Also in the News - Part 2

[ClaphamFox]

3 hours ago, Captain... said:

What do you think woke is?

I suppose when people moan about ‘woke’ they’re usually objecting to how smug and didactic it can be. There is nothing inherently woke about caring about social issues. But very often wokeness isn’t about the issues themselves: it’s about using those issues to create a kind of performance art in which demonstrating how well you understand something is more important than the actual business of doing something about it. As long as I publicly show that I fully subscribe to the correct view on a certain issue, I’m ok; if I have reservations or criticisms or even just questions, it’s because I haven’t sufficiently understood it - ie, I’m just not woke enough. Inevitably, this ends up being pretty thought-terminating: context, nuance and mitigating circumstances are not permitted - they’re just evidence that you don’t fully ‘get it’ yet. It’s a totalitarian way of thinking whose primary aim is to scare people into conforming than actually persuading them of anything. In reality, it’s more likely to make people more entrenched in their original positions, building walls and creating division. 
 

I don’t think many people object to others being passionate about social justice; it’s the way that passion so often becomes hectoring, inflexible and authoritarian that they get annoyed by.

Edited 23 February 2023 by ClaphamFox

[EastAnglianFox]

16 hours ago, Tommy Fresh said:

How do you do that from a distance?

 

Telephone 

[Jon the Hat]

46 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

I suppose when folk moan about ‘woke’ they’re usually objecting to how didactic and smug it can be. There is nothing inherently woke about caring about social issues. But very often wokeness isn’t about the issues themselves: it’s about using those issues are used to create a kind of performance art in which demonstrating how well you understand something is more important than the actual business of doing something about it. As long as I publicly show that I fully subscribe to the correct view on a certain issue, I’m ok; if I have reservations or criticisms or even just questions, it’s because I haven’t sufficiently understood it - ie, I’m just not woke enough. Inevitably, this ends up being pretty thought-terminating: context, nuance and mitigating circumstances are not permitted - they’re just evidence that you don’t fully ‘get it’ yet. It’s a totalitarian way of thinking whose primary aim is to scare people into conforming than actually persuading them of anything. In fact, it’s more likely to make people more entrenched in their original positions, building walls and creating division. 
 

I don’t think many people object to others being passionate about social justice; it’s the way that passion so often becomes hectoring, inflexible and authoritarian that they get annoyed by.

Yes a fair summation.  I wouldn't these days call woke doing something sensibly and rightly inclusive like this, although I accept the original meaning would have covered it.  

[Tommy Fresh]

36 minutes ago, EastAnglianFox said:

 

Telephone 

I imagine if you're looking to analyse someone you don't do it over the phone 😂

[Captain...]

1 hour ago, ClaphamFox said:

I suppose when folk moan about ‘woke’ they’re usually objecting to how didactic and smug it can be. There is nothing inherently woke about caring about social issues. But very often wokeness isn’t about the issues themselves: it’s about using those issues are used to create a kind of performance art in which demonstrating how well you understand something is more important than the actual business of doing something about it. As long as I publicly show that I fully subscribe to the correct view on a certain issue, I’m ok; if I have reservations or criticisms or even just questions, it’s because I haven’t sufficiently understood it - ie, I’m just not woke enough. Inevitably, this ends up being pretty thought-terminating: context, nuance and mitigating circumstances are not permitted - they’re just evidence that you don’t fully ‘get it’ yet. It’s a totalitarian way of thinking whose primary aim is to scare people into conforming than actually persuading them of anything. In fact, it’s more likely to make people more entrenched in their original positions, building walls and creating division. 
 

I don’t think many people object to others being passionate about social justice; it’s the way that passion so often becomes hectoring, inflexible and authoritarian that they get annoyed by.

It's interesting you focus on the negative aspects of woke. The Wikipedia entry is quite interesting reading: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke

My interpretation is that wokeness is very distinct from activism, it is about your own personal understanding of social issues and particularly language. Activists are very different and often have an extremist ideology rather than a woke ideology.

 

The difference, for me, between being woke and anti woke can be summed up by a person's reaction to reading this:

 

 

If you think oh that's interesting I will try not to use crazy in my everyday language you're woke, if you think "that's stupid I've always used that word, and it's my favourite Seal song" then you're not woke and if you think "I'm going to jump on twitter and slam this ridiculousness and make sure I use crazy more." You're anti-woke.

 

The words have changed 30 over the years, 30 years ago coloured was generally acceptable. A more modern example is actress, I still struggle not to say actress for a female actor.

 

There are all the associated issues of representation, visibility, equality which are related to woke ideology but very few of us have any real power to make a real difference on those issues. All we can control is what we do and say and this constant attempt to belittle the concept of trying to say and do the right thing is just bizarre.

 

We should all try to be more woke not wage a war on it.

[marbles]

22 minutes ago, Captain... said:

It's interesting you focus on the negative aspects of woke. The Wikipedia entry is quite interesting reading: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke

My interpretation is that wokeness is very distinct from activism, it is about your own personal understanding of social issues and particularly language. Activists are very different and often have an extremist ideology rather than a woke ideology.

 

The difference, for me, between being woke and anti woke can be summed up by a person's reaction to reading this:

 

 

If you think oh that's interesting I will try not to use crazy in my everyday language you're woke, if you think "that's stupid I've always used that word, and it's my favourite Seal song" then you're not woke and if you think "I'm going to jump on twitter and slam this ridiculousness and make sure I use crazy more." You're anti-woke.

 

The words have changed 30 over the years, 30 years ago coloured was generally acceptable. A more modern example is actress, I still struggle not to say actress for a female actor.

 

There are all the associated issues of representation, visibility, equality which are related to woke ideology but very few of us have any real power to make a real difference on those issues. All we can control is what we do and say and this constant attempt to belittle the concept of trying to say and do the right thing is just bizarre.

 

We should all try to be more woke not wage a war on it.

And here is where I think the difference lies.  Woke (to me) is recognizing something that could be an issue, and making the conscious effort to change.

Where the problem comes in, is when you (for example) become Woke to something, and then demand that I make the change also.

But it doesn’t just stop there.  Not only do you demand I change, but then demand that I too go overboard with said change.  It’s not enough to recognize that the word “crazy” can be harmful, but I now must make everyone else also recognize and comply.

 

Its up to me to decide how I feel about issues.  Not you, nor anyone else.  Just like it’s not up to me to tell you how to think/act/behave.

 

People have taken things too far, and completely clouded the meaning of the word.

 

 

Just my thoughts.

Edited 23 February 2023 by marbles

[Dunge]

16 minutes ago, Captain... said:

It's interesting you focus on the negative aspects of woke. The Wikipedia entry is quite interesting reading: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woke

My interpretation is that wokeness is very distinct from activism, it is about your own personal understanding of social issues and particularly language. Activists are very different and often have an extremist ideology rather than a woke ideology.

 

The difference, for me, between being woke and anti woke can be summed up by a person's reaction to reading this:

 

 

If you think oh that's interesting I will try not to use crazy in my everyday language you're woke, if you think "that's stupid I've always used that word, and it's my favourite Seal song" then you're not woke and if you think "I'm going to jump on twitter and slam this ridiculousness and make sure I use crazy more." You're anti-woke.

 

The words have changed 30 over the years, 30 years ago coloured was generally acceptable. A more modern example is actress, I still struggle not to say actress for a female actor.

 

There are all the associated issues of representation, visibility, equality which are related to woke ideology but very few of us have any real power to make a real difference on those issues. All we can control is what we do and say and this constant attempt to belittle the concept of trying to say and do the right thing is just bizarre.

 

We should all try to be more woke not wage a war on it.

That’s an interesting example. Based on it, I fall into the category of “not woke” because I don’t see so much wrong with the word. If it’s something more deliberate and insulting like “retard” then that’s another matter; I can fully appreciate why we’d seek to phase that out. But “crazy” seems like an incredibly light thing to sidestep to the point of effectively claiming superiority over most of the populace on the basis that “I don’t use that word that others might, because I have greater intelligence and empathy, which makes me better than them”. That to me is the conceit at the heart of wokeness, in that it often comes across to me not as sensitivity but as oneupmanship.

 

Essentially, if you don’t want to use it then fine, but is it really a word that deserves a wider taboo? Or are people just seeing an insult where there isn’t one?

 

On the other hand, English is a language that changes and always has changed, so maybe in years to come the word “crazy” will indeed be looked down upon and I’ll be wondering why I ever wrote in support of it.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, marbles said:

And here is where I think the difference lies.  Woke (to me) is recognizing something that could be an issue, and making the conscious effort to change.

Where the problem comes in, is when you (for example) become Woke to something, and then demand that I make the change also.

But it doesn’t just stop there.  Not only do you demand I change, but then demand that I too go overboard with said change.  It’s not enough to recognize that the word “crazy” can be harmful, but I now must make everyone else also recognize and comply.

 

Its up to me to decide how I feel about issues.  Not you, nor anyone else.  Just like it’s not up to me to tell you how to think/act/behave.

 

People have taken things too far, and completely clouded the meaning of the word.

 

 

Just my thoughts.

In an ideal world where there was more willingness to socially progress, that would result in a pleasant equilibrium and is the way things should be.

 

However, it's rather clear that our world is far from ideal in that regard.

 

People holding social positions that are, shall we say, nostalgic, isn't a problem in of itself - but those selfsame folks are often willing to *act* upon those positions - with a rather greater cost in terms of harm than the daft "woke" activists pushing too far in the other direction.

 

The worst thing is, as others have pointed out, that they have been able to weaponise the attitude of those activists, aloof and pretentious as it often is, as a tool to get enough people against the whole idea of social progress so they can continue causing that harm.

 

Social prigress needs to happen as a matter of both moral and practical necessity, but those pushing for that progress need to get smarter at actually getting it done, and frankly, work on distinguishing between those who can be convinced of that and those who will get in the way of it no matter what. Alienating the former by thinking them the latter won't work.

 

But it does still need to be done.

[bovril]

For me wokeness connotes that very Anglophone, slightly puritanical idea that certain words, acts or beliefs are inherently problematic and should be avoided, and that those who fail to avoid them should do public penance. It's very stifling and anxiety-inducing to constantly worry whether the words you're using or the beliefs you hold are offensive or socially-unacceptable in some way (e.g. the example with "crazy" above) and it is something noticeably different about the UK after you've lived abroad. 

Edited 23 February 2023 by bovril

[filbertway]

I can't be the only person fascinated to see what a down syndrome lego character looks like?

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, bovril said:

For me wokeness connotes that very Anglophone, slightly puritanical idea that certain words, acts or beliefs are inherently problematic and should be avoided, and that those who fail to avoid them should do public penance. It's very stifling and anxiety-inducing to constantly worry whether the words you're using or the beliefs you hold are offensive or socially-unacceptable in some way (e.g. the example with "crazy" above) and it is something noticeably different about the UK after you've lived abroad. 

And as anyone who has seen a certain popular science fiction franchise can attest, fear is the path to the Dark Side.

 

So yes, there needs to be much less stick and more carrot, if the necessary progress is to happen.

 

Of course, an additional complication is that sometimes those pushing for the idea of the aforementioned penance (good word use btw, it applies) are sometimes those who have been marginalised and/or hurt in the past and s such they want the change to be quick and drastic to stop them from being hurt anymore. Dealing with that at the same time... well, if anyone has any idea they'd be up for a Nobel Peace Prize (and not a ridiculous one like Kissingers).

[Captain...]

48 minutes ago, marbles said:

And here is where I think the difference lies.  Woke (to me) is recognizing something that could be an issue, and making the conscious effort to change.

Where the problem comes in, is when you (for example) become Woke to something, and then demand that I make the change also.

But it doesn’t just stop there.  Not only do you demand I change, but then demand that I too go overboard with said change.  It’s not enough to recognize that the word “crazy” can be harmful, but I now must make everyone else also recognize and comply.

 

Its up to me to decide how I feel about issues.  Not you, nor anyone else.  Just like it’s not up to me to tell you how to think/act/behave.

 

People have taken things too far, and completely clouded the meaning of the word.

 

 

Just my thoughts.

Of course and that is where conflict rises, I try not to exert my wokeness on others I don't think I have ever pulled anyone up on their language in real life or on the internet, unless it is intentionally offensive. 

 

I picked crazy as the example because it really is a very common word in our language with multiple uses. However when an expert in a field says that it is damaging to a minority group I stop and think. I still use it as a word you can probably find examples on here if you were that way inclined. I still try and understand why some groups might find that offensive and when I can I try to be aware of my language.

 

Actress is another one, and you see the ridiculousness of taking woke ideology to an illogical conclusion at the Oscars. Get rid of the best actress category, have 1 non gendered category then only nominate men.

 

The problem is woke is like vegan, it is inherently right, but nobody likes to be lectured about what is right, however this new war on woke, embracing and celebrating anti-wokeness is just bizarre. 

[Free Falling Foxes]

17 minutes ago, bovril said:

For me wokeness connotes that very Anglophone, slightly puritanical idea that certain words, acts or beliefs are inherently problematic and should be avoided, and that those who fail to avoid them should do public penance. It's very stifling and anxiety-inducing to constantly worry whether the words you're using or the beliefs you hold are offensive or socially-unacceptable in some way (e.g. the example with "crazy" above) and it is something noticeably different about the UK after you've lived abroad. 

Indeed.

During a team meeting, a colleague referred to a black gentleman she had been referred.

As soon as she said 'black' she took a sharp intake of breath, put her had to her mouth and said sorry. 'Can I use that word?'

The irony was, my colleague is the most dark skinned 'person of colour' you could ever meet.

Even she was nervous of acceptable language.

[Dunge]

5 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Of course and that is where conflict rises, I try not to exert my wokeness on others I don't think I have ever pulled anyone up on their language in real life or on the internet, unless it is intentionally offensive. 

 

I picked crazy as the example because it really is a very common word in our language with multiple uses. However when an expert in a field says that it is damaging to a minority group I stop and think. I still use it as a word you can probably find examples on here if you were that way inclined. I still try and understand why some groups might find that offensive and when I can I try to be aware of my language.

 

Actress is another one, and you see the ridiculousness of taking woke ideology to an illogical conclusion at the Oscars. Get rid of the best actress category, have 1 non gendered category then only nominate men.

 

The problem is woke is like vegan, it is inherently right, but nobody likes to be lectured about what is right, however this new war on woke, embracing and celebrating anti-wokeness is just bizarre. 

Strongly disagree. 

[Captain...]

11 minutes ago, filbertway said:

I can't be the only person fascinated to see what a down syndrome lego character looks like?

You're not, I mean that's an absolute minefield of accidental offense.

 

This is the constant conflict I live with, that comment made my dark side laugh out loud. I love the most tasteless and offensive jokes and I would never censor anything for the purposes of humour, as long as it is actually funny. I counter that with knowing the right time and place to be sensitive, when to resist making that joke that is begging to be made and where and when I can let rip.

[Captain...]

6 minutes ago, Free Falling Foxes said:

Indeed.

During a team meeting, a colleague referred to a black gentleman she had been referred.

As soon as she said 'black' she took a sharp intake of breath, put her had to her mouth and said sorry. 'Can I use that word?'

The irony was, my colleague is the most dark skinned 'person of colour' you could ever meet.

Even she was nervous of acceptable language.

And that's where we need to not vilify people for making an honest mistake around language.

[bovril]

2 minutes ago, Captain... said:

And that's where we need to not vilify people for making an honest mistake around language.

what's the mistake?

[Captain...]

2 minutes ago, Dunge said:

Strongly disagree. 

It is clearly right in terms of environmental and animal cruelty. Watch carnage by Simon Amstel it is brilliant in the way it subverts our attitudes to meat and how wrong it is to capture living creatures force them to reproduce and slaughter them.

 

However I love a steak and bacon and chicken is so versatile.

[Captain...]

Just now, bovril said:

what's the mistake?

I wasn't saying she made a mistake, but she was worried about saying the wrong thing in case someone called her out on it.

[bovril]

4 minutes ago, Captain... said:

I wasn't saying she made a mistake, but she was worried about saying the wrong thing in case someone called her out on it.

yes the problem is that people are worried they are making 'mistakes' when speaking naturally. Not a good turn of events really. 

[filbertway]

24 minutes ago, Captain... said:

You're not, I mean that's an absolute minefield of accidental offense.

 

This is the constant conflict I live with, that comment made my dark side laugh out loud. I love the most tasteless and offensive jokes and I would never censor anything for the purposes of humour, as long as it is actually funny. I counter that with knowing the right time and place to be sensitive, when to resist making that joke that is begging to be made and where and when I can let rip.

I have the same, I think I've found a level I'm happy with.

 

For me my comfortable spot is that if I'm saying something to someone that is genuinely hurting their feelings then I'll stop doing that out of respect and adjust my behaviour when around that person. I'm really not interested in catering for people who are "offended" on other peoples behalves though. 

 

I tend to avoid people I don't feel comfortable being myself around though as I don't like the tension of wondering what I can get away with

 

I don't want to genuinely upset people and make them feel like sh*t, that's really the end goal. If I'm with a majority of people I don't know, I go into boring safe mode until I get a read on the unknowns. Otherwise I'll adjust how I talk to the people I'm talking to. Everyone gets treated with a base level of respect though, then that can increase/decrease based as I get to know them.

[LiberalFox]

I'm not a huge fan of the word 'woke' as it came from the black community in the USA from the phrase 'stay woke' which was about being mindful of the dangers of systemic racism. So it was a community facing an ongoing trauma and trying to cope with that. Now the term seems to have been appropriated to describe 'very "liberal"' people, and I put liberal in quotations because it's more of a certain type of 'right on' person than someone who is necessarily liberal politically. 

 

The worst part is the people now flaunting the label 'woke' are putting actually oppressed groups into the 'activist' box.

 

Because the 'woke liberal' sees himself as an enlightened go-between to negotiate on behalf of an oppressed group with their oppressors but in practice a lot of what he does is to either appropriate the struggles of that group as his own without facing the real lived consequences of that oppression or he tells the oppressed group that they are too 'extreme' and need to be more moderate. 

 

From a trans perspective I'm finding a lot of the woke stuff is potentially harmful even if well-meaning. The main barrier to trans acceptance is simply that the majority of people alive today don't understand what a trans person is. I even have a suspicion that may include some people who are calling themselves trans although I would never pretend to know better than another person what they are experiencing. 

 

A significant portion of people will behave reactively when confronted with something that feels weird and possibly threatening. A lot of woke stuff like trying to make everything gender neutral, putting a trans character in every tv show or computer game, painting trans flags absolutely everywhere etc just makes it feel like this is major change to society when all trans people want is human rights, hopefully an increasing acceptance in society as just something that affects a few people and better healthcare.

 

Obviously a concentrated and deliberate attempt to make trans people a right wing culture war issue by the Murdoch press and other associates is a huge part of that problem too.

 

Honestly if anyone ever feels like they are worried about offending someone from a minority group and like they don't want to interact with them because of that, I really recommend working through that and considering just asking them if you aren't sure about a particular word. It really helps to know what a slur actually is and why you should want to not use slurs in general speech. By choosing to not use offensive language you make yourself seem like a safe person to interact with. If you insist on using slurs then anyone from that group knows you either are a bigot or you have an anti-social personality in general. I won't say there aren't people from minorities who get overly offended because I can't speak for everyone. Some people just have had a lot of traumatic experiences and aren't in the mood for giving grace. But a reasonable person in a healthy frame of mind isn't going to scream at you or call you names just because you said something offensive out of ignorance. Being a bigot or abusive in general is a pattern of behaviour, saying the wrong words or laughing at a joke doesn't make someone a bigot.

 

 

[Countryfox]

Well that’s cleared that up ..  

[Captain...]

15 minutes ago, LiberalFox said:

I'm not a huge fan of the word 'woke' as it came from the black community in the USA from the phrase 'stay woke' which was about being mindful of the dangers of systemic racism. So it was a community facing an ongoing trauma and trying to cope with that. Now the term seems to have been appropriated to describe 'very "liberal"' people, and I put liberal in quotations because it's more of a certain type of 'right on' person than someone who is necessarily liberal politically. 

 

The worst part is the people now flaunting the label 'woke' are putting actually oppressed groups into the 'activist' box.

 

Because the 'woke liberal' sees himself as an enlightened go-between to negotiate on behalf of an oppressed group with their oppressors but in practice a lot of what he does is to either appropriate the struggles of that group as his own without facing the real lived consequences of that oppression or he tells the oppressed group that they are too 'extreme' and need to be more moderate. 

 

From a trans perspective I'm finding a lot of the woke stuff is potentially harmful even if well-meaning. The main barrier to trans acceptance is simply that the majority of people alive today don't understand what a trans person is. I even have a suspicion that may include some people who are calling themselves trans although I would never pretend to know better than another person what they are experiencing. 

 

A significant portion of people will behave reactively when confronted with something that feels weird and possibly threatening. A lot of woke stuff like trying to make everything gender neutral, putting a trans character in every tv show or computer game, painting trans flags absolutely everywhere etc just makes it feel like this is major change to society when all trans people want is human rights, hopefully an increasing acceptance in society as just something that affects a few people and better healthcare.

 

Obviously a concentrated and deliberate attempt to make trans people a right wing culture war issue by the Murdoch press and other associates is a huge part of that problem too.

 

Honestly if anyone ever feels like they are worried about offending someone from a minority group and like they don't want to interact with them because of that, I really recommend working through that and considering just asking them if you aren't sure about a particular word. It really helps to know what a slur actually is and why you should want to not use slurs in general speech. By choosing to not use offensive language you make yourself seem like a safe person to interact with. If you insist on using slurs then anyone from that group knows you either are a bigot or you have an anti-social personality in general. I won't say there aren't people from minorities who get overly offended because I can't speak for everyone. Some people just have had a lot of traumatic experiences and aren't in the mood for giving grace. But a reasonable person in a healthy frame of mind isn't going to scream at you or call you names just because you said something offensive out of ignorance. Being a bigot or abusive in general is a pattern of behaviour, saying the wrong words or laughing at a joke doesn't make someone a bigot.

 

 

I think there is a difference between trying to have a woke/right-on/liberal outlook and woke activism and associated things like cancel culture. I don't think extremists/activists should dissuade people from adopting the kinder side of an 'ideology'. I don't agree with extinction rebellion but I'm still going to drive a hybrid, recycle and cut down on waste as much as I can. As a catchall term it does seem to come to mean anything that falls into a very wide range of 'liberal views'. 

 

Although I do think that woke-activism has largely come about or at least come to the fore in response to anti-woke antagonists. Either that or bell ends on twitter.

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, Captain... said:

I think there is a difference between trying to have a woke/right-on/liberal outlook and woke activism and associated things like cancel culture. I don't think extremists/activists should dissuade people from adopting the kinder side of an 'ideology'. I don't agree with extinction rebellion but I'm still going to drive a hybrid, recycle and cut down on waste as much as I can. As a catchall term it does seem to come to mean anything that falls into a very wide range of 'liberal views'. 

 

Although I do think that woke-activism has largely come about or at least come to the fore in response to anti-woke antagonists. Either that or bell ends on twitter.

I reckon it's difficult to say this or the opposite with much certainty, especially if you consider such things merely the latest phase in division between those who want social progress and those who do not since time immemorial.