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

punisher5112

So Eileen o Flynn has stated society isn't good enough for travellers..... Wow

46 Long

AllForIt wrote: »

I don't think it's that your're too old more that your not with it. The Woke left are not some extreme fringes of the Left anymore, they are fast becoming the mainstream Left as seen with issues such as hate speech laws and diversity quotas and LGBT segregated student accommodation in college campus's (which I think is an appalling idea).

So to spell it out, how can a stereotypical lefty wokey homosexual admonish any criticisms of Islam (which is the position they take) when they themselves would be thrown off the top of a building in the more fully Islamic countries by the people they are supposedly defending?

But I understand the mentality of how one could do that because it's the same with all wokey issues, and that is they are motivated not to defend anyone, not primarily anyway, but to attack people for the type of people they perceive them to be for the sake of it and what amuses me is the lengths they will go to to do so to often to comical effect. So back to the hypothetical Wokey homosexual, he will privately agree that the general Muslim attitude to homosexuality is bad but when he sees others calling it out he will admonish them because he has decided anyone who does so is Islamophobic. Get it now?

I'm not sure the modern Left is really all that left-wing to tell you the truth. You'll never hear the woke types talking about solidarity, owning the means of production, joining a union, campaigning to raise the minimum wage etc. They'd rather vindictively 'cancel' someone on Twitter than do something productive like volunteering at a local soup kitchen or homeless shelter.

CtevenSrowder

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

They were getting great attendances before the “lockdown”. Them and Rovers split the ex-Man United fans who stopped following them since they went shít.

I mean, they use the excuses that they prefer the “purer” form of live soccer or that the EPL has gone too commercial but, let’s be honest, they stopped following because their, adopted, team wasn’t doing well.

Very poor form. Fickle.

None of that's true though, is it.

AllForIt

46 Long wrote: »

I'm not sure the modern Left is really all that left-wing to tell you the truth. You'll never hear the woke types talking about solidarity, owning the means of production, joining a union, campaigning to raise the minimum wage etc. They'd rather vindictively 'cancel' someone on Twitter than do something productive like volunteering at a local soup kitchen or homeless shelter.

Socialism is about equal wealth imo, who owns what is irrelevant in that regard, as long as everyone has equal everything in terms of possessions and access to this that and the other.. The woke left are not just into equality of opportunity but equality of outcome so that could be argued to be the same as what you are talking about just spun a different way. A socialist version of capitalism if you see what I mean.

EmmetSpiceland

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

None of that's true though, is it.

You don’t think so, C? There were 3 or 4 vocal United fans in my office up until a couple of years ago. None of them “follow” EPL now. Felt bad for the Liverpool fans who’d been waiting years to get a few “digs” in. Thought it was bad form, myself.

I know of a few others who don’t support any English team, United, now. Various “reasons” given, all fairly mealy-mouthed.

I mean, you could put the increased turnout at games to shrewd marketing by the LoI’s, and club’s, PR team. Maybe they capitalised on the “hipster” fans attending a few years back but I don’t really think it’s any coincidence that since United have been so shít the numbers have exploded.

My real “fear” would be that if United ever get good again, maybe in 8-10 years, that the LoI would suffer a massive blow as lads dust off the United jersey, stretch it over the belly and decide to head back to the pub for their games rather than into the terraces.

Only time will tell.

auspicious

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuyoelA78nA

Strumms

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

You don’t think so, C? There were 3 or 4 vocal United fans in my office up until a couple of years ago. None of them “follow” EPL now. Felt bad for the Liverpool fans who’d been waiting years to get a few “digs” in. Thought it was bad form, myself.

I know of a few others who don’t support any English team, United, now. Various “reasons” given, all fairly mealy-mouthed.

I mean, you could put the increased turnout at games to shrewd marketing by the LoI’s, and club’s, PR team. Maybe they capitalised on the “hipster” fans attending a few years back but I don’t really think it’s any coincidence that since United have been so shít the numbers have exploded.

My real “fear” would be that if United ever get good again, maybe in 8-10 years, that the LoI would suffer a massive blow as lads dust off the United jersey, stretch it over the belly and decide to head back to the pub for their games rather than into the terraces.

Only time will tell.

The reason for the increased attendances is because the likes of the bigger clubs got together and instead of decades of shoulder shrugging decided to do something about it...

Basically they’ve been giving away a load of tickets to kids. Instead of xxxx empty seats they realize that get a load of school kids in, they won’t pay on the gate but they will get started supporting Xx team, get involved, a passion for the game and club, become supporters....revenue to compliment that arrives later.

Summer football has improved the quality of pitches, football, attendances, atmosphere...

LOI pitches used to be the worst in the world.. I went to a Shels vs Bohs game about 10 years ago that probably in 4 out of 5 leagues gets called off... you are fûcking paying in to be entertained and see a quality game of football....

Now it’s a lot better , summer football, = pitches you can play ‘quality’ football on... entertainment....

DrPhilG

km991148 wrote: »

Nah not really.

It's possible to accept that other people believe something while also disagreeing with those beliefs.
It's possible to believe that people shouldn't be persecuted over their beliefs while also disagreeing with those beliefs.
It's also possible to accept not everything has to be segregated so tightly and these mass generalisations don't really help anyone (except maybe to get a bunch of likes on a thread like this).

Then how come the wokies love defending Islam even though it oppress women and homosexuals, yet despise Christianity because it oppresses women and homosexuals?

Mad_maxx

punisher5112 wrote: »

So Eileen o Flynn has stated society isn't good enough for travellers..... Wow

Victim politics is quite profitable

Mad_maxx

DrPhilG wrote: »

Then how come the wokies love defending Islam even though it oppress women and homosexuals, yet despise Christianity because it oppress women and homosexuals?

Because political correctness involves always being blind to the shortcomings of minority groups

sbsquarepants

DrPhilG wrote: »

Then how come the wokies love defending Islam even though it oppress women and homosexuals, yet despise Christianity because it oppress women and homosexuals?

It's almost as if they care not a jot for logic nor consistency:D

Gervais08 wrote: »

I must have missed that - who would put a slogan up like that ??!!

I don't know, but it's not like you're allowed say they're wrong now is it!

DrPhilG

DrPhilG wrote: »

Then how come the wokies love defending Islam even though it oppress women and homosexuals, yet despise Christianity because it oppress women and homosexuals?

Because even while they love to group others into categories, and apply labels to others... they themselves are individuals, part of various clubs, but separate, which means their individual opinions can shift depending on the group they're currently with.

It's not the case of double standards, hypocrisy, etc, because they've managed to convince the world that such views are enlightened.. and supported by the mob. Just as those within the mob, are individuals, but when the mob acts, they act together. It's wonderful there's so many mobs to choose from (thanks to social media and the internet).. People can wear many different hats.

DrPhilG

DrPhilG wrote: »

Then how come the wokies love defending Islam even though it oppress women and homosexuals, yet despise Christianity because it oppress women and homosexuals?

The lefts reason to exist , is an opposition to the prevailing power - in this case 'White Male Patriarchy'.
So while "my enemy's enemy is my enemy" , the feeling may not be reciprocated, often realised too late.
Ideologues find it easier to unite against a common enemy, rather than common interest.

silverharp

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

The lefts reason to exist , is an opposition to the prevailing power - in this case 'White Male Patriarchy'.
So while "my enemy's enemy is my enemy" , the feeling may not be reciprocated, often realised too late.
Ideologues find it easier to unite against a common enemy, rather than common interest.

it would be funny in a way to see Europe dump one middle eastern religion for another and even more funny because Islam is more Patriarchal than Christianity.

IAMAMORON

I don't think there is some sort of Woke Committee who sit down every week to discuss what needs cancelling and get any PC house and garden work actioned.

Woke is essentially the actions of numpties who feel they are so without fault that they have the innate right to polarise something and declare a social aspersion on that something, or other, based on their own perception of an acceptable norm.

I cannot wait until the Guardian gets cancelled, for being too polarsing and for engaging in negative social paralysis.

IAMAMORON

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I don't think there is some sort of Woke Committee who sit down every week to discuss what needs cancelling and get any PC house and garden work actioned.

Woke is essentially the actions of numpties who feel they are so without fault that they have the innate right to polarise something and declare a social aspersion on that something, or other, based on their own perception of an acceptable norm.

I cannot wait until the Guardian gets cancelled, for being too polarsing and for engaging in negative social paralysis.

Ironically, the woke collective now wields substantial power, eating itself is inevitable

the purple tin

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I don't think there is some sort of Woke Committee who sit down every week to discuss what needs cancelling and get any PC house and garden work actioned.

Woke is essentially the actions of numpties who feel they are so without fault that they have the innate right to polarise something and declare a social aspersion on that something, or other, based on their own perception of an acceptable norm.

I cannot wait until the Guardian gets cancelled, for being too polarsing and for engaging in negative social paralysis.

I reckon this whole thing has been planned and organised from the get-go. These ideas have probably come from some PR firm or think tank and are then seeded into the public through social media and universities.
It is only a matter of getting the ball rolling and then enough useful idiots will get behind the movement and it becomes a self sustaining entity.

km991148

DrPhilG wrote: »

Then how come the wokies love defending Islam even though it oppress women and homosexuals, yet despise Christianity because it oppress women and homosexuals?

I dont know- go ask someone "woke". Find the wokest person you can (because I am sure that represents everyone who is woke) and see.

I was responding to the question around the decision "The left" have to make regarding Islam and LGBT:

Omackeral wrote: »

Lefties really have a decision to make when it comes to Islam vs LGBT. They mostly brush it under a massive rug though.

Like it even makes sense.

Sir Oxman

the purple tin wrote: »

I reckon this whole thing has been planned and organised from the get-go. These ideas have probably come from some PR firm or think tank and are then seeded into the public through social media and universities.
It is only a matter of getting the ball rolling and then enough useful idiots will get behind the movement and it becomes a self sustaining entity.

It's been on the roll since the 60s.
A bit of what's known as 'the long march through the institutions'

Kivaro

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

Ironically, the woke collective now wields substantial power, eating itself is inevitable

One would hope.
It is already happening with the BLM "movement" in the States. And coincidentally (not really), the in-fighting involves the enormous amounts of money that the group amassed while fighting against perceived Police brutality in the last couple of years. It's curious, isn't it, that this perception suddenly stopped after Joe Bidden got elected, as if by magic?

1800_Ladladlad

hbgv

Christ almighty

sbsquarepants

1800_Ladladlad wrote: »

hbgv

Christ almighty

Do you have to steer it with your mickey or what?

CtevenSrowder

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

You don’t think so, C? There were 3 or 4 vocal United fans in my office up until a couple of years ago. None of them “follow” EPL now. Felt bad for the Liverpool fans who’d been waiting years to get a few “digs” in. Thought it was bad form, myself.

I know of a few others who don’t support any English team, United, now. Various “reasons” given, all fairly mealy-mouthed.

I mean, you could put the increased turnout at games to shrewd marketing by the LoI’s, and club’s, PR team. Maybe they capitalised on the “hipster” fans attending a few years back but I don’t really think it’s any coincidence that since United have been so shít the numbers have exploded.

My real “fear” would be that if United ever get good again, maybe in 8-10 years, that the LoI would suffer a massive blow as lads dust off the United jersey, stretch it over the belly and decide to head back to the pub for their games rather than into the terraces.

Only time will tell.

I think it is. I don't disagree there are a lot of bandwagon supporters of EPL teams, particularly United (and Chelsea). But I don't think these people would then be likely to rock up to Dalymount now that United are a bit ****. Seems far fetched to me!

biko

If something like this gains traction things could go pear-shaped big time.

Wibbs

biko wrote: »

If something like this gains traction things could go pear-shaped big time.

Never going to happen. The legal ramifications alone would be enormous and where there is money to be lost... One "activist" nutcase - and that particular subject gathers many - won't change that.

Tacitus Kilgore

biko wrote: »

If something like this gains traction things could go pear-shaped big time.

Yeah, I mean it's one person today - tomorrow it'll be millions, then what? we'll all have to chop our dicks off cos we didn't make an informed decision? We'll all have to dye our hair blue and kneel down next.



The ease of triggering the right in 2020 is gas, clickity click click click clickbait.

Tacitus Kilgore

Tacitus Kilgore wrote: »

The ease of triggering the right in 2020 is gas, clickity click click click clickbait.

It's not the "triggering of the right" that's the problem, it's the silence of the "silent majority" that allows stull like this to gain traction because only "the right" object to it and the "silent" don't want to be painted as ***ist so keep quiet.


Then wonder how "it came to this",just look at Brexit as to what can happen.

IAMAMORON

Wibbs wrote: »

Never going to happen. The legal ramifications alone would be enormous and where there is money to be lost... One "activist" nutcase - and that particular subject gathers many - won't change that.

I think it is one of the great failings of twitter and other online social mediums, insofar as it tolerates a free for all of various viewpoints which are often open to ridicule. There is no generic governance of what gets posted, so given the relatively fallow times we live in, as regards news and other worldly items, it is straightforward for the wailings of some idealist to post whatever.

The ramifications of this are that any journalist can just pick it up and wave it around like it is the genuine feelings of any such and such activist whereas in reality it is a segment worthy of ridicule.

I take a lot more notice of the political leanings of the paper publishing the tripe, I know the Washington Examiner is a very conservative production so this repost is essentially ridiculing the concept and smirking around its readership looking for backslaps highlighting the potential pitfalls of giving transsexuals an inch.

It gets tedious to be honest.

km991148

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I think it is one of the great failings of twitter and other online social mediums, insofar as it tolerates a free for all of various viewpoints which are often open to ridicule.

It doesn't tolerate - It actively encourages via suggestion engines and recommendations. The crazy woke heads aren't the only ones given this sort of platform, the extreme right views are the same. Its all primed to keep people within their bubbles. That wasn't the intention of course, the mere side effect of these aggressive advertising platforms.

Tacitus Kilgore

Deleted User wrote: »

It's not the "triggering of the right" that's the problem, it's the silence of the "silent majority" that allows stull like this to gain traction because only "the right" object to it and the "silent" don't want to be painted as ***ist so keep quiet.


Then wonder how "it came to this",just look at Brexit as to what can happen.

So the silent majority need to speak out about an article written about one person's crap thoughts - which was written specifically to get people like Biko to get outraged about it - and generate clicks etc. Nah, its just triggerbait for the angry bais.


Whoa there - you've been trying to defend brexit for years on the brexit threads - have you just changed your coat or what??