Why is woke a dirty word now?

Post Reply New Topic

At the very least a person who is strongly anti-woke is trying repress underlying bigotry, I think this provides some type of safety valve to let off steam. Like somebody who like the concept of shooting people but decides to shoot furry animals instead and calls themselves a "recreational shooter"

"Woke" is a convenient new epithet to toss around.

It seems to mean "not racist".

If it doesnt mean that then...I am not sure what it does mean.

When a conservative dedicates their life to publishing literature/books on wokeness and can't define the word
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danidiplac ... oes-viral/
How do you expect the MAGA rabble to know any better

Kudos to Brihanna Joy Gray for her brilliant journalism

#NotAllAntiWokes

No, but enough, in particular of the ones who make being anti-woke part of their identity.

I suppose there's also the old professional edgelords (comedians) who wish to be relevant again but they're a pretty small fraction of vocal 'anti-wokes'.

There might also be an even smaller fraction of people with reasonable criticisms worth considering, but that doesn't make their overall point correct even if they raise some valid points to consider. Unfortunately for these people, they end up being used as cover by bigots, which only helps reinforce the appearance that it's all bigots, all the way down.

I wouldn't assume that to a person that they're trying to repress internally held bigotry. In fact, I'd go so far as to suggest some of the people who make those arguments do so because they don't recognize exactly what they're enabling.

If one is a free speech absolutist (for example) they'll likely be opposed to any potential infringements on speech, (likely) even some that have good reasons to exist. Often, they can be persuaded on a point by point basis, but there will still be examples where they just don't get why, or don't believe the cost is worth the benefit, etc.

A lot of criticisms against 'wokeism' from that angle boil down to not getting it, or not believing the cost is worth the benefit.

Now, it's possible other biases inform that cost/benefit analysis for some, but with others they might really believe it and be consistent. After all, it's not as though there aren't really people out there who believe everyone needs to grow a thicker skin, it's just that we might want to consider what leads people to believe that everyone should just get tougher to deal with the world being sh***y.

Yes they are a broad church with a common interest in perpetuating the status quo. Free speech is the freedom to say what they want against those deemed undesirable. Many comedians are hiding behind this ruse.

My take on woke:

“You got to be taught
Before it’s too late.
Before you are six
Or seven or eight
To HATE all the people
Your relatives HATE
You got to be carefully taught!
YOU GOT TO BE CAREFULLY TAUGHT!

Oscar Hammerstein II
from Rogers and Hammerstein’s South Pacific

Amazing how Hammerstein defined woke nearly 80 years ago.

As a matter of fact, the whole subtext of South Pacific deals with racism, based on James Micheners stories, Tales of the South Pacific

Frankly, I’m sick and tired of either political extremes hijacking words that had a completely different meaning, such as woke, which was past-tense of to wake, as well as gay, which meant to be happy.

I would not say that either. They may want change just not agree with all or some of the change "wokes" advocate for.



I have known a lot of people that fundamentally disagree with their relatives


"Woke" can still mean to wake such as "I woke up at 6 AM"

"Gay did mean to be happy. In my dad's 1946 High School Yearbook was inscribed "To be happy and gay". We had some chuckles over that one. By the '70s the meaning was similar but less specific than today's meaning. It meant what we call "LGBTQIA" today. By the 2000s it had become a slur again such as "He's so gay". While it did not necessarily mean being sexually attracted to other men but being a weak/lame person, the homophobic connotations were obvious.

Last edited by ASPartOfMe on 08 Jun 2023, 2:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

re: "hijacked words" and political "extremes"

This video explores the word "queer" (along with a bunch of other, related topics)

Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUgFQv4ocLI

I don't have time to watch a three hour video but the meaning of queer has changed. Up until the 1960s or so it meant weird or odd. By the '70s it was a homophobic slur. If you called somebody "queer" you had better be ready for that person to try and beat the living daylights out of you. Now it is a descriptor.

I don't use the word woke to be honest. I'm not even pc but I like to think that I can give people a fair chance no matter who they are or what they represent.

I think in the UK woke is misused a lot.

Some or in the case of 75 million all of what so called wokes say or do.

There are a few reasons. Here are some examples that spring to mind:

Every conspiracy theory I've ever seen has contained a call to "wake up!" Every ideology seems to think they are awoken to the truth and everyone else is asleep. I view such a call as a red flag that someone is trying to indoctrinate me.

Any term viewed as a positive by one side will be viewed as a negative by the other side.

When people go online, they're faced with multiple opinions that disagree with theirs. The reaction many people seem to have is to just have a short word they can use to dismiss these opinions without having to put any thought into it. I picture them having a sack of bricks with their one word printed on them and whenever they see any opinion they don't like, they just reach into their sack and hurl a brick at it. A less-politicized version of this is the term "hater." Someone criticized a movie you like? Just call them a "hater" and it automatically means they can't be right about anything.

This last bit is what bugs me about how the term "woke" is used (in contrast to what bugs Leftists about it). The blatant lack of thought behind it. In every social media discussion of a movie that underperformed at the box office, half the comments will be "You go woke, you go broke." Then again, I don't think most people on the internet will be convinced to change their minds by a more thoughtful argument. (I admit I myself can be very stubborn and set in my ways, too.) So I guess at least the "brick-throwers" aren't wasting their time by writing out multiple paragraphs that might be disregarded anyway. Then again, again, they write "Go woke, go broke," so often, they may actually be wasting just as much time as if they had.

The responses Leftists give to this term, I find to be just as pre-programmed and repetitive. Either they dismiss it as something that Right-wingers completely made up and can't define, or they claim it just means "common decency" and anyone who uses such a term -- indeed, anyone with any critical opinion of the Left at all -- is such an absolute mustache-twirling villain that they hate common decency. This is where I, as an atheist, see the more secular Leftist culture as crossing the line into religion. The idea that the Left is so purely, unquestionably GOOD that nobody can have a legitimate grievance with it.

The term that "woke" replaced, "SJW," was something I don't think Leftists ever called themselves. I always saw that as more sarcastic, referring to people who viewed themselves as brave social activists, risking life and limb for their cause, when in reality, they were just having petty internet squabbles in safety and comfort. However, over time, it became less specific and came to just mean "anyone with any mildly Leftist view," and the same thing happened to the term "woke." I rarely see anyone refer to themselves as "woke" now, except in a context like this thread, where they are refuting the conservative view of the term as a negative.

Responding to an older message in this thread:

“The illiberal wing of the progressive movement” requires that you type more characters, but is that really more cumbersome than responding to the confusion that results when you use the word "woke"?

These days, most people who use the word "woke" (in a negative way) are right wingers. They are not moderates like you. They are not objecting just to the illiberal attitudes of the more fanatical leftists. In many cases they are objecting, for example, to the very existence of transgender people.

Earlier, I made the following suggestion:


To which you responded:


You do have the ability to invent a new term. You would have to define it every time you use it, but, again, would that really be more cumbersome than responding to the confusion that results from using the word "woke"?


Merely signaling that there are issues with the term does not do enough to clear up the confusion.

Exactly. "Woke" has indeed come to mean just "anyone with any mildly Leftist view." That is why it should NOT be used by moderates to refer only to the more fanatical, illiberal leftists.

Most people here know what I mean even if they disagree.

I guess I could try and bring back "regressive left" that did not fly the first time.

But I don't know influential people with the money and knowledge to make a replacement term go viral.

Unlike autistics, the "wokes" quickly abandoned the term. Why should I help them out when they refuse to help themselves?