Poll: Is Woke a new religion?

[Father Heathen]

In my country there is no wokeism.
Wokeism is in the US.
Where drag queens read fairy tales to children.

The right uses "wokeism" to refer to any sort of advocacy for racial equality, LGBT rights, bodily autonomy, ecological protection, etc.
Are you suggesting none of this exists outside the U.S.?

You do realize that it calls your judgement and credibility into question to be supporting the anti-lgbt movement as a trans woman, right? You do realize that if the "team" you're rooting for won, it wouldn't end well for you, right?

 

[Father Heathen]

Absolutely. Because kids get confused. If it deals with drag queens, we are speaking of people looking like fairies or mermaids, but sounding like a male.
It's better women do that job.

How does keeping kids dumb and sheltered prepare them for the real world?

 

[Estro Felino]

The right uses "wokeism" to refer to any sort of advocacy for racial equality, LGBT rights, bodily autonomy, ecological protection, etc.
Are you suggesting none of this exists outside the U.S.?

You do realize that it calls your judgement and credibility into question to be supporting the anti-lgbt movement as a trans woman, right? You do realize that if the "team" you're rooting for won, it wouldn't end well for you, right?

My country is very modern.
LGBT rights are incredibly protected by the State. Feminism and gender equality are really taken care of by politics.

But wokeism means to cross all lines: it means to propagandize the LGBT issues as if they were a product to sell.

 

[Father Heathen]

"Woke" has become a meaningless term since there's no consistent usage.

Even if you try to redefine it from awareness of systematic racism to advocacy that goes too far, where is the line drawn? We have people calling plant based sausage "woke", ffs...

 

[Stevicus]

Grrr...I wrote half a response, went to a party, and seem to have lost it.
However, whilst basically a progressive, I think of myself in centrist terms. A key rationale in doing so is to encourage myself NOT to be reactionary. I'm strongly against the sort of hypocritical views that yell freedom when it suits, then remove abortion rights, for example. I get that they have justifications...I don't find them compelling. But despite being mostly against 'the right' (if I can use some clumsy shorthand) I have an intense dislike of reactionism. If Side B tries to tell me that something is metaphorically black, my response is not to argue that it's white. Rather, my response is to ignore them entirely and try to work out what shade of grey it is. Because everything is grey.

So, when you say that 'overall, I think most canceling and demonization of people or even entire groups, distortion of history, and vilification of items associated with "evil groups" (e.g., Pagans) come from the groups who most often use "woke" as a term of denigration toward others' my immediate thought is 'so what'? My next thought is to wonder why progressives would be so keen to become that which they hate, if via the employment of different means.

At the end of the day, I agree that conservative views are often intertwined with what I see as biased messaging, an ability to ignore inconvenient truths, and a deep-rooted belief that things were better in the 1950s...which seems entirely dependent on what group of people out belong to.

But in terms of cancel culture, seeing the left pushing harder to use social stigma to punish non-conformers doesn't give me comfort. It just makes me wonder how few are left actually prioritising natural justice, assumptions of innocence, concepts of free speech (and I am faaaaar from a zealot in terms of free speech) and more.

That's all a little ramble-ey, as I'm still mad I lost my original post, so sorry.
This article is a decent representation of my views, I would say. And hey, it's The Atlantic, so I should maintain some level of progressive cred...lol.

The Real Reason Cancel Culture Is So Contentious

That was an interesting article. Another point I would add about cancel culture (or PC or "wokeness" or whatever anyone wants to call it) is that, despite whatever well-intentioned motive there might be behind it, it hasn't been successful at achieving any sort of coherent objective. It's a failed strategy. As a political tactic, it doesn't work. Hate crimes are on the rise. They're not going down. How do the defenders of cancel culture explain this, if they think they're so right and everyone else is so wrong? Why isn't their strategy succeeding?

A lot of the narrative also seems inaccessible to much of the general public, as it seems to be concocted within the insularity of academia, without giving much attention to the cares and needs of working class Americans. The people who seem most prominent within cancel culture are those who were born into wealth and privilege, while going around and pointing their fingers at everyone else for being "privileged." Do they seriously believe that no one notices this? Are they that far out of touch?

 

[wellwisher]

Woke is a religion since so much of its doctrine is based on an imaginary extrapolation, of some root arguments that are based on reality. The problem is how facts are extrapolated. The main culprit is to use of a one size fits all approach, that lumps mostly members of the left wing voter base, as the oppressed, while the right wing voter base is the oppressor. Clarence Thomas of the Supreme Court is called Uncle Tom by the Left, since he is not included, since he is on the other clan. It is not exactly about race, as they claim. If it was he would be held up as a black man who overcame without sour grapes; good example.

Name me a Left wing white male, such as President Biden, who is called a racist, even if he says such things that the left would call racist, if Trump said it? If you are Lefty you are excused. If we did a case by case study, extrapolation the one size firs all would not hold up to political reality. That makes it unscientific and closer to a religion.

I was born over a hundred years, after slavery ended in the USA. But according to woke fantasy religion, I am still somehow responsible for slavery due to only my white skin. I have to pay reparations; via collective taxes, for something they cannot prove had anything to do with me. It sound like plagiarism of original sin being tried in a kangaroo court. If they could prove their claim of slavery applied to me, with hard evidence, I will gladly pay, but if not or until then, I should be exempt. The self serving fantasy world, that will not hold up under simple scientific scrutiny. This tells me fantasy and manipulative form of religion; Satanic.

Woke and Critical Race Theory, does not mention that before slaves came to America, slaves were very common in Africa. It was customary for conquering African tribes to enslave their defeated rivals. Africa also had over a million white slaves, before slavery reached America, so slavery was not personal but practical. The slave trade in the West, began when existing slaves were traded to the Dutch for guns. It was a transfer of slaves from African slave owners to Western slave owners.

Why is only white skins having to pay, since slavery in America, not have been possible without the original black slave owners and their slaves already accepting the right of their slave master to trade them? Will some blacks also have to pay retribution for priming the pump? Or does the religion of woke get to use a different starting time, that better favors their Party benefiting sales pitch? Separation of church and state needs to purge this religion from schools, but we should still allow it to be covered under free speech and private donations.

Is anyone aware, that the Southern branch of the Democrat party, at the time of Lincoln, tried to separate the USA into two countries, so these Democrat leaders could keep slavery alive in the USA, after Lincoln made it illegal? This led to the Civil War. Lincoln stopped them, via the Civil War.

After losing, the same Southern Democrats worked to undermine the blacks in the South with systemic racism, which lasted longest in the Democrat run South; George Wallace. My guess is the Left is trying to avoid full responsibility, by creating a narrative blaming all whites, and not just the Democrats white who wanted to keep slavery alive, one way or the other. Democrat blacks may have a case against their own party, since party loyalty in General Elections since the Civil War, against Republicans, would cause many Northern Democrats to horse trade with the systemic racism goals of the Southern Democrats. This was done via the pork barrel addenda to bills; pork could be a bridge or a racist law; quid pro quo. The Party would unify around trades to stay in power and control the law.

Foe example, when Southern Democrat culture was divided into white and black only, everything, this could not perpetuate in National Law, without full Democrat party support. It only fell apart in the 1950's, when Northern Democrats, started to fight for change in Court. The Republicans finally got the votes needs for change. In Woke religion, this pivotal 150 years is very foggy and blamed on everyone but themselves.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Absolutely. Because kids get confused. If it deals with drag queens, we are speaking of people looking like fairies or mermaids, but sounding like a male.
It's better women do that job.

My kids wouldn't give two hoots if it was a drag queen reading the story, a cisgender male, or a cisgender female. There was a drag queen story hour at our local library (not just a US thing) in the time the regular story hour was, so my 2 year old went to that instead. She's much more worried about whether the story is one of her favourites, and whether they get time to have a dance after the story.

Kids mostly get confused when adults tell them to, in my experience. Otherwise they are remarkably more resilient than we give them credit.

 

[Father Heathen]

My country is very modern.
LGBT rights are incredibly protected by the State. Feminism and gender equality are really taken care of by politics.

Yet this is precisely what the right is calling "woke".

But wokeism means to cross all lines: it means to propagandize the LGBT issues as if they were a product to sell.

Define the lines.

Also, you keep dodging this question: how do you reconcile being a trans woman who embraces anti-lgbt ideology?

 

[Estro Felino]

My kids wouldn't give two hoots if it was a drag queen reading the story, a cisgender male, or a cisgender female. There was a drag queen story hour at our local library (not just a US thing) in the time the regular story hour was, so my 2 year old went to that instead. She's much more worried about whether the story is one of her favourites, and whether they get time to have a dance after the story.

Kids mostly get confused when adults tell them to, in my experience. Otherwise they are remarkably more resilient than we give them credit.

I understand.
Drag queens here are interested in entertaining men, rather than kids.

 

[Father Heathen]

Woke is a religion since so much of its doctrine is based on an imaginary extrapolation, of some root arguments that are based on reality. The problem is how facts are extrapolated. The main culprit is to use of a one size fits all approach, that lumps mostly members of the left wing voter base, as the oppressed, while the right wing voter base is the oppressor. Clarence Thomas of the Supreme Court is called Uncle Tom by the Left, since he is not included, since he is on the other clan. It is not exactly about race, as they claim. If it was he would be held up as a black man who overcame without sour grapes; good example.

Name me a Left wing white male, such as President Biden, who is called a racist, even if he says such things that the left would call racist, if Trump said it? If you are Lefty you are excused. If we did a case by case study, extrapolation the one size firs all would not hold up to political reality. That makes it unscientific and closer to a religion.

I was born over a hundred years, after slavery ended in the USA. But according to woke fantasy religion, I am still somehow responsible for slavery due to only my white skin. I have to pay reparations; via collective taxes, for something they cannot prove had anything to do with me. It sound like plagiarism of original sin being tried in a kangaroo court. If they could prove their claim of slavery applied to me, with hard evidence, I will gladly pay, but if not or until then, I should be exempt. The self serving fantasy world, that will not hold up under simple scientific scrutiny. This tells me fantasy and manipulative form of religion; Satanic.

Woke and Critical Race Theory, does not mention that before slaves came to America, slaves were very common in Africa. It was customary for conquering African tribes to enslave their defeated rivals. Africa also had over a million white slaves, before slavery reached America, so slavery was not personal but practical. The slave trade in the West, began when existing slaves were traded to the Dutch for guns. It was a transfer of slaves from African slave owners to Western slave owners.

Why is only white skins having to pay, since slavery in America, not have been possible without the original black slave owners and their slaves already accepting the right of their slave master to trade them? Will some blacks also have to pay retribution for priming the pump? Or does the religion of woke get to use a different starting time, that better favors their Party benefiting sales pitch? Separation of church and state needs to purge this religion from schools, but we should still allow it to be covered under free speech and private donations.

Is anyone aware, that the Southern branch of the Democrat party, at the time of Lincoln, tried to separate the USA into two countries, so these Democrat leaders could keep slavery alive in the USA, after Lincoln made it illegal? This led to the Civil War. Lincoln stopped them, via the Civil War.

After losing, the same Southern Democrats worked to undermine the blacks in the South with systemic racism, which lasted longest in the Democrat run South; George Wallace. My guess is the Left is trying to avoid full responsibility, by creating a narrative blaming all whites, and not just the Democrats white who wanted to keep slavery alive, one way or the other. Democrat blacks may have a case against their own party, since party loyalty in General Elections since the Civil War, against Republicans, would cause many Northern Democrats to horse trade with the systemic racism goals of the Southern Democrats. This was done via the pork barrel addenda to bills; pork could be a bridge or a racist law; quid pro quo. The Party would unify around trades to stay in power and control the law.

Foe example, when Southern Democrat culture was divided into white and black only, everything, this could not perpetuate in National Law, without full Democrat party support. It only fell apart in the 1950's, when Northern Democrats, started to fight for change in Court. The Republicans finally got the votes needs for change. In Woke religion, this pivotal 150 years is very foggy and blamed on everyone but themselves.

Wow, that's quite the fleshed out straw man.

 

[metis]

Clarence Thomas of the Supreme Court is called Uncle Tom by the Left, since he is not included, since he is on the other clan.

I've never heard any in the "Left" do that, but maybe you travel on different circles.

Name me a Left wing white male, such as President Biden, who is called a racist, even if he says such things that the left would call racist, if Trump said it? If you are Lefty you are excused.

Party politics should be an issue of concern, no doubt with me, but anyone who understands politics here in the States well knows that Biden is more of a left centrist than a "Lefty", such as with AOC. Omar, etc.

I was born over a hundred years, after slavery ended in the USA. But according to woke fantasy religion, I am still somehow responsible for slavery due to only my white skin.

Do you have any more Fox propaganda to share with us while you're at it because the above is nothing but sheer nonsense? What scholars refer to was called "institutionalized racism", namely that we may grow up exposed to racism and not even be aware of it, and it doesn't happen with just one "race", btw. A basic understanding of social psychology in this context has very much varied this subliminal influence.

Is anyone aware, that the Southern branch of the Democrat party, at the time of Lincoln, tried to separate the USA into two countries, so these Democrat leaders could keep slavery alive in the USA, after Lincoln made it illegal? This led to the Civil War. Lincoln stopped them, via the Civil War.

During Lincoln's time period, the Republicans were the party of the "Left", and the gradual switch around occurred mainly in the 1930's but with the majority of "Southern Democrats" finally switching to become Republicans mainly in the 1960's.

 

[PureX]

Grrr...I wrote half a response, went to a party, and seem to have lost it.

**chucking** And this surprises you?

However, whilst basically a progressive, I think of myself in centrist terms. A key rationale in doing so is to encourage myself NOT to be reactionary. I'm strongly against the sort of hypocritical views that yell freedom when it suits, then remove abortion rights, for example. I get that they have justifications...I don't find them compelling. But despite being mostly against 'the right' (if I can use some clumsy shorthand) I have an intense dislike of reactionism. If Side B tries to tell me that something is metaphorically black, my response is not to argue that it's white. Rather, my response is to ignore them entirely and try to work out what shade of grey it is. Because everything is grey.

So, when you say that 'overall, I think most canceling and demonization of people or even entire groups, distortion of history, and vilification of items associated with "evil groups" (e.g., Pagans) come from the groups who most often use "woke" as a term of denigration toward others' my immediate thought is 'so what'? My next thought is to wonder why progressives would be so keen to become that which they hate, if via the employment of different means.

At the end of the day, I agree that conservative views are often intertwined with what I see as biased messaging, an ability to ignore inconvenient truths, and a deep-rooted belief that things were better in the 1950s...which seems entirely dependent on what group of people out belong to.

But in terms of cancel culture, seeing the left pushing harder to use social stigma to punish non-conformers doesn't give me comfort. It just makes me wonder how few are left actually prioritising natural justice, assumptions of innocence, concepts of free speech (and I am faaaaar from a zealot in terms of free speech) and more.

That's all a little ramble-ey, as I'm still mad I lost my original post, so sorry.
This article is a decent representation of my views, I would say. And hey, it's The Atlantic, so I should maintain some level of progressive cred...lol.

The Real Reason Cancel Culture Is So Contentious

Here is what I find interesting about "woke culture".

When I am searching around for some sort of theatrical entertainment and find every streaming service buried in "woke" content because woke-ness is now apparently absolutely mandatory among entertainment content producers these days, and I feel annoyed, I then have to ask myself how committed I really am to the ideals behind this phenomenon. It pushes my own liberal idealism right back in my face.

And I like that.

I like having to look at myself and ask how committed I really am to progressive inclusion when I'm feeling annoyed by all the progressive, inclusive content I have to weed through and reject to get to some form of entertainment that I actually identify with. Call me a weirdo, but the very thing that conservatives hate so much about "woke-ness" (that in your face, forced inclusivity) is the very thing I find interesting about it. Not because I like it, but because I don't.

And I think this is the real difference between being a liberal or being a conservative these days. The conservatives just can't get past the "I don't like it" level of consideration, to asking themselves why not.

 

[Stevicus]

My kids wouldn't give two hoots if it was a drag queen reading the story, a cisgender male, or a cisgender female. There was a drag queen story hour at our local library (not just a US thing) in the time the regular story hour was, so my 2 year old went to that instead. She's much more worried about whether the story is one of her favourites, and whether they get time to have a dance after the story.

Kids mostly get confused when adults tell them to, in my experience. Otherwise they are remarkably more resilient than we give them credit.

Thinking back to my school days, I don't think I can recall a single time where we had anything like any kind of "story hour" at a local library, regardless of who was doing the reading. Occasionally our teachers might read a story to the class, but that was also a good time to zone out. I never really cared much for "story time." We made up our own stories as kids, such as the story about how the fire started in the boys lavatory.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Lols I guess Ancient Greek theatre was woke all along, eh?)

Oh, that Aristophanes.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

And they are not interested in working with kids.

Been there, done that. What about it?
Shouldn't matter anymore than my music, movie or literature choices (which some people think is something that actually does matter).

I am not understanding why so many trans women are into cisgender women, in the United States. I find it really weird, honestly.

From what I've seen you are HORRIBLE about assuming this and wrong in your assumption.

Because kids get confused

 

[Estro Felino]

Also, you keep dodging this question: how do you reconcile being a trans woman who embraces anti-lgbt ideology?

If LGBT ideology means to propagandize young kids who are cisgender and heterosexual to push them to become all LGBTs, then yes, I am against it.
And yes, it's indoctrination.
And yes, the 90% of kids (and of people) are cisgender heterosexuals

 

[LuisDantas]

What exactly is woke?

To the best of my understanding, it is caring about people that others may perceive as acceptable targets.

But currently the word is used mostly as a conveniently non-specific derogative and insult by the maddest segments of the far right.

 

[Gargovic Malkav]

Apart from not enumerating a "god" (afaik), do other characteristics of "woke" align with religions?

I'd say in a way similar to how "scientism" or "salafism" can be called a religion.
When such questions are asked to people whom I would think such a label may be applicable though, they often don't seem to understand what it means.
Whether it's genuine ignorance or willful, people will always be people.

 

[Estro Felino]

From what I've seen you are HORRIBLE about assuming this and wrong in your assumption.

If I am wrong, I am sorry. But that's what mainstream media advertises all the time.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

**chucking** And this surprises you?
Here is what I find interesting about "woke culture".

When I am searching around for some sort of theatrical entertainment and find every streaming service buried in "woke" content because woke-ness is now apparently absolutely mandatory among entertainment content producers these days, and I feel annoyed, I then have to ask myself how committed I really am to the ideals behind this phenomenon. It pushes my own liberal idealism right back in my face.

And I like that.

I like having to look at myself and ask how committed I really am to progressive inclusion when I'm feeling annoyed by all the progressive, inclusive content I have to weed through and reject to get to some form of entertainment that I actually identify with. Call me a weirdo, but the very thing that conservatives hate so much about "woke-ness" (that in your face, forced inclusivity) is the very thing I find interesting about it. Not because I like it, but because I don't.

And I think this is the real difference between being a liberal or being a conservative these days. The conservatives just can't get past the "I don't like it" level of consideration, to asking themselves why not.

That doesn't sound very healthy, to force yourself onto something in such a way for such reasons.