Woke is white arrogance

[Trausti]

 

[TomC]

At least with Trump, your $45 card comes in a variety of design choices.
Tom

 

[TomC]

When you call someone “woke,” you do it to someone who never called themselves that,

Just so we understand each other,

I consider myself Woke, according to the definition "Aware of and concerned about social issues, such as racism."


That doesn't mean I agree about things like prioritizing or dealing with or causes with any particular person, including other people I also consider Woke, by that definition.
Honestly, I consider practically everyone who posts on TFT political forums to be Woke. Not everyone everywhere, I know lots of people who are so wrapped up in themselves they could barely name the current president.

But yeah, TFT is populated by the Woke. Why else would anybody bother posting here?
Tom

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I am sure your heart is in the right place but it is not the people ridiculing wokeism that are the bullies. It is the virtue signaling, cancel culture, de-platforming wokesters that are the bullies. It is virtue signaling wokesters that have "flame purification" ceremonies, i.e. burning books deemed "problematic". It is wokesters that kick up a fuss about Dr Seuss books and bully publishers and distributors. It is the wokesters that are knocking books out people's hands "you can't read that, it's "problematic". It's the wokesters tearing down statues etc.

You're not getting a decent picture of what happened.

It was a few Dr. Seuss books that are objectionable, not a general problem with Dr. Seuss.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Bearing in mind that the people you call “wokes” do not call themsleves “wokes” and thus demonstrates that your use of the worrd as a means to disdain their efforts at whatever they want to do is just a manifestation of attempted agressive dominance.

That's a very warped way of looking at the world. Disagreement about ideological positions and politics isn't by definition "attempted agressive dominance". It's got to be ok to have different opinions on things.

But I find it interesting that you see it as aggressive. It looks to me like you are being defensive because it hits too close to home?

The word started as a term to identify caring people by those receiving the caring (it actually started before that as something else, but that is a digresssion). And here you are saying that the term is now an insult - doing your level best to damage a caring relationship between groups by mocking, disdaining and insulting the relationship itself.

Well.. it's fake caring. It's disingenuous and destructive IMHO. I think it deserves mockery.

Which makes you the asshole who kicks over the sandcastle. The one who will destroy the structures of others so you can feel tall yourself standing in the rubble.

I think wokes are greater assholes. At least standard assholes don't sit in a smug comforting blanket of moral superiority. Wokes are assholes deluding themselves to be believe they aren't. Since they aren't aware of how destructive they are, good luck, ever getting them to admit any wrongdoing or finding a problem with their own behaviour. The only thing worse than a bully is a bully in complete denial about it.

When you call someone “woke,” you do it to someone who never called themselves that, and you do it with a sneer and a smug insult. It’s simply destructive, not constructive. You seek to tear down relationships. And call yourself enlightned for doing it.

I disagree. It's the other way around.

It’s just a schoolyard bully, though, shoving over kids in the hallway to make himself feel powerful.

I agree that is exactly what wokes are. I think we should take a stand against wokes and stop their bullying. To make the world a better place.

I agree that wokes are being bullies just so that they get to feel powerful. They're assholes and should be called out on it IMNHO.

I just want to emphasize that I don't think wokes are just bullying conservatives. I think wokes are also bullying minorities. They're using gays, blacks and any other marginalised group as an ideological baseball bat, completely ignoring the needs of that group. The minorities are only included and given respect as long as they obey the woke ideological party line. If they would truly speak their minds, they'd of course be cast back into anonymity. They're only welcome into the woke warmth as tokens. It's conditional love as found in any truly abusive relationship.

I'm not fighting for the rights of conservatives to get to say mean words. I'm fighting for the rights of blacks and gays (etc) to get released from the ideological straight jacket wokes have put them in.

How many films by black directors have you seen that isn't about racism? Films from black directions about ANY other topic? Or do you truly believe that the ONLY thing black directors think about all day, every day, is racism?

In the early childhood of pulp science fiction and weird fiction it was a world where many writers were Jewish, black, lesbian or mentally ill, etc. It was a place where they could be welcome as themselves. Many people don't know this today, because they weren't writing specifically about racism, sexism and homophobia. They were just telling stories, but from their perspective using WASP pseudonyms. So today we don't think of these stories as being written from Jews, blacks or lesbians. They're just good stories. Also a lot of terrible stories. But it's hard to tell from these stories, by the text alone, the gender or race of the authors. It wasn't that they were trying to hide it (which they as a matter of fact were). It just wasn't the main draw of the readers or why they were writing. These books were also often read by Jews, lesbians and blacks. It's was a genre truly bridging cultural gaps and bringing communities together.

In the science fiction or horror genre movie or TV industry today we see none of this. It's a straight white boys club, often making woke stories, writing us on the nose about how important it is to be feminist, gay friendly and not racist.

Edit: Here's an example of what I mean. H.P. Lovecraft was famously (most likely) gay. Apart from the fact that his books have no women in them, they're not about male homosexuality or the gay lifestyle. He's not famous for being a specifically gay author. His homosexuality, while historically interesting, isn't a theme in his books. His main theme is existential anxiety and the terror of realize there's no loving God out there. Themes universally poignant.

He was also a raging, frothing at the mouth, racist. The current woke ideology has no place for a person like him. It's incredibly streamlined and monolithic in what beliefs and opinions are allowed to be expressed.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think you are partly correct. However;

Sure, but I don't think woke necessarily is a conscious choice. I think the woke most often think they are good people.

I think there is a difference between people who are “woke”, the unhinged type that see being white or not particularly supportive of BLM automatically makes them racist and most people who have their heart in the right place and thumbs/like some twaddle on Facebook or post a pithy quote or meme.

The “woke” (and CRT and BLM proponents) are professional agitators and it takes a conscious choice to be part of that.

I don't think it does. I think it's actually harder for them. Since their income is based on getting likes, they will chase the likes more aggressively. Remember that they are all the time surrounded by their fan clubs. I think the agitators are more blind than people in general. Have you never noticed that when they debate opponents they're not talking to the other guy. They're talking to their fan clubs. It doesn't matter if their answers make no sense to any hypothetical objective third party.

I think seeing the professional agitators as necessarily aware of the disconnect, is a bit of a conspiracy theory IMHO.

I'm sure there's contradictory examples. But I don't think it's a rule.

 

[ZiprHead]

Well.. it's fake caring.

How did you determine it's fake?

 

[DrZoidberg]

Well.. it's fake caring.

How did you determine it's fake?

Because the lack of any grand plan to succeed. There's no vision of where we want to get to. There's no acknowledgement that there's any price to pay. Because of the hallmark of PC/woke, tokenism. Blacks, gays and minorities are only allowed up on the stage as long as they repeat the woke message. If they have anything else to say, they are not welcome. While blacks might front these organizations, on social media it's whites having a go at one another. Ie, it's an internal ideological war within the priviliged class, who have no intention of letting go of their privilege. No priviliged group ever does.

Wokes are woke because it's an easy way for members of a priviliged group to get status in the group without having to let go of any privilege. It's a symbolic sacrifice with zero results.

The LGBT movement didn't have broad impact on society and gay acceptance until the 90'ies. Ie after the death of 80'ies PC culture.

Trying to control others speech is fundamentally something conservative movements do. It's fearing an impending and inevitable change, so we try to control the situation by controlling expression. Not conservative in the left/right sense. But conservative as in, reluctant to change.

The fact that wokes are so upset about people saying mean things, I interpret as a conservative impulse.

If we want to empower any group the ONLY thing we can do is allowing them to express themselves freely.

An example is Rose Alliance. The Swedish sex workers union.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ruth-jacobs/pye-jakobsson_b_4977067.html

They've always been very vocal about that their main enemy comes from Swedish feminists and the feminist movement. Who never allow them a platform to speak or are willing to let them speak. But claim they are fighting to protect the rights of Sex Workers. Since no Swedish Sex workers wants to toe the woke party line they are not welcome to speak. And Swedish feminists continue to treat Swedish sex workers as children, who don't know what's good for them, because you know... women... and their silly little ideas, why would they understand stuff and long words? Their care for Swedish Sex Workers is fake. It's nothing but old conservative sex negativity and trying to control people they think are scary, ie empowered women who chose to be promiscuous. All of woke is like this. It's incredibly patronizing.

 

[KeepTalking]

When you call someone “woke,” you do it to someone who never called themselves that,

Just so we understand each other,

I consider myself Woke, according to the definition "Aware of and concerned about social issues, such as racism."

That is the problem with the definitions in this thread, using those definitions, damn near everyone is woke.

That doesn't mean I agree about things like prioritizing or dealing with or causes with any particular person, including other people I also consider Woke, by that definition.
Honestly, I consider practically everyone who posts on TFT political forums to be Woke. Not everyone everywhere, I know lots of people who are so wrapped up in themselves they could barely name the current president.

But yeah, TFT is populated by the Woke. Why else would anybody bother posting here?
Tom

So are you saying DrZ, Trausti, and TSwizzle are woke? Well, if that is the case, then I guess I was right above, damn near everyone is woke.

Of course, I think you are wrong. I don't think you are woke, I don't think I am woke, and I can't even imagine Trausti and TSwizzle being referred to in that manner. DrZ claims he was once woke, but I find that to be quite the post hoc admission on his part.

I have been posting on this board, and it's precursors since the early 90s. Many in this thread have said they were not even aware of the term back then. I was, but it was not a term used by, or applied to, white people at that time. I came here (actually IIDB) because I was a newly minted atheist, looking for a community of like-minded individuals, and was still not comfortable with admitting that I had de-converted to many of those who were close to me in real life. It gave me a place to stretch my wings, so to speak. I don't know that my reasons are common among posters on this board, but I doubt that I am the only one who came here for that reason.

 

[KeepTalking]

That's a very warped way of looking at the world. Disagreement about ideological positions and politics isn't by definition "attempted agressive dominance". It's got to be ok to have different opinions on things.

That is so obviously not what Rhea said. She said that someone insisting on applying a label to someone when they do not identify with that label is "attempted agressive dominance". Why don't you answer that accusation, rather than making up a strawman? Why are you insisting on applying labels to others who do not identify with that label? That is not a thing that is ok, that is the very definition of bullying.

I think wokes are greater assholes. At least standard assholes don't sit in a smug comforting blanket of moral superiority.

Really? "Smug moral superiority" and "assholeishness" would be synonyms if they were words.

Wokes are assholes deluding themselves to be believe they aren't.

Once again, that is practically a necessary requirement of being an asshole. Most people stop being assholes once they come to a realization that they have been assholes.

When you call someone “woke,” you do it to someone who never called themselves that, and you do it with a sneer and a smug insult. It’s simply destructive, not constructive. You seek to tear down relationships. And call yourself enlightned for doing it.

I disagree. It's the other way around.

It’s just a schoolyard bully, though, shoving over kids in the hallway to make himself feel powerful.

I agree that is exactly what wokes are. I think we should take a stand against wokes and stop their bullying. To make the world a better place.

So, you see the following schoolyard confrontation:
Kid1: "You're a little faggot."
Kid2: "Please don't call me that."
And you think Kid2 is the bully? Why isn't Kid1 the bully for applying a label to another person that the person does not identify with?

How many films by black directors have you seen that isn't about racism? Films from black directions about ANY other topic? Or do you truly believe that the ONLY thing black directors think about all day, every day, is racism?

Someone has never heard of Tyler Perry.

In the science fiction or horror genre movie or TV industry today we see none of this. It's a straight white boys club, often making woke stories, writing us on the nose about how important it is to be feminist, gay friendly and not racist.

Two of the more popular horror movies in recent years have been Get Out, directed by Jordan Peale (making your first point wrong), and A Quiet Place with no noticeable feminist, LGBT, or racist overtones despite having been directed by a straight white man (making your second point wrong).

 

[TSwizzle]

Only white woke arrogance could come up with “Latinx” to describe brown people.

 

[DrZoidberg]

When you call someone “woke,” you do it to someone who never called themselves that,

Just so we understand each other,

I consider myself Woke, according to the definition "Aware of and concerned about social issues, such as racism."


That doesn't mean I agree about things like prioritizing or dealing with or causes with any particular person, including other people I also consider Woke, by that definition.
Honestly, I consider practically everyone who posts on TFT political forums to be Woke. Not everyone everywhere, I know lots of people who are so wrapped up in themselves they could barely name the current president.

But yeah, TFT is populated by the Woke. Why else would anybody bother posting here?
Tom

I think that's only part of the definition. That's also the only part of woke that isn't problematic. If it only was being aware and concerned about social issues, woke would be great. But they don't stop there. It's the demand that others also are concerned about social issues, are concerned in the same way, and accept the same models of explanations as the mainstream wokes. It is monolithic in its demands. It doesn't have room for a multitude of explanations. The thread about critical race theory is a good example. The wokes in that thread don't seem to accept that you can be against critical race theory while also being against racism.

Woke is a poverty of thought. It's simplistic. The real world is messy. Defies simple answers. Solving racism is hard. As is gender inequality.

Woke attracts a lot of mean people. People who like to bully and hurt others. And use the justification of a moral crusade as a justification to hurt others.

If it was only about awareness and care about social issues, I would be a proud member of the club.

 

[DrZoidberg]

That is so obviously not what Rhea said. She said that someone insisting on applying a label to someone when they do not identify with that label is "attempted agressive dominance". Why don't you answer that accusation, rather than making up a strawman? Why are you insisting on applying labels to others who do not identify with that label? That is not a thing that is ok, that is the very definition of bullying.

I don't understand the problem. We don't get to chose the labels others give us. That's never been true for anyone. People give others whatever labels they think fit. And they give themselves the labels they think fits. Sometimes those are the same labels. Sometimes they resent those labels.

So, you see the following schoolyard confrontation:
Kid1: "You're a little faggot."
Kid2: "Please don't call me that."
And you think Kid2 is the bully? Why isn't Kid1 the bully for applying a label to another person that the person does not identify with?

lol. I thought you were against using strawmen?

How many films by black directors have you seen that isn't about racism? Films from black directions about ANY other topic? Or do you truly believe that the ONLY thing black directors think about all day, every day, is racism?

Someone has never heard of Tyler Perry.

Yes, there are examples. Doesn't negate the statement overall. I hope there will be more.

In the science fiction or horror genre movie or TV industry today we see none of this. It's a straight white boys club, often making woke stories, writing us on the nose about how important it is to be feminist, gay friendly and not racist.

Two of the more popular horror movies in recent years have been Get Out, directed by Jordan Peale (making your first point wrong), and A Quiet Place with no noticeable feminist, LGBT, or racist overtones despite having been directed by a straight white man (making your second point wrong).

No, it doesn't.

You are just pretending that I spoke in absolutes. But I never did.

 

[KeepTalking]

Only white woke arrogance could come up with “Latinx” to describe brown people.

As usual, you are wrong:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinx

According to Google Trends, it was first seen online in 2004,[10][23][24] and first appeared in academic literature "in a Puerto Rican psychological periodical to challenge the gender binaries encoded in the Spanish language."[22]

Checking that reference, we find:
Salinas, Cristobal (2020). "The Complexity of the 'x' in Latinx : How Latinx/a/o Students Relate to, Identify With, and Understand the Term Latinx"

A white person did not come up with the term to describe brown people, but rather it came from a person of the ethnicity to which it was applied.

 

[laughing dog]

I don't understand the problem. We don't get to chose the labels others give us. That's never been true for anyone. People give others whatever labels they think fit. And they give themselves the labels they think fits. Sometimes those are the same labels. Sometimes they resent those labels.



lol. I thought you were against using strawmen?

How many films by black directors have you seen that isn't about racism? Films from black directions about ANY other topic? Or do you truly believe that the ONLY thing black directors think about all day, every day, is racism?

Someone has never heard of Tyler Perry.

Yes, there are examples. Doesn't negate the statement overall. I hope there will be more.

In the science fiction or horror genre movie or TV industry today we see none of this. It's a straight white boys club, often making woke stories, writing us on the nose about how important it is to be feminist, gay friendly and not racist.

Two of the more popular horror movies in recent years have been Get Out, directed by Jordan Peale (making your first point wrong), and A Quiet Place with no noticeable feminist, LGBT, or racist overtones despite having been directed by a straight white man (making your second point wrong).

No, it doesn't.

You are just pretending that I spoke in absolutes. But I never did.

Regardless of your intent, a plain reading of

In the science fiction or horror genre movie or TV industry today we see none of this. It's a straight white boys club, often making woke stories, writing us on the nose about how important it is to be feminist, gay friendly and not racist.

make it an absolute in the English language.

 

[TSwizzle]

Only white woke arrogance could come up with “Latinx” to describe brown people.

As usual, you are wrong:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinx

According to Google Trends, it was first seen online in 2004,[10][23][24] and first appeared in academic literature "in a Puerto Rican psychological periodical to challenge the gender binaries encoded in the Spanish language."[22]

Checking that reference, we find:
Salinas, Cristobal (2020). "The Complexity of the 'x' in Latinx : How Latinx/a/o Students Relate to, Identify With, and Understand the Term Latinx"

A white person did not come up with the term to describe brown people, but rather it came from a person of the ethnicity to which it was applied.

Nevertheless, despite the dubious wiki, it’s arrogant white wokesters that use it exclusively use it.

 

[KeepTalking]

I don't understand the problem. We don't get to chose the labels others give us. That's never been true for anyone. People give others whatever labels they think fit. And they give themselves the labels they think fits. Sometimes those are the same labels. Sometimes they resent those labels.

When they resent those labels, and you use them anyway, that is being a bully. Now do you understand?

So, you see the following schoolyard confrontation:
Kid1: "You're a little faggot."
Kid2: "Please don't call me that."
And you think Kid2 is the bully? Why isn't Kid1 the bully for applying a label to another person that the person does not identify with?

lol. I thought you were against using strawmen?

Replace "faggot" with "wokester". Is it a strawman now?

How many films by black directors have you seen that isn't about racism? Films from black directions about ANY other topic? Or do you truly believe that the ONLY thing black directors think about all day, every day, is racism?

Someone has never heard of Tyler Perry.

Yes, there are examples. Doesn't negate the statement overall. I hope there will be more.

It certainly negates the statement I placed in bold above.

In the science fiction or horror genre movie or TV industry today we see none of this. It's a straight white boys club, often making woke stories, writing us on the nose about how important it is to be feminist, gay friendly and not racist.

Two of the more popular horror movies in recent years have been Get Out, directed by Jordan Peale (making your first point wrong), and A Quiet Place with no noticeable feminist, LGBT, or racist overtones despite having been directed by a straight white man (making your second point wrong).

No, it doesn't.

You are just pretending that I spoke in absolutes. But I never did.

The statements I placed in bold above certainly seem like absolutes. If you don't mean to speak that way, then don't use absolutes. But then again, if you weren't using all of those absolutes, the anti-woke nonsense you are preaching about wouldn't seem quite so sinister, would it?

 

[KeepTalking]

As usual, you are wrong:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinx


Checking that reference, we find:
Salinas, Cristobal (2020). "The Complexity of the 'x' in Latinx : How Latinx/a/o Students Relate to, Identify With, and Understand the Term Latinx"

A white person did not come up with the term to describe brown people, but rather it came from a person of the ethnicity to which it was applied.

Nevertheless, despite the dubious wiki, it’s arrogant white wokesters that use it exclusively use it.

Then you should probably stop using it, as you are the only white person in this thread I have seen bring the term up.

 

[TomC]

As usual, you are wrong:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latinx


Checking that reference, we find:
Salinas, Cristobal (2020). "The Complexity of the 'x' in Latinx : How Latinx/a/o Students Relate to, Identify With, and Understand the Term Latinx"

A white person did not come up with the term to describe brown people, but rather it came from a person of the ethnicity to which it was applied.

Nevertheless, despite the dubious wiki, it’s arrogant white wokesters that use it exclusively use it.

Then you should probably stop using it, as you are the only white person in this thread I have seen bring the term up.

Dang that's racist. Applying different rules to people based on race.

Latinx isn't particularly common, but it's linguistically useful. It's a gender neutral word to refer to a group that includes both men and women. Hispanic languages aren't good at that.

It's rather like English speakers using the plural "they" to refer to a single person, because the person's gender is unknown and/or unimportant. "They" is gender neutral, even though the plural pronoun isn't accurate.
Tom

 

[KeepTalking]

Then you should probably stop using it, as you are the only white person in this thread I have seen bring the term up.

Dang that's racist. Applying different rules to people based on race.

Latinx isn't particularly common, but it's linguistically useful. It's a gender neutral word to refer to a group that includes both men and women. Hispanic languages aren't good at that.

It's rather like English speakers using the plural "they" to refer to a single person, because the person's gender is unknown and/or unimportant. "They" is gender neutral, even though the plural pronoun isn't accurate.
Tom

I did not apply any rules to the situation, they are TSwizzle's rules, I just advised him to abide by his own rules.