Is Woke a religion?

[icehorse]

I don’t care about that.

The meaning of the term “woke” hasen’t changed. The word is just being deliberately corrupted and abused by people with a slanderous agenda. And I don’t see any reason to allow the study of linguistics to excuse it. There is nothing new or unique about the concept of someone experiencing a cognitive, intellectual, spiritual, or experiential awakening. People do so all the time, and always have. But at this moment in history, there happens to be a sub-group within our culture that wants to promote our collective ignorance by slandering any sort of personal awakening, because our ignorance is required to serve their agenda.

And we need to stop buying into their BS and making excuses for them. Being “woke” (awakened) is a good thing. Period. And it always has been. We should be encouraging it. Not perverting the term by misapplying it to bad behavior just so we can slander the true value of it.

Words are symbols for the actual things. I appreciate how you're using the term "woke" and agree that, that older meaning symbolizes good things.

But as progressives tell us all the time, language evolves, and now "woke" has an additional, newer meaning, and it's the behaviors and beliefs associated with the newer meaning that we're discussing in this thread.

Many words have multiple meanings.

 

[Argentbear]

Words are symbols for the actual things. I appreciate how you're using the term "woke" and agree that, that older meaning symbolizes good things.

But as progressives tell us all the time, language evolves, and now "woke" has an additional, newer meaning, and it's the behaviors and beliefs associated with the newer meaning that we're discussing in this thread.

Many words have multiple meanings.

it didn't evolve it was manipulated into being a derogatory term and chosen to be manipulated because of the positive connotations of being work and being aware of discrimination going on around you. SUch awareness is the last thing those doing the manipulating want.

 

[icehorse]

it didn't evolve it was manipulated into being a derogatory term and chosen to be manipulated because of the positive connotations of being work and being aware of discrimination going on around you. SUch awareness is the last thing those doing the manipulating want.

As I've said, I'm not attached to the word "woke". So for now I'll say "radical left". So the thread could have been titled "Has the radical left created a new religion?"

And as I've, what I mean when I say "radical left" is people who view the world thru the lens of:

- relentless identity politics
- intersectionality theory
- gender ideology
- the oppressed vs. the oppressor worldview
- attempts to curtail free speech in the name of reducing "hate ______" (crimes, speech
- DEI
- cultural appropriation
- white colonizers / white guilt

And so on

 

[ppp]

As I've said, I'm not attached to the word "woke". So for now I'll say "radical left". So the thread could have been titled "Has the radical left created a new religion?"

And as I've, what I mean when I say "radical left" is people who view the world thru the lens of:

- relentless identity politics
- intersectionality theory
- gender ideology
- the oppressed vs. the oppressor worldview
- attempts to curtail free speech in the name of reducing "hate ______" (crimes, speech
- DEI
- cultural appropriation
- white colonizers / white guilt

And so o

Which of those things are you complaining about?

 

[icehorse]

Which of those things are you complaining about?

When taken to the extremes that the radical left take them to, all of them.

 

[ppp]

When taken to the extremes that the radical left take them to, all of them.

Cultural Appropriation is a sociological term that describe the fact that when cultures come in contact that one or both cultures will take some phenomenon from the other. Cuisines are a common example of a neutral for appropriation.

What you are complaining about is Cultural exploitation where the more power culture uses some component of a less powerful culture to their advantage, and to the determent of the subject culture. Are you going to deny that such a thing is a common occurrence; both historically and currently?

 

[Augustus]

it didn't evolve it was manipulated into being a derogatory term and chosen to be manipulated because of the positive connotations of being work and being aware of discrimination going on around you. SUch awareness is the last thing those doing the manipulating want.

Seems an oversimplistic way to paint it. People have always taken terms and used them ironically to critique a particular stance or perspective.

Other than the big bad boogeyman of "Right Wing Media", it is perfectly possible for reasonable people to agree with the goal of reducing discrimination., but disagree with the policies and ideologies being promoted by some of the more ideological groups.

These are subjective 'solutions' to complex problems, and policies and programmes in such case can make things better or make things worse.

For example, some studies have shown (unsurprisingly) that the more people focus on things like race as a marker of identity, the more they judge people differently based on this marker. So one may legitimately find the current trend towards emphasis of differences to be counterproductive. Maybe they are right, maybe they are wrong, but either perspective is reasonably arguable.

People may find "progressive" segregationist policies of 'safe spaces' where certain races are not allowed to be problematic. Or policies that aim to 'correct' past discrimination by discriminating against a different group in the present. Ditto concepts such as 'microaggressions', 'cultural appropriations' etc.

Then there is also criticism of those who affectedly and performatively aim to show their progressive bona-fides to gain social status. Such behaviour, whether moral, political or religious has always been something mocked by large sections of society.

People need simple labels to apply to complex phenomena in their environment, always have done always will do. Hence the evolution of the term 'woke' used in an ironic, pejorative or satirical manner.

So while you certainly get bigoted demagogues railing against woke, you also get people who simply disagree with a certain stream of ideological approaches to solving a complex problem, and others who find certain public displays of 'virtue' to be pretentious and self-righteous. Unless we say such groups could not possibly exist, and everyone who disagrees with one particular subjective, ideological approach is doing so out of bad faith or because they have been brainwashed by "Right Wing Media", we have to accept that many people just use the term as it is what emerged as the most convenient label to describe a social phenomenon.

Like many such things it is a vague and amorphous concept that means different things to different people, but so are countless uncontroversial labels we use.

To me it seems wilfully obtuse to insist “woke just means being aware of discrimination” and therefore anyone who uses the term dismissively must be pro-discrimination (or ignorant or something else along those lines), when that is quite obviously not how many people use the term. It's just another form of the manipulation of language for cheap point scoring.

 

[icehorse]

Very well written @Augustus

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Its relevant because you were talking about how women view(accept)transgenders.
Its relevant because they view(accept)gay men in a similar way.

It's different because gay men are men whereas trans women are women. It's a big difference. My female friends don't treat me like their gay friends.

another slur, wow your arguments must be weak.

You must not have known many lesbians who outbutch you. Or ever hear of Dykes on Bikes? The best manager I ever had, she's more masculine and manly than anyone you know and she describes herself as a proud dike.
It's not a weak argument, it's that I've known women who feel people deny them their "feminity because [they] act like one of the guys." Amd, yes, they get targeted amd made into victims by people who obsess over trans women and enforcing segregation.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

establishment of religion for legal types of purposes.

Do you even know what the generally legak definition of a religion is?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

But as progressives tell us all the time, language evolves, and now "woke" has an additional, newer meaning, and it's the behaviors and beliefs associated with the newer meaning that we're discussing in this thread.

In this case its RW bozos who totally misunderstood it and insist that's what it really means, much like the pinheaded masses who never correctly use passive-aggressive (there's always demiberate action in what they call) or anti-social (being shy is not the opposite of pro-social).

 

[We Never Know]

It's different because gay men are men whereas trans women are women. It's a big difference. My female friends don't treat me like their gay friends.

Ok. Question time...

If a transgender female who is still physically male has a relationship with a man/male, is that a homosexual relationship?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If a transgender female who is still physically male has a relationship with a man/male, is that a homosexual relationship?

Why is it even important to label it? I'd just call it a romantic relationship like I do any other romantic relationship. I see no reason to focus on the gay/straight thing unless it's needed for clarity, like how race is usually not really needed or relevant to a discussion except for the few occasions when it's needed to clear things up.

 

[anotherneil]

Do you even know what the generally legak definition of a religion is?

The "legal definition" of what a religion is would be what the definition of what a religion is. What's your point & why did you cut out part of my quote?

 

[We Never Know]

Why is it even important to label it? I'd just call it a romantic relationship like I do any other romantic relationship. I see no reason to focus on the gay/straight thing unless it's needed for clarity, like how race is usually not really needed or relevant to a discussion except for the few occasions when it's needed to clear things up.

Why is anything labeled?
Why use labels like
-transgender
-homosexual
-straight
-nonbianary
-cisgender
-etc etc.

Its for clarity I reckon.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Why is anything labeled?
Why use labels like
-transgender
-homosexual
-straight
-nonbianary
-cisgender
-etc etc.

Its for clarity I reckon.

Well you reckon wrong.

 

[ppp]

Why is anything labeled?
Why use labels like
-transgender
-homosexual
-straight
-nonbianary
-cisgender
-etc etc.

Its for clarity I reckon.

I think that @Shadow Wolf was asking why you feel it necessary to label that specific relationship? Anything more than your idle curiosity?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

The "legal definition" of what a religion is would be what the definition of what a religion is. What's your point & why did you cut out part of my quote?

I cut it because the entire post is built on a very faulty premise. There is an actual legal definition of religion and it's not "what a religion is." You don't know. Obviously you don't know. Woke isn't a religion according to any law or legal definition and doesn't satisfy the standards that even Scientology managed to weasel through.

 

[Argentbear]

Seems an oversimplistic way to paint it. People have always taken terms and used them ironically to critique a particular stance or perspective.

Other than the big bad boogeyman of "Right Wing Media", it is perfectly possible for reasonable people to agree with the goal of reducing discrimination., but disagree with the policies and ideologies being promoted by some of the more ideological groups.

There is a lot to unpack right there.

Recently I came across a report on the civil right protests led by Martin Luthor King Jr and in particular Birmingham Alabama. Eugene "Bull" Conner the city commissioner of Birmingham Alabama in the late 50s' and early 60's and a staunch segregationist. He was the man who ordered high pressure hoses be turned on black children along with ordering the police to turn dogs loose on these same children and insisting the children be attacked with batons. Conner said in an interview at the time that he did not in any way hate black people but disagreed with the idea of racial equality and only had issues with African American's who didn't know and accept their place.
I was struck by your use of the same ideas 60 years later.

History teaches us a lot and the history of how the word "woke" was hijacked is an interesting read.

in a 2020 interview with Vox Magazine Karen Swallow Prior, a professor of English and Christianity and culture at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary recalls “In my conservative Southern Baptist community, the term has become an insult that is used against anyone who is concerned about justice and racism,” She relates how religious leaders were encouraged to push the new usage in their sermons and daily dealings to attack anyone and any idea from the left.


So yes it is perfectly possible for reasonable people to agree with the goal of reducing discrimination., but disagree with certain ideologies that isn't what happened.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I think that @Shadow Wolf was asking why you feel it necessary to label that specific relationship? Anything more than your idle curiosity?

Yup. It's not really important and indeed in the past people didn't make such distinctions.