Of Course You Know What "Woke" Means
The title for this thread was stolen from the Freddie deBoer blog/article quoted and linked below. I couldn't come up wi
Women at the very top of any organization aren't representative of women as a whole.Anyway it can't be random that it's economically rightwing parties that elevate women to the top much more than leftwing parties.Thatcher of course but also Benazir Butto in Pakistan, Sonya Gandhi in India, Meloni on Italy.as with everything else, the right opens the doors and the left closes th
Counterexamples: Christina Fernandez de Kirchner, the new Mexican president Sheinbaum or whatever her name is, Dilma Rouseff....can't think of any others but I'm sure there are at least a couple more.
*Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo
Paul Graham just published the origins of wokeness
https://paulgraham.com/woke.html
...
Let's start with the easier problem. Is there a simple, principled way to deal with wokeness? I think there is: to use the customs we already have for dealing with religion. Wokeness is effectively a religion, just with God replaced by protected classes. It's not even the first religion of this kind; Marxism had a similar form, with God replaced by the masses. [15] And we already have well-established customs for dealing with religion within organizations. You can express your own religious identity and explain your beliefs, but you can't call your coworkers infidels if they disagree, or try to ban them from saying things that contradict its doctrines, or insist that the organization adopt yours as its official religion.
...
If we have genuine pluralism, I think we'll be safe from future outbreaks of woke intolerance. Wokeness itself won't go away. There will for the foreseeable future continue to be pockets of woke zealots inventing new moral fashions. The key is not to let them treat their fashions as normative. They can change what their coreligionists are allowed to say every few months if they like, but they mustn't be allowed to change what we're allowed to say. [17]
The advantage of being a modern conservative is that you can stomp angrily into every every culture war debate there is, hold extremely bombastic opinions for how people should act and think, and launch into as many hot takes and diabetries as you wish about people who are different.
If someone responds to you and their view is different, you can laugh at them for being pathetic enough to care about the culture war, chuckle about how they constantly have to bring up the culture war and roll your eyes at all the virtue signalling.
Bonus points for loudly bringing up social media posts you "don't care about".
The advantage of being a modern conservative is that you can stomp angrily into every every culture war debate there is, hold extremely bombastic opinions for how people should act and think, and launch into as many hot takes and diabetries as you wish about people who are different. If someone responds to you and their view is different, you can laugh at them for being path
I should note here that my point isn't that it is wrong to have opinions about norms and culture.
What is wrong and destructive is to have such views, and often strong ones, but then pretend that you aren't actually part of the debate. When you have strong opinions about others and how they to act, think or talk and this is part of your politics, you should own that. I'm no fan of progressives that focus overly much on expression as opposed to intent, but at least they actually express their opinion on the issue and aren't shy about wanting people to act differently.
That's great, deuces, but most people aren't on the extremes you pointed out here.
The reasonable hot take is to not particularly care how weird people choose to behave in their private lives, but do it at home and don't make other people participate in your kinks. I think most detractors live in this area of the acceptance spectrum, and not the bombastic shouting area.
If, for instance, we suddenly had a very public movement of sub/dom being the latest hotness and you had a bunch of people out in public "walking" their wives and husbands, I think you'd have a similar societal response. Far left would say it's fine, they're just expressing themselves. Far right would have an aneurism. People in the middle would say, "wtf man, this is a Wendy's. Do that **** at home, and don't demand that I start calling you master and slave when we're at work on a Zoom call."
People who participate in the above generally know how to keep it subtle and out of the public eye. Follow their example and nobody will care what you do in your spare time. And definitely don't start calling everyone else Nazis if they call you out for walking your gagged wife through a family restaurant.
Look at this woke bullshit. The country sure went too far left since the good old days.
Broken YouTube LinkAll true, however memory dies slowly in the internet era and next cycle, there will still be a majority of (D)’s who in one way or another were party to this. - and won’t be able to “… no no no see what we REALLY meant was…” their way out of it. This last election just stamped it.
How did this happen? Wow!
That's great, deuces, but most people aren't on the extremes you pointed out here.The reasonable hot take is to not particularly care how weird people choose to behave in their private lives, but do it at home and don't make other people participate in your kinks. I think most detractors live in this area of the acceptance spectrum, and not the bombastic shouting area.If, for
I don't think progressives have done their cause any favors by pushing for approval, when they should focus more on tolerance. Approval would sort itself out, once tolerance is the majority view.
It has led to this weird phenomena were you see a large swath of progressive attention and talking points being aimed at people saying something wrong rather than focusing on people intending harm. It also makes it easy to portray their cause as dogmatic, inflexible and controversial. Even violent extremists seem to fly under the progressive radar, while they as a group seems more intent on being angry at whatever troll post some influencer or politician posted last week. Posts and statements meant to provoke just such reactions, to gain social media engagement.
While they can't be blamed for the counter culture that has come about, they left the door wide for it to gain popularity for the 10+ years, and in recent years we're even seeing the rise of violent extremism that targets people for being different.
I don't think progressives have done their cause any favors by pushing for approval, when they should focus more on tolerance. Approval would sort itself out, once tolerance is the majority view.It has led to this weird phenomena were you see a large swath of progressive attention and talking points being aimed at people saying something wrong rather than focusing on people int
I am not sure what you mean here.
At the end you either allow hormones and surgery for minors or not.
You either allow individuals with a dick in women prison or not.
You either allow individuals with a dick in women sports or not.
You either allow public money to be spent to prop up hiring, education or anything else of women and racial minorities , or not.
You either allow affirmative action or you don't.
What's the difference between "tolerance" and "approval"? There is none.
And btw opposing all of that in full isn't violent extremism
I am not sure what you mean here.At the end you either allow hormones and surgery for minors or not.You either allow individuals with a dick in women prison or not.You either allow individuals with a dick in women sports or not.You either allow public money to be spent to prop up hiring, education or anything else of women and racial minorities , or not.You either allow affirma
It’s a hill the democrats want to die on Crazy
I am not sure what you mean here.At the end you either allow hormones and surgery for minors or not. - Largely allowedYou either allow individuals with a dick in women prison or not. - Universally allowedYou either allow individuals with a dick in women sports or not. - Not allowed anymore, but statistically speaking shouldn't be an issueYou either allow public money to be spen
You didn't do a great job of expressing your point. Maybe you should express your thoughts on trans people and black people more clearly
You didn't do a great job of expressing your point. Maybe you should express your thoughts on trans people and black people more clearly
? It's about legal effects, so there is no in between.
You are eitgher oppose those legal choices or not.
My position is well known: for trans people, no law should force anyone to treat them differently than their biological sex. For minorities, no law or regulation should ever in any way or form , treat minorities better without exception.
For women, i do accept several privileged legal treatments.
Does this not thoroughly describe you as well?
This is the personification of Deuces point. Are you not involved in this conversation yourself? Do you not hold passionate beliefs that you've argued agressively?
What's the difference if you at the end are against people with dicks to be allowed in women prison, if you argue the point "passionately" or very detachedly? nothing at all. The only thing that matters is if you are in favour or against that specific legal choice (and many others i listed, plus others i didn't list).
Deuce point is completly irrelevant, the only thing that ever matters is which set of legal mandates passes or not.
Does this not thoroughly describe you as well?
This is the personification of Deuces point. Are you not involved in this conversation yourself? Do you not hold passionate beliefs that you've argued agressively?
no not at all I am willing to compromise and say we must treat the trans community with kindness, denounce bullying and any type of discrimination but not allow Penises in women; sports, women's prisons and cut the nonsense that men menstrate and can get pregnant and leave the kids alone till their adults
The advantage of being a modern conservative is that you can stomp angrily into every every culture war debate there is, hold extremely bombastic opinions for how people should act and think, and launch into as many hot takes and diabetries as you wish about people who are different. If someone responds to you and their view is different, you can laugh at them for being path
Magnificent
no not at all I am willing to compromise and say we must treat the trans community with kindness, denounce bullying and any type of discrimination but not allow Penises in women; sports, women's prisons and cut the nonsense that men menstrate and can get pregnant and leave the kids alone till their adults
Do you think trans men don't menstruate and can't get pregnant? This isn't really a debatable point. It's demonstrably true.
Do you think trans men don't menstruate and can't get pregnant? This isn't really a debatable point. It's demonstrably true.
We just don't think the word man should be used to discuss someone who can menstruate.
And as much as you should be free in your private life to use whatever word Yoh prefer, the legal system shouldn't .
So any university getting federal funds should be mandated to use normal (non woke) words and expressions, police should be, judges, and so on.
When I was 20 in Italy, Trans man was a MAN who wanted to live as a woman.
A Man (something immutable that no matter what you think or do can never change), that is also trans.
You want to use different words invented by radical leftists, you cannot force them on us though.
Basically man and woman should only be used for the biological sex. You want to superimpose the existence of *gender* above biological sex, use other words to define it
Then make that argument. The other argument is just stupid. No one is saying biological males menstruate or give birth, but the argument as presented is dishonestly capitalizing on that absurdity to support this argument. I think the argument that trans men aren't men is stupid and narrow-minded, but at least it is honest. Saying "hurr durr men can't get pregnant dummy" is just dishonest BS, not that I expect less from you lot.
I didn't read the rest of your post because I couldn't care less about it.
Then make that argument. The other argument is just stupid. No one is saying biological males menstruate or give birth, but the argument as presented is dishonestly capitalizing on that absurdity to support this argument. I think the argument that trans men aren't men is stupid and narrow-minded, but at least it is honest. Saying "hurr durr men can't get pregnant dummy" is just
It's not an argument, it's a semantic definition.
No, it's not. You just don't like the concept of gender, and I couldn't care less about the opinion of fascists. Argue with yourself about it, because I won't be responding to you.
No, even with gender you should simply use different words for genders.
It's absolutely insane to use the same word for gender and for biological sex.
But it's done on purpose by you radical activists
