Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 11246553)

Scotland wants to start calling paedophiles, 'minor attracted persons'

Just wondering if that's wokism?

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11246497)

Do you see what I mean? you don't have to agree with me, but do you at least see my point?

You said wokesists were as bad as racists, I ask for an example, and you said not you, but a couple of people on twitter.

Do you see how uneven those issues are?

Not having a go or trying to belittle you, but does this at least provide an example for how overblown the "dangers of wokeism" are versus the reality of what is being done to the world?

I agree about Ms Flack - Dan Wooton was rewarded for that by being given his own right wing TV show to spew more hate, so taking that into consideration, do you still consider wokeism/bigotry as 2 sides of the same coin?

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11246498)

It's all good dude, I hope you have the same understanding when it comes to my post replying to you above this one. Nothing personal, just trying to make a point.

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11246608)

Oh I understood where you were coming from.

Originally Posted by parmnion (Post 11246553)

Scotland wants to start calling paedophiles, 'minor attracted persons'

Just wondering if that's wokism?

Originally Posted by Alf (Post 11246609)

You're alone on that one.

I can't understand the geezer.

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11246611)

That group should be put in jail imo, regardless of what name that they want to go by.

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11246607)

Admittedly I did exaggerate it a little bit about how bad woke stuff can be, especially when thinking about that they're more of a danger to entertainment related things rather than people's actual lives.

So basically I can see where you're coming from.

And I honestly can't believe that Dan Wooton got rewarded for his treatment towards Caroline Flack, and the sad thing is that he hasn't learned anything from that incident.

Originally Posted by Christmas Lights (Post 11246627)

Dan Wooten is and has always been a greasy goblin , he's vile .

I don't think you exaggerated the woke stuff atall, it's got to the stage now where we've gone so far left with ideaology ...that it's gotten delusional & ridiculous .

But I've made my views clear on the right wing especially the far right , they're crazy and I will never agree with them on everything.

But I've found myself agreeing more & more with the average conservative /moderate right wing , because of how crazy the other side has gone .

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock (Post 11246662)

I agree with you about Dan Wooton, he is a disgrace.

I don't know if this is classed as woke (but it's definitely criminal) would you class this woman pouring Bleach down a man's crotch on a crowded Train as far left/woke ideology? Because it's the only criminal offence that I can think of that might be motivated with that kinda thought process, which admittedly is one too many if that's the case.

And I agree with you on the far right, their viewpoints are too extreme for me, especially when it comes to black people or women getting anything positive, they'll have a fit about it.

Originally Posted by Christmas Lights (Post 11246674)

Now i remember that insane story, was it ACTUALLY bleach???.... i heard that might have been clickbaity . But i remember being shocked when i heard about it . It was in a water bottle wasn't it??.
As for the woke ideaology , i think the nutty unhinged ones would probably applaud her .... so yeah things are bleak now.

But that's not to be confused with the normal feminists who would not support this . See even that word 'feminism' has become something else now which is really sad.

Weirdly the far left & far right have alot in common despite being polar opposites, both will never step down and both will never listen to reason ... so yeah crazy .

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11246469)

Firstly, good to see you back and I hope you're ok. You got a little crazily obsessed and unhinged towards the end there, so I hope the break has done you good. That's not being a smart arse or to try and put you down/sneak diss, it happens to all of us, so I hope you take it in the genuine way in which I meant it, and that you have a good 23.

So, the first thing that sticks out is the acknowledgement of what I'm referring when I describe the propagandistic explanation for woke/wokeism. So then on the other side of that, please point out the journalists, the newspapers, the tv personalities, or anyone other than your circle of friends that knows exactly what you're on about, and use the word in the nuanced way you suggest.

That's without the telepathy required to know whether or not someone understands the cause they claim to be progressing, is yet another hoop that needs to be jumped through to conform to your definition. It's seems to be more of what you think it should be, than a generally accepted view.

The very first line in that post is



The rest of that paragraph is basically you tying yourself in knots, so lets go back. On the previous page, I explained that "stay woke" was initially a black description of being aware of their own history. Do you agree with that? Obviously there are other nuances at play, but as a general descriptor? So then, again, is that the way woke/wokeism is used today? Is it's use in media and on tv, and even on this forum, the pejorative, propagandistic one, or the original one?

The last paragraph is more of a rant that i'm not sure makes a lot of sense to me.

To explain again, my view on wokeism is that it is a primarily right wing culture war. There is no need for the dance and telepathy.

The world is has been screwed by the right wing status quo - capitalist/conservatives. The wealth inequality is growing exponentially, people are dying waiting for ambulances, so there is a definite need to keep left wing idea out of the mainstream because they would appeal.

If you ask a non leftist on the street, about leftist politics, what do you think would be the first one or two things they would say to describe what leftism is?

Do you think woke would come up before holiday pay. maternity/paternity pay, safe working environments, fairer tax system, investing in communities, social programs?

I think we both know that telepathy isn't required to answer that honestly.

I'm not even mad. The right are absolutely killing it at the moment (literally and figuratively) and they've done a great job with this culture war, so that even the leader of the opposition regularly has to attack them from the right.

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy (Post 11246802)

I don't disagree with you about "the man on the street" at all, but I believe (and am sure I've said on here before) that the real issue there is the conflation of left/right politics with what's playing out in "culture wars" which actually has very little to do with traditional left/right politics, and everything to do with anti-intellectualism of competing flavours - none of them good flavours. THere's an imbalance because (what might be called) "Progressive" anti-intellectualism is a MASSIVE albatros for the actual-political-left, whereas "Conservative" anti-intellectualism is being played like a fiddle by the right.

I 100% agree with the observation that the mainstream media leans heavily towards the Fox News/Piers Morgan/Jordan Peterson end of the spectrum but the actual public discourse (mainly of course on Social Media) is a mess all around. I don't think it's possible to deny that the aggression/violence aimed at Rowling for example isn't a clear example of extreme "social justice anti-intellectualism" and poor discourse, nor that it's abundant. I also think there's an inclination for people to deny it for fear of inadvertantly bolstering "the other side", or drawing friendly fire.

It's also very easy to be drawn into that style of rhetoric (for everyone) if one forgets to take a step back and take a breath, and I'm finding, also worryingly easy to backslide - and that's because of the attack-defense-attack cycle of these conversations when they're not open-minded or wholehearted. But that's the nature of tribalism. It can't exist without more than one tribe.

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper (Post 11246813)

So for Rowling, I agree to an extent, but I also think she is purposefully and consistently antagonistic towards the trans community.


Anyone who has concerns about trans issues - I get it, there are grey areas that still exist for me - mainly sports, but if anyone presents that they have issues, but then trawls mumsnet and facebook to constantly attack the community, then that is a very different issue.

Rowling uses her platform to attack in a way that also goes beyond "concerns." Now does that mean she deserves death threats? Absolutely not, but lets not pretend that she doesn't know exactly what she's doing. I'd be interested in your thoughts on the contra points vid I posted in the other thread, if you ever get the chance to watch it.