those currently oppressed and marginalized by the Wiki’s own rules and regulations.