With respect, I haven't asked for an essay, just an update to the definition. Simply amend the following line from Merriam Webster:
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.