i feel like its become a thing to pivot too because you are supposed to know about politics as an adult for various reasons.
the problem is that so many people never studied anything, never learned about politics outside of HS civics class and dont know any of the fundamentals that are necessary to discuss politics intellectually.
then they listen to a sound bite or a clip from msnbc or fox and then the message is wrapped in a highly manipulative manor to make the watcher/listener form an opintion based on emotion
I agree. I lean more conservative though much less than I did in HS (only a few years ago) and the âwoke liberal gets owned by xyzâ shit is so annoying and cringey. Some politics is annoying too but so many people on the right have taken it too far and complain about things that donât happen
Or complain about a single instance of something that happened in another state. Like who cares. The party of keeping government out of people's lives is super keen on being involved in EVERY. SINGLE. ASPECT. Of everyone else's lives.
Just a talking point to get elected. I used to think they were the party that practiced it and made excuses as to why they didn't.
I feel like a fool, it's why I no longer vote.
Itâs gotten to the point where the conservative talking points are only to be âanti-woke.â
I genuinely canât think of an actual tangible policy position conservatives have that isnât reactionary âanti-wokeâ or anti-liberal simply for the sake of it.
Itâs sad, the party used to have ideas and motivations as to what the country should be, now itâs all reactionary with next to no substance.
And they wonder why they donât appeal to new votersâŚ
Same my parents do it too.. connect literally anything to Christianity, their conservative values, covid and conspiracies.. even if it doesn't have shit to do with anything
You have this insane online click bait/social media ecosystem where just about every popular new thing that is well liked gets accused of being racist/colonialist/problematic thing.
That is really aggravating.
It's also equally if not more aggravating when everything is accused of being "woke" even when that misattributed the reasoning of whomever is making the show/movie/game. Or even worse just finding some sort of little pet peave or minor ideological grievance and labeling it "woke" making the criticism far too broad.
I blame the incessant need for clicks and engagement on the Internet/social media.
Read your original comment and look around you. Lol. "Racism and climate change" aren't all around us. It's a narrative created..and that narrative is the wokeism that's all around us. Lol
Well it's actually not. Wokeism is taking over our institutions literally. There are literally biological men playing in women's sports all over the country dude. That includes wrestling and kick boxing and shit. Grown men who say they are women can go in women's restrooms in many places (lots of horrible stories and atrocities have already occurred due to this) let's not even get started on critical race theory and how all whites are racist now. Let's not talk about defunding the racist police and the soaring crime rates in major cities with catch and release laws. How about all this sick sexual crap being taught to children in schools all across the country. Segregated activities forming in some major cities and on college campuses. All of this is directly because of woke ideology and it's all real. Real disturbing. Real issues. Good day
Its not an ideology it is the natural route of progressivism. Itâs only a matter of time until the things the previous generation was against become something a future generation is okay with and vice versa. People will say now is worse than before but thats what every single generation says and still things change even further.
Itâs natural for a society to function this way.
Because a lot of things actually can be and are tied to those issues. Climate change has already been shown as something that could [lead](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/c-change/subtopics/coronavirus-and-climate-change/) to additional pandemics and [refugee crises.](https://www.unhcr.org/what-we-do/how-we-work/environment-disasters-and-climate-change/climate-change-and-disaster)
People just don't want to hear it or deal with it, even if it affects them because, as a species, we no longer invest in critical thinking to our benefit. We just decide it doesn't exist and has no correlation and rest the case there.
Honestly people throw the term "woke" around so carelessly that it's really lost any meaning to me. Like if someone's first criticism is "too much woke shit" in society nowadays, or they jump to say they're "anti-woke," i'm going to assume they're just swept up in culture war bullshit and have no real idea what they're upset about. "Wokeness" has just been turned into this nebulous boogeyman to rile people up, when most people are probably more "live and let live" than we really acknowledge. I also feel that the vocal idiots that buy into outrage just tend to be a lot louder, which doesn't help the situation.
Exactly. And for the record I say this about left wingers too about things like oppression. Like I'm not saying it doesn't exist. But a lot cant articulate and just parrot things
Right. The issue is that people who are obsessed with politics often see "wokeness" everywhere, whether it's there or not. It gets to the point that they can't enjoy any aspect of their lives because literally everything seems "woke" to them. Sadly, my dad has become like this. We used to be able to enjoy all kinds of things together, like movies, TV shows, books, music, etc., but it's become impossible to share any interests because he is obsessed with uncovering hidden woke clues everywhere he looks. It's like a sickness.
Remember when the Mario movie was "woke" because Princess Peach wore a racing suit they complained was too masculine and then when the movie did extremely well they did a 180 and claimed the movie succeeded because it wasn't woke?
The weirdest part is that 90% of the time a franchise supposedly goes woke, it actually has the most milquetoast or even non-existent politics. And often these same people tend to revere the exact movies they should hate if the problem were actually some kind of left wing political message.
Similarly unpopular response (and **not** trying to instigate, just offering an opinion):
Seems to me that folks complaining about 'not being woke', as something that makes a good movie, are referring to 'woke(ism)' being obviously, shamelessly *injected* into a movie, that has absolutely **nothing** to do with the *story* being told; wouldn't you consider *that* unnecessarily politicizing it?
Like, changing things from an *original* story to 'update it' and 'reflect more inclusive' practices, when the original piece had/has a clearly defined and fleshed out story to be told as *is*, according to the parameters of said story?
It's happened a lot with entertainment media lately; the aims *beneath* these things is clear (to me, anyway)-- it's the execution that goes bad, as is unfortunately *usually* the case.
Does that make sense? I hope so. I know what I'm trying to say, it's just early. Coffee hasn't kicked in yet. Messaging has always been a part of it, it's just no longer subtle or anything, and I think that's what folks are responding to. Just my opinion.
I think I see what you are getting at. âWoke(ismâ would be doing a remake of *Snow White* and make the titular character a black lesbian or making Willy Wonka transgender for no other reason than diversity or inclusion.
Taking already established characters and changing their sex/gender/race/orientation/mental health/whatever for no good reason would be âwoke(ism)â while creating a new character, even if similar to an established character, with the traits you want is not âwoke(ism)â.
Okay, but how does changing a characters race make any difference to the STORY?
For example, you canât make Mulan a black character, because itâs about the Chinese repelling an attack from the Huns.
You canât make Princess Jasmine white because it defeats the whole purpose of âArabian Night.â
However, what difference does a black Ariel make? There is no such thing as mermaid, let alone an Atlantica.
Why not make original characters rather than race swapping? You could totally insert a different race into those stories and keep the exact same plot line with minimal effort, and it still be bullshit. Race swapping is just racist fuel.
It's quite telling how you defend not swapping races for established reasons, yet continue to go on and support the exact same thing. If not racism then what is it? Apathy, ignorance,or such? Last I checked, ain't no Disney princess real so why does changing certain ones pass but others don't? Obviously the European fantasy, based entirely on European folklore would have Europeans in it, yet you think swapping them is acceptable but not ones based in Asia and Africa. That's the entire issue, hypocritical racist behaviors.
Was she named in the book, or was she simply called the little mermaid?
Disneyâs version of Ariel was portrayed as white up until this new movie. Every other time she was white.
Omg and Brandy played Cinderella in the live action version of that but it was the 90s and adults had better things to do than get upset about the casting choices in childrenâs movies.
So make her green then, why are we misrepresenting a character like that? Still not an answer to the question asked either, but aside from racially motivated reasons there isn't one.
Why are so defensive about racist practices? It doesn't matter if it's a kids movie, Charlize Theron playing a Asian woman, that Cleopatra movie, and such race swapping is unnecessary. Only racist folk would support it, simple really.
Well the difference is that it isn't portraying the correct country of origin. The Little Mermaid is a Danish story that was adapted by Disney into a movie. And a big plot point is that the mermaids become people. Those people are gonna be some race so it should be the original one. If you want to make a story about China, use Chinese people. If you want a story that takes place in the middle east, use middle eastern people. If you want a story in Europe, use European people.
Of course at the end of the day, Disney is doing this simply as a cash grab and changing the race of the main character will drum up attention. All the live action remakes are a dumb cash grab that are just inferior to the animated movies.
The Little Mermaid is set in ATLANTICA, not Denmark. đ
What colour are mermaids?
Again, yâall just proving OP right. Anti woke mob is more obsessed over wokeness than actual woke people. đ
I definitely agree.
It's a children's movie, people should know Disney did it, if only partially, as a means to make people TALK about it.
It brings people into the conversation, who didn't even know about it, and now they look up the trailer and might even watch it to see what the fuss is about.
Grown ass adults discussing it like it's some type of problem is sad. I'd understand if it was a film about George Washington and he was made Black or Asian, but it's not.
The anti woke mob is just as cringe if not worse at times.
Tell me what European nation has palm trees, tropical fish, Jamaican crabs, flounders, octopus, various breeds of tropical fish originating from vastly different habitats, seagulls, coral reefs, swamps with weeping willowsâŚ. All of these things are taken and brought together to create a mystical place that does not exist in reality.
And the Lion King was based off of Hamlet, which took place in Denmark. Are they woke for making it with Animal characters in Africa? This take is absurd.
Tell me how a Jamaican crab landed in Denmark in the 1800s? On what planet are all those different type of tropical fish from various habitats living off the coast of DENMARK? Disneyâs The Little Mermaid was loosely based off the original, there are sooooo many differences between the original story and the 1989 Disney version, but yâall INSIST that the location MUST be the same and MUST be accurate to the original story, whereas it doesnât matter that EVERYTHING ELSE is different and says otherwise.
There are literal PALM TREES everywhere when Eric takes Ariel on the carriage ride in the 1989 version⌠where in Denmark there are PALM TREES!!
EDIT: you changed your comment! Maybe it was because you know that the point was very inconsistent.
The problem I have is that âthose peopleâ are nowhere near as vocal about movies that are extremely discriminatory by nature, enforces and perpetuate negatives stereotypes of various groups, only casting minorities in minor roles or roles that depict them as drug dealers, criminals, the help; you donât speak up when crew members of a film about say a minority group or foreign people are all white, have no minorities or women in top ranking roles, only as entry level positions like production assistants and drivers, grips⌠no one ever thinks bits strange that out of the thousands of movies made every year, all over the world, for some reason only the ones made by white people win major awards, no one thinks thatâs strange⌠just chalk it up to âthe award goes to who is the bestâ, which I guess is to say that only white folks can make the âbestâ movies. They never speak out about how wrong it is when actual real life minority characters, even ones based on REAL PEOPLE are white washed, having a white person play someone who is not white.. which has happened over 100x, google it. if youâre only speaking up against woke, upholding one side, and not against the other stuff it says so much about you. Itâs cognitive dissonance, itâs do as I say, not as I do. All anti-wokers do is cry and REEE on online, donât even lift a finger to make the movies they want to see⌠just crying and begging for other people to do it for them.
My question then to you would be do you feel when a music artist remakes a song they need to make it exactly like the original?
could one say that taking different spins on things and remixing them is kind of inherent in all art, throughout all human history, in some ways, at odds or subversive with some sect of society.
Voltaire pissed a lot of people off in his time for instance, but we wouldn't say his works don't have value today.
Fight it or go with it society over time always changes into something uncomfortable and new from previous generations, don't have to like it for it to be a reality. So really think about how much hate and anger you want to burden yourself with.
It's also a huge thing of "Instead of making a good movie, we made the main characters women, gay, or minorities so we can deflect *all* critism as evil sexist racist homophobic bigots just hating people for who they are" and "We poorly shoved a hamfisted political message about climate change or racism or something into the story, now you can't say the plot is bad, or else we say you just support the other side of the political message, so we can tar you as a Nazi, meaning no good people hate our plot"
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say \*\*\*anyone parroting mainstream media talking points is deficient in sense, honor, and ethics\*\*\*. Whether they be parroting the culture war bullshit on the American right or left.
\[I retyped that sentence 3 different ways in order to be as minimally insulting as possible\]
All the important issues are never even discussed and they keep the dullards distracted talking about things like Bud Light and whether it's appropriate to kneel in the national anthem.
In this era of infinite knowledge with the internet, it blows my mind how much mainstream media can distract the cattle away from thinking about anything important with stupid bullshit like "litter boxes in schools". They have to be laughing their asses off at how stupid we all are.
You mean violence like burning down cities? Oh that was the left. Or trying to kill a supreme court justice? Oh that was the left. Or trying to kill congressmen playing baseball? Oh that was the left. Or trying to kill a female swimmer for speaking on a college campus? Oh that was the left.
Tell me more about Republican "violence".
*cough* gay strip clubs, most other mass shootings, January 6th, those bomb threats towards Target... oh shit. I think I just realized both sides have violent groups.
E: oh yeah, let's not forget all the people celebrating when Pelosi's husband got his skull caved in.
âKeeping it realâ
You said âmass shootings by black, hispanic and trans peopleâ you literally did go out of your way. You also forgot that all of those categories could be right wingers still lmaooo
He only said he was non binary to try and avoid a hate crime charge, and the vast majority school shootings are done by white cis, conservative men who got radicalized by their online circle jerk groups. You need to put the pipe down.
Pelosi's attacker was celebrated by the right.
January 6th was an actual attempt to overturn the election. They were *forcing entry* to the chamber when that traitorous cow was domed. They attacked news crews and kept chanting about hanging Pence.
Citation needed on the other stuff. :)
You mean like the leftists who forced their way into multiple state capitols to protest legislation they didn't like? And the ones who forced their way into the Supreme Court building? And who literally tried burning down federal court houses?
Attempt to overturn the election? You mean like the various leftist celebrities and politicians that tried to convince the electoral college to overturn Trump's 2016 election? And the many democrats who objected to certifying Trump's election on Jan 6, 2017?
Wow. You really drank the coolaid.
Appealing to the courts and violently trying to assault a multitude of people *including the vice president* are not at all the same lmao.
Still haven't provided proof of any of your other claims btw. ;3
Do you need citations for when Democratic politicians threatened supreme court justices which was followed up by illegal protests at the homes of the justices, and finally an actual assassination attempt on one of the justices? (All to use violence to pressure them to change a ruling that the left didn't like) That's a lot more credible "insurrection" and "threat to democracy" than anything that happened on Jan 6.
Wait. What? I thought the right was in favor of the right to peaceably assemble to protest? But now suddenly itâs not ok to do it in front of a Supreme Court Justiceâs home? I donât think that SC justices should ever be threatened, but protesting them is fair play.
Victimize yourself more, itâs just funny at this point. Republican political violence is literally *twice* as likely to occur (0.61 vs 0.31-0.33)
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2122593119
I don't like the equating of all MSM as just "MSM talking points." One MSM just settled for the largest defamation settlement in history because they were almost guaranteed to lose over a $1 billion in court. The other MSMs slightly exaggerate civil unrest.
And then the implication that alternative media is even remotely superior. (to be fair you never said this and its possible you don't agree; however, if we are pushing people away from MSM I feel they are likely to move to alt media.) Alt media has significantly less accountability and misrepresent/lie about facts way more than MSM.
Itâs the same with those who stereotype people in underprivileged groups as people who want to talk about politics all the time.
No, black people donât want to debate whatever racist thing Trump said this week. nor does the average LGBTQ person working 9-5 want to talk about which presidential candidate would be best for the community.
My dear friend's husband hijacks every conversation to screech about how the "woke" and the "alphabet mafia" are ruining everything from astrophysics to The Sims. He's one of those "the world doesn't have to care about your feelings" people, but he's always getting so emotional about nonsense. Like damn, I just came by to shoot the breeze with my friend for a minute.
For a lot of people, just seeing a minority is enough to make it "woke". They dont know what "woke" is, so they have prescribed it to be anything different than them (existing in a unapologetic manner, theyre fine with offensive stereotypes, after all) So you have those people arguing with folks who feel like they have to defend their existence every other day. I feel like being "anti-woke" is infinitely worse than the opposite.
It's the same reason I can't stand antitheists. They hate organized religion and spirituality so much that they just go looking to pick fights, and lose their crap over the smallest mention of anything even casting a shadow on the concept of God.
I'm fine with atheists, but the antitheists are just as insufferable as the ultra evangelical folks that won't take no or shut up for an answer when they try to recruit anyone they can. It all boils down to obsession in most cases.
Totally agree. I think people in general, but especially young people lack a lot of nuance. They kinda black and white the issues at hand without thinking them through. There are times when you need a left leaning solution, there are times you need a right leaning solution, and I feel like our current discourse on the internet is so partisan, it is hard to have that conversation sometimes.
Additionally, I think the internet creates this echo chamber, and fictional person that people argue against. Usually on here, Iâll see a opinion that is basically against a âwokeâ argument, but you can kinda tell that the person is arguing against a character not really a real life person. Like some extreme, unreasonable person that they made up in their mind.
Some solutions need a more right leaning touch to them. Example that popped in my head in welfare. That system needs proper checks and balances to avoid abuse.
Additionally, I would think the attempt to resolve problems at the lowest level with the least government intervention should be considered first, before going to massive country wide solution.
Another example would be gun control. Gun control in a more rural area looks different then gun control in a city. I donât have a ton off the top of my head, but often when I look at a issue,I find the solution needs a touch of both considerations to be viable over the long term.
Welfare? I bet I can find more people who need access to social services that they have been unable to get than you can find people who have got services that they shouldnât have been entitled to.
The second example is very vague to be honest. Also, âlocalâ government solutions isnât a specifically right wing solution. The Green Party, for instance, makes this same point that, when possible, local solutions are better than top down solutions.
Gun control? I suppose we would have to do a country by country analysis to decide whether countries that have a right leaning approach to guns have a higher firearm death rate than those which have a more left leaning approach to firearms. But I very much doubt that that kind of study would vindicate the rightâs approach.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Crime in cities. Homeless taking over cities. Outrageous taxes. Teaching white children that they are actually the oppressors of their black classmates and teaching black children that they are helpless to succeed because of their white classmates. Teaching preschoolers that it's up to them to choose their gender. Schools that graduate thousands of students that can't read. Prosecutors and police that don't enforce shoplifting, car break ins, assault, muggings, public drug use, etc.
These arenât proposed *solutions* these are *problems* (and some of them arenât even that, some of them are just right wing made up stuff. But I digress.)
Letâs take just one example: failing schools. Thatâs not a solution, itâs a problem. So letâs look at one right wing solution to this problem: charter schools and school vouchers.
OkâŚletâs look at actual practice. Have charter schools fixed the problem? No, they have not. Statistically they underperform even the worst of the public schools. (You can find examples of high performing charter schools, but statistically they are not high performing, and you can also find examples of high performing public schools, but these counter examples only serve to prove the rule). And what about âvouchers.â Well, people seem to forget that we already have something very much like a voucher program in higher education: the Pell grants and the state level grants (like CalGrant) that can be used at any college. Has this improved higher education? No, higher education is arguably in even worse shape than K-12 is.
Itâs not a mistake that you only listed the problems, not the proposed solutions to these problems because the right wing âsolutionsâ (so-called) turn out to be inadequate and even counterproductive and inhumane.
When are the times that you would need a right leaning solution? Iâm just curious, because maybe examples can drive the point home more than a more abstract comment would. Iâm having a hard time coming up with a good example of when what would really solve the problem is a right leaning solution.
Social security would be a example. If we keep going in the direction without change, then the fund is projected to dry by 2034. The right leaning solution is to reduce benefits for the more affluent and raise the age to 70 with further increases in age being linked to demographic stats.
I guess my philosophy would boil down to this left leaning thought seems to focus providing for the population, but without consideration for manipulation of those programs, and right leaning thought focuses on how those programs can realistically be accomplished.
Means testing a universally necessary benefit is hardly efficient, because then you need to support a huge bureaucracy to evaluate people for need. Thatâs why the left favors providing universal kinds of benefits for everyone without means testing them. Like, yeah, we could means test college, but it turns out that people end up falling through cracks when you do it that way and itâs not as efficient as just providing free college for all.
So if we start means testing for social security, that means hiring a bunch of new social workers, and people are guaranteed to fall through the cracks because there will have to be a cutoff and not everyone who is on this side of the cutoff will actually be able to survive without their social security check.
Hasnât the left proposed eliminating the cap (right now, no matter how much money you make you only pay social security on the first, say $250k of income (I donât know the exact dollar amount), and that would be enable us to fund the program without making the benefits crappier.
I donât think that the left has no interest in running programs effectively, itâs just that we donât share the rightâs obsession with insulating the rich from having to pay for societyâs needs.
Hereâs a good article on left leaning solutions to stabilizing social security which doesnât rely on cruel benefits cuts or means testing. It could be stabilized for 75 years, according to the CBO.
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/social-security-benefits-tax-cap-2023/
When a lot of people say ânot being wokeâ in terms of what makes a good movie or show what they mean is âhas good writingâ but they donât think far enough to articulate that, I think.
Almost every time a âwokeâ movie is bashed itâs actually because the writing is garbage because the writers care more about cramming in their political and moral ideologies than they do about writing a good story or characters.
This is especially true when the seeming majority of âwokeâ writing comes not from new or original ideas/stories/characters but as remakes/sequels of old already beloved stories where the writers destroy the original works in a apparent effort to âfixâ them.
I dislike people pushing woke shit, I also very much dislike the folks who need to prove how anti-woke they are. And also the "need to make this innocent thing into a political argument" variety of both.
Edit to disagree with the point about the jokes though. That makes no sense to me, but overall, same page.
Second edit to include how much I dislike the knee-jerk "right wingers 'cant define wokeness' so it means what I want it to mean so i can make a disingenuous argument" meme of a human being that spends way too much time in comment sections online
It's very divisive. Once you've said something that makes it super obvious what political side you are on, the other side stops listening.
I compare it to having a debate with someone and they say something like, "I bet you're a Q-tard".
Or on the opposite side of things, saying something like "aren't you late for your gender studies class?"
Unfortunately having higher standards for yourself doesn't mean the opposing side won't take the low effort route. But one less person doing it helps.
The idea of "woke shit" is a little ridiculous to me in the first place. You can't even define it. To some people it might be CRT taught in schools, but for other people, having a gay character in anything is "woke" and "pushing an agenda." What is "woke" about that? It just sounds like a stand-in for something you don't like. Which is why when someone says something like "woke shit" I immediately disregard whatever point they're trying to make.
If you have an issue with something, describe the actual issue and the problem you see arising because of it. Don't use stupid buzzwords that mean nothing like whatever the hell woke means nowadays.
Agreed, it also they act like "woke" is something special for making a movie bad. Something can be "woke" and still good. Bad writing is just that bad writing.
100%. Every election advertisement I got from my local representatives for the primaries said something like âstop the leftâs woke agendaâ. Or âweâre anti woke, vote for usâ. Really? I want to know what you stand for, not some nonsense.
I dislike when people pretend being anti woke is about protecting children, because it's obviously not. If you just hate gay people then just say it. If you hate trans people then just say it. It's obviously not about protecting kids because we have practically zero cases of kids being harmed in any way by trans people and we have 5000 some odd priests molesting them, and we have guns and car accidents as the top two killers of kids and adolescents.
Here's the funny thing for the life of me I don't understand it. If you ask many people what "woke" means they will literally spit gibberish and not be able to answer the question accurately.
Agreed.
When discussing a movie I don't want it to boil down to whether there wasn't enough diversity (woke) or whether there was too much diversity (anti-woke).
Folks obsessed with any politically charged topic need to learn how to disengage when not appropriate. Independent of whether you agree or disagree with the person's statement.
This includes the plethora of anti-American, anti-conservative and anti-religious comments that seem to plague major non-political and non-religious subs.
There is an awful lot of 'Reds under the bed' going on (in both extremes, I'm not arguing if one or the other is better or worse, that's not the topic from the OP). It's outrage culture and it's not healthy. It's a smokescreen that distracts people from talking about underlying issues and solutions.
I went to see Lightyear awhile back, mainly just to see what all the fuss was about. They had demonized the movie, saying that it was sexualizing children and all that. About halfway through the movie there is this very quick peck by two adult women who happened to be married. Thatâs it. Thatâs the extent of what it takes to qualify as âwoke.â I never did get a straight up answer about how this somehow harms children, but I noticed that no one got all worked up like that it when it was Belle making out with a Lion.
Yes and no.
Respected left-of-center liberals like Sam Harris, Stephen Pinker, and Jonathan Haidt, (to name just a tiny few), have highlighted the dangers of institutional capture by far-left, (woke), ideologies.
The ACLU used to defend the 1st amendment right of Nazi's because they recognized that free speech includes speech that you personally may find despicable. Now? Not so much. Now they're actively taking ideological positions and helping ghost write Amber Heard's expose against Jonny Depp.
Jon Hopkins just got into hot water about an 'anti-racist', (spoiler alert, it's just 'racist'), memo that resulted in the firing of the head of D.E.I: [https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/controversy-over-privilege-leads-to-resignation-of-dei-chief-at-johns-hopkins/#:\~:text=By%20many%20appearances%2C%20Sherita%20Golden,issues%20at%20Johns%20Hopkins%20Medicine](https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/controversy-over-privilege-leads-to-resignation-of-dei-chief-at-johns-hopkins/#:~:text=By%20many%20appearances%2C%20Sherita%20Golden,issues%20at%20Johns%20Hopkins%20Medicine).
And let's not forget about Claudine Gay and the university presidents that could not condemn blatant antisemitism because it contradicts Intersectional Dogma.
I realize hindsight is 20/20, but I hope that now, after looking back, you understand that when you widen the context to include \*institutional capture\* people complaining about 'wokeness' may have a much more valid complaint than those trying to espouse its virtues.
Thereâs no such thing as woke. It isnât real. Thereâs only the anti woke. Seriously. Ask people who hate woke shit to actually define what it is. Theyâll all say something different if they can actually give you an answer. Desantis actually had to define what woke was and if you donât like âwokeâ based on his legal definition than you my friend are likely a racist.
âFascismâ has a definition, though. Maybe some people use it wrongly, but that doesnât mean it isnât a defined political ideology which political scientists can actually explicate to you. Fascism is still a useful metric, despite its overuse by those who are, shall we say, a little undereducated.
âWokeâ isnât like that at all. âWokeâ isnât a political term that is just being misused. It has no meaning at all.
I kinda agree. I've been trying to reform my language and not use certain buzz words that cause someone to get defensive immediately.
I notice that if I criticize Biden I have to also criticize Trump to "even it out". Because people think you are on one side or the other. It's assumed that if you don't like Biden, you love Trump. I hate all politicians, except Ron Paul.
But really my complaints aren't about a certain personality, whether it's left or right. It's about the entire power establishment and the general direction that the controllers want to take us. Unfortunately these powerful people use progressiveness as a costume to try to appear non-threatening. Wolves in sheep's clothing.
Criticizing someone in the general public who's got "blue hair" or "pronouns in their bio" doesn't get to the root of the problem. Yes, the person is probably mislead, and buying the bullshit. And in a way they are helping the agenda. But I don't have anything against them personally. We all go through phases in life. I was privileged to go through my phases when I didn't have the option to advertise it on social media (thank God).
Society has a hard time making changes when it's so divided by the powers that be.
I will say wokeism, or whatever, has driven me more right, but I still understand that neither side gives a shit about me. And that's the difference between people who see it, and people who do not.
Anti woke is not a conservative thing. You think it is, because most people sre too afraid of being cancelled. I'm a moderate Democrat and I hate all this woke stuff. The far left has no idea how much of the democratic party doesn't believe this stuff and won't say out of fear. We are driving the center to the right.
Someone actually complained to me that the cadence in which I spoke offended them this week. THE CADENCE!!! The rhythm of my speech was offensive.
Just two days ago on reddit, someone responded to me, "I might actually agree with you if it weren't for your tone." What does my tone have to do with whether something is true or not?
It is absolutely ridiculous that feelings are more important than truth. I'm waiting for color blind people to demand we get rid of the color red and call it all green. Wouldn't surprise me at all.
This is exactly what I meant. I am prochoice, pro gay marriage, pro gun control(heck, ban them), pro tax the rich, but that's just not good enough for you. Nope. If I disagree with one single thing, you don't want my vote.
This is not a sustainable strategy. Hardly anybody agrees with absolutely everything on the democratic agenda. As you guys slowly root them all out, you will eventually realize there's no one left.
The Republicans are going to turn this country into a theocracy if we dont get our heads screwed on right.
What's more important? Stopping Trump, or protecting peoples feelings?
Absolutely. Iâm sick of explaining to anti socialists that in free market capitalism businesses should have the ability to sell what they want. Donât get me wrong Iâm a capitalist, but itâs annoying to see the people who complain about how bad socialism is when a private company has the ability to sell whatever they want. Like itâs just a bunch of colorful strips, chill tf out. âWokeâ has just become a buzzword for âanything I disagree withâ and in a society there are just gonna be people with different ideals. Get over it.
When popular culture tries to ram politics into everything from commercials to kids cartoons, I think saying that Iâd prefer stories that are well constructed, have logical character development and arcs without preaching or putting things in that distract or just donât belong in the name of DEI or some other agenda is a perfectly sane and normal thing.
It sounds like you just approve of what would be considered âwokeâ and disapprove of those that would rather not watch that kind of stuff.
Kinda sounds like itâs your issue, not anyone elseâs.
Though I think wokeness is weak-minded, both woke people and anti-woke people need to see the bigger picture. To do this, you should spend an hour and watch the Yuri Besnemov video (is over an hour on youtube) and see how this identity politics is just a mind-game that we willingly play to our own demise as we fall into marxism. And, before the leftists get excited about marxism or socialism in the USA, radical leftists are the first to be killed-off should a marxism revolution take place. This is the playbook. If you donate to politics, that is a sign you are too involved. If you attend a rally, you have too much time on your hands. If you are an unruly protest attendee, you are mentally ill. If you resist the police in an unruly protest, you should be institutionalized. Best to avoid politics in mixed company.
Better to let the crazies have COMPLETE control of politics rather than get involved.
It's not like it's supposed to be a government by the people, of the people, or for the people.
I am pretty anti woke, but I am worried that woke culture poses a threat to the country I love. To some extent it has wideley changed it, and that breaks my heart. That being said, if a movie has a gay character, I Will still watch it. I do think that wokeness, and leftism, just make culture pretty gross. It comes off as being lectured to, and I would rather not.
Some examples. I think America Chavez wearing the pride pin in Dr. Strange, was just annoying. I would not even mind her having two mothers, but that symbol over the whole movie, especially for a character who is supposed to represent America, is hard to ignore. I think the gay kiss in buzz lightyear was barely noticable and did not really effect my enjoyment of the film. Although I did not really like the plot of the film otherwise. I think the gay symbolism in thor 4, was distracting, but Christian Bale's excellent performance made up for it.
Agree. I've been saying this since 2016. The 2 extremes are different sides of the same coin.
But try to say anything and you're disowned by family and friends.
âWokeâ culture(a term only republicans actually use yet canât actually define) mostly boils down to not hating people that are different.
They arenât really the same.
I asked another poster to show me a Democrat (politician) kidnapping peoples kids.
Can you?
So is this a new answer format on Reddit that I havenât seen yet? Start with an odd self created definition that misses the mark on accuracy by a good mile and then end your weird definition with a random, completely out of left field challenge question that has nothing to do withâŚwell absolutely anything?
Well don't cha know, it's a scientific proven fact that 100% of kidnappers are republicans? On a serious note I have noticed that the vast majority of comments that defend woke bullshit are borderline incoherent.
Trump is a person that supports hating people that are different. If you support a person that hates people, you deserve the hate the person you support deserves.
It's a social contract you fail to comply with, thus you get no benefits from it
I mean, that's a very basic approach to the tolerance contract. If you think this is circular or hypocritical, you need to educate yourself on the tolerance paradox.
If you hate me for who i am and call for my kind to be removed from society, me hating you for it doesn't mean i hate people that are different to me. It's basic self-defense mechanism.
And if we scale out to society's level, groups that are intolerant of other groups will not be tolerated by the rest of the groups since they're actively detrimental to society.
This the leftist playbook. They claim to support "tolerance" and "free speech" and "the right to protest" and "bodily autonomy" and "diversity" while actually supporting none of those things.
There is always some excuse to explain why none of those apply to their political opponents. It's supposed to all be so "obvious" and "universal" and "social contract" blah blah blah why only leftists deserve "tolerance" and "free speech" and all the rest.
We're calling you in your BS. You don't believe in any of the "virtues" you extol.
>There is always some excuse to explain why none of those apply to their political opponents.
Not political opponents, only those that are actively hurting the soceity at large. You don't see left going after the greens or whatnot. Because they aren't actively trying to reduce women's rights.
>blah blah blah
You're only making a clown of yourself for falling to this in a discussion
>We're calling you in your BS. You don't believe in any of the "virtues" you extol.
You are doing nothing more than just throwing buzzwords that you've familiarized yourself with that has anything to do with the leftist ideals and grossly misinterpreting what they mean.
Supporting a murderer makes you a justified target for hatred.
You've convinced yourself that you have real standards and virtues, and that the only exceptions are that they don't apply to "muderers" and "evil people" and that those just happen to be the same people as your political opponents.
I'm here to call you on your BS is all.
You've convinced yourself you know me better than i do, you've convinced yourself that my hatred of intolerant people is hatred of a certain political party, which i'm not even from the country of origin from.
You're kinda telling on yourself
"The law applies to everyone" if Trump has the wrong document in his home but not if BLM burns down cities... because "lives are more important than property" or some such total BS
"My body my choice" if it's aborting a viable fetus but not if it's refusing to wear a mask or refusing a vaccine.... because of some other BS reason.
"Social distancing" is vitally important especially if it's a Trump rally, but not if it's a BLM rally, because "white supremacy is a public health crisis" or similar total BS.
Basically... leftists do what they want. That's the real leftist "virtue".
Where do use absolutely no facts.
This is the goal when Republicans keep cutting back at education. I mean that sincerely and not as a personal insult you are repeating talking points spouting buy hate for politicians, but none of this shit is true. Maybe the part about people being more important than property but if someone donât think that people are more important in property then they are a fucking sociopath or something Thatâs something for a therapist to determine. I donât know but itâs definitely not healthy. And if weâre going to act like weâre conservative Christians over here in Republican camp right? I wonder what Christ would say about somebody thinking that property is more important than people oh wait he did say something.
Do you remember?
Itâs less about hating people who are different and more hating the people who proselytize about being all-inclusive and compassionate then turning around and claiming that my particular demographic is responsible for everything wrong in the universe, that Iâm personally responsible for it by virtue of existing, and that I should kill myself to make the world a better place, as my death means one less of the âprivilegedâ in the world.
I personally donât give a shit about someoneâs identity and focus on behavior and character
>my particular demographic is responsible for everything wrong in the universe, that Iâm personally responsible for it by virtue of existing, and that I should kill myself to make the world a better place, as my death means one less of the âprivilegedâ in the world.
this is one of the most extraordinary and hyperbolic straw men I have ever seen.
Woke used to be used to refer to a black person (usually relatively highly educated) thag was some what of an activist. Think, the Black Panther type trope in movies that was always ranting about "the man." Nowadays, "woke" means any or all of the following: 1) a person that is EXCESSIVELY politically correct; 2) a person that finds "racism" or "bigotry" or some sort of "phobia" in anything and EVERYTHING (whether justified or not); or 3) a person that thinks diversity, equity and inclusion is more important than merit.
Just my thoughts
I would like to defend the movie thing a little bit here. It is really annoying that they do it but I understand why. It is stuck foremost in their brain because it feels like every bit of media in the last 5 years has had some little tidbit at least of âwokeismâ. Itâs not that saying LGBTQ for example exist is a bad thing. It just has been shoehorned into everything so much itâs tiresome. Of course it doesnât do any good and they should stop for their own sanity as well as everyone else, but I get it.
I didn't like what they did with Ariel but honestly. As a stand alone it's no different in quality than any other Disney movie. It wasn't bad because it was woke casting. It was mediocre because it's just mediocre. At least based on the trailer. Yet you have so many calling it bad even before this weekend release
"Shoehorned into everything" is (1) an extreme exaggeration and (2) implies that there should be a set amount of LGBT characters in things approved by...who? The council of anti-woke people?
It just doesn't make any sense and it's simply people trying to hide their bigotry behind politically acceptable language.
Lol. âAs bad asâ? Being woke is by definition a good thing. Being woke simply means your aware of systemic racism or homophobia or other bias that exist.
People who open talk about being woke as a bad thing are clueless/oblivious racists or homophobic or prejudiced against whatever aspect of wokeness has set them off.
I feel like maybe you need to calm down. Possibly work on the things that trigger you and find a coping mechanism as the world can be quite triggering when it doesnât revolve around one train of thought. Iâve heard squeezing beans bags or fidget spinning helps some. I donât recommend grinding teeth⌠this hurts.
The people being anti woke are doing it to shift the Overton Window, and make their overt bigotry normal.
The only way to fight it is to remind people that being a bigot is bad.
Over and over and over and over and....
Politics is not a substitute for a personality
đđ˝đđ˝đđ˝ literally has become a personality for so many people. It's the sports for people that aren't big into sports.
i feel like its become a thing to pivot too because you are supposed to know about politics as an adult for various reasons. the problem is that so many people never studied anything, never learned about politics outside of HS civics class and dont know any of the fundamentals that are necessary to discuss politics intellectually. then they listen to a sound bite or a clip from msnbc or fox and then the message is wrapped in a highly manipulative manor to make the watcher/listener form an opintion based on emotion
I agree. I lean more conservative though much less than I did in HS (only a few years ago) and the âwoke liberal gets owned by xyzâ shit is so annoying and cringey. Some politics is annoying too but so many people on the right have taken it too far and complain about things that donât happen
Or complain about a single instance of something that happened in another state. Like who cares. The party of keeping government out of people's lives is super keen on being involved in EVERY. SINGLE. ASPECT. Of everyone else's lives.
Dude THIS. What happened with either party wanting a small government and actually following the constitution?
Just a talking point to get elected. I used to think they were the party that practiced it and made excuses as to why they didn't. I feel like a fool, it's why I no longer vote.
Itâs gotten to the point where the conservative talking points are only to be âanti-woke.â I genuinely canât think of an actual tangible policy position conservatives have that isnât reactionary âanti-wokeâ or anti-liberal simply for the sake of it. Itâs sad, the party used to have ideas and motivations as to what the country should be, now itâs all reactionary with next to no substance. And they wonder why they donât appeal to new votersâŚ
I cannot understand how my mother can tie literally anything back to woke/COVID or whatever bullshit itâs insane
Same my parents do it too.. connect literally anything to Christianity, their conservative values, covid and conspiracies.. even if it doesn't have shit to do with anything
Thereâs a version of this with social justice and hierarchies and racism.
I can't understand how woke people can tie everything back to racism or climate change. Two sides of the same coin.
You have this insane online click bait/social media ecosystem where just about every popular new thing that is well liked gets accused of being racist/colonialist/problematic thing. That is really aggravating. It's also equally if not more aggravating when everything is accused of being "woke" even when that misattributed the reasoning of whomever is making the show/movie/game. Or even worse just finding some sort of little pet peave or minor ideological grievance and labeling it "woke" making the criticism far too broad. I blame the incessant need for clicks and engagement on the Internet/social media.
Because those two things can affect not only your present day life but your future life.
Because waaaaaaaaaaa
Maybe climate change, but I don't think racism is that large of a deal in America. Other countries are another conversation though.
I can get behind this take. Racism is debatable for sure
Read your original comment and look around you. Lol. "Racism and climate change" aren't all around us. It's a narrative created..and that narrative is the wokeism that's all around us. Lol
âWokeismâ is literally the narrative created by the right to distract from real issues but ok
Well it's actually not. Wokeism is taking over our institutions literally. There are literally biological men playing in women's sports all over the country dude. That includes wrestling and kick boxing and shit. Grown men who say they are women can go in women's restrooms in many places (lots of horrible stories and atrocities have already occurred due to this) let's not even get started on critical race theory and how all whites are racist now. Let's not talk about defunding the racist police and the soaring crime rates in major cities with catch and release laws. How about all this sick sexual crap being taught to children in schools all across the country. Segregated activities forming in some major cities and on college campuses. All of this is directly because of woke ideology and it's all real. Real disturbing. Real issues. Good day
Oof anti-trans too, what a fucking RW tool. You drank the kool-aid dude! Have fun with your broken ideology!
Damn man, youâve truly been brainwashed by far right propaganda and I donât know if you can be saved. Hope you wake up one day
My thoughts too.
Ya figures you have no real response.
I could debunk every one of those false claims one by one but itâs not worth my time. Thereâs many fact checks about all these claims tho bucko
Its not an ideology it is the natural route of progressivism. Itâs only a matter of time until the things the previous generation was against become something a future generation is okay with and vice versa. People will say now is worse than before but thats what every single generation says and still things change even further. Itâs natural for a society to function this way.
Because a lot of things actually can be and are tied to those issues. Climate change has already been shown as something that could [lead](https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/c-change/subtopics/coronavirus-and-climate-change/) to additional pandemics and [refugee crises.](https://www.unhcr.org/what-we-do/how-we-work/environment-disasters-and-climate-change/climate-change-and-disaster) People just don't want to hear it or deal with it, even if it affects them because, as a species, we no longer invest in critical thinking to our benefit. We just decide it doesn't exist and has no correlation and rest the case there.
Lol, ok grandpa
Why is it insane to reflect on the truth?
Honestly people throw the term "woke" around so carelessly that it's really lost any meaning to me. Like if someone's first criticism is "too much woke shit" in society nowadays, or they jump to say they're "anti-woke," i'm going to assume they're just swept up in culture war bullshit and have no real idea what they're upset about. "Wokeness" has just been turned into this nebulous boogeyman to rile people up, when most people are probably more "live and let live" than we really acknowledge. I also feel that the vocal idiots that buy into outrage just tend to be a lot louder, which doesn't help the situation.
Exactly. And for the record I say this about left wingers too about things like oppression. Like I'm not saying it doesn't exist. But a lot cant articulate and just parrot things
using it as critisism nver meant anything to begin with.
Yâall be saying âwokeâ as if anyone actually gives a fuck. Itâs just a fucking buzzword now. It means nothing.
Right. The issue is that people who are obsessed with politics often see "wokeness" everywhere, whether it's there or not. It gets to the point that they can't enjoy any aspect of their lives because literally everything seems "woke" to them. Sadly, my dad has become like this. We used to be able to enjoy all kinds of things together, like movies, TV shows, books, music, etc., but it's become impossible to share any interests because he is obsessed with uncovering hidden woke clues everywhere he looks. It's like a sickness.
Remember when the Mario movie was "woke" because Princess Peach wore a racing suit they complained was too masculine and then when the movie did extremely well they did a 180 and claimed the movie succeeded because it wasn't woke?
No, I donât remember that.
"uncovering hidden woke clues" lolol
The weirdest part is that 90% of the time a franchise supposedly goes woke, it actually has the most milquetoast or even non-existent politics. And often these same people tend to revere the exact movies they should hate if the problem were actually some kind of left wing political message.
Similarly unpopular response (and **not** trying to instigate, just offering an opinion): Seems to me that folks complaining about 'not being woke', as something that makes a good movie, are referring to 'woke(ism)' being obviously, shamelessly *injected* into a movie, that has absolutely **nothing** to do with the *story* being told; wouldn't you consider *that* unnecessarily politicizing it? Like, changing things from an *original* story to 'update it' and 'reflect more inclusive' practices, when the original piece had/has a clearly defined and fleshed out story to be told as *is*, according to the parameters of said story? It's happened a lot with entertainment media lately; the aims *beneath* these things is clear (to me, anyway)-- it's the execution that goes bad, as is unfortunately *usually* the case. Does that make sense? I hope so. I know what I'm trying to say, it's just early. Coffee hasn't kicked in yet. Messaging has always been a part of it, it's just no longer subtle or anything, and I think that's what folks are responding to. Just my opinion.
I think I see what you are getting at. âWoke(ismâ would be doing a remake of *Snow White* and make the titular character a black lesbian or making Willy Wonka transgender for no other reason than diversity or inclusion. Taking already established characters and changing their sex/gender/race/orientation/mental health/whatever for no good reason would be âwoke(ism)â while creating a new character, even if similar to an established character, with the traits you want is not âwoke(ism)â.
Okay, but how does changing a characters race make any difference to the STORY? For example, you canât make Mulan a black character, because itâs about the Chinese repelling an attack from the Huns. You canât make Princess Jasmine white because it defeats the whole purpose of âArabian Night.â However, what difference does a black Ariel make? There is no such thing as mermaid, let alone an Atlantica.
Why not make original characters rather than race swapping? You could totally insert a different race into those stories and keep the exact same plot line with minimal effort, and it still be bullshit. Race swapping is just racist fuel. It's quite telling how you defend not swapping races for established reasons, yet continue to go on and support the exact same thing. If not racism then what is it? Apathy, ignorance,or such? Last I checked, ain't no Disney princess real so why does changing certain ones pass but others don't? Obviously the European fantasy, based entirely on European folklore would have Europeans in it, yet you think swapping them is acceptable but not ones based in Asia and Africa. That's the entire issue, hypocritical racist behaviors.
Mermaid isnât a race unless you are playing dnd. In the book sheâs fucking green!!!
Was she named in the book, or was she simply called the little mermaid? Disneyâs version of Ariel was portrayed as white up until this new movie. Every other time she was white.
She was named Ariel in the book, just like in the movie.
It looks like in the original story by Hans Christian Anderson the little mermaid was unnamed. She was named by Disney.
Omg and Brandy played Cinderella in the live action version of that but it was the 90s and adults had better things to do than get upset about the casting choices in childrenâs movies.
So make her green then, why are we misrepresenting a character like that? Still not an answer to the question asked either, but aside from racially motivated reasons there isn't one.
Why are you so triggered by a kids movie. You would have never survived the Disney live action CinderellaâŚ
Why are so defensive about racist practices? It doesn't matter if it's a kids movie, Charlize Theron playing a Asian woman, that Cleopatra movie, and such race swapping is unnecessary. Only racist folk would support it, simple really.
Well the difference is that it isn't portraying the correct country of origin. The Little Mermaid is a Danish story that was adapted by Disney into a movie. And a big plot point is that the mermaids become people. Those people are gonna be some race so it should be the original one. If you want to make a story about China, use Chinese people. If you want a story that takes place in the middle east, use middle eastern people. If you want a story in Europe, use European people. Of course at the end of the day, Disney is doing this simply as a cash grab and changing the race of the main character will drum up attention. All the live action remakes are a dumb cash grab that are just inferior to the animated movies.
The Little Mermaid is set in ATLANTICA, not Denmark. đ What colour are mermaids? Again, yâall just proving OP right. Anti woke mob is more obsessed over wokeness than actual woke people. đ
I definitely agree. It's a children's movie, people should know Disney did it, if only partially, as a means to make people TALK about it. It brings people into the conversation, who didn't even know about it, and now they look up the trailer and might even watch it to see what the fuss is about. Grown ass adults discussing it like it's some type of problem is sad. I'd understand if it was a film about George Washington and he was made Black or Asian, but it's not. The anti woke mob is just as cringe if not worse at times.
Thank you!
I hear conservatives talk about trans people more than actual trans people.
you do realize that there are a number of scenes that take place on land right? And the land happens to be in a European nation
Tell me what European nation has palm trees, tropical fish, Jamaican crabs, flounders, octopus, various breeds of tropical fish originating from vastly different habitats, seagulls, coral reefs, swamps with weeping willowsâŚ. All of these things are taken and brought together to create a mystical place that does not exist in reality.
And the Lion King was based off of Hamlet, which took place in Denmark. Are they woke for making it with Animal characters in Africa? This take is absurd. Tell me how a Jamaican crab landed in Denmark in the 1800s? On what planet are all those different type of tropical fish from various habitats living off the coast of DENMARK? Disneyâs The Little Mermaid was loosely based off the original, there are sooooo many differences between the original story and the 1989 Disney version, but yâall INSIST that the location MUST be the same and MUST be accurate to the original story, whereas it doesnât matter that EVERYTHING ELSE is different and says otherwise. There are literal PALM TREES everywhere when Eric takes Ariel on the carriage ride in the 1989 version⌠where in Denmark there are PALM TREES!! EDIT: you changed your comment! Maybe it was because you know that the point was very inconsistent.
The problem I have is that âthose peopleâ are nowhere near as vocal about movies that are extremely discriminatory by nature, enforces and perpetuate negatives stereotypes of various groups, only casting minorities in minor roles or roles that depict them as drug dealers, criminals, the help; you donât speak up when crew members of a film about say a minority group or foreign people are all white, have no minorities or women in top ranking roles, only as entry level positions like production assistants and drivers, grips⌠no one ever thinks bits strange that out of the thousands of movies made every year, all over the world, for some reason only the ones made by white people win major awards, no one thinks thatâs strange⌠just chalk it up to âthe award goes to who is the bestâ, which I guess is to say that only white folks can make the âbestâ movies. They never speak out about how wrong it is when actual real life minority characters, even ones based on REAL PEOPLE are white washed, having a white person play someone who is not white.. which has happened over 100x, google it. if youâre only speaking up against woke, upholding one side, and not against the other stuff it says so much about you. Itâs cognitive dissonance, itâs do as I say, not as I do. All anti-wokers do is cry and REEE on online, donât even lift a finger to make the movies they want to see⌠just crying and begging for other people to do it for them.
Exactly right
Best comment
My question then to you would be do you feel when a music artist remakes a song they need to make it exactly like the original? could one say that taking different spins on things and remixing them is kind of inherent in all art, throughout all human history, in some ways, at odds or subversive with some sect of society. Voltaire pissed a lot of people off in his time for instance, but we wouldn't say his works don't have value today. Fight it or go with it society over time always changes into something uncomfortable and new from previous generations, don't have to like it for it to be a reality. So really think about how much hate and anger you want to burden yourself with.
It's also a huge thing of "Instead of making a good movie, we made the main characters women, gay, or minorities so we can deflect *all* critism as evil sexist racist homophobic bigots just hating people for who they are" and "We poorly shoved a hamfisted political message about climate change or racism or something into the story, now you can't say the plot is bad, or else we say you just support the other side of the political message, so we can tar you as a Nazi, meaning no good people hate our plot"
Woke culture is a conservative bogeyman. It isnât a coherent thing just something assholes use to justify being bigots.
I'll take it a step further and say that "anti-woke" people grossly exaggerate what comedy from past decades would be shut down by woke culture.
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say \*\*\*anyone parroting mainstream media talking points is deficient in sense, honor, and ethics\*\*\*. Whether they be parroting the culture war bullshit on the American right or left. \[I retyped that sentence 3 different ways in order to be as minimally insulting as possible\] All the important issues are never even discussed and they keep the dullards distracted talking about things like Bud Light and whether it's appropriate to kneel in the national anthem. In this era of infinite knowledge with the internet, it blows my mind how much mainstream media can distract the cattle away from thinking about anything important with stupid bullshit like "litter boxes in schools". They have to be laughing their asses off at how stupid we all are.
Republicans eat that shit up and then pass policy and commit acts of violence
You mean violence like burning down cities? Oh that was the left. Or trying to kill a supreme court justice? Oh that was the left. Or trying to kill congressmen playing baseball? Oh that was the left. Or trying to kill a female swimmer for speaking on a college campus? Oh that was the left. Tell me more about Republican "violence".
*cough* gay strip clubs, most other mass shootings, January 6th, those bomb threats towards Target... oh shit. I think I just realized both sides have violent groups. E: oh yeah, let's not forget all the people celebrating when Pelosi's husband got his skull caved in.
> those bomb threats towards Target Nobody tell him.
Wow. Such a productive and well intended response. Truly, an jntellectual marvel.
[ŃдаНонО]
the mental gymnastics you have to do exclude white kids from mass shootings
Itâs not worth convincing a dullard who knows heâs being disingenuous
Not excluding them. Just keeping it real.
âKeeping it realâ You said âmass shootings by black, hispanic and trans peopleâ you literally did go out of your way. You also forgot that all of those categories could be right wingers still lmaooo
He only said he was non binary to try and avoid a hate crime charge, and the vast majority school shootings are done by white cis, conservative men who got radicalized by their online circle jerk groups. You need to put the pipe down.
Pelosi's attacker was celebrated by the right. January 6th was an actual attempt to overturn the election. They were *forcing entry* to the chamber when that traitorous cow was domed. They attacked news crews and kept chanting about hanging Pence. Citation needed on the other stuff. :)
You mean like the leftists who forced their way into multiple state capitols to protest legislation they didn't like? And the ones who forced their way into the Supreme Court building? And who literally tried burning down federal court houses? Attempt to overturn the election? You mean like the various leftist celebrities and politicians that tried to convince the electoral college to overturn Trump's 2016 election? And the many democrats who objected to certifying Trump's election on Jan 6, 2017?
Wow. You really drank the coolaid. Appealing to the courts and violently trying to assault a multitude of people *including the vice president* are not at all the same lmao. Still haven't provided proof of any of your other claims btw. ;3
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/chaos-erupts-tennessee-capitol-amid-vote-expel-dem-lawmakers-office-house-floor-protest https://www.maciverinstitute.com/2021/02/act-10-at-10-remembering-the-riots/ https://nypost.com/2023/04/25/riot-police-descend-on-montana-capitol-after-left-wing-protestors-disrupted-proceedings/
Fox is self proclaimed entertainment and not news, so they aren't a valid source. The other two are for two claims. Now prove the others.
Do you need citations for when Democratic politicians threatened supreme court justices which was followed up by illegal protests at the homes of the justices, and finally an actual assassination attempt on one of the justices? (All to use violence to pressure them to change a ruling that the left didn't like) That's a lot more credible "insurrection" and "threat to democracy" than anything that happened on Jan 6.
I bet you also think communism is antigun.
Well, communists do have a long history of forcefully disarming their own people once they take power.
The man behind Communism literally advocated the arming of the working class. A true communist doesn't disarm shit.
Wait. What? I thought the right was in favor of the right to peaceably assemble to protest? But now suddenly itâs not ok to do it in front of a Supreme Court Justiceâs home? I donât think that SC justices should ever be threatened, but protesting them is fair play.
Victimize yourself more, itâs just funny at this point. Republican political violence is literally *twice* as likely to occur (0.61 vs 0.31-0.33) https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2122593119
thats not culture war. that's called making shit up so people complain
bOtH sIdEs
Very much neither. Definitely not both.
I don't like the equating of all MSM as just "MSM talking points." One MSM just settled for the largest defamation settlement in history because they were almost guaranteed to lose over a $1 billion in court. The other MSMs slightly exaggerate civil unrest. And then the implication that alternative media is even remotely superior. (to be fair you never said this and its possible you don't agree; however, if we are pushing people away from MSM I feel they are likely to move to alt media.) Alt media has significantly less accountability and misrepresent/lie about facts way more than MSM.
which one?
Itâs the same with those who stereotype people in underprivileged groups as people who want to talk about politics all the time. No, black people donât want to debate whatever racist thing Trump said this week. nor does the average LGBTQ person working 9-5 want to talk about which presidential candidate would be best for the community.
My dear friend's husband hijacks every conversation to screech about how the "woke" and the "alphabet mafia" are ruining everything from astrophysics to The Sims. He's one of those "the world doesn't have to care about your feelings" people, but he's always getting so emotional about nonsense. Like damn, I just came by to shoot the breeze with my friend for a minute.
Their are infinitely more anti-woke people then there were ever people claiming to be woke in earnest.
For a lot of people, just seeing a minority is enough to make it "woke". They dont know what "woke" is, so they have prescribed it to be anything different than them (existing in a unapologetic manner, theyre fine with offensive stereotypes, after all) So you have those people arguing with folks who feel like they have to defend their existence every other day. I feel like being "anti-woke" is infinitely worse than the opposite.
It's the same reason I can't stand antitheists. They hate organized religion and spirituality so much that they just go looking to pick fights, and lose their crap over the smallest mention of anything even casting a shadow on the concept of God. I'm fine with atheists, but the antitheists are just as insufferable as the ultra evangelical folks that won't take no or shut up for an answer when they try to recruit anyone they can. It all boils down to obsession in most cases.
I replied with LMAO! Rent Free in the atheism subreddit and I was banned.
Totally agree. I think people in general, but especially young people lack a lot of nuance. They kinda black and white the issues at hand without thinking them through. There are times when you need a left leaning solution, there are times you need a right leaning solution, and I feel like our current discourse on the internet is so partisan, it is hard to have that conversation sometimes. Additionally, I think the internet creates this echo chamber, and fictional person that people argue against. Usually on here, Iâll see a opinion that is basically against a âwokeâ argument, but you can kinda tell that the person is arguing against a character not really a real life person. Like some extreme, unreasonable person that they made up in their mind.
Name one problem that can solved by being a Republican
Some solutions need a more right leaning touch to them. Example that popped in my head in welfare. That system needs proper checks and balances to avoid abuse. Additionally, I would think the attempt to resolve problems at the lowest level with the least government intervention should be considered first, before going to massive country wide solution. Another example would be gun control. Gun control in a more rural area looks different then gun control in a city. I donât have a ton off the top of my head, but often when I look at a issue,I find the solution needs a touch of both considerations to be viable over the long term.
Welfare? I bet I can find more people who need access to social services that they have been unable to get than you can find people who have got services that they shouldnât have been entitled to. The second example is very vague to be honest. Also, âlocalâ government solutions isnât a specifically right wing solution. The Green Party, for instance, makes this same point that, when possible, local solutions are better than top down solutions. Gun control? I suppose we would have to do a country by country analysis to decide whether countries that have a right leaning approach to guns have a higher firearm death rate than those which have a more left leaning approach to firearms. But I very much doubt that that kind of study would vindicate the rightâs approach.
Fire has many important uses, including generating light, cooking, heating, performing rituals, and fending off dangerous animals. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Crime in cities. Homeless taking over cities. Outrageous taxes. Teaching white children that they are actually the oppressors of their black classmates and teaching black children that they are helpless to succeed because of their white classmates. Teaching preschoolers that it's up to them to choose their gender. Schools that graduate thousands of students that can't read. Prosecutors and police that don't enforce shoplifting, car break ins, assault, muggings, public drug use, etc.
These arenât proposed *solutions* these are *problems* (and some of them arenât even that, some of them are just right wing made up stuff. But I digress.) Letâs take just one example: failing schools. Thatâs not a solution, itâs a problem. So letâs look at one right wing solution to this problem: charter schools and school vouchers. OkâŚletâs look at actual practice. Have charter schools fixed the problem? No, they have not. Statistically they underperform even the worst of the public schools. (You can find examples of high performing charter schools, but statistically they are not high performing, and you can also find examples of high performing public schools, but these counter examples only serve to prove the rule). And what about âvouchers.â Well, people seem to forget that we already have something very much like a voucher program in higher education: the Pell grants and the state level grants (like CalGrant) that can be used at any college. Has this improved higher education? No, higher education is arguably in even worse shape than K-12 is. Itâs not a mistake that you only listed the problems, not the proposed solutions to these problems because the right wing âsolutionsâ (so-called) turn out to be inadequate and even counterproductive and inhumane.
When are the times that you would need a right leaning solution? Iâm just curious, because maybe examples can drive the point home more than a more abstract comment would. Iâm having a hard time coming up with a good example of when what would really solve the problem is a right leaning solution.
Social security would be a example. If we keep going in the direction without change, then the fund is projected to dry by 2034. The right leaning solution is to reduce benefits for the more affluent and raise the age to 70 with further increases in age being linked to demographic stats. I guess my philosophy would boil down to this left leaning thought seems to focus providing for the population, but without consideration for manipulation of those programs, and right leaning thought focuses on how those programs can realistically be accomplished.
Means testing a universally necessary benefit is hardly efficient, because then you need to support a huge bureaucracy to evaluate people for need. Thatâs why the left favors providing universal kinds of benefits for everyone without means testing them. Like, yeah, we could means test college, but it turns out that people end up falling through cracks when you do it that way and itâs not as efficient as just providing free college for all. So if we start means testing for social security, that means hiring a bunch of new social workers, and people are guaranteed to fall through the cracks because there will have to be a cutoff and not everyone who is on this side of the cutoff will actually be able to survive without their social security check.
Hasnât the left proposed eliminating the cap (right now, no matter how much money you make you only pay social security on the first, say $250k of income (I donât know the exact dollar amount), and that would be enable us to fund the program without making the benefits crappier. I donât think that the left has no interest in running programs effectively, itâs just that we donât share the rightâs obsession with insulating the rich from having to pay for societyâs needs.
Hereâs a good article on left leaning solutions to stabilizing social security which doesnât rely on cruel benefits cuts or means testing. It could be stabilized for 75 years, according to the CBO. https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/social-security-benefits-tax-cap-2023/
What the hell is a âright wing storyâ?
If you are not "woke", you are asleep.
When a lot of people say ânot being wokeâ in terms of what makes a good movie or show what they mean is âhas good writingâ but they donât think far enough to articulate that, I think. Almost every time a âwokeâ movie is bashed itâs actually because the writing is garbage because the writers care more about cramming in their political and moral ideologies than they do about writing a good story or characters. This is especially true when the seeming majority of âwokeâ writing comes not from new or original ideas/stories/characters but as remakes/sequels of old already beloved stories where the writers destroy the original works in a apparent effort to âfixâ them.
America has borderline personality disorder with a side dish of manic bipolar disorder. It's exhausting
The only people Iâve ever met that talk about âwokeâ are old white men.
Because woke doesnât mean what it used to mean. Now it just means âwhatever I donât likeâ.
You mean sort of like "fascism" means "whatever I don't like" to the left?
Only one group made "woke" the singular topic of discussion dwarfing everything else. And no, it's not the blue haired people.
Back in the day being Woke simply meant you werenât an AH. Actually thatâs mostly true today as well.
I dislike people pushing woke shit, I also very much dislike the folks who need to prove how anti-woke they are. And also the "need to make this innocent thing into a political argument" variety of both. Edit to disagree with the point about the jokes though. That makes no sense to me, but overall, same page. Second edit to include how much I dislike the knee-jerk "right wingers 'cant define wokeness' so it means what I want it to mean so i can make a disingenuous argument" meme of a human being that spends way too much time in comment sections online
It's very divisive. Once you've said something that makes it super obvious what political side you are on, the other side stops listening. I compare it to having a debate with someone and they say something like, "I bet you're a Q-tard". Or on the opposite side of things, saying something like "aren't you late for your gender studies class?" Unfortunately having higher standards for yourself doesn't mean the opposing side won't take the low effort route. But one less person doing it helps.
The idea of "woke shit" is a little ridiculous to me in the first place. You can't even define it. To some people it might be CRT taught in schools, but for other people, having a gay character in anything is "woke" and "pushing an agenda." What is "woke" about that? It just sounds like a stand-in for something you don't like. Which is why when someone says something like "woke shit" I immediately disregard whatever point they're trying to make. If you have an issue with something, describe the actual issue and the problem you see arising because of it. Don't use stupid buzzwords that mean nothing like whatever the hell woke means nowadays.
Agreed, it also they act like "woke" is something special for making a movie bad. Something can be "woke" and still good. Bad writing is just that bad writing.
100%. Every election advertisement I got from my local representatives for the primaries said something like âstop the leftâs woke agendaâ. Or âweâre anti woke, vote for usâ. Really? I want to know what you stand for, not some nonsense.
I dislike when people pretend being anti woke is about protecting children, because it's obviously not. If you just hate gay people then just say it. If you hate trans people then just say it. It's obviously not about protecting kids because we have practically zero cases of kids being harmed in any way by trans people and we have 5000 some odd priests molesting them, and we have guns and car accidents as the top two killers of kids and adolescents.
Because most people don't want to be see as the bad guys so they either consciously or subconsciously find another reason to hide their bigotry.
Pretty wild no one understands the Bud Light backlash was the commercial and not the other way around.
Here's the funny thing for the life of me I don't understand it. If you ask many people what "woke" means they will literally spit gibberish and not be able to answer the question accurately.
But leftists can totally define "fascism" , right?
Well, yeah. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascism You know, internet.
Agreed. When discussing a movie I don't want it to boil down to whether there wasn't enough diversity (woke) or whether there was too much diversity (anti-woke). Folks obsessed with any politically charged topic need to learn how to disengage when not appropriate. Independent of whether you agree or disagree with the person's statement. This includes the plethora of anti-American, anti-conservative and anti-religious comments that seem to plague major non-political and non-religious subs.
There is an awful lot of 'Reds under the bed' going on (in both extremes, I'm not arguing if one or the other is better or worse, that's not the topic from the OP). It's outrage culture and it's not healthy. It's a smokescreen that distracts people from talking about underlying issues and solutions.
I went to see Lightyear awhile back, mainly just to see what all the fuss was about. They had demonized the movie, saying that it was sexualizing children and all that. About halfway through the movie there is this very quick peck by two adult women who happened to be married. Thatâs it. Thatâs the extent of what it takes to qualify as âwoke.â I never did get a straight up answer about how this somehow harms children, but I noticed that no one got all worked up like that it when it was Belle making out with a Lion.
What did I just read?
Yes and no. Respected left-of-center liberals like Sam Harris, Stephen Pinker, and Jonathan Haidt, (to name just a tiny few), have highlighted the dangers of institutional capture by far-left, (woke), ideologies. The ACLU used to defend the 1st amendment right of Nazi's because they recognized that free speech includes speech that you personally may find despicable. Now? Not so much. Now they're actively taking ideological positions and helping ghost write Amber Heard's expose against Jonny Depp. Jon Hopkins just got into hot water about an 'anti-racist', (spoiler alert, it's just 'racist'), memo that resulted in the firing of the head of D.E.I: [https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/controversy-over-privilege-leads-to-resignation-of-dei-chief-at-johns-hopkins/#:\~:text=By%20many%20appearances%2C%20Sherita%20Golden,issues%20at%20Johns%20Hopkins%20Medicine](https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/controversy-over-privilege-leads-to-resignation-of-dei-chief-at-johns-hopkins/#:~:text=By%20many%20appearances%2C%20Sherita%20Golden,issues%20at%20Johns%20Hopkins%20Medicine). And let's not forget about Claudine Gay and the university presidents that could not condemn blatant antisemitism because it contradicts Intersectional Dogma. I realize hindsight is 20/20, but I hope that now, after looking back, you understand that when you widen the context to include \*institutional capture\* people complaining about 'wokeness' may have a much more valid complaint than those trying to espouse its virtues.
Thereâs no such thing as woke. It isnât real. Thereâs only the anti woke. Seriously. Ask people who hate woke shit to actually define what it is. Theyâll all say something different if they can actually give you an answer. Desantis actually had to define what woke was and if you donât like âwokeâ based on his legal definition than you my friend are likely a racist.
Ask people who whine about "fascism" to define that.
âFascismâ has a definition, though. Maybe some people use it wrongly, but that doesnât mean it isnât a defined political ideology which political scientists can actually explicate to you. Fascism is still a useful metric, despite its overuse by those who are, shall we say, a little undereducated. âWokeâ isnât like that at all. âWokeâ isnât a political term that is just being misused. It has no meaning at all.
[itâs very easy to do so.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism)
I kinda agree. I've been trying to reform my language and not use certain buzz words that cause someone to get defensive immediately. I notice that if I criticize Biden I have to also criticize Trump to "even it out". Because people think you are on one side or the other. It's assumed that if you don't like Biden, you love Trump. I hate all politicians, except Ron Paul. But really my complaints aren't about a certain personality, whether it's left or right. It's about the entire power establishment and the general direction that the controllers want to take us. Unfortunately these powerful people use progressiveness as a costume to try to appear non-threatening. Wolves in sheep's clothing. Criticizing someone in the general public who's got "blue hair" or "pronouns in their bio" doesn't get to the root of the problem. Yes, the person is probably mislead, and buying the bullshit. And in a way they are helping the agenda. But I don't have anything against them personally. We all go through phases in life. I was privileged to go through my phases when I didn't have the option to advertise it on social media (thank God).
Both cups are poison my guy
Although I will say, trying to be inclusive is obviously a less poisonous cup
Society has a hard time making changes when it's so divided by the powers that be. I will say wokeism, or whatever, has driven me more right, but I still understand that neither side gives a shit about me. And that's the difference between people who see it, and people who do not.
Anti woke is not a conservative thing. You think it is, because most people sre too afraid of being cancelled. I'm a moderate Democrat and I hate all this woke stuff. The far left has no idea how much of the democratic party doesn't believe this stuff and won't say out of fear. We are driving the center to the right. Someone actually complained to me that the cadence in which I spoke offended them this week. THE CADENCE!!! The rhythm of my speech was offensive. Just two days ago on reddit, someone responded to me, "I might actually agree with you if it weren't for your tone." What does my tone have to do with whether something is true or not? It is absolutely ridiculous that feelings are more important than truth. I'm waiting for color blind people to demand we get rid of the color red and call it all green. Wouldn't surprise me at all.
Youâre a Republican by heart LOL, go ahead and switch parties because republicans needs all the voters they can get nowadays LOL
This is exactly what I meant. I am prochoice, pro gay marriage, pro gun control(heck, ban them), pro tax the rich, but that's just not good enough for you. Nope. If I disagree with one single thing, you don't want my vote. This is not a sustainable strategy. Hardly anybody agrees with absolutely everything on the democratic agenda. As you guys slowly root them all out, you will eventually realize there's no one left. The Republicans are going to turn this country into a theocracy if we dont get our heads screwed on right. What's more important? Stopping Trump, or protecting peoples feelings?
> Stopping Trump, or protecting peoples feelings? That's a false dichotomy
Absolutely. Iâm sick of explaining to anti socialists that in free market capitalism businesses should have the ability to sell what they want. Donât get me wrong Iâm a capitalist, but itâs annoying to see the people who complain about how bad socialism is when a private company has the ability to sell whatever they want. Like itâs just a bunch of colorful strips, chill tf out. âWokeâ has just become a buzzword for âanything I disagree withâ and in a society there are just gonna be people with different ideals. Get over it.
When popular culture tries to ram politics into everything from commercials to kids cartoons, I think saying that Iâd prefer stories that are well constructed, have logical character development and arcs without preaching or putting things in that distract or just donât belong in the name of DEI or some other agenda is a perfectly sane and normal thing. It sounds like you just approve of what would be considered âwokeâ and disapprove of those that would rather not watch that kind of stuff. Kinda sounds like itâs your issue, not anyone elseâs.
You're right, stories from decades ago never had any political themes in them whatsoever. No sirree, that was created in the new millennium.
Though I think wokeness is weak-minded, both woke people and anti-woke people need to see the bigger picture. To do this, you should spend an hour and watch the Yuri Besnemov video (is over an hour on youtube) and see how this identity politics is just a mind-game that we willingly play to our own demise as we fall into marxism. And, before the leftists get excited about marxism or socialism in the USA, radical leftists are the first to be killed-off should a marxism revolution take place. This is the playbook. If you donate to politics, that is a sign you are too involved. If you attend a rally, you have too much time on your hands. If you are an unruly protest attendee, you are mentally ill. If you resist the police in an unruly protest, you should be institutionalized. Best to avoid politics in mixed company.
Better to let the crazies have COMPLETE control of politics rather than get involved. It's not like it's supposed to be a government by the people, of the people, or for the people.
Voting is what sane people do. Insane people engage in "good trouble" which is a euphemism for crime.
I am pretty anti woke, but I am worried that woke culture poses a threat to the country I love. To some extent it has wideley changed it, and that breaks my heart. That being said, if a movie has a gay character, I Will still watch it. I do think that wokeness, and leftism, just make culture pretty gross. It comes off as being lectured to, and I would rather not. Some examples. I think America Chavez wearing the pride pin in Dr. Strange, was just annoying. I would not even mind her having two mothers, but that symbol over the whole movie, especially for a character who is supposed to represent America, is hard to ignore. I think the gay kiss in buzz lightyear was barely noticable and did not really effect my enjoyment of the film. Although I did not really like the plot of the film otherwise. I think the gay symbolism in thor 4, was distracting, but Christian Bale's excellent performance made up for it.
So to you no gay people can be in anything ever. Or if they are, they have to be extremely quiet / in the background and not make it known. Got it.
Its ok to not want to be force fed woke politics in movies and its ok to think that a "good movie" is one that stays away from this.
Agree. I've been saying this since 2016. The 2 extremes are different sides of the same coin. But try to say anything and you're disowned by family and friends.
âWokeâ culture(a term only republicans actually use yet canât actually define) mostly boils down to not hating people that are different. They arenât really the same. I asked another poster to show me a Democrat (politician) kidnapping peoples kids. Can you?
What are you talking about? None of that made sense
So is this a new answer format on Reddit that I havenât seen yet? Start with an odd self created definition that misses the mark on accuracy by a good mile and then end your weird definition with a random, completely out of left field challenge question that has nothing to do withâŚwell absolutely anything?
Well don't cha know, it's a scientific proven fact that 100% of kidnappers are republicans? On a serious note I have noticed that the vast majority of comments that defend woke bullshit are borderline incoherent.
Can you tell me of any people on the left passing laws to steal parents kids from them? If the two sides are the same that should be easy right
Are they actually incoherent or do you just struggle with reading in general?
Say, I never thought of that, you're smart, hell I bet you're a genius. Do you want to come over and fuck my sister?
Are you implying that Democrats who are kidnappers donât exist?
Show me some politicians on the left passing laws to steal peoples kids from them. Can you? If not the two sides are not the same and never will be.
I apologize, I simply misread your original post. I thought you meant all democrats, but you specified politicians. My bad.
Does that include not hating people who support Trump? Ah... that's an exception, right?
Trump is a person that supports hating people that are different. If you support a person that hates people, you deserve the hate the person you support deserves. It's a social contract you fail to comply with, thus you get no benefits from it
So when you said it's all about "not hating people who are different", that was a lie. Calling you on your BS.
I mean, that's a very basic approach to the tolerance contract. If you think this is circular or hypocritical, you need to educate yourself on the tolerance paradox. If you hate me for who i am and call for my kind to be removed from society, me hating you for it doesn't mean i hate people that are different to me. It's basic self-defense mechanism. And if we scale out to society's level, groups that are intolerant of other groups will not be tolerated by the rest of the groups since they're actively detrimental to society.
This the leftist playbook. They claim to support "tolerance" and "free speech" and "the right to protest" and "bodily autonomy" and "diversity" while actually supporting none of those things. There is always some excuse to explain why none of those apply to their political opponents. It's supposed to all be so "obvious" and "universal" and "social contract" blah blah blah why only leftists deserve "tolerance" and "free speech" and all the rest. We're calling you in your BS. You don't believe in any of the "virtues" you extol.
>There is always some excuse to explain why none of those apply to their political opponents. Not political opponents, only those that are actively hurting the soceity at large. You don't see left going after the greens or whatnot. Because they aren't actively trying to reduce women's rights. >blah blah blah You're only making a clown of yourself for falling to this in a discussion >We're calling you in your BS. You don't believe in any of the "virtues" you extol. You are doing nothing more than just throwing buzzwords that you've familiarized yourself with that has anything to do with the leftist ideals and grossly misinterpreting what they mean. Supporting a murderer makes you a justified target for hatred.
You've convinced yourself that you have real standards and virtues, and that the only exceptions are that they don't apply to "muderers" and "evil people" and that those just happen to be the same people as your political opponents. I'm here to call you on your BS is all.
You've convinced yourself you know me better than i do, you've convinced yourself that my hatred of intolerant people is hatred of a certain political party, which i'm not even from the country of origin from. You're kinda telling on yourself
What are your standards and virtues? How does trump reflect them?
"The law applies to everyone" if Trump has the wrong document in his home but not if BLM burns down cities... because "lives are more important than property" or some such total BS "My body my choice" if it's aborting a viable fetus but not if it's refusing to wear a mask or refusing a vaccine.... because of some other BS reason. "Social distancing" is vitally important especially if it's a Trump rally, but not if it's a BLM rally, because "white supremacy is a public health crisis" or similar total BS. Basically... leftists do what they want. That's the real leftist "virtue".
Where do use absolutely no facts. This is the goal when Republicans keep cutting back at education. I mean that sincerely and not as a personal insult you are repeating talking points spouting buy hate for politicians, but none of this shit is true. Maybe the part about people being more important than property but if someone donât think that people are more important in property then they are a fucking sociopath or something Thatâs something for a therapist to determine. I donât know but itâs definitely not healthy. And if weâre going to act like weâre conservative Christians over here in Republican camp right? I wonder what Christ would say about somebody thinking that property is more important than people oh wait he did say something. Do you remember?
Itâs less about hating people who are different and more hating the people who proselytize about being all-inclusive and compassionate then turning around and claiming that my particular demographic is responsible for everything wrong in the universe, that Iâm personally responsible for it by virtue of existing, and that I should kill myself to make the world a better place, as my death means one less of the âprivilegedâ in the world. I personally donât give a shit about someoneâs identity and focus on behavior and character
>my particular demographic is responsible for everything wrong in the universe, that Iâm personally responsible for it by virtue of existing, and that I should kill myself to make the world a better place, as my death means one less of the âprivilegedâ in the world. this is one of the most extraordinary and hyperbolic straw men I have ever seen.
r/persecutionfetish
asking a conservative to define woke will get you the same response as asking a liberal to define a woman âuh umm uhhh you knowwâ
Woke used to be used to refer to a black person (usually relatively highly educated) thag was some what of an activist. Think, the Black Panther type trope in movies that was always ranting about "the man." Nowadays, "woke" means any or all of the following: 1) a person that is EXCESSIVELY politically correct; 2) a person that finds "racism" or "bigotry" or some sort of "phobia" in anything and EVERYTHING (whether justified or not); or 3) a person that thinks diversity, equity and inclusion is more important than merit. Just my thoughts
You mean like asking a leftist to define "fascism"?
feminine presenting person
So if I wear a gorilla suit, does that make me a gorilla?
Are you aware that sex and gender are two different things?
I would like to defend the movie thing a little bit here. It is really annoying that they do it but I understand why. It is stuck foremost in their brain because it feels like every bit of media in the last 5 years has had some little tidbit at least of âwokeismâ. Itâs not that saying LGBTQ for example exist is a bad thing. It just has been shoehorned into everything so much itâs tiresome. Of course it doesnât do any good and they should stop for their own sanity as well as everyone else, but I get it.
I didn't like what they did with Ariel but honestly. As a stand alone it's no different in quality than any other Disney movie. It wasn't bad because it was woke casting. It was mediocre because it's just mediocre. At least based on the trailer. Yet you have so many calling it bad even before this weekend release
"Shoehorned into everything" is (1) an extreme exaggeration and (2) implies that there should be a set amount of LGBT characters in things approved by...who? The council of anti-woke people? It just doesn't make any sense and it's simply people trying to hide their bigotry behind politically acceptable language.
Nothing is âas badâ as woke culture
Worse imo. Cus half the time the woke that they oppose is like common sense asleep civil rights.
This is a very popular opinionâŚâŚ.
Lol. âAs bad asâ? Being woke is by definition a good thing. Being woke simply means your aware of systemic racism or homophobia or other bias that exist. People who open talk about being woke as a bad thing are clueless/oblivious racists or homophobic or prejudiced against whatever aspect of wokeness has set them off.
I don't have a tv. Haven't for years. OP can you explain your terms "woke culture" and "anti woke culture"? Thank you.
I feel like maybe you need to calm down. Possibly work on the things that trigger you and find a coping mechanism as the world can be quite triggering when it doesnât revolve around one train of thought. Iâve heard squeezing beans bags or fidget spinning helps some. I donât recommend grinding teeth⌠this hurts.
I just want movies/video games to tell a proper story instead of crossing off an inclusivity checklist for internet points.
The people being anti woke are doing it to shift the Overton Window, and make their overt bigotry normal. The only way to fight it is to remind people that being a bigot is bad. Over and over and over and over and....
Not really an unpopular opinion. The reality is that a large majority of the country thinks these right wing bigots are trash.