Wokeness

[The Slim Reaper]

As this is obviously the biggest insult on this island at the moment, I'd like for some of the folks who believe it's a negative, to explain exactly what it means, to help the rest of us, and me in particular, understand exactly why it's a problem.

Anyone is welcome to contribute, but I only want to read your personal opinions, not daily mail comments or telegraph articles.

[arista]

I do not like the word.

Ban it.

[Kate!]

I do not like the word.

Ban it.

why Arista. Its just a word for social or racial injustice awareness.

[The Slim Reaper]

I do not like the word.

Ban it.

But I've seen you use it regularly. What are woke people standing for/against that is so offensive to you? It's primarily a rw word, as no one calls themselves woke, it's only ever used as an insult these days.

[arista]

But I've seen you use it regularly. What are woke people standing for/against that is so offensive to you? It's primarily a rw word, as no one calls themselves woke, it's only ever used as an insult these days.


Sure
I just do not like it
Imported from USA

[arista]

why Arista. Its just a word for social or racial injustice awareness.


If only that was all it was used for

[The Slim Reaper]

Sure
I just do not like it
Imported from USA

So what does it mean?

What are woke people standing for/against?

[arista]

2. adjective
Someone who is woke is very aware of social and political unfairness.

[Kate!]

2. adjective
Someone who is woke is very aware of social and political unfairness.

That's surely a positive thing though. Not at all negative.

[arista]

That's surely a positive thing though. Not at all negative.



But the Word
Woke
is used for to many things

[Crimson Dynamo]

As this is obviously the biggest insult on this island at the moment, I'd like for some of the folks who believe it's a negative, to explain exactly what it means, to help the rest of us, and me in particular, understand exactly why it's a problem.

Anyone is welcome to contribute, but I only want to read your personal opinions, not daily mail comments or telegraph articles.

who says its the biggest insult?

the dictionary definition is:

a state of being aware, especially of social problems such as racism and inequality:

His latest record displays his wokeness.

More examples
Wokeness encompasses the need to search for more knowledge, understanding and truth in order to challenge injustice.
The actor and the politician met in a display of mutual wokeness.
Wokeness has to be about more than just saying the right thing.

[GiRTh]

As this is obviously the biggest insult on this island at the moment, I'd like for some of the folks who believe it's a negative, to explain exactly what it means, to help the rest of us, and me in particular, understand exactly why it's a problem.

Anyone is welcome to contribute, but I only want to read your personal opinions, not daily mail comments or telegraph articles.Excellent thread and the bit in bold should become a forum rule IMO. I post articles so cant really talk but some forum members pretty much 95% of their contribution to S&D is articles they dont respond to.

I use it as a kind of ironic insult. I remember there was a thread on Women football that was overwhelmingly negative. I posted I quite like Women's football cuz I'm 'dead woke'.

Its become the new 'snowflake'. A kind of catch all insult to describe people who simply believe there are inequalities in our society. Its a lazy word to use IMO

[The Slim Reaper]

who says its the biggest insult?

the dictionary definition is:

a state of being aware, especially of social problems such as racism and inequality:

His latest record displays his wokeness.

More examples
Wokeness encompasses the need to search for more knowledge, understanding and truth in order to challenge injustice.
The actor and the politician met in a display of mutual wokeness.
Wokeness has to be about more than just saying the right thing.

Re: the bit in bold, so you think that the problem with "the woke" is that equality is just about words, and people aren't activist enough? Which is in direct contradiction to the bloke you quoted from the telegraph that said taking the knee was the problem, or the threads on the climate activists I've seen, where posters openly tell them to stop it.

[Alf]

This thread is so woke!

[Alf]

I'm fooking off.

Good luck to you all

Cheerio!

[Swan]

Unfortunately tik tok ego-maniacs are lumped in to this 'woke movement' and even though at it's core 'wokeness' isn't a bad thing, too many shouty over privileged social media obsessed people bring down what being woke really stands for.

The general working class public don't want, or need an overly entitled 18 year old shouting at them because they might on first impressions get their pronouns wrong. Or a 16 year old girl claiming to be 'woke' whilst lecturing people on how eating meat/having a family BBQ is 'racist'. And before anyone says anything, age does play a big part. A working class 40 year old who has worked their fingers to the bone just to put food on the table, has tried to do the right thing and been accepting of everything and everyone doesn't need, and shouldn't be talked down to by a 19 year old student (hate to bring race into this but i have to) usually a white middle class entitled girl telling them how to live their lives, and what terrible people they are.

It's easy to muddle what woke actually means when you have so many people bringing down it's true meaning with nonsensical waffle on social media. With the majority of these people saying what they think is popular and what will get them more attention and likes.

[Toy Soldier]

Holding an opinion that's popular within certain groups but is NOT evidence-based, or backed by a solid philosophy or explanation, without giving it much (if any) thought, because it's been declared to be "the right way to think".

Now... many of the ideologies that would fall under "woke" are absolutely solid and valid, others don't stand up to scrutiny when it comes right down to it, HOWEVER that's not the part that's relevant;

If someone holds an opinion because it sounds virtuous, and largely because other members of "their group" think it's correct, but (and this is the important part) cannot actually justify or explain their individual thinking or philosophies when pressed ont he subject then that is what I would call "wokeness". Also the idea that deviation from, or even vague questioning of, the status-quo opinion is "wrong" or "immoral". That doesn't mean the opinion is NOT virtuous or doesn't have merit. It's about how that person came to that conclusion.

Similar examples of group-think/tribalism exist all across the political spectrum but I'd say what makes it specifically "wokeness" is that moral absolutism when it comes to social justice issues.

[Tom4784]

It's such a weird insult. 'Haha! You have empathy for others and you don't like treating people as lessers because of who they are! What a ****ing loser!'

It's just bigots trying to demonise common decency really.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I blame all the Gammons for using this term Woke as a lazy collective diss

[Ammi]

Excellent thread and the bit in bold should become a forum rule IMO. I post articles so cant really talk but some forum members pretty much 95% of their contribution to S&D is articles they dont respond to.

I use it as a kind of ironic insult. I remember there was a thread on Women football that was overwhelmingly negative. I posted I quite like Women's football cuz I'm 'dead woke'.

Its become the new 'snowflake'. A kind of catch all insult to describe people who simply believe there are inequalities in our society. Its a lazy word to use IMO


…yeah, this for me is similar to my own thoughts…it’s a word/label that is used to ‘close down’ a belief in inequalities within society and any highlighting of those equalities isn’t a ‘woke’ thing anyway…those inequalities have always been there and there has always been awareness of them…’woke’ surely is to have become awoken to…to suddenly realise…?…and that wouldn’t and doesn’t apply at all…but the ‘woke’ bit of it for me is the aim to weaponise a word and create a label to turn some social beliefs into a negative…which basically says no, we’re all fine as we are/society is all fine and wonderful and dandy just as it is and no changes/progression etc is needed or wanted because we like our society and world just as it is…and for those who cry out any equality…?…well
then they’re attacking the very core of you and you must rise up against that ‘wokeness’…in fact actually a bit of regression might be quite nice and back to those good old days when we didn’t have to be so mindful of equalities that not everyone has…


….and lazy…?…yeah, ironically …there definitely seems to be quite a career and income made by some in the labelling of and weaponising of ‘woke’…as a social media type label…

[Ammi]

Unfortunately tik tok ego-maniacs are lumped in to this 'woke movement' and even though at it's core 'wokeness' isn't a bad thing, too many shouty over privileged social media obsessed people bring down what being woke really stands for.

The general working class public don't want, or need an overly entitled 18 year old shouting at them because they might on first impressions get their pronouns wrong. Or a 16 year old girl claiming to be 'woke' whilst lecturing people on how eating meat/having a family BBQ is 'racist'. And before anyone says anything, age does play a big part. A working class 40 year old who has worked their fingers to the bone just to put food on the table, has tried to do the right thing and been accepting of everything and everyone doesn't need, and shouldn't be talked down to by a 19 year old student (hate to bring race into this but i have to) usually a white middle class entitled girl telling them how to live their lives, and what terrible people they are.

It's easy to muddle what woke actually means when you have so many people bringing down it's true meaning with nonsensical waffle on social media. With the majority of these people saying what they think is popular and what will get them more attention and likes.

…to me that ‘muddling’ …or weaponising ‘woke’ in terms of its actual meaning…?…would be for attention and likes etc, as you say, yes…but for some it would be a clear and specific purpose of self agenda and self promotion and self income …people like Piers Morgan, Katie Hopkins, Laurence Fox …..who most definitely manipulate it as ‘threat’ thing to society…rather than a support of any society inequality…

[bots]

…to me that ‘muddling’ …or weaponising ‘woke’ in terms of its actual meaning…?…would be for attention and likes etc, yes…but for a clear and specific purpose of self agenda and self promotion and self income …people like Piers Morgan, Katie Hopkins, Laurence Fox …..

but equally, you have picked 3 of the most ridiculous examples :laugh:

Like all these movements that gain a bit of traction, people add more and more ridiculous things to the "woke" agenda daily which is what leaves it open to ridicule and scorn. There hasn't been a movement in recent years that hasn't suffered exactly the same

[The Slim Reaper]

but equally, you have picked 3 of the most ridiculous examples :laugh:

Like all these movements that gain a bit of traction, people add more and more ridiculous things to the "woke" agenda daily which is what leaves it open to ridicule and scorn. There hasn't been a movement in recent years that hasn't suffered exactly the same

Do you have some examples of the woke agenda? And what is your definition of woke?

[bots]

Do you have some examples of the woke agenda? And what is your definition of woke?

honestly don't take much notice of it, i've just seen people getting irate and quoting "woke" :laugh:

[Ammi]

but equally, you have picked 3 of the most ridiculous examples :laugh:

Like all these movements that gain a bit of traction, people add more and more ridiculous things to the "woke" agenda daily which is what leaves it open to ridicule and scorn. There hasn't been a movement in recent years that hasn't suffered exactly the same

…I’ve picked the examples that scream ‘woke’ because I don’t hear it with people I know who don’t manipulate words and label people to weoponise and turn into a negative because they’re not so keen on their beliefs…how can it be said for instance that equality is wrong…?…so attack the person or people with a belief to attempt to devalue any words they have…

[Ammi]

honestly don't take much notice of it, i've just seen people getting irate and quoting "woke" :laugh:

…but then isn’t that one of the points or one of the things that ‘woke’ is accused of as if it’s a negative thing …that ‘woke’ does ‘take notice’ ..it doesn’t just look on the surface of society inequalities or anything it finds deeply concerning for whatever the specific reason….

[bots]

…but then isn’t that one of the points or one of the things that ‘woke’ is accused of as if it’s a negative thing …that ‘woke’ does ‘take notice’ ..it doesn’t just look on the surface of society inequalities or anything it finds deeply concerning for whatever the specific reason….

you can't force people to be interested in something when they are just not. We all have our own priorities as individuals

[The Slim Reaper]

…but then isn’t that one of the points or one of the things that ‘woke’ is accused of as if it’s a negative thing …that ‘woke’ does ‘take notice’ ..it doesn’t just look on the surface of society inequalities or anything it finds deeply concerning for whatever the specific reason….

A second ago, he knew that new items were being added to the "woke agenda" on a daily basis; and therein lies the problem - intellectual dishonesty (excluding TS).

[Ammi]

…and actually they’re not ‘ridiculous examples…they’re very harmful examples because there are some who are believing ‘that woke weapon’ and that they have to rise up against it and take a stand …the power of labels and demonisation and manipulation…*cough*…Nigel Farage….

[Swan]

…to me that ‘muddling’ …or weaponising ‘woke’ in terms of its actual meaning…?…would be for attention and likes etc, as you say, yes…but for some it would be a clear and specific purpose of self agenda and self promotion and self income …people like Piers Morgan, Katie Hopkins, Laurence Fox …..who most definitely manipulate it as ‘threat’ thing to society…rather than a support of any society inequality…

I agree with that. Both 'sides' do it. And both sides of the argument have well documented opinions. The media are a lot to blame for this. Nothing can ever be black and white, it's just one extreme to the other.

(Piers Morgan is a tricky one for me, i do agree with some of what he says. I don't know enough about Laurence Fox to have an opinion. Katie Hopkins is a vile human being and i never have, and never will take anything she says serious. A perfect example of self obsessed ego-maniac)

[bots]

A second ago, he knew that new items were being added to the "woke agenda" on a daily basis; and therein lies the problem - intellectual dishonesty (excluding TS).

i really should have learned from previous interactions with you, there is absolutely no need to get personal and accusatory ... but here we are again. I confess a disinterest, i note that people get irate about something new every day .... that does not equate to intellectual dishonesty, i am merely stating things as I see them, which is actually a very honest position

[Ammi]

you can't force people to be interested in something when they are just not. We all have our own priorities as individuals

…of course we do and no one is ‘forcing’ anything or anyone…it’s that manipulation/skewed thing again of perceiving something as a negative…there are those who hope to have that ‘interest’ from others because they are not able..(…for whatever reasons…)…to find their own equality in society and it’s always, always been the way that ‘the more able to’ support the ‘less able to’….that’s how a healthy and successful society works, surely…

[The Slim Reaper]

i really should have learned from previous interactions with you, there is absolutely no need to get personal and accusatory ... but here we are again. I confess a disinterest, i note that people get irate about something new every day .... that does not equate to intellectual dishonesty, i am merely stating things as I see them, which is actually a very honest position

How is that personal? You made a post, I commented and asked you questions and you ran away. If that's not intellectually dishonest, please provide a better example of it.

[Liam-]

Nobody ever actually refers to themselves as ‘woke’ in a serious manner, the only people who use the word are the right wingers who see it as an excuse to try and justify the fact that they are simply, just not very nice people

[GiRTh]

I think the term can be overanalysed. I think it is nothing more than a lazy way of opposing people who want some change.

I agree the term has been weaponised by both sides of the political spectrum as a negative to score points and dismiss an others opinion.

[Ammi]

I agree with that. Both 'sides' do it. And both sides of the argument have well documented opinions. The media are a lot to blame for this. Nothing can ever be black and white, it's just one extreme to the other.

(Piers Morgan is a tricky one for me, i do agree with some of what he says. I don't know enough about Laurence Fox to have an opinion. Katie Hopkins is a vile human being and i never have, and never will take anything she says serious. A perfect example of self obsessed ego-maniac)

…that’s the ‘trick’ and manipulation though, isn’t it…to follow public opinions, which are mostly expressed in a negative …and again that’s always been the way and it’s obviously a very fast track world of social media now….to take a ‘seed’ of something that is public talking point etc…and then feed and manipulate it into a demonised beast…

[Swan]

…that’s the ‘trick’ and manipulation though, isn’t it…to follow public opinions, which are mostly expressed in a negative …and again that’s always been the way and it’s obviously a very fast track world of social media now….to take a ‘seed’ of something that is public talking point etc…and then feed and manipulate it into a demonised beast…

Yes i completely agree. The media play a huge part. Highlighting a 'woke' teen girl saying white people having a BBQ are racist doesn't help.

Behaviour on both sides cannot be dismissed. So many nuts on this 'woke for the wrong reasons' 'woke for the right reasons' are dominating what we see in the media.

We need a middle ground, we need a discourse, we need to find mutual grounds. We need an understanding, no shouting, no 'you're wrong im right' etc. But none of that sells. So all we really see is extremes from both sides because it sells, unfortunately.

[Ammi]

I think the term can be overanalysed. I think it is nothing more than a lazy way of opposing people who want some change.

I agree the term has been weaponised by both sides of the political spectrum as a negative to score points and dismiss an others opinion.

….yep, it’s all just games of words …it’s hard to argue social equalities and justice as a negative so the trick of the game is to label it into a negative…you goddamn woke thing you…no listening/no talking/just labelling…back and forth and back and forth…

[Ammi]

Yes i completely agree. The media play a huge part. Highlighting a 'woke' teen girl saying white people having a BBQ are racist doesn't help.

Behaviour on both sides cannot be dismissed. So many nuts on this 'woke for the wrong reasons' 'woke for the right reasons' are dominating what we see in the media.

We need a middle ground, we need a discourse, we need to find mutual grounds. We need an understanding, no shouting, no 'you're wrong im right' etc. But none of that sells. So all we really see is extremes from both sides because it sells, unfortunately.


…’divisiveness’ is a tactic as well, though…because I don’t believe that we have very much integrity in our political figures and political leadership to admire…divisiveness helps to detract and turn the attention away from public scrutiny….

[Swan]

…’divisiveness’ is a tactic as well, though…because I don’t believe that we have very much integrity in our political figures and political leadership to admire…divisiveness helps to detract and turn the attention away from public scrutiny….

It does, and that's why it needs to stop. The problem starts at home, in this case.

[GoldHeart]

'Woke' and 'snowflake' is so overused now to the point where it's ridiculous , it's always used as an insult usually towards the left and it's an excuse for people to moan and complain.

[jet]

As this is obviously the biggest insult on this island at the moment, I'd like for some of the folks who believe it's a negative, to explain exactly what it means, to help the rest of us, and me in particular, understand exactly why it's a problem.

Anyone is welcome to contribute, but I only want to read your personal opinions, not daily mail comments or telegraph articles.

To me, woke is a positive or a negative depending on how it’s used. To be ‘woke’ should be a positive attribute, as it recognizes inequalities and strives to understand and eradicate them - and it often is.

But it is often used in a negative way to describe people like 'virtue signallers' who create a divisive, reactionary atmosphere by going to extremes. Calling people out as racist or sexist for example with no evidence at all other than a difference of opinion or cancelling people or things for unnecessary or ridiculous reasons achieves nothing. It just demonstrates the smugness of the accuser and the ‘look at me, I’m so enlightened and better than you’ mindset when what they are actually doing is damaging and limiting progress.

The majority of men and women are just trying to look after their families and be decent citizens, they don’t need some teen or twenty something woke warrior insisting they know what they think and feel or destroying statues instead of directing their energies towards the future and positive change.
When a person’s 'wokeness' isn’t used as an OTT tool to beat people with to score points and likes, it’s obviously a very desirable and needed quality.

[Ammi]

As this is obviously the biggest insult on this island at the moment, I'd like for some of the folks who believe it's a negative, to explain exactly what it means, to help the rest of us, and me in particular, understand exactly why it's a problem.

Anyone is welcome to contribute, but I only want to read your personal opinions, not daily mail comments or telegraph articles.

…just to add…(..I was thinking this morning because a phrase popped up in something unrelated that I was reading…)…?…’don’t hate the player, hate the game’….how that could be applied to ‘woke’ or ‘wokeness’….the ‘game’ ..(…for example..)…being an inequality that’s still prevalent in society despite apparent ‘progression’ etc..and that’s obviously the thing to be looked at/the inequality and issue that society should be looking at…?…but for whatever the reasons, that game that shows inequality or exclusivity or whatever is averted away from in favour of ‘hating the player’…as in focusing on those who are highlighting something…anyway, I know that’s quite simplistic and it’s much more layered and complex as everything is…but that phrase made me think of that association anyway…I think as someone said, I think it was GiRTh…that its a ‘lazy way’…because it’s an easier option to ‘label’ the player, rather than look at more deep and more unpleasant things within the game itself…

[Livia]

I think the term 'woke' used to mean people who are aware of world crises - poverty, climate change etc. - and tried to do something about it. But the word's been hijacked and now it refers to people who try to highlight world problems by showing people how virtuous they are, who talk about climate change (etc) in a didactic way, assuming that others aren't quite so virtuous or worried. Furthermore, it's just another name, just another reason to push people into pigeon holes and name call with no consequence: woke, gammon, Karen, Millennial, GenX, Boomer.....

[Toy Soldier]

I think the term 'woke' used to mean people who are aware of world crises - poverty, climate change etc. - and tried to do something about it. But the word's been hijacked and now it refers to people who try to highlight world problems by showing people how virtuous they are, who talk about climate change (etc) in a didactic way, assuming that others aren't quite so virtuous or worried. Furthermore, it's just another name, just another reason to push people into pigeon holes and name call with no consequence: woke, gammon, Karen, Millennial, GenX, Boomer.....

I'd say that's a fairly succinct summing up, and largely agree with this whole post. In 2021 I think using any of these words other than at least semi-ironically really misses the point.

[Ammi]

…actually I just came back in to say about climate change etc and that’s a good example because for me…the first time that I became familiar with the label was when it was attached to Greta Thunberg…such a young person challenging world leaders and something that wasn’t accepted very well at all by those world leaders but also other adults in society who some seemed to feel a type of resentment…and I think again it’s too layered to infer lecturing when it’s also how something is received and whether it’s received openly…highlighting/informing of consequences/of changes needed etc is not lecturing…communication is on how something is received as well and whether an individual sees it as a lecture or a highlighted concern …


…IMO, there is often a resistance to receive if from a much younger person../…a child such as Greta…but Sir David Attenborough more or less echoes everything she says and yet is much more less likely to be labelled ‘woke’ or inferred that he’s lecturing…because neither of them are…it doesn’t really help anything at all to not look at the person labelling and their reasons for doing so and only looking at the person being labelled ….

[Niamh.]

Yeah I've really only heard it in an insulting manner, I've not heard anyone refer to themselves as woke (maybe people do but I've not come across that yet) I take it to mean people who follow every social justice issue to the letter without question and if you question anything you're automatically on the far right. There doesn't seem to be a lot of middle ground allowed anymore or open conversations on emotive social issues.

[Toy Soldier]

…actually I just came back in to say about climate change etc and that’s a good example because for me…the first time that I became familiar with the label was when it was attached to Greta Thunberg…such a young person challenging world leaders and something that wasn’t accepted very well at all by those world leaders but also other adults in society who some seemed to feel a type of resentment…and I think again it’s too layered to infer lecturing when it’s also how something is received and whether it’s received openly…highlighting/informing of consequences/of changes needed etc is not lecturing…communication is on how something is received as well and whether an individual sees it as a lecture or a highlighted concern …


…IMO, there is often a resistance to receive if from a much younger person../…a child such as Greta…but Sir David Attenborough more or less echoes everything she says and yet is much more less likely to be labelled ‘woke’ or inferred that he’s lecturing…because neither of them are…it doesn’t really help anything at all to not look at the person labelling and their reasons for doing so and only looking at the person being labelled ….

You have to feel bad for Al Gore - he was trying to get people to listen long before Greta was born. The term "woke" didn't exist but more or less everyone treated him like a joke for it :umm2:. Sorry Al.

[Niamh.]

You have to feel bad for Al Gore - he was trying to get people to listen long before Greta was born. The term "woke" didn't exist but more or less everyone treated him like a joke for it :umm2:. Sorry Al.

It's because most people don't want to hear it because doing anything meaningful about it would require too much change to their behaviours and probably give up some comforts/luxuries etc

[Ammi]

You have to feel bad for Al Gore - he was trying to get people to listen long before Greta was born. The term "woke" didn't exist but more or less everyone treated him like a joke for it :umm2:. Sorry Al.

…the thing is for me, working in a school…?…is that Greta engaged the interest of the children in a way that hadn’t been so before…and that was largely obviously because of her age…I do think Al was listened to tbh…but it just didn’t engage in the same way because of that aspect of raising awareness and concerns in our children…

[Toy Soldier]

Yeah I've really only heard it in an insulting manner, I've not heard anyone refer to themselves as woke (maybe people do but I've not come across that yet) I take it to mean people who follow every social justice issue to the letter without question and if you question anything you're automatically on the far right. There doesn't seem to be a lot of middle ground allowed anymore or open conversations on emotive social issues.

I think this is basically what I'm trying to nail my thoughts down on (with the Labour thread too). It's not about centrism or both-sides, in fact I generally find myself falling on one side of the fence more than the other, but I find myself with certain people (or a certain type of person) unable to trust them because I know that despite me agreeing with what they're saying, it feels like their stance is coming from a place of echoed dogma and not their own personal reasoning or rationale. And I know that you can't actually have a discussion with someone with that mindset... so despite agreeing with them... I know that they'll be just as unreasonable with me if opinions happen to diverge. Is it just that trust issue, maybe? I know there's something about current left-rhetoric that has me "ill at ease" even when I largely agree. That's something we're trying to hammer out in the TS household lately. Can't quite nail it down.

[Niamh.]

…the thing is for me, working in a school…?…is that Greta engaged the interest of the children in a way that hadn’t been so before…and that was largely obviously because of her age…I do think Al was listened to tbh…but it just didn’t engage in the same way because of that aspect of raising awareness and concerns in our children…

But you know besides the fact that they didn't want to have to think about it, people like Trump are never going to respect or be lectured by a teenager never mind a female teenager

[Ammi]

…I mean, that for me is such a key in working in schools for most of my working life…awareness is raised in adults all of the time and always has been and that’s brought about some changes…but children are our future…(…cliche, I know but it’s true…)…to engage them is the key to an Earth future and to do that, sadly Al just wasn’t going to do it….

[Ammi]

But you know besides the fact that they didn't want to have to think about it, people like Trump are never going to respect or be lectured by a teenager never mind a female teenager

…exactly, so Trump did what Trump did best and insulted and name called…and then with the help of social media…sadly the age and era of ‘followers’ and people said haha…etc…

[Niamh.]

I think this is basically what I'm trying to nail my thoughts down on (with the Labour thread too). It's not about centrism or both-sides, in fact I generally find myself falling on one side of the fence more than the other, but I find myself with certain people (or a certain type of person) unable to trust them because I know that despite me agreeing with what they're saying, it feels like their stance is coming from a place of echoed dogma and not their own personal reasoning or rationale. And I know that you can't actually have a discussion with someone with that mindset... so despite agreeing with them... I know that they'll be just as unreasonable with me if opinions happen to diverge. Is it just that trust issue, maybe? I know there's something about current left-rhetoric that has me "ill at ease" even when I largely agree. That's something we're trying to hammer out in the TS household lately. Can't quite nail it down.

I actually know exactly what you mean. I suppose (and I hate to bring this topic up again, I don't want to talk about it, it just fits my example of what I think you're trying to say) So the trans debate, I know my opinion comes from worrying about women's rights and how they will be/have been effected but I know that some people who agree with me on some of these topics agree with me for different reasons and sometimes it makes me uncomfortable too

[Toy Soldier]

…the thing is for me, working in a school…?…is that Greta engaged the interest of the children in a way that hadn’t been so before…and that was largely obviously because of her age…I do think Al was listened to tbh…but it just didn’t engage in the same way because of that aspect of raising awareness and concerns in our children…

I suppose though with reference to the above, part of my worry lies in children being told the correct conclusion rather than being given the tools to reach the conclusion for themselves. I think there's something sorely missing in the development of proper reasoning and formal operational thought. Some of it is tied into education seemingly going down a slightly post-structuralist/post-truth route of extreme individualism.

Like I said I'm in a bit of a philosophical soup with this stuff at the moment so I'm not actually 100% on my thoughts, I just know there's "something" :joker:.

[Niamh.]

…exactly, so Trump did what Trump did best and insulted and name called…and then with the help of social media…sadly the age and era of ‘followers’ and people said haha…etc…

Social Media (and I know it has great points too) I think is certainly responsible for the weaponising of all these "buzz words"

[Ammi]

I think this is basically what I'm trying to nail my thoughts down on (with the Labour thread too). It's not about centrism or both-sides, in fact I generally find myself falling on one side of the fence more than the other, but I find myself with certain people (or a certain type of person) unable to trust them because I know that despite me agreeing with what they're saying, it feels like their stance is coming from a place of echoed dogma and not their own personal reasoning or rationale. And I know that you can't actually have a discussion with someone with that mindset... so despite agreeing with them... I know that they'll be just as unreasonable with me if opinions happen to diverge. Is it just that trust issue, maybe? I know there's something about current left-rhetoric that has me "ill at ease" even when I largely agree. That's something we're trying to hammer out in the TS household lately. Can't quite nail it down.



…I often have long chats with the Mister that have stemmed from a forum thread…well, I have to say…it’s less now that I do because so many ‘discussions’ sadly aren’t discussions at all…they’re like backward and forward tennis matches or ball batting of media links and articles and statistics and etc…those best long chats for me that go on in depth and endlessly into the early hours with friends etc…?..we’ve never once so far as I can recall said….hang on, look here’s an article and it says…!!!!!!!….so there…!!!….it’s all about thoughts and the communication of and listening to opinions that sometimes can rearrange your own thinking with a different focus….

[Toy Soldier]

One thing that's really bugging me is that moral absolutism and post-truth are concepts that are essentially completely incompatible and yet they are definitely merging and interacting within left-rhetoric. How, and why? There's an inherent incompatibility and I think on some level people know that - because if you push at that incompatibility people get very, very angry which is surely borne of frustration at trying to combine incongruent philosophies?

[Ammi]

I actually know exactly what you mean. I suppose (and I hate to bring this topic up again, I don't want to talk about it, it just fits my example of what I think you're trying to say) So the trans debate, I know my opinion comes from worrying about women's rights and how they will be/have been effected but I know that some people who agree with me on some of these topics agree with me for different reasons and sometimes it makes me uncomfortable too

…(..there are some things, I feel…)….where support is apparently shown toward females in regard to sexist issues….and then sexist threads/comments etc are displayed without any thought at all from those same directions…

[Niamh.]

…(..there are some things, I feel…)….where support is apparently shown toward females in regard to sexist issues….and then sexist threads/comments etc are displayed without any thought at all from those same directions…

Yeah exactly

[Ammi]

I suppose though with reference to the above, part of my worry lies in children being told the correct conclusion rather than being given the tools to reach the conclusion for themselves. I think there's something sorely missing in the development of proper reasoning and formal operational thought. Some of it is tied into education seemingly going down a slightly post-structuralist/post-truth route of extreme individualism.

Like I said I'm in a bit of a philosophical soup with this stuff at the moment so I'm not actually 100% on my thoughts, I just know there's "something" :joker:.

…I actually think the opposite tbh…:laugh:…I think that children now more than ever are involved in open discussions and free thoughts and the opportunity to express those thoughts/reasons for them etc…in a way that very much wasn’t the thing back in the day…when children weren’t given that freedom because they were children and not yet ‘qualified’ to express…go away and come back when you’re an adult, please….it’s very much not like that anymore…my children have always been as knowledgeable as I have in things that they’ve taught me…and it’s been a two way thing, the sharing of life experiences etc…of different generations lived in…

[Ammi]

Yeah exactly

…feminist issues can be used as an agenda to express something else and yeah, I don’t feel comfortable about that at all and rarely engage in it if I feel that’s how it is…

[Niamh.]

One thing that's really bugging me is that moral absolutism and post-truth are concepts that are essentially completely incompatible and yet they are definitely merging and interacting within left-rhetoric. How, and why? There's an inherent incompatibility and I think on some level people know that - because if you push at that incompatibility people get very, very angry which is surely borne of frustration at trying to combine incongruent philosophies?

Can you explain a bit more about that

[Toy Soldier]

…I actually think the opposite tbh…:laugh:…I think that children now more than ever are involved in open discussions and free thoughts and the opportunity to express those thoughts/reasons for them etc…in a way that very much wasn’t the thing back in the day…when children weren’t given that freedom because they were children and not yet ‘qualified’ to express…go away and come back when you’re an adult, please….it’s very much not like that anymore…my children have always been as knowledgeable as I have in things that they’ve taught me…and it’s been a two way thing, the sharing of life experiences etc…of different generations lived in…

Ahh Ammi that's actually what I'm talking about being the problem :joker:. Children are exposed to post-truth individualism much younger than they used to be an essentially are being plonked into a world of free-thinking, that requires robust formal operational abilities, before they've nailed down the previous stage (concrete operational) that forms the foundation for that more advanced free-thinking.

In essense... I'm currently wondering if there's something slightly risky about shoe-horning free thinking into young minds that aren't quite prepped for it yet. Leading young people to believe that they are free-thinking when they're actually mimicking (below about age 10 or 11 they CAN only be mimicking) and that somehow affecting their ability to develop true independent reasoning later in life, e.g. during higher education. After all - they think they've been doing it since they were kids, so what do they need to know about these advanced concepts?

[Ammi]

…anyways, I do feel that sadly the forum has come to follow the media and social media in terms of ‘click bait’ for too long and that’s been the deterioration of discussion quality…so thank you, Slim ….:love:…for a thread and question that’s been very open and honest and agenda free…more like the thriving SD we’ve all experienced and loved as a core of TiBB…

[Toy Soldier]

Can you explain a bit more about that

In short, post-structuralism (loosely, post-truth) is the concept that we all have "our own truth" and there is no absolute; any description of the absolute is a social construction and ambiguous/up for debate. It's an essential concept in gender theory. Moral absolutism on the other hand is the idea that certain aspects of morality are absolute and beyond reasonable discussion; that discussing the "how and why" of a supposedly-moral statement "that anyone should be able to see is moral" is inherently immoral (making them off the table for discussion, if you don't want to be deemed a wrong'un).

But no form of absolutism fits with post-structuralism... the nuances of morality would ALWAYS be up for debate and an element of subjectivity.

But I see a lot of left-rhetoric strongly advocating for both. Individual truth is real. Objective morality is also real. It doesn't blend, it requires a level of cognitive dissonance to even hold both views similtaneously and I honestly think that's where a lot of the frustration and aggression is rooted. Maybe. It's a work in progress :joker:

[Ammi]

Ahh Ammi that's actually what I'm talking about being the problem :joker:. Children are exposed to post-truth individualism much younger than they used to be an essentially are being plonked into a world of free-thinking, that requires robust formal operational abilities, before they've nailed down the previous stage (concrete operational) that forms the foundation for that more advanced free-thinking.

In essense... I'm currently wondering if there's something slightly risky about shoe-horning free thinking into young minds that aren't quite prepped for it yet. Leading young people to believe that they are free-thinking when they're actually mimicking (below about age 10 or 11 they CAN only be mimicking) and that somehow affecting their ability to develop true independent reasoning later in life, e.g. during higher education. After all - they think they've been doing it since they were kids, so what do they need to know about these advanced concepts?

…children are learning…(…in all of their lessons…)…through philosophy, through developing their thinking skills and the complexities and layers of many topics and situations and to think beyond themselves to impacts on others around them…not to be more insular in thought or actions but to give more careful thought …and also think less restricting in terms of a right or a wrong, a black or a white…I don’t see that as any negative….


…..sorry I must go, I’m on the drag…but yeah…

[Niamh.]

In short, post-structuralism (loosely, post-truth) is the concept that we all have "our own truth" and there is no absolute; any description of the absolute is a social construction and ambiguous/up for debate. It's an essential concept in gender theory. Moral absolutism on the other hand is the idea that certain aspects of morality are absolute and beyond reasonable discussion; that discussing the "how and why" of a supposedly-moral statement "that anyone should be able to see is moral" is inherently immoral (making them off the table for discussion, if you don't want to be deemed a wrong'un).

But no form of absolutism fits with post-structuralism... the nuances of morality would ALWAYS be up for debate and an element of subjectivity.

But I see a lot of left-rhetoric strongly advocating for both. Individual truth is real. Objective morality is also real. It doesn't blend, it requires a level of cognitive dissonance to even hold both views similtaneously and I honestly think that's where a lot of the frustration and aggression is rooted. Maybe. It's a work in progress :joker:

That's very interesting, very 1984 actually, George Orwell was a head of his time.

[Toy Soldier]

…children are learning…(…in all of their lessons…)…through philosophy, through developing their thinking skills and the complexities and layers of many topics and situations and to think beyond themselves to impacts on others around them…not to be more insular in thought or actions but to give more careful thought …and also think less restricting in terms of a right or a wrong, a black or a white…I don’t see that as any negative….


…..sorry I must go, I’m on the drag…but yeah…

Piaget (which I admit, might be outdated) would suggest that they cannot (physically) do this until the onset of adolescence which I would say there's a good amount of anecdotal evidence for, which again is where I feel some concern dripping in; kids are being told too young that they are capable of a level of objective reasoning that they are not capable of through no fault of their own, and in the process missing out on some of the essential concrete operational skills base that will allow them to fully develop those skills in adolescence and beyond... whilst believing that they do have those skills, because they grew up being told that they have them. That's a risky combination that in fact leads to people with VERY concrete views (moral absolutism) also being VERY confident in those views, but without actually having reasoned through those views independently.

... "wokeness"... :umm2:

[Livia]

You have to feel bad for Al Gore - he was trying to get people to listen long before Greta was born. The term "woke" didn't exist but more or less everyone treated him like a joke for it :umm2:. Sorry Al.

I agree.

The thing that irritates me with Greta is how she intimates that everyone who came before her has stolen something from her and her generation and that simply isn't true. Some people have worked hard to reduce their carbon footprint, Prince Philip, for instance, was talking about global warming decades ago' but it feels like anyone older than Greta is blind to the problems and guilty of exacerbating them. I also am wary of kids pushed into the faces of the public by two parents who know exactly how engage and manipulate the media.

[Ammi]

Piaget (which I admit, might be outdated) would suggest that they cannot (physically) do this until the onset of adolescence which I would say there's a good amount of anecdotal evidence for, which again is where I feel some concern dripping in; kids are being told too young that they are capable of a level of objective reasoning that they are not capable of through no fault of their own, and in the process missing out on some of the essential concrete operational skills base that will allow them to fully develop those skills in adolescence and beyond... whilst believing that they do have those skills, because they grew up being told that they have them. That's a risky combination that in fact leads to people with VERY concrete views (moral absolutism) also being VERY confident in those views, but without actually having reasoned through those views independently.

... "wokeness"... :umm2:


..hmmmmmm…(…I really am so on the drag and need to eat something…)…but to delay the encouragement of free thinking and problem solving thinking etc …to philosophise in thoughts…?..until adolescence would not prepare for their higher school advancement but it would also leave it open for more fixed mindsets …more ‘limited conditioning’ within individual environmental factors and less open to thinking beyond themselves and their world…anyways, ta ta…I think I might faint with food deprivation….

[Toy Soldier]

..hmmmmmm…(…I really am so on the drag and need to eat something…)…but to delay the encouragement of free thinking and problem solving thinking etc …to philosophise in thoughts…?..until adolescence would not prepare for their higher school advancement but it would also leave it open for more fixed mindsets …more ‘limited conditioning’ within individual environmental factors and less open to thinking beyond themselves and their world…anyways, ta ta…I think I might faint with food deprivation….

Oh I'm not talking about creative thought/expression/problem solving, but more advanced abstract thinking and subjectivity. Not to have the same thing come up time and time again, but there'd be a very strong basis to assume that pre-adolescents are not capable of grasping a concept like gender, for example, and their understanding of morality WILL tend to be quite black-and-white no matter how much you try to explain the grey areas.

From personal anecdotal experience; there's something quite fascinating occurring in my daughter's age group at the moment that highlights this really. She's 11, in the final year of primary school, but she's well into "teen territory" in terms of physical development and that tends to be the case at that age; some of the kids are still very much pre-adolescent, some are essentially spotty teens... and there is a clear divergence when it comes to social and abstract thinking that occurs along that line. LOTS of clashes between moody opinionated adolescents and "still more childlike" kids who see things as very black and white. Lots of more advanced concepts seem to "click" and (it would appear) it's much more firmly rooted in actual physical development than in age or education.

[Ammi]

Oh I'm not talking about creative thought/expression/problem solving, but more advanced abstract thinking and subjectivity. Not to have the same thing come up time and time again, but there'd be a very strong basis to assume that pre-adolescents are not capable of grasping a concept like gender, for example, and their understanding of morality WILL tend to be quite black-and-white no matter how much you try to explain the grey areas.

From personal anecdotal experience; there's something quite fascinating occurring in my daughter's age group at the moment that highlights this really. She's 11, in the final year of primary school, but she's well into "teen territory" in terms of physical development and that tends to be the case at that age; some of the kids are still very much pre-adolescent, some are essentially spotty teens... and there is a clear divergence when it comes to social and abstract thinking that occurs along that line. LOTS of clashes between moody opinionated adolescents and "still more childlike" kids who see things as very black and white. Lots of more advanced concepts seem to "click" and (it would appear) it's much more firmly rooted in actual physical development than in age or education.



…I’m not really understanding you…obviously emotional and physical developments will vary…but do you mean more peer stuff which would possibly conflict with parental influences…?…


…I’m with you on Year 6 children being a very interesting year group…:laugh:..years 5 and 6 are probably my favourite year groups…:love:…I learn a lot from their thought processes….

[arista]

This thread is so woke!


https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/3AB7/production/_119013051_dailystar-nc.png

[Ammi]

…’14yr old kids walked out’….one child walked out of class according to reports…

..’just for teaching kids how to pronounce a word’….but ‘it was probably a mistake to use it in any context’….a complete contradiction…obviously it would be looked into why indeed it was used as it wasn’t a wise choice to use it…


….so the word was used and Andrew Neil in his own words said that he didn’t feel as though it was wise to use the word in any context, leading to the school looking into why it was used…and without that context yet given in explanation…OUTRAGE/WOKENeSs etc is being screamed anyway…let’s not wait for the context that was important to have but the word wasn’t necessary to be used in any context according to this discussion…they sound a little confused…silly OUTRAGE culture….


…through time if there are any thoughts of concern with a school…(…or other areas…)…then raising those concerns is what has always been encouraged…and when that happens, WOKE is now screamed in accusation….which effectively is a silencing cancel culture being promoted…calling the investigation of the context and reasoning for using it isn’t a ‘disciplinary investigation’ either….just all emotive and misleading…

[thesheriff443]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink

The world will never think as one because it has more than one religion
The world will never think as one because men and women are not the same
The world will never think as one because we don’t all look the same
The world will never think as one because we don’t earn the same

Above are some of the fundamental reasons we will never see the world as one

[thesheriff443]

Would a kind member up load a YouTube video in this thread as it sums up part of life’s issues christy Moore ordinary man

[Ammi]

LIh5dUOz824

[thesheriff443]

LIh5dUOz824

Thank you ammi xx

[Toy Soldier]

The road to hell is paved with good intentions
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make it drink

The world will never think as one because it has more than one religion
The world will never think as one because men and women are not the same
The world will never think as one because we don’t all look the same
The world will never think as one because we don’t earn the same


https://media.tenor.com/images/836e842e0ff302184ee2188a9b2d6c4e/tenor.gif


You can't fit quicker than a KwikFit fitter.

[Livia]

Wokeness to me means getting all twisted out of shape because someone mis-gendered someone and going on a crusade over it, while ignoring the girls undergoing FGM every year in the Middle East and Africa. Hundreds of thousands of girls every year... I hardly ever see any outrage over it. In fact when I've brought it up in the past the replies have included "Yeah, but... doesn't your religion circumcise boys". Like it's the same thing.

[Niamh.]

LIh5dUOz824

legend :flutter:

[The Slim Reaper]

As this is obviously the biggest insult on this island at the moment, I'd like for some of the folks who believe it's a negative, to explain exactly what it means, to help the rest of us, and me in particular, understand exactly why it's a problem.

Anyone is welcome to contribute, but I only want to read your personal opinions; not daily mail comments, telegraph articles, or song requests.

:laugh:

[Niamh.]

:laugh:

Exceptions should be made for the legend that is Christy Moore though tbf

[GoldHeart]

Wokeness to me means getting all twisted out of shape because someone mis-gendered someone and going on a crusade over it, while ignoring the girls undergoing FGM every year in the Middle East and Africa. Hundreds of thousands of girls every year... I hardly ever see any outrage over it. In fact when I've brought it up in the past the replies have included "Yeah, but... doesn't your religion circumcise boys". Like it's the same thing.

No actually I think you'll find 'woke' is over used as an insult for anyone ...who's usually a far left/ democrat supporter who call out various injustices and have different opinions on politics . You could literally call out Boris' shambles and be called "woke" or "snowflake", that's how ridiculous it's become .

And I haven't seen anyone excusing the horrific FGM issue that's happening around the world, nobody can defend that. People probably bring up the whole 'Male circumcision' because they they themselves don't agree with it or they think it's unnecessary . And of course it's not the same.

But there's been terrible instances where circumcised babies have had infections passed onto them through the process. Hopefully those are a rare occurrence though.

[Toy Soldier]

2l6JUNFAJ9o

A bop.

Also... the top comment

Every time he says "Facts don't care about your feelings" I just imagine Ben Shapiro jamming this in his car wearing his little hat.

:joker: :joker: :joker: I squeaked.

[thesheriff443]

Exceptions should be made for the legend that is Christy Moore though tbf

Absolutely, true honest and beautiful songs that can be found in a lot of Irish music like his.

[The Slim Reaper]

Wokeness to me means getting all twisted out of shape because someone mis-gendered someone and going on a crusade over it, while ignoring the girls undergoing FGM every year in the Middle East and Africa. Hundreds of thousands of girls every year... I hardly ever see any outrage over it. In fact when I've brought it up in the past the replies have included "Yeah, but... doesn't your religion circumcise boys". Like it's the same thing.

But by the same token, when you complain about fgm with your history of referring to the same brown middle eastern people as trash, and regularly slut shaming, it's difficult to treat your opinions as sincere on this subject

[Swan]

But by the same token, when you complain about fgm with your history of referring to the same brown middle eastern people as trash, and regularly slut shaming, it's difficult to treat your opinions as sincere on this subject

Well all that aside as it's nothing to do with me, and im not too familiar with Livia's posts, don't you thing she makes a point? We do, in the western world, seem to put a lot of effort and time into finding problems that don't really exist. Should we really be worrying more about misgenedring children, or referring to them as 'learners' more than those going through horrific ordeals in the middle east and Africa? This is not to mention the forced marriages at the age of 11/12 to much older men. Or homosexuality punishable by death.

[Toy Soldier]

Well all that aside as it's nothing to do with me, and im not too familiar with Livia's posts, don't you thing she makes a point? We do, in the western world, seem to put a lot of effort and time into finding problems that don't really exist. Should we really be worrying more about misgenedring children, or referring to them as 'learners' more than those going through horrific ordeals in the middle east and Africa? This is not to mention the forced marriages at the age of 11/12 to much older men. Or homosexuality punishable by death.

I don't necessarily disagree entirely but there's a lot of study in this area and some very good arguments for why the "there's starving kids in Africa" argument isn't usually very helpful. Essentially it's generally the case that "there are others worse off" is used as an excuse to do nothing at all about any of it rather than as a refocus on other issues.

If anything I'm inclined to say it works better COMPLETELY the other way; people's energy is generally best spent as close to home as possible. Not even "in the west" or "in our own country" but literally within our own towns and communities.

That's not to say we should ignore the wider issues facing people across the world entirely, but there are very sound psychological explanations for why it's harder to have true empathy for people whose worlds are very different to our own, and that being overly determined to "heal the world" usually results in little more than compassion fatigue, becoming jaded, and failing to actually help anyone near or far. Just a lot of talk.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Well all that aside as it's nothing to do with me, and im not too familiar with Livia's posts, don't you thing she makes a point? We do, in the western world, seem to put a lot of effort and time into finding problems that don't really exist. Should we really be worrying more about misgenedring children, or referring to them as 'learners' more than those going through horrific ordeals in the middle east and Africa? This is not to mention the forced marriages at the age of 11/12 to much older men. Or homosexuality punishable by death.

or the fact that "wokeness" caused Rotherham

and the fact that white working class kids have been totally forgotten in the UK

White working-class pupils ‘neglected’ by education system for decades

(all media today)

[GoldHeart]

or the fact that "wokeness" caused Rotherham

and the fact that white working class kids have been totally forgotten in the UK

White working-class pupils ‘neglected’ by education system for decades

(all media today)

Oh really
I'm pretty sure the government are a big part of these problems,but no no continue to blame "wokeness" why don't you .

And there's working class people from all backgrounds that need help & support .

[The Slim Reaper]

or the fact that "wokeness" caused Rotherham

and the fact that white working class kids have been totally forgotten in the UK

White working-class pupils ‘neglected’ by education system for decades

(all media today)

Meanwhile, in the real world...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E4eveMdXMAkw0QH?format=jpg&name=medium

[Crimson Dynamo]

Meanwhile, in the real world...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E4eveMdXMAkw0QH?format=jpg&name=medium

i will just...leave....this...here...


https://i.ytimg.com/vi/UchmgVK16r4/maxresdefault.jpg



:skull:

[The Slim Reaper]

i will just...leave....this...here...


https://i.ytimg.com/vi/UchmgVK16r4/maxresdefault.jpg



:skull:

Not the first time you've brought this up, and I'll repeat again what i told you all the other times. There is nothing extraordinary about that note, it's been the kind of note chancellors have left incoming chancellors from other parties forever. The only difference here, is that it was seized upon and used as propaganda in what would be a sign of things to come for this generation of liars.

When witticisms become weapons

https://www.theguardian.com/global/2010/may/17/liam-byrne-letter-wider-tradition

This all happened on the back of the 2008 world wide financial crisis, so it's not even as though there was a choice. However, even on the back of all that information, what you can't even begin to explain away, is the fact our finances are horrendously worse now than they ever were under that labour government, and if you can find me saying anything positive about Blairite labour, then you've got some magic beans.


We owe more money, we have more debt, it's worse as a percentage of gdp, etc, etc, etc, etc.

But "man left note." shows how willfully people will lie and manipulate to defend ideology

[Cherie]

As this is obviously the biggest insult on this island at the moment, I'd like for some of the folks who believe it's a negative, to explain exactly what it means, to help the rest of us, and me in particular, understand exactly why it's a problem.

Anyone is welcome to contribute, but I only want to read your personal opinions, not daily mail comments or telegraph articles.

Meanwhile, in the real world...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E4eveMdXMAkw0QH?format=jpg&name=medium

I note you are not following your own rules :laugh:

[The Slim Reaper]

[/B]


I note you are not following your own rules :laugh:

Yeah, I wasn't really worried about myself spamming threads with telegraph or nonce-enabler, and LT favourite Jim Davidson nonsense, and if you could see deleted posts, you'd see why I asked for peoples opinions, not spam.

[Cherie]

Not the first time you've brought this up, and I'll repeat again what i told you all the other times. There is nothing extraordinary about that note, it's been the kind of note chancellors have left incoming chancellors from other parties forever. The only difference here, is that it was seized upon and used as propaganda in what would be a sign of things to come for this generation of liars.

When witticisms become weapons

https://www.theguardian.com/global/2010/may/17/liam-byrne-letter-wider-tradition

This all happened on the back of the 2008 world wide financial crisis, so it's not even as though there was a choice. However, even on the back of all that information, what you can't even begin to explain away, is the fact our finances are horrendously worse now than they ever were under that labour government, and if you can find me saying anything positive about Blairite labour, then you've got some magic beans.


We owe more money, we have more debt, it's worse as a percentage of gdp, etc, etc, etc, etc.

But "man left note." shows how willfully people will lie and manipulate to defend ideology

and here again you have quoted the Guardian which comes back to my point sometimes you need a link to back up an opinion, in my opinion of course!

You can't be dictating for others to abide by these self made rules if you don't abide by them yourself in my humble opinion :idc:

[The Slim Reaper]

and here again you have quoted the Guardian which comes back to my point sometimes you need a link to back up an opinion, in my opinion of course!

You can't be dictating for others to abide by these self made rules if you don't abide by them yourself in my humble opinion :idc:

Providing a link is not the same as spamming the thread with stupid massive pictures and nonsense. It just isn't, and it shouldn't need to be explained if we're being honest.

it's the same reason I don't have a problem with TS posting the music vid and I only made light of the sheriff music vid - I know they're not going to start spamming. I don't think I could have been fairer - by saying all are welcome, but I want your opinions, I really think I've opened the thread up to more people than most threads on here

[Strictly Jake]

I get confused by the term woke

I take it as being responsive and taking action to opinions and actions of others because of others sexist, prejudiced, racist or homophobic views

However I do think and I hope noone comes at me for this comment that although people should not be treated(treat?) with discrimination. Sometimes people want attention and take things a bit too far with their views when someone's opinion wasnt meant in a certain way.

For example if I said I love yellow on black women more than white women. If someone took that comment to mean black woman should only wear yellow then come at me for that comment when I was being complimentary. That's when people get annoyed at "woke"

[arista]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E4gRcZ5XwAE9zhN?format=png&name=360x360

[smudgie]

Thank heavens I sleep too much to be woke.:laugh:

[bots]

i'm not sure which hacks me off the most if i'm honest, everything being called woke for outrage or the genuine woke behaviour of some people

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E4gRcZ5XwAE9zhN?format=png&name=360x360

Yes all about intolerant people who think they are right.

[Toy Soldier]

Yes all about intolerant people who think they are right.
No they think they are left. Aren't you paying attention at all?

[The Slim Reaper]

Oooh, Edgy stuff.

[Marsh.]

Oooh, Edgy stuff.

.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Ooh cheerleaders

[Babayaro.]

It's such a weird insult. 'Haha! You have empathy for others and you don't like treating people as lessers because of who they are! What a ****ing loser!'

It's just bigots trying to demonise common decency really.

Basically

[arista]

1407975491991228416

[Nicky91]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E4gRcZ5XwAE9zhN?format=png&name=360x360

the creator of this cartoon should receive a jail sentence of that forbidden cross

:idc:

[Toy Soldier]

1407975491991228416

How can they expect to be taken seriously with those sorts of graphics? Honestly, it's not even an uninteresting discussion or one without merit, this is something that does need further study and proper consideration and it IS a problem, in the world as a whole today, that people just forge ahead with "what feels right" without any actual critical thinking going into it...

... but then they plaster "WOKE WATCH" across the bottom of the screen which just makes it look like more silly, divisive nonsense. If they want to be taken seriously as a professional news channel, they need to start acting like one, and get rid of the tabloid attention-grabbers.

[Toy Soldier]

the creator of this cartoon should receive a jail sentence of that forbidden cross

:idc:

They should have received a jail sentence for not bothering to crop the GB flag to stop it extending over the clear boundary of the image. Sloppy.

[Crimson Dynamo]

1407975491991228416

this is just the type of news we need, exposing the creeping hard-left agenda in our schools

:clap1:

[Toy Soldier]

this is just the type of news we need, exposing the creeping hard-left agenda in our schools

:clap1:

Do you not agree that the argument would be more effective in terms of doing anything other than "preaching to the choir", if it didn't have WOKE WATCH written across the bottom?

A bit pointless if the only people clapping are the people who already thought the same, no?

[arista]

this is just the type of news we need, exposing the creeping hard-left agenda in our schools

:clap1:



Yes a Daily Woke Watch
ideal for Slims thread




Feel The Force

[bots]

if what you want in life is a daily dose of new outrage then go for it, personally, i have things in my life that are a lot more important

[Crimson Dynamo]

Do you not agree that the argument would be more effective in terms of doing anything other than "preaching to the choir", if it didn't have WOKE WATCH written across the bottom?

A bit pointless if the only people clapping are the people who already thought the same, no?

if the msm on tv are not covering this then no

but this channel is no different to any commercial channel that provide content that will get an audience and ad revenue

[Toy Soldier]

if the msm on tv are not covering this then no

but this channel is no different to any commercial channel that provide content that will get an audience and ad revenue

I suppose I'd have to argue that an echo chamber is closer to entertainment than news... but I suppose some people find "comfort viewing" in a nice big dose of confirmation bias. Not limited to GB News, to be fair. Each to their own.

[The Slim Reaper]

Yes a Daily Woke Watch
ideal for Slims thread




Feel The Force

Arista stop being a weirdo because I said team the other day. I've been respectful of your weatherspoons news thread.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Arista stop being a weirdo because I said team the other day. I've been respectful of your weatherspoons news thread.
what is weird is you resorting to name-calling because you feel threatened by a news channel :crazy:

[The Slim Reaper]

what is weird is you resorting to name-calling because you feel threatened by a news channel :crazy:

It's etiquette, LT. Arista goes mental at any perceived slight in a thread, so asking him to be consistent isn't name-calling or a threat, and I'll be happy to explain this to Parm when he finishes off the discussion on your behalf again.

Even this thread, I set out some rules to try and have a discussion - they used to be popular on here before the trolls took over, but you can't help yourself. As I said the other day, it's just boring now - the act is well worn and tired.

[arista]

USA :University of Michigan
is blasted as 'parochial and moronic' after 'woke' IT task force
bans words like 'picnic,' 'brown bag' and 'blacklist' for
being offensive and harming morale

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9085007/University-Michigan-task-force-claims-words-picnic-brown-bag-blacklist-offensive.html


What the hell is wrong with the word "Picnic"
Slim?

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/12/24/13/37216224-9085007-The_University_of_Michigan_was_blasted_as_moronic_ for_launching_-a-1_1608818352455.jpg

[Ammi]

…the DM are outraged over this 6 month old story and want to share their outrage and spread the outrage word because of their interest in the university of Michigan…but the more recent story of historical abuse against a former professor of the university against multiple students at the time…no such articles of concern from the DM…

…the DM don’t know who your university are…they don’t know about you but they’re looking for WOKE and they can tell you, they may not have true stories but what they do have is a very particular set of WOKE STORY SEEKING SKILLS…skills that they’ve acquired over a very long OUTRAGE career…skills that make their stories a nightmare for people like you…if you let that WOKE go now, that might be the end of them because they might run out of woke manipulating…but they’ll still look for woke and they’ll still pursue woke and they’ll still find woke and they’ll KILL woke…

[Livia]

That's Labour councils for you.

[Marsh.]

What's Labour got to do with the University of Michigan? :conf:

[arista]

[Comparing Sir Winston Churchill to Adolf Hitler
is a 'disgrace', says top historian Sir Anthony Seldon]


Woke Nutters

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9729135/Comparing-Sir-Winston-Churchill-Adolf-Hitler-disgrace-says-historian-Sir-Anthony-Seldon.html

[arista]

What's Labour got to do with the University of Michigan? :conf:


No
it was a tweet on Camden Council I posted
but it vanished

[The Slim Reaper]

USA :University of Michigan
is blasted as 'parochial and moronic' after 'woke' IT task force
bans words like 'picnic,' 'brown bag' and 'blacklist' for
being offensive and harming morale

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9085007/University-Michigan-task-force-claims-words-picnic-brown-bag-blacklist-offensive.html


What the hell is wrong with the word "Picnic"
Slim?

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/12/24/13/37216224-9085007-The_University_of_Michigan_was_blasted_as_moronic_ for_launching_-a-1_1608818352455.jpg

Only just seen this, but i'm sure I've spoken abut picnics on here before. It's actually 2 issues at play here. First off, the association of picnics, including cannibalistic and trophy collection from black lynchings, but it's also coupled with a bit of a myth that popped up within former slaves, and it's been passed on down their descendants. Namely that the word picnic is derived from "pick a n*****"

[arista]

Only just seen this, but i'm sure I've spoken abut picnics on here before. It's actually 2 issues at play here. First off, the association of picnics, including cannibalistic and trophy collection from black lynchings, but it's also coupled with a bit of a myth that popped up within former slaves, and it's been passed on down their descendants. Namely that the word picnic is derived from "pick a n*****"


So its due to the Horrors of 200 years ago.


Picnic is a normal thing for a family today.



What is Next avoiding roads?
as Roman slaves built them?

[Ammi]

..as I said, it’s interesting that the DM will carry this 6 month old story with their interest in the university but a current story attached to the same university of historic student abuse by a professor being investigated …and no interest…


…I think the question, Arista would more be…what the hell is wrong that the DM feel their readers ‘outrage’ would be sparked more with a ‘word task force’ story than student abuse…outrage culture is quite outrageous atm and becoming more and more so…

[arista]

..as I said, it’s interesting that the DM will carry this 6 month old story with their interest in the university but a current story attached to the same university of historic student abuse by a professor being investigated …and no interest…


…I think the question, Arista would more be…what the hell is wrong that the DM feel their readers ‘outrage’ would be sparked more with a ‘word task force’ story than student abuse…outrage culture is quite outrageous atm and becoming more and more so…


Its a Worldwide top site
Legit

[The Slim Reaper]

So its due to the Horrors of 200 years ago.


Picnic is a normal thing for a family today.



What is Next avoiding roads?
as Roman slaves built them?

No, lynchings were still happening as late as the early 1980's but more widespread only 20 years earlier in the 60's. People are alive today that would have lost family members to lynchings.

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/12/24/06/37216222-9085007-image-a-86_1608791614179.jpg

:laugh2:

no wonder people do not take the woke-squad seriously

[arista]

No, lynchings were still happening as late as the early 1980's but more widespread only 20 years earlier in the 60's. People are alive today that would have lost family members to lynchings.



OK
but it does not matter now, I can still buy an M&S picnic set

[arista]

https://images-eu.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71JgUhTTeCL.__AC_SX300_SY300_QL70_ML2_.jpg


This Set
on amazon UK

[Tom4784]

Deleted Post

[arista]

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/12/24/06/37216222-9085007-image-a-86_1608791614179.jpg

:laugh2:

no wonder people do not take the woke-squad seriously



They are Bonkers

[arista]

Tell that to India.

Do I think Churchill is as bad as Hitler? No. Do I think he should be hero worshipped as he is? Definitely not. He was a terrible human being that saw none-white people as animals and left India (which was a part of the Brittish Empire at the time) to suffer a famine that killed 2-3 million people. People that could have easily been saved and SHOULD have been saved given that India was under our rule, our protection.

Churchill is undeserving of statues and hero worship, people who equate his statues to the people who died fighting in WW2 are basically using those sacrifices to fuel an agenda. You can honour the lives lost in WW2 without monuments to monstrous men who inflicted undue suffering upon people they should have looked after. Replace Churchill's monuments with monuments to all the people we lost in WW2. Honour their sacrifice.



Yes Dezzy we must say sorry to India

[Ammi]

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2020/12/24/06/37216222-9085007-image-a-86_1608791614179.jpg

:laugh2:

no wonder people do not take the woke-squad seriously

…Arista takes it very seriously I’ll have you know…it’s a worldwide top thing, legit…

[Crimson Dynamo]

Yes Dezzy we must say sorry to India


India have so much to thank this country for

[arista]

…Arista takes it very seriously I’ll have you know…it’s a worldwide top thing, legit…

Yes
but the World is Split.

I say Dig up all History
but do not change our ways now,
Publish all the horrors.


Does not mean we will change.

[The Slim Reaper]

Only just seen this, but i'm sure I've spoken abut picnics on here before. It's actually 2 issues at play here. First off, the association of picnics, including cannibalistic and trophy collection from black lynchings, but it's also coupled with a bit of a myth that popped up within former slaves, and it's been passed on down their descendants. Namely that the word picnic is derived from "pick a n*****"

.

[Toy Soldier]

To be honest some of the list I agree with and some I don't, and the reasoning for picking the words seems really haphazard and sometimes in reverse? For example, there's nothing wrong with the word "handicap" used as intended, the offensive part is that it was EVER then used to describe people with disabilities "as handicapped" (presumably, in comparison to the average). The complicated part there, I suppose, is that you could argue the same for "disabled".

I personally totally agree with stopping using terms and phrases that are unambiguously linked to slavery.

I also agree with using gender-neutral terms in place of the male default (police officer over policeman, etc.) however I don't agree with forcing gender neutrality where it isn't warranted.

On principle I agree that people shouldn't use terms like "crazy", "insane", "sanity check" as throwaway words though I think the meanings of those have possibly shifted to the point where that's unrealistic.

That's sort of what I mean about the reasoning and it seeming to come from both angles.

Some words that have had the meaning totally change over time, they want to ban because of the etymology. Others they want to ban completely IGNORING the uncontroversial etymology, because of current word associations. I find it hard to see how we can have it both ways without ending up with an untenable list of "not ok words and phrases" with volumes A-Z.

Picnic is a bit of a bizarre standalone example because the offense taken to the word is based on an imaginary etymology that never actually existed in the first place...

[ThomasC]

Woke is fine sometimes. If you're fighting for inequality.

The reason why it becomes a problem is because some people who are 'woke' become too PC. You can't say anything these days!

[bots]

if we had to stop using picnic it would end yogi bear, and i'm not having that :fist:

[ThomasC]

To be honest some of the list I agree with and some I don't, and the reasoning for picking the words seems really haphazard and sometimes in reverse? For example, there's nothing wrong with the word "handicap" used as intended, the offensive part is that it was EVER then used to describe people with disabilities "as handicapped" (presumably, in comparison to the average). The complicated part there, I suppose, is that you could argue the same for "disabled".

I personally totally agree with stopping using terms and phrases that are unambiguously linked to slavery.

I also agree with using gender-neutral terms in place of the male default (police officer over policeman, etc.) however I don't agree with forcing gender neutrality where it isn't warranted.

On principle I agree that people shouldn't use terms like "crazy", "insane", "sanity check" as throwaway words though I think the meanings of those have possibly shifted to the point where that's unrealistic.

That's sort of what I mean about the reasoning and it seeming to come from both angles.

Some words that have had the meaning totally change over time, they want to ban because of the etymology. Others they want to ban completely IGNORING the uncontroversial etymology, because of current word associations. I find it hard to see how we can have it both ways without ending up with an untenable list of "not ok words and phrases" with volumes A-Z.

Picnic is a bit of a bizarre standalone example because the offense taken to the word is based on an imaginary etymology that never actually existed in the first place...

There is something wrong with the word 'handicap' and it's to do with the connotations of the word. I work in this sector and it's just not a word that is used. Not saying that you think there isn't just saying. It's contextual to how you use the word as certain words have numerous meanings.

[Toy Soldier]

Woke is fine sometimes. If you're fighting for inequality.

The reason why it becomes a problem is because some people who are 'woke' become too PC. You can't say anything these days!

The issue for me will always be simply in ability to debate and justify a stance. If someone can do that then I'm more than willing to hear them out no matter what their stance happens to be. If they start parroting mantras and insisting on what "is and isn't right and wrong" but on a little prodding are clearly just repeating a script rather than having any real thought or logic behind it... then to me that's really just a different flavor of ignorance.

I know a lot of people believe that if someone accidentally happens to fall on "the right side of the fence" then that's all good for strength in numbers and it doesn't really matter if they have a clue what they're talking about or not... but I would counter that their mindset is a bigger problem than the beliefs. Put that person in a different echo chambre for a month or two and they're going to come out humming a completely different tune. Because if they don't have the critical reasoning skills to form and back up their own genuine opinion, then they don't have the structures in place to avoid indocrination full stop.

In a nutshell that is my main issue with a lot of "woke people". Throw a couple of tougher questions at them and it becomes evident that there's absolutely **** all reasoning behind their opinions.

[Toy Soldier]

There is something wrong with the word 'handicap' and it's to do with the connotations of the word. I work in this sector and it's just not a word that is used. Not saying that you think there isn't just saying. It's contextual to how you use the word as certain words have numerous meanings.

My point was that the word is fine used in its intended context (levelling the playing field between players of different skill levels in sports/competition). That is the etymology of the wors and I think it's still fine to use the term in that way, e.g. "your golf handicap". It should of course NEVER have been used to offensively describe people with disabilities, and has never/will never be OK in that context.

[Toy Soldier]

what kind of weird moderation is going on in this thread?

all sorts of legit content is being deleted

slim can post this inaccurate stuff:

Only just seen this, but i'm sure I've spoken abut picnics on here before. It's actually 2 issues at play here. First off, the association of picnics, including cannibalistic and trophy collection from black lynchings, but it's also coupled with a bit of a myth that popped up within former slaves, and it's been passed on down their descendants. Namely that the word picnic is derived from "pick a n*****"

----------

I post a Reuters fact check proving that Picnic has nothing to do with race and its gets deleted

wtf

what is the agenda here???
__________________

What he said isn't inaccurate to be fair - he did say that the "pick-a" etymology of picnic is "a myth"/misconception that's been handed down generationally. That is accurate. I think the disagreement would be around whether or not it's sensible to ban a word "with innocent origins" based on the offense it might cause due to those misconceptions.

[ThomasC]

The issue for me will always be simply in ability to debate and justify a stance. If someone can do that then I'm more than willing to hear them out no matter what their stance happens to be. If they start parroting mantras and insisting on what "is and isn't right and wrong" but on a little prodding are clearly just repeating a script rather than having any real thought or logic behind it... then to me that's really just a different flavor of ignorance.

I know a lot of people believe that if someone accidentally happens to fall on "the right side of the fence" then that's all good for strength in numbers and it doesn't really matter if they have a clue what they're talking about or not... but I would counter that their mindset is a bigger problem than the beliefs. Put that person in a different echo chambre for a month or two and they're going to come out humming a completely different tune. Because if they don't have the critical reasoning skills to form and back up their own genuine opinion, then they don't have the structures in place to avoid indocrination full stop.

In a nutshell that is my main issue with a lot of "woke people". Throw a couple of tougher questions at them and it becomes evident that there's absolutely **** all reasoning behind their opinions.

People can still have an opinion though without knowing all the ins and outs.

The debater can change my opinion or educate me.

Suppose it depends on the speaker's knowledge of the subject.

Yes, you have to have some thought and logic.

[The Slim Reaper]

what kind of weird moderation is going on in this thread?

all sorts of legit content is being deleted

slim can post this inaccurate stuff:

Only just seen this, but i'm sure I've spoken abut picnics on here before. It's actually 2 issues at play here. First off, the association of picnics, including cannibalistic and trophy collection from black lynchings, but it's also coupled with a bit of a myth that popped up within former slaves, and it's been passed on down their descendants. Namely that the word picnic is derived from "pick a n*****"

----------

I post a Reuters fact check proving that Picnic has nothing to do with race and its gets deleted

wtf

what is the agenda here???
__________________

As TS pointed out, nothing I said was incorrect, and I think mods were trying to help with the clear up of the constant spamming of pictures instead of discussion - which is all I asked for in this thread. I made it pretty clear in the op, and the one instant you try to make a semi-legitimate point (you only made it because you thought you'd caught me out). you got caught up in a sweep of Arista posting picnic hampers.

There was no agenda

And if it's legitimate, put it into your own words.

[Toy Soldier]

People can still have an opinion though without knowing all the ins and outs.

Well yes and it's unrealistic to expect anyone to know ALL of the ins and outs, that's the whole point of debate, but when someone appears to know essentially NONE of the ins and outs, can't explain any of their reasoning to you, and are simply repeating verbatim arguments they've heard elsewhere... I struggle to find those opinions really worth listening to.

Doesn't even mean they're wrong. Obviously anyone can throw a dart and have it land on a sensible conclusion. I just place a fair bit of stock in knowing that it is actually their conclusion. In short, I suppose, I'm saying I have far more time for someone with a polar-opposite opinion to mine who has a strong argument backing up that opinion, than I do for someone who happens to agree with me but has little reasoning to share.

[Crimson Dynamo]

as ts pointed out, nothing i said was incorrect, and i think mods were trying to help with the clear up of the constant spamming of pictures instead of discussion - which is all i asked for in this thread. I made it pretty clear in the op, and the one instant you try to make a semi-legitimate point (you only made it because you thought you'd caught me out). You got caught up in a sweep of arista posting picnic hampers.

There was no agenda

and if it's legitimate, put it into your own words.

thanks but i will post how i like not how you want

this thread is ironically proof of what it is trying to debunk

[Toy Soldier]

I actually think it could be fair enough/interesting to allow thread-starters to set official parameters for threads. It would have to be an "official rule" though and I doubt we have the moderation capacity for it these days.

I'd also stipulate that in SD's it couldn't include restricting alternate GENUINE opinion, no to echo chambers :nono:, but I do think "no just spamming images", "no just posting links without comment to go with it", "no replying just to :clap1: the poster above", "decent length responses only" (or even "keep responses succinct and don't meander off into random allegories"... if one was so inclined... :hmph: ...) could be fair enough requests when starting a thread.

[The Slim Reaper]

thanks but i will post how i like not how you want

this thread is ironically proof of what it is trying to debunk

Lets not act like you haven't constantly spammed stupid pictures throughout the whole thread. I tried to set up one thread to have a proper discussion, and even that was too much for you, so you've had to troll.

Pretty sure it's not a coincidence that it's only you and Arista that have done it, when you never post your opinions, and Arista never posts a sentence. I don't watch drag race, so you never see me in those threads, so if you can't put your thoughts into a coherent paragraph, then maybe threads asking for coherent paragraphs just aren't for you.

Keep going though, I'm sure you can get it closed down if you carry on.

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that Liv tried the exact same thing earlier, too.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Lets not act like you haven't constantly spammed stupid pictures throughout the whole thread. I tried to set up one thread to have a proper discussion, and even that was too much for you, so you've had to troll.

Pretty sure it's not a coincidence that it's only you and Arista that have done it, when you never post your opinions, and Arista never posts a sentence. I don't watch drag race, so you never see me in those threads, so if you can't put your thoughts into a coherent paragraph, then maybe threads asking for coherent paragraphs just aren't for you.

Keep going though, I'm sure you can get it closed down if you carry on.

^^^

blah blah sly dig

blah blah member insult



yeah slim REAL coherence



:skull:

[Marsh.]

I actually think it could be fair enough/interesting to allow thread-starters to set official parameters for threads. It would have to be an "official rule" though and I doubt we have the moderation capacity for it these days.

I'd also stipulate that in SD's it couldn't include restricting alternate GENUINE opinion, no to echo chambers :nono:, but I do think "no just spamming images", "no just posting links without comment to go with it", "no replying just to :clap1: the poster above", "decent length responses only" (or even "keep responses succinct and don't meander off into random allegories"... if one was so inclined... :hmph: ...) could be fair enough requests when starting a thread.

Let Vicky live!!!

[The Slim Reaper]

If I had argued myself into a corner, I'd put my fingers in my ears and go "lalalala" too.

All of it is facts. You couldn't even get to the end of page 2 before the spamming started. I think if you read the first few posts you'll see that the idea of the thread and setting up the rules was well received.

I don't post vimeo vids in your YT thread.

[Cherie]

Let Vicky live!!!

And Ammi!

like I enjoy peoples different posting styles :shrug:

not sure what the problem is tbh :laugh:

[The Slim Reaper]

And Ammi!

like I enjoy peoples different posting styles :shrug:

not sure what the problem is tbh :laugh:

It's not about posting styles because we all have our own versions. I just wanted a good faith discussion for once. Nowhere in the OP does it say anything about ellipses and Ammi or nonsense and Annie, all it says is that I want peoples opinions. Why that should be controversial or fought against in SD is truly bizarre.

[thesheriff443]

Why would you want to keep spending hours and hours on here arguing a point of view on a subject that you can’t do anything about or change the opinion of someone else who doesn’t agree with you.

Intelligence tells me it’s a waste of time

[Marsh.]

Why would you want to keep spending hours and hours on here arguing a point of view on a subject that you can’t do anything about or change the opinion of someone else who doesn’t agree with you.

Intelligence tells me it’s a waste of time

Why do you feel the need to enter any debate topic and tell the people who take part how superior you are because you don't wish to take part, except when you do.

Intelligence tells me you're a fake.

[Crimson Dynamo]

And Ammi!

like I enjoy peoples different posting styles :shrug:

not sure what the problem is tbh :laugh:

restricting freedoms is restricting freedoms

its woke and its negative

[ThomasC]

It's not about posting styles because we all have our own versions. I just wanted a good faith discussion for once. Nowhere in the OP does it say anything about ellipses and Ammi or nonsense and Annie, all it says is that I want peoples opinions. Why that should be controversial or fought against in SD is truly bizarre.

You're probably wasting your time.

I think TiBB is the wrong forum for deep debate. :joker:

Too many on here have lived very sheltered lives, which is fine, we all have different circumstances.

Thankfully, I was banned for well over a decade so I was able to venture out and experience life etc. Life experience helps develop debate and wisdom.

Alternatively, people just want to have fun and not be serious.

I think it's such a shame DS has closed a lot of their main forums because if you wanted a debate you sure could get it there. Their traffic was immense whereas TiBB is on a very slow trajectory into the sea. This place has got so quiet you struggle to even gather enough members to have a good debate.

[thesheriff443]

Why do you feel the need to enter any debate topic and tell the people who take part how superior you are because you don't wish to take part, except when you do.

Intelligence tells me you're a fake.

Your lack of intelligence tells me I’m right
Stay pressed.

[Beso]

I dont understand these words.

Can someone make a list of all these words, with their meanings, and make a sticky thread please.

[Marsh.]

Your lack of intelligence tells me I’m right
Stay pressed.

Nothing to say? Thought so. Stick to the insults.

[ThomasC]

I dont understand these words.

Can someone make a list of all these words, with their meanings, and make a sticky thread please.

Google helps :blush:

[Beso]

I'm confused, is marsh now woke?

[ThomasC]

I think we all need to sit back and calm down.

ORDER, ORDER, ORDER. Your Queen has spoken.

Yours faithfully,

Thomas

[Beso]

Google helps :blush:

You used to have an answer to a question within minutes on tibb in the past.

Before all these new words came along things were fine.

[ThomasC]

You used to have an answer to a question within minutes on tibb in the past.

Before all these new words came along things were fine.

Viewing figures dramatically dropped when I LEFT.

I fear that there is no return.

I do apologise.

[Toy Soldier]

Why would you want to keep spending hours and hours on here arguing a point of view on a subject that you can’t do anything about or change the opinion of someone else who doesn’t agree with you.

Intelligence tells me it’s a waste of time


A good debate is as much (for me personally, moreso) about examining, challenging and refining your own thoughts on the debate topic as it is about “changing other people’s minds”.

As for whether or not TiBB is the right place for it, often the answer is no, but there’s also a different type of discussion to be had between a smaller group of people that has a long-term measure of each other than there is just having robust standalone debates with strangers. There are plenty of places on the internet you can go for that.

[Beso]

It's etiquette, LT. Arista goes mental at any perceived slight in a thread, so asking him to be consistent isn't name-calling or a threat, and I'll be happy to explain this to Parm when he finishes off the discussion on your behalf again.

Even this thread, I set out some rules to try and have a discussion - they used to be popular on here before the trolls took over, but you can't help yourself. As I said the other day, it's just boring now - the act is well worn and tired.

Name the trolls.

[Mystic Mock]

I can't be woke because I'm too busy being sleep.

[Mystic Mock]

…and actually they’re not ‘ridiculous examples…they’re very harmful examples because there are some who are believing ‘that woke weapon’ and that they have to rise up against it and take a stand …the power of labels and demonisation and manipulation…*cough*…Nigel Farage….

How anyone still takes Nigel Farage seriously is beyond me.

The guy doesn't even live in the UK anymore, yet he was so pro-Brexit.:fist:

[Mystic Mock]

Yeah I've really only heard it in an insulting manner, I've not heard anyone refer to themselves as woke (maybe people do but I've not come across that yet) I take it to mean people who follow every social justice issue to the letter without question and if you question anything you're automatically on the far right. There doesn't seem to be a lot of middle ground allowed anymore or open conversations on emotive social issues.

I agree with you 100% that having a middle ground approach to certain Political issues is nigh impossible nowadays, people in the UK in particular feel like they're becoming more and more far right or far left rather than be moderate.

Being woke nowadays does tend to be associated with the far left, but in it's original definition I personally think that it's a good thing, obviously idiots have taken the term and made it a bit more psychotic like that Curry thread on here with the American woman.

[Rob!]

I do not like the word.

Ban it.

You mean cancel it?

[arista]

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/1692E/production/_120326429_star3008.png

[BBC TEXT
Daily Star leads on a story that "idiot flakes"
want to cancel children's cartoon Paw Patrol
for brainwashing children into liking police officers.
"You paw deluded fools" is the headline.]

[Mystic Mock]

Some people want to ban Paw Patrol?:laugh2:

Jfc and I thought that I needed to get a life lol.

[Toy Soldier]

The “paw patrol” thing is ancient news…

[arista]

The “paw patrol” thing is ancient news…


Well
The Star has dug it up
to sell their cheeky paper.