The "Black Hole" of woke....
Dox47 wrote:
Apparently you unenlightened savages don't realize that "women" is an offensive term that reinforces heteropatriarchy, and that using it is literally violence.
It's Worth Noting 'Online'
is only 'Many Representations
of Reality.' Not everyone Spends
THeir Time 'Worrying' About Who Said What Online;
Some Do;
Most DO NOT.
THere Are As Many 'Religions' Online
As There Are Comments on Discussion
Boards, YouTube Videos, Etc., And 'Twitter Squirts' of Course.
The Fact That ALMOST No One Knew What in the World You Are on About
Per "The 'Women' 'Dog Whistle' Associated Modernly With Transphobia"
Pretty Much Seals
That Fate as Real;
Let's Just Say i Have
A Broader Attention Span, hehe...
So Yes 'Class,' Let's Get Woke Again;
Yes, There is A Broad Spectrum of
So-called 'Male to Female Associations;'
Life isn't Black And White; It's All A Spectrum
And That Sort of Blows the Minds of Some Folks
Who Don't Like Different Out of Whatever Paradigm
or 'Cave' They Are Stuck in And That's Just Part of the 'Overall Spectrum' too.
What Makes A Woman And Or A Man is Way too Complicated for A Short Answer
For A Supreme Court Nominee to Answer, When She Really Isn't Qualified to Answer That Question.
Of Course, She Could Have Checked out the Link Below And Read it Verbatim to Lesson The Audience
Out of
Ignorance too.
It's Nice to Have
A Great Memory
And Resources
At One's Finger Tips.
And Nope, in 'Reality,' Rare to None,
is Anyone Getting 'Canceled' For Calling
Women Women, Unless 'The Term' is Used
As A 'Pejorative' Term For Someone Clearly
Identifying As Transgender
Female-to-Male, Etc.;
There Are Some Folks
From Outside Appearances
And Behaviors, Where it is Almost
Impossible to Clearly Discern Male And
or Female or Some Other Gender Identity;
A Respectful Everyday Communication is to
Let Them Clarify That if They Care to And if They
Want to Be Identified By A New Pronoun Just Be Human And Kind.
Most of the Transgender Folks i've Come Across in my Life Are Stellar
Examples of Caring and Empathic Human Beings; No Wonder Some American Indians
Provided 'Two Spirit' Human Beings So Much Reverence And Respect For Their Existence.
Of Course They Needed
An All Hands Effort to
Survive And Thrive;
Particularly,
Kind and
Cooperative Human
Beings Who Truly Heal This Way With Love.
True, What The World Needs Now is More Transgender
Folks For Healing the Colder Human Condition These Days;
(In Other Words, "Love Sweet Love")
And From A Casual View in 'Matt Gaetz Land' They Are Even
Gaining Acceptance
Here;
So Yep,
Hooray.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/stop-using-phony-science-to-justify-transphobia/
_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI
Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !
http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick
Dox47 wrote:
Apparently you unenlightened savages don't realize that "women" is an offensive term that reinforces heteropatriarchy, and that using it is literally violence.
I never heard if that. I only heard female is an offensive term to use unless you are also referring men as males too.
_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed and ASD lv 1.
Daughter: NT, no diagnoses. Possibly OCD. Is very private about herself.
cyberdad wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
Apparently you unenlightened savages don't realize that "women" is an offensive term that reinforces heteropatriarchy, and that using it is literally violence.
Dude, you are calling women on this forum "bigots" and "unenlightened savages"?
He is calling people who ...CALL women "women" ...bigoted savages.
He is obviously being sarcastic. Except I thought you werent supposed to call women "girls". So I am also a bit confused as to what the exact target of his sarcasm is.
I thought that hyperwoke objected to 'girl', but were okay with 'woman'.
OH maybe its the suffix 'man' he ...is pretending to object to...in order to make fun of the woke, or the PC or whatever.
you're not supposed to call them "women". It "wo-persons". Right?
Last edited by naturalplastic on 25 Aug 2022, 5:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.
cyberdad wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
Apparently you unenlightened savages don't realize that "women" is an offensive term that reinforces heteropatriarchy, and that using it is literally violence.
Dude, you are calling women on this forum "bigots" and "unenlightened savages"?
I wonder what happened there, is he trying to get himself banned?
_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed and ASD lv 1.
Daughter: NT, no diagnoses. Possibly OCD. Is very private about herself.
ASPartOfMe wrote:
All you proved is what we know, politicians are hypocrites. That politicians then and now practice the opposite of what they preached does not make what they preached evil. Wokes conclude that since so many of the people that founded these ideas were racist the ideas are both racist and a smokescreen for racism. What you did prove is that “Christian Classical Liberalism” is a more accurate name then “Western Classic Liberalism”. More accurate is the key. “Western Classical Liberalism” is not a lie. The Christians who thought up those ideas lived in what we now call the “western world”. Despite its flaws naming things after locations they are believed to have come from is common practice. If it was an autistic world it would probably be different, but it isn’t.
We are both students of history AS. Judeo-christian scripture is the foundation of western philosophy, law and government. Some of the most enlightened minds of the renaissance such as Descartes were firmly influenced by the idea of god. It was the christian movements that are at the heart of the liberty and individual freedom of all mankind that was the inspiration for the French revolution and the American revolution.
But, the founding fathers who created the institutions of government in America were first and foremost men of god, as were the men who ran the British East India company and other colonial expeditions. They laid the foundations for liberal roots of laisse fairre economics. However, the freedom that was enshrined in consitutional laws were stained by the social mores of the time which was ethno-nationalist, misogynist and racist. This permeated in all institutions whether it be the administrative offices government, banks or the cartels. To pretend that institutional discrimination didn't exist is to simply buy into the anti-woke narrative that there is nothing to fix and that wokeism is some type of godzilla like monster stomping it's way through western civilisation.
naturalplastic wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
Dox47 wrote:
Apparently you unenlightened savages don't realize that "women" is an offensive term that reinforces heteropatriarchy, and that using it is literally violence.
Dude, you are calling women on this forum "bigots" and "unenlightened savages"?
He is calling people who ...CALL women "women" ...bigoted savages.
He is obviously being sarcastic. Except I thought you werent supposed to call women "girls". So I am also a bit confused as to what the exact target of his sarcasm is.
I thought that hyperwoke objected to 'girl', but were okay with 'woman'.
OH maybe its the suffix 'man' he ...is pretending to object to...in order to make fun of the woke, or the PC or whatever.
you're not supposed to call them "women". It "wo-persons". Right?
I'm afraid the subtlety is designed to be a double edged sword. I'm not that stupid.
Tweety_Pie
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Joined: 15 Aug 2022
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Posts: 66
Location: Finland
League_Girl wrote:
I wonder what happened there, is he trying to get himself banned?
According to Alex, calling out another poster's bigotry is not a personal attack, so no. What I'm doing is holding you to the standards you endorsed when you called yourself woke, which includes using inclusive language in place of many everyday terms, e.g. "woman", which should be replaced by an acceptable alternative such as uterus haver, menstruator, birthing person (specifically for mothers), etc. Did you not realize that this sort of thing is part of what being woke entails?
_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.
- Rick Sanchez
Dox47 wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
I wonder what happened there, is he trying to get himself banned?
According to Alex, calling out another poster's bigotry is not a personal attack, so no. What I'm doing is holding you to the standards you endorsed when you called yourself woke, which includes using inclusive language in place of many everyday terms, e.g. "woman", which should be replaced by an acceptable alternative such as uterus haver, menstruator, birthing person (specifically for mothers), etc. Did you not realize that this sort of thing is part of what being woke entails?
“Woke” means different things to different people. Most often it’s used to refer to people with progressive values. You are using a strawman.
Last edited by TwilightPrincess on 25 Aug 2022, 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
naturalplastic wrote:
I thought that hyperwoke objected to 'girl', but were okay with 'woman'.
Oh, they're way past that, the inclusive language stuff is a rabbit hole:
https://nasaa-arts.org/nasaa_research/i ... age-guide/
Lest anyone accuse me of nut picking, that's literally the first result from a Google search for "Inclusive Language Guide", you can duplicate the results yourself and see if I'm lying.
Before anyone accuses me of overreacting to something no one actually does, here's a recent example where a quote was mangled by a progressive organization, in this case the ACLU:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/27/us/a ... quote.html
Quote:
Anthony Romero, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said Monday that he regretted that a tweet sent out recently by his organization altered the words of a well-known quote by the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The A.C.L.U. tweet, which was sent out Sept. 18, changed Justice Ginsburg’s words, replacing each of her references to women with “person,” “people” or a plural pronoun in brackets. Justice Ginsburg, who died last year, is a revered figure in liberal and feminist circles and directed the A.C.L.U.’s Women’s Rights Project from its founding in 1972 until she became a federal judge in 1980.
Justice Ginsburg underwent Senate confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court in 1993. Asked where she stood on reproductive rights, she did not equivocate.
“The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity,” she said. “It is a decision she must make for herself. When government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.”
The A.C.L.U. rendered her quote this way: “The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person’s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity…When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices.”
The A.C.L.U. tweet, which was sent out Sept. 18, changed Justice Ginsburg’s words, replacing each of her references to women with “person,” “people” or a plural pronoun in brackets. Justice Ginsburg, who died last year, is a revered figure in liberal and feminist circles and directed the A.C.L.U.’s Women’s Rights Project from its founding in 1972 until she became a federal judge in 1980.
Justice Ginsburg underwent Senate confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court in 1993. Asked where she stood on reproductive rights, she did not equivocate.
“The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity,” she said. “It is a decision she must make for herself. When government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.”
The A.C.L.U. rendered her quote this way: “The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person’s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity…When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices.”
The ACLU literally bowdlerized RBG for saying the word "woman", this isn't a fringe thing.
_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.
- Rick Sanchez
Last edited by Dox47 on 25 Aug 2022, 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Twilightprincess wrote:
“Woke” means different things to different people. You are using a strawman.
I have repeatedly defined the term, it is others who refuse to acknowledge that this is a distinct ideology that is markedly different than previous civil rights and liberties struggles, who in my belief deliberately confuse the issue by refusing to accept a label. Woke is short and snappy and the vast majority of people know what you mean when you say it, but my ears are open for alternatives if anyone would suggest them.
Also, a straw man is when you misstate another person's argument in order to knock down a weaker version of it, so your incorrect usage of it here is doubly ironic.
_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.
- Rick Sanchez
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Black Hole Spins Unravel Mystery of Ultraluminous Light |
16 Nov 2024, 6:19 pm |
Time-Lapse of 1st Black Hole Reveals How Matter Swirls Aroun |
25 Jan 2025, 7:13 pm |
Beyond Woke |
20 Dec 2024, 10:47 am |
Concern about police interactions with autistic black kids. |
16 Dec 2024, 10:54 pm |