What's wrong with Woke

[The Grand Nudger]

That seems to accurately describe a fear that people have and refer to when they talk about why they don't like cancel culture..but..when we go looking at people who got canceled...do they turn out to be some rando who said one stupid thing the one time? It seems to take quite a bit to get canceled, and you're never more than one successful pitch away from a rehabilitation tour. Even more needlingly, people who get canceled are very often (and much more accurately) being let loose by for profits because they become a financial liability. It's a strange world. We're told to vote with our wallets - but when we do, it's decried as cancel culture.

Nobody but the suess company canceled dr suess..but we still had to watch dipshits make hay about it. Comedians call it getting canceled when people refuse to pay to hear them talk. Politicians go on magavision to loudly and publicly tell us all about how they got canceled (don't worry, they got better). Meh.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Yes, it is absolutely wrong. End of story. If you don't think so, how about we cancel you and see how you like it?

How someone feels  about is irrelivant 

---

Woke is an empty term that essentially means " I don't like it" or "I don't like there being consequences for my actions" it's a buzzword for regressives and bigots and littles else  

[Jehanne]

People who complain about "Wokeness" are all shitty people who don't want to be shit on for their shitty ideas.  You'll notice people attack 'wokeness' because they are small minded neanderthals who can't handle anything different than them. This particularly includes having different beliefs. It's almost ironic, given how they want their beliefs to be respected and bitch about 'cancel culture' but then try to cancel people and refuse to respect any beliefs but their own.

A century ago being anti-Semitic was quite fashionable.  Henry Ford wrote a anti-Semitic book and won a distinguished award from the Nazis.  Is anyone alive today, other than The Daily Stormer (who appear to be always asking for money), willing to defend Ford and his nutty ideas??  Ditto for interracial marriage.  After all, it was God who drew the line between white and black, hence, the abomination of either race intermarrying one with another!

[Fireball]

Ford was an anti-semite and did everything he could to keep FoMoCo private, saying that no Jew would ever have any ownership in his company.

[Rev. Rye]

That seems to accurately describe a fear that people have and refer to when they talk about why they don't like cancel culture..but..when we go looking at people who got canceled...do they turn out to be some rando who said one stupid thing the one time?  It seems to take quite a bit to get canceled, and you're never more than one successful pitch away from a rehabilitation tour.  Even more needlingly, people who get canceled are very often (and much more accurately) being let loose by for profits because they become a financial liability.  It's a strange world.  We're told to vote with our wallets - but when we do, it's decried as cancel culture.

Nobody but the suess company canceled dr suess..but we still had to watch dipshits make hay about it.  Comedians call it getting canceled when people refuse to pay to hear them talk.   Politicians go on magavision to loudly and publicly tell us all about how they got canceled (don't worry, they got better).  Meh.

On the one hand, the majority of people who end up getting “canceled” tend to have had a long trend of despicable behavior, but on the other, you can still find plenty of examples of cases where it was just set off by one dodgy tweet, cases like Justine Sacco making a crass tweet about AIDS just before before getting on a flight to South Africa and becoming the highest-trending topic on Twitter before the plane even lands, or Lindsay Ellis, a video essayist who recently compared Raya and the Last Dragon to Avatar: The Last Airbender and it caused so much controversy that she recently announced she had to retire from YouTube permanently. And there’s also the case of August Ames, who made a tweet about a scene she dropped out of because the guy recently did gay porn, and got enough harassment for it that she… ended up doing something more permanent than retiring. There’s honestly enough of either the “getting a lot of horrible shit for doing a lot of horrible shit” or “one bad takes gives people an excuse to be bastards” categories that I cannot, in good conscience, think about it in just one way.

That said, I do think that the majority of people who whine about it are mostly doing it as a pretext to complain about not being allowed to do whatever the fuck they want without consequences. I remember an old user named Agnostico outright stated that he hoped to free himself of the shackles of morality, and I can even remember watching Hannah Reloaded take on a John Doyle video where he ends up outright saying he wanted to be able to do whatever he wanted without consequences:


 
I don’t remember the time stamp (it’s a two hour video I watched several months ago), for the record.

That said, at this point, once that idea popped in my head, it became an obvious enough idea that it got me wondering if that, above all else, even the bigotry, might actually be the big motivating force behind the right: 

To say what Cartman says, and use any excuse to punish people they don’t like. Especially if they’re playing with gender the way Cartman is.

[Ranjr]

"Woke" is something a wookie says, some dude with blonde dreads and crusty clothes at a Keller Williams show in 2008.  "I'm woke, bra.  I don't base my life on soap.  Everybody's all about hygiene, but I'm like fuck Gene!"  Beyond that, I don't know what "woke" means.

[Spongebob]

I don't like cancel culture.  Imagine if your every action were to be scrutinized by the internet, and the first time you do or say something that doesn't meet a purity test, people actively try to destroy your life.

In real life, bad behavior can be called out by the people who it actually affects.  In cancel culture, it is called out by people who it doesn't affect.  The average Joe is judge, jury and executioner.  There is no room for tolerance or a different life experience.

Cancel culture is no different than the intolerance of religious zealots.

Lets examine that.  Let's say a white TV personality is at a party, has a few drinks and decides it would be funny to put on black face and sing "Jump Jim Crow".  There are black people in attendance who record the song and dance and post on social media.  Of course the next day its everywhere and there are calls for him to be cancelled, meaning no more TV show.  Who is intolerant here?  Who is wrong here?  Is firing him from his TV show going too far?  I'm not advocating so much as asking, how much punishment is enough?

Now if this occurred 25 years ago when the person was in college, and this information just comes out now, is the punishment different?  Is a public apology warranted?  

I've set up a situation that's actually happened, so I'm curious what everyone thinks the reaction to this should be.  I consider this situation in very bad taste but not a serious crime, but what if it were more serious?  What if this TV personality was known for seriously mistreating black employees or neighbors?  I'm looking for when it becomes something worthy of serious social punishment.  Surely you have a line that can be crossed that constitutes more than just bad taste.

---

 And there’s also the case of August Ames, who made a tweet about a scene she dropped out of because the guy recently did gay porn, and got enough harassment for it that she… ended up doing something more permanent than retiring. There’s honestly enough of either the “getting a lot of horrible shit for doing a lot of horrible shit” or “one bad takes gives people an excuse to be bastards” categories that I cannot, in good conscience, think about it in just one way.

That said, I do think that the majority of people who whine about it are mostly doing it as a pretext to complain about not being allowed to do whatever the fuck they want without consequences. I remember an old user named Agnostico outright stated that he hoped to free himself of the shackles of morality, and I can even remember watching Hannah Reloaded take on a John Doyle video where he ends up outright saying he wanted to be able to do whatever he wanted without consequences:

I plucked out these comments because it hits on a salient point.  Let's say (as apparently some people no this forum feel) we jettison all constructs for social feedback and everyone is allowed to say and do anything they wish without consequences.  All calling out people for horrible language is banned and punishable by death, so sayeth Trump.  Short of assaulting someone, you can do or say any damn thing you want and fuck all to anyone who doesn't like it.  Is that even possible in a civil society?  What would be the result?  I can say for sure that if I said the right things about the right people, I would get my head bashed in.  And would the violent responder get punished for retaliating to my words?  Is that a desired outcome, a society that is based on your ability to violently respond to commentary?

[Neo-Scholastic]

Leftist keep introducing new shibboliths so they can accuse others of racism where no actual racism exists. No one can ever explain why the phrase "colored people" is offensive while the phrase " people of color" is not other than the wrong types of people say the former. They literally mean the same thing.

---

I don't like cancel culture.  Imagine if your every action were to be scrutinized by the internet, and the first time you do or say something that doesn't meet a purity test, people actively try to destroy your life.

In real life, bad behavior can be called out by the people who it actually affects.  In cancel culture, it is called out by people who it doesn't affect.  The average Joe is judge, jury and executioner.  There is no room for tolerance or a different life experience.

Cancel culture is no different than the intolerance of religious zealots.

Lets examine that.  Let's say a white TV personality is at a party, has a few drinks and decides it would be funny to put on black face and sing "Jump Jim Crow".  There are black people in attendance who record the song and dance and post on social media.  Of course the next day its everywhere and there are calls for him to be cancelled, meaning no more TV show.  Who is intolerant here?  Who is wrong here?  Is firing him from his TV show going too far?  I'm not advocating so much as asking, how much punishment is enough?

Now if this occurred 25 years ago when the person was in college, and this information just comes out now, is the punishment different?  Is a public apology warranted?  

I've set up a situation that's actually happened, so I'm curious what everyone thinks the reaction to this should be.  I consider this situation in very bad taste but not a serious crime, but what if it were more serious?  What if this TV personality was known for seriously mistreating black employees or neighbors?  I'm looking for when it becomes something worthy of serious social punishment.  Surely you have a line that can be crossed that constitutes more than just bad taste.

---

 And there’s also the case of August Ames, who made a tweet about a scene she dropped out of because the guy recently did gay porn, and got enough harassment for it that she… ended up doing something more permanent than retiring. There’s honestly enough of either the “getting a lot of horrible shit for doing a lot of horrible shit” or “one bad takes gives people an excuse to be bastards” categories that I cannot, in good conscience, think about it in just one way.

That said, I do think that the majority of people who whine about it are mostly doing it as a pretext to complain about not being allowed to do whatever the fuck they want without consequences. I remember an old user named Agnostico outright stated that he hoped to free himself of the shackles of morality, and I can even remember watching Hannah Reloaded take on a John Doyle video where he ends up outright saying he wanted to be able to do whatever he wanted without consequences:

I plucked out these comments because it hits on a salient point.  Let's say (as apparently some people no this forum feel) we jettison all constructs for social feedback and everyone is allowed to say and do anything they wish without consequences.  All calling out people for horrible language is banned and punishable by death, so sayeth Trump.  Short of assaulting someone, you can do or say any damn thing you want and fuck all to anyone who doesn't like it.  Is that even possible in a civil society?  What would be the result?  I can say for sure that if I said the right things about the right people, I would get my head bashed in.  And would the violent responder get punished for retaliating to my words?  Is that a desired outcome, a society that is based on your ability to violently respond to commentary?

According to the left their violence is speech and our speech is violence.

[Spongebob]

Confusion over acceptable adjectives or whatever is understandable. I suppose this happens because there is no official spokesperson for an entire race, when just defining who is included in that race itself is difficult. The short phrase "you people" has become as bad as "shit people" when it's literally a valid way to phrase things. Then again, not acknowledging someone's race can sometimes be just as bad. It can be difficult, but then again, its a lot less painful than what many minorities have experienced.

I was taught to notice the differences in race, but learned that this isn't the most important aspect of most people. It is part of their character but there's a lot more to be considered. Once I figured that out I felt that a world was opened up.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Leftist keep introducing new shibboliths so they can accuse others of racism where no actual racism exists. No one can ever explain why the phrase "colored people" is offensive while the phrase " people of color" is not other than the wrong types of people say the former. They literally mean the same thing.

Nah they are just pointing out cultural blindspots and plenty of people explained the difference sorry you didn't get the memo 

According to the left their violence is speech and our speech is violence.

Nope nice strawman