Wokeism of the day *Revised Mod Note in OP and threadbanned users*

Biker79

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Who...??

You know, those sullen teenage wokies who put FFS at the end of everything.

Like they've just been told to go outside and get some fresh air.

IAMAMORON

I thought about it earlier.

I agree, RTE have ramped up their inclusivity - but - I would rather that they consciously did so rather than unconsciously. At least they are attempting to include all members of society. It is too easy for people to cast aspersions all said. - And yes I am being deliberately cagey and duplicitous, it is in my nature to be so. I am off ambiguity for the next few weeks, but it shall return in due course.

I find it unfortunate that this thread is not afforded the direct freedom of thought and speech it deserves. Albeit posts need to be challenged as opposed to posters, we are all guilty of prejudice - it is in our nature.

The beauty with contention is that it evolves within itself, almost camouflaged within it's own insincerity? There lies within the miraged infamy of censorship, fear and subjugation.

If you think something is worth taking the piss out of and exposing for what it is, don't let fear of your honesty become nurtured? Spit it out and say it proud, tell the truth and shame the devil. The reality is that the blurred lines of woked correctness are murky and treacherous. Therein lies your fears. Don't let the phuckers away with it, they deserve to be challenged.

It is not the inclusion of inclusivity that it the enemy, it is the complacency of mindlessness when challenged by mindfulness. There is a difference.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I thought about it earlier.

I agree, RTE have ramped up their inclusivity - but - I would rather that they consciously did so rather than unconsciously. At least they are attempting to include all members of society. It is too easy for people to cast aspersions all said. - And yes I am being deliberately cagey and duplicitous, it is in my nature to be so. I am off ambiguity for the next few weeks, but it shall return in due course.

I find it unfortunate that this thread is not afforded the direct freedom of thought and speech it deserves. Albeit posts need to be challenged as opposed to posters, we are all guilty of prejudice - it is in our nature.

The beauty with contention is that it evolves within itself, almost camouflaged within it's own insincerity? There lies within the miraged infamy of censorship, fear and subjugation.

If you think something is worth taking the piss out of and exposing for what it is, don't let fear of your honesty become nurtured? Spit it out and say it proud, tell the truth and shame the devil. The reality is that the blurred lines of woked correctness are murky and treacherous. Therein lies your fears. Don't let the phuckers away with it, they deserve to be challenged.

It is not the inclusion of inclusivity that it the enemy, it is the complacency of mindlessness when challenged by mindfulness. There is a difference.

Very true, but then you have the exact opposite: the moment a person with an ethnic background gets the position, you get whingers cliaming that it's only down to inclusivity and PC and screaminging woke this and woke that and you end up with conversations like these.

Maybe - just maybe - they're getting these positions because they're talented and appiontments are made on merit.

IAMAMORON

It is the prerogative of any institution to staff itself as it sees fit.

I would find it important in the modern world that employers diversify as they require, it is within their own demand.

I am not interested in debating it to be frank. All efficient employment roles are subject to the scrutiny of the employer. It is the employer that bears the risk of appointment. Nothing is ever seamless.

I have heard the cranks in many organisations, the reality is that most employees' secure their positions on the basis of their popularity as opposed to their capabilities. I have witnessed this truth far too many times.

I would rather get on with the boss than do my job properly. It is laughable but true. I have been fired previously for doing my job. Ethnicity never came into it. If they like you... your job is secure. I have witnessed complete clowns annihilate entire commercial divisions and retain their role through nepotism - a bigger evil imo.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Maybe - just maybe - they're getting these positions because they're talented and appiontments are made on merit.

Sure, very true. They could be. Or they might not be.

Considering the racial demographics of Ireland, many Irish people feel this showing of other racial groups is forced, and artificial. There's the expectation that it would take time (2-3 decades) for the additions of other racial groups to develop, earn their spurs, etc until they got these attractive/prominent positions.

However, we are increasingly seeing more non-whites being put in such roles, and it's hard for many (myself included) to believe that it's down to their hard earned experience working up the ladder, the way the remainder of the population is expected to achieve success.

I've lived in other countries with very diverse, and established racial populations. It doesn't bother me, in the slightest when I'm abroad, to see such representation (since it feels natural) but considering the relatively short period for immigration to become "a thing" for Ireland... it certainly does feel pushed on to the population.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sure, very true. They could be. Or they might not be.

Considering the racial demographics of Ireland, many Irish people feel this showing of other racial groups is forced, and artificial. There's the expectation that it would take time (2-3 decades) for the additions of other racial groups to develop, earn their spurs, etc until they got these attractive/prominent positions.

However, we are increasingly seeing more non-whites being put in such roles, and it's hard for many (myself included) to believe that it's down to their hard earned experience working up the ladder, the way the remainder of the population is expected to achieve success.

I've lived in other countries with very diverse, and established racial populations. It doesn't bother me, in the slightest when I'm abroad, to see such representation (since it feels natural) but considering the relatively short period for immigration to become "a thing" for Ireland... it certainly does feel pushed on to the population.

We're taking about rwo different things here - woke and social inciusuon.

And both sides are guilty of the same thing: having an agenda and rying too hard to highlight something that simply isn't there; be it racisn/bigotry or PC.

silverharp

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

We're taking about rwo different things here - woke and social inciusuon.

And both sides are guilty of the same thing: having an agenda and rying too hard to highlight something that simply isn't there; be it racisn/bigotry or PC.

the fundamental idea behind wokeness is to destroy the existing order not just to to include outsiders in the existing order.Give it 10 or 20 years and Irish dancing will be seen as a espousing "right wing" extremism or the GAA an expression of whiteness and toxic male heteronormativity unless there is a general push back before then

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

We're taking about rwo different things here - woke and social inciusuon.

And both sides are guilty of the same thing: having an agenda and rying too hard to highlight something that simply isn't there; be it racisn/bigotry or PC.

You're talking about different things. Apparently. Social inclusion refers to helping those in poverty. The woke movement is about forcing social change on others based on issues relating to racial, gender, etc.

You might want to reconsider the post that I originally quoted...

Rodin

It's not RTE's job to be inclusive.
It is their job to make sure they are NOT EXclusive.
Social engineering is an awful thing.

I don't see them being inclusive when it comes to their content. Very liberal/left-wing.. No attempt to have more conservative/rightwing commentary.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

silverharp wrote: »

the fundamental idea behind wokeness is to destroy the existing order not just to to include outsiders in the existing order.Give it 10 or 20 years and Irish dancing will be seen as a espousing "right wing" extremism or the GAA an expression of whiteness and toxic male heteronormativity unless there is a general push back before then

That's not the idea behind it at all - what in the hell give you the idea that it was? I'm not saying this isn't the effect it's having, or this isn't what's happening, but this shows a gross lack of understandung to the original concept and motivations.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You're talking about different things. Apparently. Social inclusion refers to helping those in poverty. The woke movement is about forcing social change on others based on issues relating to racial, gender, etc.

You might want to reconsider the post that I originally quoted...

That's the title of a research document, not a definition...

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

That's the title of a research document, not a definition...

The point was made that people are supposedly getting annoyed at the pushing of other racial groups into the public eye, and you suggested that these chosen individuals could have been perfectly qualified for those positions.. yes? As opposed to them being chosen solely to promote the existence or racial/ethnic diversity of Ireland.

In response, I pointed out that due to the relatively newness (20ish years) of immigration, that people have the expectation that people would earn their positions, and as such, it would take time for them to achieve such visible positions... positions that are likely in demand.

Now you're introducing completely different factors. I have no idea why. Oh, and the link I provided was to the Irish government website which deals with "Social inclusion". Not a research document.

There's no argument going on here. You stated one way of looking at the situation, and I pointed out another. Both are equally possible.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The point was made that people are supposedly getting annoyed at the pushing of other racial groups into the public eye, and you suggested that these chosen individuals could have been perfectly qualified for those positions.. yes? As opposed to them being chosen solely to promote the existence or racial/ethnic diversity of Ireland.

In response, I pointed out that due to the relatively newness (20ish years) of immigration, that people have the expectation that people would earn their positions, and as such, it would take time for them to achieve such visible positions... positions that are likely in demand.

Now you're introducing completely different factors. I have no idea why. Oh, and the link I provided was to the Irish government website which deals with "Social inclusion". Not a research document.

There's no argument going on here. You stated one way of looking at the situation, and I pointed out another. Both are equally possible.

Your link is not to a definition.

Woke and social inclusion are global ideas, not specific to Ireland and a lot older than 20ish years. Immigration has certainly been going on a lot longer that that - the Irish, as you know, have been emigrating for nearly 200 years.

Also, the definions go wider than just RTE appointments.

How are YOU actually defining these terms? Generally? With your words, not with links?

I'm referring to the example above of the RTE appointment and the pushing of visibility for racial diversity. Obvious enough, really (since I've stated it twice already).

You seem to want to argue something entirely different. Nah. Not interested in playing the game of definitions with you, since I figured the use of "Social inclusion" was a side issue, and a distraction.

As for the Irish emmigrating for 200 years, i said immigration to Ireland. The way some peoples minds work is utterly bizarre. Forget it. It's pretty clear you've no intention of actually discussing the subject at hand.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm referring to the example above of the RTE appointment and the pushing of visibility for racial diversity. Obvious enough, really (since I've stated it twice already).

You might be, I'm not.

You seem to want to argue something entirely different. Nah. Not interested in playing the game of definitions with you, since I figured the use of "Social inclusion" was a side issue, and a distraction.

As for the Irish emmigrating for 200 years, i said immigration to Ireland. The way some peoples minds work is utterly bizarre. Forget it. It's pretty clear you've no intention of actually discussing the subject at hand.

No, that "something diffetrent" is exactly what I've been arguing in the frist place.

Here's the post again - which you replied to - where I clearly state what I mean:

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

We're taking about rwo different things here - woke and social inciusuon.

And both sides are guilty of the same thing: having an agenda and rying too hard to highlight something that simply isn't there; be it racisn/bigotry or PC.

It's delibertely general. It's not specific to any event, organsation or country. It's about "woke" and "social inclusion" as global entities.

If you want to debate RTE, fair enough. but you'll need to find someone else to debate with. I don't know enough about them to say one way or the other and I never have posted about them. I simply put forward a theory on one appointment.

Biker79

" Woke ' and ' Social Inclusion ' are elements of a global cult. Their simplistic tenets are purposely designed to travel unchecked through social media to the smartphones of lonely, vulnerable people all over the world.

They have created a ready market of righteous but naive consumers, hooked into their smartphones, and willing to buy whatever advertisers on social platforms sell to them. Its marketing genius.

Woke-ism reminds me of Miss World* taking the stage to tearfully wish for world peace. Endearing, well-meaning fo sure...but obviously not to be taken in any way seriously.

(Except that wokies are often bitter and not very photogenic) *

km991148

Biker79 wrote: »

" Woke ' and ' Social Inclusion ' are elements of a global cult. Their simplistic tenets are purposely designed to travel unchecked through social media to the smartphones of lonely, vulnerable people all over the world.

They have created a ready market of righteous but naive consumers, hooked into their smartphones, and willing to buy whatever advertisers on social platforms sell to them. Its marketing genius.

Woke-ism reminds me of Miss World* taking the stage to tearfully wish for world peace. Endearing, well-meaning fo sure...but obviously not to be taken in any way seriously.

(Except that wokies are often bitter and not very photogenic) *

Mass consumerism and capitalism are one thing and "woke ideologies" as this thread would put it are another. But the exploiting of these woke ideas for marketing purposes (if that's what you mean) is another beast all together. Closer to how YouTube and Twitter etc trade in controversy for the $$$.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Biker79 wrote: »

" Woke ' and ' Social Inclusion ' are elements of a global cult. Their simplistic tenets are purposely designed to travel unchecked through social media to the smartphones of lonely, vulnerable people all over the world.

They have created a ready market of righteous but naive consumers, hooked into their smartphones, and willing to buy whatever advertisers on social platforms sell to them. Its marketing genius.

Woke-ism reminds me of Miss World* taking the stage to tearfully wish for world peace. Endearing, well-meaning fo sure...but obviously not to be taken in any way seriously.

(Except that wokies are often bitter and not very photogenic) *

That's soceity general - look at the situation with right-wing activism on the QAnon crowd in the US (not global, I know, but an example of media manipulating people to be morally outraged). Even down to capitalism with MAGA merchandising.

Biker79

km991148 wrote: »

Mass consumerism and capitalism are one thing and "woke ideologies" as this thread would put it are another. But the exploiting of these woke ideas for marketing purposes (if that's what you mean) is another beast all together. Closer to how YouTube and Twitter etc trade in controversy for the $$$.

It's not only controversy that has currency on social platforms - its victimhood and outrage, which are manufactured and stoked by the engagement tools of social platforms to create data to sell on to advertisers.

You can trace the development of Woke and Social Inclusion ideologies from about 2007/ 2008. This was when the first smartphones began to appear alongside mass-market social media platforms.

km991148

Biker79 wrote: »

It's not only controversy that has currency on social platforms - its victimhood and outrage, which are manufactured and stoked by the engagement tools of social platforms to create data to sell on to advertisers.

You can trace the development of Woke and Social Inclusion ideologies from about 2007/ 2008. This was when the first smartphones began to appear alongside mass-market social media platforms.

I don't think the social platforms favour one extreme over the other. Controversy doesn't care about right vs left. What is one persons controversy is another persons common sense.

Doesn't really fit into the preserve of the woke brigade only.

Danzy

km991148 wrote: »

Mass consumerism and capitalism are one thing and "woke ideologies" as this thread would put it are another. But the exploiting of these woke ideas for marketing purposes (if that's what you mean) is another beast all together. Closer to how YouTube and Twitter etc trade in controversy for the $$$.

Mass consumerism, Capitalism and Woke ideologies are all linked. Woke is the grandkids if Thatcher and Reagan.

Woke, progressives, whether centre or Left tend to be upper middle class.

Anarchists in Dublin are more likely to have gone to Blackrock College than Moyle Park in Clondalkin.


Woke, left wing radicalism etc are growing because it's the politics of young wealthy people.

It's popular in marketing and big corporations because they have income to spend and they are the type working in such places.

silverharp

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

That's not the idea behind it at all - what in the hell give you the idea that it was? I'm not saying this isn't the effect it's having, or this isn't what's happening, but this shows a gross lack of understandung to the original concept and motivations.

the post modernists look at it this way , they describe their ideas in terms of infecting the system. Im sure well meaning people wouldnt see it that way, but go back a couple of steps to the intellectual backdrop of people like Derrida and its there

Necro

Mod:

AllForIt's threadban lifted after discussion with user

km991148

Danzy wrote: »

Mass consumerism, Capitalism and Woke ideologies are all linked. Woke is the grandkids if Thatcher and Reagan.

Woke, progressives, whether centre or Left tend to be upper middle class.

Anarchists in Dublin are more likely to have gone to Blackrock College than Moyle Park in Clondalkin.


Woke, left wing radicalism etc are growing because it's the politics of young wealthy people.

It's popular in marketing and big corporations because they have income to spend and they are the type working in such places.

That's what I said - they are linked because companies exploit causes for marketing.

The rest of the comments on the last few posts are really just mass generalisations, some of which may or may not be true to some extent - but I don't want to ruin the fun of the thread - carry on!

Biker79

I don't think the social platforms favour one extreme over the other. Controversy doesn't care about right vs left. What is one person's controversy is another person's common sense.

Doesn't really fit into the preserve of the woke brigade only.

The great coup that Woke has pulled off is making it aspirational. Celebs, senior marketing/sales execs, Technology execs - everyone wants to signal their virtue because it has an association with higher social status. People further down the food chain lap it up.

This distinguishes it from anything else that is stoked by social media, such as conspiracy theories, which are often sneered at despite some of them being well-grounded in truth. Sneering at conspiracy theories is another way of trying to claim higher social status without earning it. They may be untrue, but they are harmless ways for ordinary people to figure out how the world works. They do it through fantastical stories, which is the way it was always done, just like it was in the Bible.

Unlike Woke ideologies, there is no risk of cultural & institutional damage with QAnon/ CTs. The way events in the US have played out over the last 8 months is evidence of this. Going back a lot further than 8 months actually.

biko

Don't lose weight. Is fatphobic...

https://twitter.com/pixiiefrida/status/1345957924204646400?s=19

Hellokitty1212

Saw this nonsense online.

No it’s not.

km991148

Biker79 wrote: »

The great coup that Woke has pulled off is making it aspirational. Celebs, senior marketing/sales execs, Technology execs - everyone wants to signal their virtue because it has an association with higher social status. People further down the food chain lap it up.

This distinguishes it from anything else that is stoked by social media, such as conspiracy theories, which are often sneered at despite some of them being well-grounded in truth. Sneering at conspiracy theories is another way of trying to claim higher social status without earning it. They may be untrue, but they are harmless ways for ordinary people to figure out how the world works. They do it through fantastical stories, which is the way it was always done, just like it was in the Bible.

Unlike Woke ideologies, there is no risk of cultural & institutional damage with QAnon/ CTs. The way events in the US have played out over the last 8 months is evidence of this. Going back a lot further than 8 months actually.

I disagree with most of what you say, but I dont really want to get in to it because it will derail the thread AND will lead to accusations of me sneering at conspiracy theories, being woke or something else.. so agree to disagree is the only solution here!

Hellokitty1212

I don’t get why Serena Williams being called too old and too fat by a tournament site it is “racist”.

I don’t think she’s either myself but if it was said about say Kim Clijsters there would be no racism accusation.

It’s doing no one any favors.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

silverharp wrote: »

the post modernists look at it this way , they describe their ideas in terms of infecting the system. Im sure well meaning people wouldnt see it that way, but go back a couple of steps to the intellectual backdrop of people like Derrida and its there

SJWs would consider themselves as well meaning people, even though most others wouldn.t.

I'd argue they feel that they're improving the existing order rather than destroying or infecting it.