Drewbahr's recent activity
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
-
Comment on Help - Steam Link inconsistent across different games in ~games
Drewbahr Link ParentArtemis is a... fork? I dunno, maybe the wrong term, but it's related to Moonlight. I have a friend who tried Sunshine and Moonlight and it didn't work well at all for him, but Sunshine and...Artemis is a... fork? I dunno, maybe the wrong term, but it's related to Moonlight.
I have a friend who tried Sunshine and Moonlight and it didn't work well at all for him, but Sunshine and Artemis did. I'm just happy there's some options in this space.
-
Comment on Help - Steam Link inconsistent across different games in ~games
Drewbahr LinkI'll have to dig around for specific help on Steam Link, so I must apologize in advance ... however, I've never gotten Steam Link to behave well at all. If it isn't issues like what you're facing,...I'll have to dig around for specific help on Steam Link, so I must apologize in advance ... however, I've never gotten Steam Link to behave well at all. If it isn't issues like what you're facing, it's others - poor latency, low image quality, and other issues.
What I did instead was, I installed Sunshine on the host machine, and installed Moonlight on the device which I was going to be using to play the game. While the initial setup may be a bit time-consuming, given that you're running an atypical OS (Bazzite) I'm going to guess that you're more tech-savvy than I am - and that said, I didn't find the setup to be that complicated or challenging to implement.
I even found a video that appears to explain how to set this all up on Bazzite itself. I haven't watched it myself, as I'm at work and haven't the time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVKmQTkLvLYI hope someone comes through and explains the specific issue with Steam Link for you, though.
EDIT TO ADD:
Looks like there's some years-old discussions on the issue:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Steam_Link/comments/mbqyor/support_steam_link_just_displays_black_screen/
https://steamcommunity.com/app/506500/discussions/0/343785574529836515/ -
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentIf people had listened to the people who are far more patient and eloquent than I, I wouldn't still be shouting about it. And yet, here we are. I'll never say I'm the most effective about this...If people had listened to the people who are far more patient and eloquent than I, I wouldn't still be shouting about it.
And yet, here we are.
I'll never say I'm the most effective about this topic, and there's always room for improvement in messaging. But as you said, it takes two people, and if the people that shared stuff like this transcript would take a step back and consider whether it's adding to the discourse, or just noise intended to start a flight, we'd be in a better place still.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentI was taking a break, right up until you replied to a days-old thread. I'm not distressed. I'm sick of having the same conversation over and over again, for years. And this is the same...Maybe a break is due?
I was taking a break, right up until you replied to a days-old thread.
I'm not distressed. I'm sick of having the same conversation over and over again, for years. And this is the same conversation. Every part of it. And we'll keep having this conversation, for generations to come, until this country has an actual reckoning on its racism.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentThe word "woke" is hitting semantic satiation for me. "Did wokeness leave us worse off?" and "woke value system" and "woke messaging system" and, and, and ... do you see what the problem here is?...The word "woke" is hitting semantic satiation for me. "Did wokeness leave us worse off?" and "woke value system" and "woke messaging system" and, and, and ... do you see what the problem here is? "Woke" doesn't mean anything anymore, not just in this thread but in media generally.
What is a "woke value system"? What is a "woke messaging system"?
If people find "wokeness" as "performative, cringey, scolding, or just flat out annoying" ... then why? What part(s) of "wokeness" hit them that way?
-
If it's because they felt like they were being "hit over the head" with messaging about murders, police killings, etc, from a racial standpoint ... then they missed the point entirely. The fact that people are paying attention and talking about how bad things are shouldn't be "annoying", it should be infuriating! And if it isn't ... why is that?
-
If it's because they don't like being confronted with LGBTQ+ issues ... same question about, why is that annoying?
If people are getting irritated with the delivery and not the message, then maybe that's a conversation worth having - but it doesn't address the article! Did Wokeness Leave Us Worse Off? continues to go unanswered (in my opinion - because I suspect some people are going to accuse me, again, of "not engaging with peoples' responses).
I don't know enough about the entire panel to say what their values are, but they certainly didn't strike me as having “anti-woke” beliefs.
One of the panelists specifically says they have "anti-woke sensibilities". Given that you and that panelist appear to disagree on what that means, we bump into the age-old problem, again, of what "woke" means.
I am genuinely curious about the rest of your political identity though. I've seen you get passionate a number of times about bigotry and identity politics, and obviously we've discussed 2024 through that lens, but I can't recall seeing anything else about what type of world you want to live in, the type of candidates you support, or who/what your influences are.
I want to live in a world in which people stop murdering each other over race, sexual identity, religion, etc. I don't really want to go further than that, because as this thread has shown, there's people that will find ways to lambaste others over such statements (I've done it too, I admit).
-
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentYes, I "insisted" upon writing a response as I read it - because I wanted to break down my thoughts and feelings as they came to me as I went through the piece. What's wrong with that? What...Yes, I "insisted" upon writing a response as I read it - because I wanted to break down my thoughts and feelings as they came to me as I went through the piece. What's wrong with that?
What context am I disregarding? I constant refer back to where the speakers themselves change their opinions mid-podcast on the very topic they're discussing.
Did I write a reactionary piece? OF COURSE. It's a reaction to this topic/podcast! What else could it be?
It's playing to the audience here at Tildes who like to imagine they're so educated but simultaneously intentionally choosing to not read.
Pot and kettle?
What does the article boil down to? Some of the actions taken in the last decade were performative, not effective at bringing about progressive change, and became mainstream which drove a counter-culture. None of that should be controversial for anyone paying attention unless the reader believes that their black square profile picture was super duper effective.
The stated headline of the article/podcast is "Did Wokeness Leave Us Worse Off?" Sure, some of what some people did was performative - there's extensive documentation out there that suggests even "performative" demonstrations can be effective in getting people on your side, and I would argue that rallies, protests, etc are also "performative". But I see the point there and I don't disagree with it. But what, in your paragraph there, addresses the question from the article - "Did Wokeness Leave Us Worse Off"?
Did it?
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr (edited )Link ParentOne offhand comment about frat houses is all it took for you to disagree with everything? Really? I'm not "mad at the speakers" for this. I made an observation that "dudebro" culture has been...One offhand comment about frat houses is all it took for you to disagree with everything? Really?
I'm not "mad at the speakers" for this. I made an observation that "dudebro" culture has been ever-present at frat houses for as long as I can remember. Am I not allowed to make a snarky but otherwise unimportant observation?
Beyond that, you're entitled to your opinion, and I'll take your criticism as seriously as it's warranted.
EDIT TO ADD: I should note:
This comment displays signs that you went into it ready to disagree with it no matter what it said.
Absolutely. I went into reading the article ready to disagree with it, because I disagree with the premise, and title of the article: Did Wokeness Leave Us Worse Off?
I don't see how I could go into the article with an open mind, when I disagree with the title of the article itself.
-
Comment on What does Tucker Carlson really believe? I went to Maine to find out. (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr (edited )Link ParentIf we're thinking that Tucker Carlson is somehow the face of a "better" right wing, then we're in deep trouble. He's no better than anyone you've mentioned. EDIT TO ADD: Please, I implore you (and...If we're thinking that Tucker Carlson is somehow the face of a "better" right wing, then we're in deep trouble. He's no better than anyone you've mentioned.
EDIT TO ADD: Please, I implore you (and anyone else stumbling across this thread) to find details about Tucker Carlson and his beliefs. The long-running (and recently ended - RIP) podcast "Knowledge Fight" focuses primarily on Alex Jones/InfoWars and his decades-long career of racism, conspiracy theories, and rampant hatred ... but they have several episodes focused on Tucker Carlson as well.
When I say that Tucker Carlson is no different than Alex Jones, I mean it. He's a monster in a bowtie that has managed to somehow apply a veneer of respectability over himself, but if you actually listen to what he says he is just as monstrous as Alex Jones, Nick Fuentes, and other right-wing hate-mongers.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentDisagreement isn't dismissal, and engagement isn't dismissal either. I'm still confused as to the harms that are being claimed that have been done by "woke". The claim is there that "well meaning...Disagreement isn't dismissal, and engagement isn't dismissal either. I'm still confused as to the harms that are being claimed that have been done by "woke".
The claim is there that "well meaning folks have been crucified in the name of pronouns", which is simply not a thing I've seen really happen outside of, perhaps, some extremely online spaces. I've never seen it happen in-person, face-to-face, with or to anyone, apart from obvious bigots who misgender people on purpose. So I disagree with the assertion that "crucifixion in the name of pronouns" is a thing that happens on any statistically significant level.
In the meantime, people have been murdered for being members of the Democratic Party, have had their houses raided by the FBI for being Democrats - actual, real harms.
Then there's the idea that "woke left us worse off" because it didn't go far enough in the moment ... to which I say, is that an actual harm? It harmed us by not being adopted by people in this country? Or is the harm the pushback against that movement, that halted it before it got rolling?
Now, are there things worth examining in how certain movements succeeded or failed? Of course. But "woke" isn't a thing. "Wokeness" isn't a movement, it isn't an organization. It's a poorly-defined boogeyman being held up by the American right as a strawman that they can pin whatever evils they want onto, as a scapegoat to keep their supporters incensed and donating. And it's working!
So all of that is to say, I reject the premise of the article/podcast, and in explaining myself I'm now being called condescending and dismissive.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentIt took over an hour to put that post together, and the OP is unlikely to read or engage with it. The story may have been different had I done so from the beginning, but nothing that I've seen in...More of this, please.
It took over an hour to put that post together, and the OP is unlikely to read or engage with it. The story may have been different had I done so from the beginning, but nothing that I've seen in this thread suggests that that hour was spent well.
"Unfair" opinion incoming!
The podcast transcription suggests that it was 30 minutes of people saying "Man, aren't woke people exhausting?" That isn't worth anyone's time, IMO, and I called it out from the start. And instead of people reflecting on the obvious bad-faith framing of the article/podcast, they instead insist upon asking us to listen to this, without forming an opinion of the material themselves, other than to say "I don't agree with all of it, but some of it I found interesting or thought-provoking."
You'll see that throughout this thread, I ask a simple question - "where has wokeness gone too far?" "Where did wokeness leave us worse off?" And other than people describing "the left" as patronizing and condescending, leading to a shitty outcome in 2024 ... there's nothing.
And yes, 2024's election was a shitty outcome. Part of that may come down to messaging, sure. But at the end of the day, white Americans chose Trump again. They chose a man with decades of documented racism, who inspired a mob to try and overthrow the government, and some people here are claiming that it's because "the left" wasn't nice enough, or Kamala Harris bungled her messaging.
I would argue that Trump won because ours is a deeply racist country, and he reflects what we are. But that's getting a bit off-topic, so I'll stop that there (this time).
This conversation gets more and more tiring every time it happens. And it has happened many, many times, here and elsewhere. And it will happen again, here and elsewhere, with a new coat of paint and insistence that no actually it's a different conversation this time when it's just ... not. It's just not.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentI believe it is possible that folks on the left could go "too far" in their methods. What I have yet to see is an example of what that means, or any concrete example of the left actually "going...I believe it is possible that folks on the left could go "too far" in their methods. What I have yet to see is an example of what that means, or any concrete example of the left actually "going too far".
An example could be The Weather Underground, which sought to overthrow the government (at least, according to Wikipedia) using such methods as bombings of government buildings. That is definitely "going too far" despite being a "leftist" organization with goals that I don't necessarily disagree with (the United States is, after all, extremely imperialistic).
Thus far, what I have seen "the woke left" do is ... what, talk down to people while advocating for justice? For centuries of murder?
People are going to bring up Charlie Kirk, to which I respond with Mark and Melissa Hortman (and their dog), or January 6th, or any other myriad examples of the political right murdering people without consequence.
What I am asking for are concrete examples of something that you feel a "woke" person has asked for, or done, that went too far. Was asking for pronoun recognition a step too far? Was asking for racial justice too much? What specific "demand" that has been made has been too much?
I'd argue that the reason you're coming up empty is for a number of reasons:
- the demands aren't actually extreme
- you can't find a single set of concrete demands, because there is no "woke movement", no single organizing faction, no singular set of ideals - "woke" isn't a group
- you may be affected by right-wing propaganda being exported from the USA
- some other reason I lack the energy to figure out
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentI personally do not agree that asking for a modicum of respect (in terms of pronouns, or bathroom access, personal rights, etc) is being "condescending", but I also admit that I'm on the side of...I personally do not agree that asking for a modicum of respect (in terms of pronouns, or bathroom access, personal rights, etc) is being "condescending", but I also admit that I'm on the side of the condescenders, so to speak.
I also don't agree that this condescention, so to speak, is what led to Trump's win in 2024. I have a much more negative view on that - it was this country doing what it does best, which is being racist and sexist in extreme ways. Just look at the history of the country, in my opinion, and see what I see, and I think you'd agree.
So maybe that's my blind spot. My family comes from "flyover country" and I grew up in a small, rural, farming town (admittedly, one with a university), so I don't speak to "those people" as the problem, because American culture is the problem. Ours is an incredibly white, and incredibly racist culture, and it has been for over 400 years. It still is. I mean, we're what - two generations out from when Black folks didn't have the right to vote. We're 50 years out from when women couldn't open a line of credit. All of these advancements are still very very new, and the underlying culture hasn't actually kept up with them - in large part because, IMO, it doesn't want to.
And I fail to see how that's a problem of "the left", personally.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentYou're still not engaging with the question - where has "woke" gone too far? What parts have gone wrong? I'm asking for your input because you've done the same here. I personally don't think any...You're still not engaging with the question - where has "woke" gone too far? What parts have gone wrong?
I'm asking for your input because you've done the same here. I personally don't think any parts of "wokeness" were "wrong", because many of the left-wing movements since 2020 have focused on such simple ideas as "stop killing people" and "respect each other". I don't agree that "language policing" is that much of a problem, because - as stated in the article - so many people are becoming comfortable with throwing slurs around again. That's something that should be "policed" - we shouldn't be accepting that people will just throw the R word or N word around in public.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr LinkSo, I've decided to engage with and read the article - or rather, the transcript of a podcast. I feel I was initially unfair to TreeFiddyFiddy, and I feel like the discourse has gone on long...- Exemplary
So, I've decided to engage with and read the article - or rather, the transcript of a podcast. I feel I was initially unfair to TreeFiddyFiddy, and I feel like the discourse has gone on long enough that there may be some "value" in informing myself about this.
First off, my biggest question: do they define "wokeness"? I'll find out.
The first thing I will say is, the title of the "article" is clearly click- and engagement-bait. It's not asking the reader to engage honestly, but rather it's trying to incite the very conflict we're seeing throughout this thread. I will also say that by titling the article in this fashion, it informs me of what their intentions are. It's not to have an honest discussion about "wokeness" and its excesses; it's to take shots against the left.
My opinions, etc etc.
So, here's where I start reading.
-
First off, they say our culture is abandoning "political correctness", not "wokeness". They're inconsistent with their terms and topic.
-
The "game" of stating whether a word is "alive" or "dead" seems like a dumb gimmick, punching down (again) on the left.
-
People opining on "folx" and "latinx" without actually being a member of the people who use such terms feels like an issue. I understand latinx has baggage, and there's a lot of arguments for and against the term. I won't weigh in with my opinion, because I don't have one - I'm a cishet white man. It's not my word to use "towards" people. I won't assume someone's identity in that fashion.
-
Now they have "defined" woke as just "politically correct" in a new suit. Colyar here defines themselves as "anti-woke", which tells me everything I need to know about them. The fact that they unironically call being "the woke of five years ago" as "cringe" is also very telling. Five years ago, "woke" people were protesting in the streets because of the murders of George Floyd, Brianna Taylor, and so, so many others. I don't think that's "cringe". Now, I may be conflating the "wokeness" of ... well, not murdering people with the "wokeness" of pronoun choice, which is probably what Colyar is actually in opposition to - but they never define terms, so here we are.
-
To Spiegelman's point, if a white person says they're "woke", that is definitely a red flag - because of the conversation throughout this thread. "Woke" has taken on far too much baggage thanks to the American right for people to use it earnestly anymore. Furthermore, as I've seen throughout a variety of circles I run with, being "woke" isn't a label you apply to yourself. That misses the point of the original use of the term.
-
Now we're taking pot shots at the "pink pussyhats" and books on anti-racism. Again, what is the actual problem with those things? Many of the books on anti-racism predate 2020, they weren't written "for the moment". Now their issue seems to be more about how people chose to show their political affiliation and resistance against Trump and the "culture war", rather than the message itself. So is the problem "wokeness", or is the problem that people showed up in ways you don't like?
-
Again, they are continuing to attack the style of the message, but not the message. They don't like "black square day", they don't like people posting infographics, they don't like certain books, fine. But what do they think of "wokeness"? They aren't engaging with the premise of their article/podcast - which was "did wokeness leave us worse off?"
-
People rankling at the "anti-racist training in workplaces" now, saying it doesn't feel effective. My main issue with that workplace training has less to do with the fact that it exists, and more to do with the fact that people won't actually engage with it. I can understand pushing back against it because "work is telling me what to do/say/think", but honest to God if people actually took a step back and engaged with the content, they may see where it's coming from. At the very least they'll have an informed opinion about it - much like I'm doing with this article.
-
Shockingly, Colyar discovers that "the left" isn't a monolith. People have a diversity of opinions!
-
Sow speaks to her experience as an African later moving to the USA. It's good insight. I'd have been curious to have had the insight of a Black American born and raised in the racism from day one, too. I've sought out such voices, and ... well, I'll just say I don't think they would agree with this article at all.
-
Now we're taking a joke seriously (Marc Maron).
-
Sow and Colyar seem to feel that the past five years may have actually annoyed people into fascism, and not - y'know, the past 400+ years of institutionalized racism, or the fact that the Nazis were inspired by American racism, or the fact that concentration camps (as we know them) were created in the United States, or any other such thing. People, these article people included, seem to feel that American Fascism is a new construct, born of the modern era - without wrestling with sundown towns or the Asian Exclusion Acts or any of our actual history. For fuck's sake, the Oregon Territory was initially created to be a haven for white people!
-
I think Colyar's right, in the sense that "the right" talks like "normal people". I don't think they're right for the same reason they think, though. I think Colyar is right because there's a deep, deep undercurrent of racism and hatred in white American culture, so much so that using those offensive slurs is normal. And that's a problem, one that should be corrected! I don't want people running around throwing slurs at anyone.
-
Now Sow is talking about politeness and civility in terms, which seems to be in direct opposition to their stated opinions about the frivolity of "woke language". It's hard to circle that square - why is it now basic decency to refer to someone by their preferred pronouns or name, when earlier it was "cringe"?
-
Sow is a card-carrying member of the DSA, and we have fundamental disagreements about language! The left does contain multitudes.
-
I think Colyar and Sow have gotten far, far too internet focused on these interactions. I have never, ever in my life, met someone in meatspace/"the real world" that got brutally offended over the earnest misuse of a pronoun, or being personally offended when asked what their pronouns are. And even if they were, it costs no one anything to apologize and move on. They say "people do not give each other grace", and maybe that's true - on the internet. I could learn something from that, except for the fact that my friends can all vouch for the fact that I talk (and am confrontational) like this in the real world too. And maybe that's not a good thing. Regardless, I feel like they're making strawman arguments left and right - they're creating "militant students" that bite the heads off their professors as a target dummy for their misgivings about the way language is moving.
-
Again, Sow making statements about fragility that are in direct contrast to their stated opposition to the "cringe language" of yesteryears.
-
Colyar doesn't seem to think that people were taking steps against rising fascism while also fighting about pronoun use. I don't think they've been paying attention the past several years. People can walk and chew gum - or, alternatively, argue on the internet and take direct action - at the same time. It's not either/or. The fact that the Democratic Party (nation level) is wholly unprepared for the moment is a problem, and some would argue that they are PART of the problem, but that's another story. Suffice it to say, I can post on Tildes and attend rallies, and write letters to my representatives, and do many things at once.
-
Frat houses, "hotbeds of the R word"? Shocking. That's consistent with literally every frat I've ever known.
-
Colyar talking about a small school that had a small pro-Palestine protest, as if that is surprising.
-
Colyar feels that kids these days don't align with the left or the right. And that's true! It also has nothing to do with the topic of the article - which, to-date, they have only defined "wokeness" as "political correctness" again.
-
Now we're complaining about language drift. Language changes all the time and that should never be controversial. Polite words from yesteryear become offensive words over time, and vice versa. It happens, it has always happened, it will continue to happen.
-
The folks on the article continue to not discuss the topic of the article.
-
Sow continues to contradict herself on whether pronouns are a good thing or "cringe".
-
Colyar continues to confuse online discourse with the real world (which shouldn't have much of a divide, but there is one). They're also bemoaning the fact that people raked them over the coals for stating their use of bad humor, much like has been done in this thread. Again, I reiterate - when you make your private thoughts and actions public, you invite the public to comment on them. If you're making racist/sexist/-ist jokes in private (or, if you're a comedian and the expectation is that you are making jokes), that's one thing - but to tell the world that you use certain slurs in private invites discourse about it! That shouldn't be surprising, particularly to someone who writes for a major magazine.
-
"New leaders of the woke" is a phrase I never thought I'd read/hear. Once again, they've just said "woke" is "political correctness". Which I fundamentally disagree with. For my money, "woke" is opening your eyes to the injustices of the world, particularly of the United States, and seeing the inherent racism, sexism, and other -isms built into our society. But that's the thing, it's warped into a near-meaningless word because the American right has weaponized it against people and its intended meaning and use, much like they've done with "critical race theory". Fancy that - two terms that arose from "the left" (either from Black American use, or from academia) that have been weaponized against them by the right.
-
Language policing happens across all fronts, in all spaces - there's words I can say with friends but not at work, and certainly not in public, loudly, for all to hear. Language policing isn't unique to "the left" either, and I think I know why they're taking aim at the left - because the right is currently the flavor du jour and they don't want to write in opposition to the current state of things (IMO).
-
Colyar insists that "woke policies" have lost, despite people like Zohran Mamdani winning in resounding fashion on "woke policies". Colyar insists that "wokeness" shouldn't come back in the same way ... why? Again, other than being upset that certain words seem "cringe", they haven't actually stated what damage "wokeness" has done to the culture. They have stated what damage has been done by the response to wokeness, which is FAR more telling.
-
Now we're talking about conspiracy theorists (Candace Owen, Joe Rogan). Joe Rogan enjoys a large cultural following, but I don't think Candace Owen is nearly on the same level. Then again, I don't pay attention to right wing pundits, because I don't have space for that kind of hate in my life.
-
Now they're taking more pot shots at language. "Cados" and "ayos". Who the fuck cares what people say to each other when there's no harm done? Seriously.
-
Article over.
Now, having engaged fully with the article, here are my takeaways:
- The hosts don't like words that people used five years ago.
- They define "wokeness" as "political correctness". Which I disagree with.
- They create a lot of strawmen.
- They really don't like cutesy language.
- On the one hand they feel like language used in years past is "cringe". On the other hand, Sow states "if it doesn't hurt anyone, who cares?" Which should have been the title of the article/podcast from the start.
- They never engage with the topic - they never state what damage has been done by "wokeness". They stated several times what damage has been done in response to wokeness, though, which should be far more telling.
- If people really don't like "being told what to think", why do they listen to Joe Rogan or Candace Owens or any of the other bad-faith right wing pundits? Because that's what their living has been for decades.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentI'd go back and edit it to say more, but there's two things: I feel like I said what needed to be said about my stance on the matter in that single sentence. After a day or so now, it feels cheap...I'd go back and edit it to say more, but there's two things:
- I feel like I said what needed to be said about my stance on the matter in that single sentence.
- After a day or so now, it feels cheap to go in and add a big ol' thing onto it after the fact. People may agree with the single sentence, but may not agree with the edit, were it to occur.
That said, I'm planning (now) to read the article and actually state my position on its content. TreeFiddyFiddy has (somewhat rightfully) pointed out that it's not fair of me to rake them, and the article, over the coals without having actually read it. So I figure I'll see if I can dig up an archived version of the article, so as to deny the NYT their click, and see what's what.
I don't pretend to be unbiased, though, and I fully expect my assumptions about the content to be found to be accurate.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentHow did the participants define it, then? You keep referring to a "wokeness movement" without ever defining terms.How did the participants define it, then?
You keep referring to a "wokeness movement" without ever defining terms.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentI have no problem with what consenting adults do in private, but I reserve the right to have an opinion about it when it's brought up in public.I have no problem with what consenting adults do in private, but I reserve the right to have an opinion about it when it's brought up in public.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
Drewbahr Link ParentI return to my question - where has "woke" gone too far? Intersectionality is a great talking point, one that the American right has lumped in with critical race theory as being woke (pejorative)....I return to my question - where has "woke" gone too far?
Intersectionality is a great talking point, one that the American right has lumped in with critical race theory as being woke (pejorative). I'd love to talk intersectionality! With you or anyone. But that's not the topic here.
The topic is "did wokeness leave us worse off?" And my answer is no. Because we never had a chance to sincerely engage with it. We had a moment, in 2020, where it seemed like we might. Then the right wing adopted "woke" as a bad thing, and seemingly everyone in the USA forgot that maybe being racist isn't okay.
Look at where we are now, and tell me that it's because of "wokeness". Even a little bit. Because I say no, we're not where we are because some people wanted the world to be a Little more flexible with pronouns and tone it down with the racism.
We're where we are now because of white supremacy, in a country that has never actually had a reckoning with its foundational racism (and yes I know there was a whole Civil War).
Now, as for the offense taken - I'm not offended by you or anyone here. I asked a simple question - what harms has "woke" actually wrought? And I have yet to see an answer.
The first statement in the transcript is "did woke go too far?" So I don't think the title of the podcast is all that editorialized.
The disconnect is in what "woke" means. To you, to the authors, to me, to anyone. What does it mean? Why is some "wokeness" cringey, and some of it not-so? What makes the difference?
Why is being "earnest" a bad thing?
Politics is absolutely about persuasion, and if I were trying to be persuasive, I would be using different language. It just so happens that I'm not really trying to be persuasive here. I'm not trying to convince you, or anyone, about "wokeness" - because the topic is ridiculous on its face. It's a right wing bogeyman being trotted out at this point, and I'm not going to take it seriously, so to speak.
So now, if we're changing topics from "what the article says it's about" to "what I think the article is about" then we're having a different discussion. Maybe I got hung up on the title, but I'm also not impressed by the content of it either.
You don't need to tell me to be charitable about the American electorate. My family goes back hundreds of years in this country. So does my wife's family. But our familial experiences are vastly different. The fact that this country embraced Trump twice is informative. What the SCOTUS is doing, is informative. What Black and Asian and various other non-white people say about their experiences, their realities, is informative.
I listen to them.
And I agree with DefinitelyNotAFae - "real" change comes from within. You can be presented with every fact under the sun, in so many different ways, but ultimately it's up to you (the audience) to make that change yourself. I can't make anyone listen to me. Even if I phrase my thoughts in a completely different manner, there's zero guarantee that it works.
The rhetoric I'm using, is the rhetoric that worked on me.