I don't think so. I'm just stuggling to see why being alert to racial prejudice and discrimination is bad thing. If you would like to explain why it is, please do.
...while Antifa is literally burning down cars and shops indiscriminately...
I said nothing about Antifa - why are you creating a straw man? Stick to woke.
If you would like to propose a new term that encompases the original defintion of woke and something else then feel free - hyer-woke, or something. Why do you want to change the defintion of words?
And, are you a fascist?
You're pretending to be wholly unfamiliar with the subject of culture wars, when in reality you are very familiar with them. That's disingenuous. The other poster seemed to have endless patience with you pretending "not to understand" and "not know" things which you know and understand perfectly well.
I don't know why you can't just stand up straight and argue for the things you believe in, instead of trying to play some mind games, lying and cheating? If your cause is worthy and your arguments are good, then surely you can achieve your goals without resorting to lies?
Same as a bunch of strange crazes that have cropped up over the years; witch trials, spanish inquisition, mccarthayism, 80s satanic child-abuse.
Say something or someone is woke and it's like yelling "communist" in the 50s.
It's a fantastic distraction mechanism for anyone wishing to deploy it and I'm just staggered that seemingly intelligent people go into a Pavlov's dog response as soon as they hear it.
The amazing thing what I've found is practially no-one can actually put into words what they think it means.
Yes they have. The other poster used hundreds of words to explain it to you. You just dismiss any explanations, just as you dismiss any concrete examples of the destruction woke has caused to society. You ask for stuff, then people give it to you, then you close your eyes and ears and say you still haven't seen any of that stuff you asked for.
chiefly US slang : aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)
In terms of concrete examples, going back over the thread so far all I can find (if I missed any please correct me):
) SDG&E driver.
) Boeing comms director.
*) Grievance studies affair
For the SDG&E driver, if he was performing some kind of white power salute in clearly marked company vehicle (and, let's be honest, nobody really knows if he did or not except him) then some kind of disciplinary action at work would be appropriate - it's pretty dispicable (unless you're a keen racist) and it brings the company into disrepute. A final written warning or something. But because we don't know if he did or not, a less severe meeting with HR, being reminded of the need not to bring any bad publicity to the company, we believe you are acting in good faith, but please don't do this knuckle cracking thing again - it looks bad.
What amazes me about it is that the labour laws are so lax that people can be summarily sacked without any due process. I understand that this is common practice in the US and happens all of the time. Seems to me that solution to this is to campaign for stronger employee rights. You can't uninvent smartphone cameras, and you can't stop people from posting things on twitter, but you can strengthen labour laws. This isn't a problem with woke, it's a problem with lax regulations.
As for the comms director, he resigned. That's just what comms directors do if they become the story. He wasn't sacked. If behind the scenes he was forced to resign then see previous point about labour laws and he should take them to an employment tribunal.
I find the Grievance studies thing hilarious. Clearly it is a wonderful hoax, and calls into question the quality of the review process at the journals and maybe the utility of social science (I've alwayss been a bit sceptical of calling it science, tbh). But seeing as it was a hoax and not really not a controlled experiment you can't really take away many conlcusions from it.
How anyone can read a title like "Human reactions to rape culture and queer performativity at urban dog parks in Portland, Oregon" or "Going in Through the Back Door: Challenging Straight Male Homohysteria, Transhysteria, and Transphobia Through Receptive Penetrative Sex Toy Use" without pissing themselves laughing is beyond me. I would certainly resign if I'd have waved that through without going back to the submitter and saying WTF is this.
If these are your "concrete examples of the destruction woke has caused to society", I just don't see it. An example of how lax labour laws are a bad thing, certainly. An example of calling (some) social sciences a science being a bit silly, yes.
But just look at the people crying woke all of the time, the likes of Fox and talk radio. The same people who want lax labour laws. The same people who undermine the science about vaccinations and have lead to tens (possibly hundreds?) of thousands of uneccessary deaths of people who would have survived had they got vaccinated. That is very real and raw destruction of human lives and society.
Fine, here's how I would define woke: a political movement focusing on issues related to racial and social justice.
Are you happy with this definition? How does this help in any way?
> But just look at the people crying woke all of the time ...
Again, two wrongs don't make a right. You can't just resort to a whataboutism argument every time somebody points out something wrong your camp has done.
> Are you happy with this definition? How does this help in any way?
Absolutely happy. It helps because now that I know that if someone says that they are anti-woke then by definition they are anti racial and social justice. Kind of what I suspected, but good to have it confirmed.
Look, I'm a middle aged, middle class, white, straight, cisgendered (whatever that means) male. It makes no difference to me. But I know that I'm not anti-woke.
> Again, two wrongs don't make a right. You can't just resort to a whataboutism argument every time somebody points out something wrong your camp has done.
It's not whataboutery, it's just an explanation. If you don't want people to be fired from a job for specious reasons then don't don't vote for those who want lax labour laws which allow people to be fired for specious reasons (or no reason at all - which is likely far more common than anything to do with white power signs, but doesn't make the news).
If the people who don't want stronger protections for employees also happen to be the ones who are telling you that woke is the problem (definitely not the lack of rights for employees!), then maybe recalibrate your bullshit detector.
If they are also the same people who are discouraging you from getting vaccinated or maybe bleach will cure covid then run like hell - they are the real sociopaths.
If you think that woke is problem, you're being gaslit.
If you don't support Antifa, you must be a literal nazi. If you don't support BLM, you must think black lives don't matter. If you don't support woke, you must be anti racial and social justice. We already visited this logical fallacy, I'm not gonna explain again what's wrong with it.
I might not support Antifa beause of (some of) their activities. But I'm anti-fascist because I'm not fascist.
I might not support BLM (although I'd struggle to see why) - I don't support them financially, if that counts. The opposite of beliving that black lives matter is believing that black lives don't mater.
There is no Woke. There is only woke.
Continue to vote for the Leopards Eating Faces party, and blame "woke" when leapords eat your face. As the LEF party encourages you to.
So then perhaps you might see how someone else might not support the woke movement because of some of their activities, even if they think the goals of the movement are good?
> The opposite of beliving that black lives matter is believing that black lives don't mater.
Yes, and? Where are the people saying "black lives don't matter"? Are you implying that people who don't support BLM (due to their activities of literally burning down cities) are thinking that black lives don't matter? Can you see how a person might agree with the statement "black lives matter", while simultaneously opposing a political movement that's literally named "black lives matter"?
> There is no Woke. There is only woke.
I have no idea what kind of pedantic nitpickery this is, but woke is a political movement just as BLM is, regardless of how you capitalize words.
However, if you're looking for offence where none was intended ... doesn't that mean that you're woke? That's what they do, right?
Let's just ... Finish.
(And the Italian guy, I wasn't mocking - certainly not his English - I found the first message difficult to undertand what he meant, so wanted to make sure that he was referring to what I thought he was before contining. God knows his English is better than my Itaian. Or Finnish).