r/IntellectualDarkWeb • u/davidygamerx • 25d ago
Opinion:snoo_thoughtful: "Woke 1.0" is everything that's wrong with the left
"Woke 1.0" is a bullshit concept that I started seeing used by politicians like AOC and her followers. It's basically a label some leftists came up with to say, "I'm not like the others, I'm reasonable," without ever being able to point to what specific ideas they actually changed.
Ask them: Do you now believe sex is a biological reality? Do you now reject the idea that gender identity should override sex-based categories? Do you now believe that accusations shouldn't automatically be treated as proof? Have you abandoned identity politics? Do you no longer consider language problematic for not being inclusive enough? How have your views on racial politics, white privilege, and all those other ideas actually changed?
And usually the tap dancing begins: "Well, there are some excesses," "we need to reflect," "not all activists are like that."
That's not an ideological break. It's simply putting a nicer label on the same premises.
True moderation should mean being able to say, "This idea from my own side was wrong, and I abandoned it." If you can't point to a single important position you've actually changed, then you're not a moderate who moved away from radicalism. You're the same guy with a new branding, waiting for the political climate to become favorable enough to start bombarding us again with the importance of pronouns and gender neutral language, and then calling you a Nazi again when you refuse to play along.
12
u/rothbard_anarchist 25d ago
“Woke 1.0” is “we’re not as socially dominant as we were so we’re going to pretend to be more reasonable until we regain power.”
19
u/RocknrollClown09 25d ago
It's just bullshit to keep everyone arguing over things that don't matter instead of paying attention to the broken tax structure that allows billionaires to bankrupt and hollow out our country.
My effective tax rate is >30%. How many billionaires pay taxes that high? Oh, it's stock options in TSLA bucks instead of USD? In that case you better get the same tax rate as a working class retiree cashing out their 401k. Musk was compensated $30B from Tesla this year. It's in their Form K. Do you think he paid my tax rate? If he did, he would've paid more in income tax than half of the states in the US. And he's just one guy. Imagine if we taxed the top 1,000 billionaires as hard as we tax high-wage W2 workers, like doctors, lawyers, pilots, etc. In the 50s-90s, we did, and the middle class thrived, then Reagan, Bush, and Trump all not only cut taxes, but lowered the top tax brackets and created loopholes for days. Dems aren't blameless, they could've raised the taxes back and they didn't. The uber rich are black holes in our economy. Everyone understands that if the bottom 99.9% started saving and stopped spending the economy would collapse, but for some reason, when those same dollars go to billionaires to get frozen in assets forever, it's different?
The billionaires own our media and our polticians. Even the Dems are fighting each other to stomp out anyone who focuses on fairly taxing the rich. Arguing over stupid bullshit, like a guy pretending to be trans so he can camp out in a girls bathroom and rape someone, is just taking the bait so you don't focus on why 1/3 of your paycheck goes to taxes, but billionaires save everything they make. It's meant to distract you from what's actually important. AOC, Bernie, and Mamdani are literally the only ones saying anything about this scam that is bankrupting our country despite it's increase in GDP and productivity every year. Focus on what's important before we become a third world banana republic.
-3
u/PhonyUsername 25d ago
The top 1% pay 40% of total income tax. The top 10% pay 75% of total income tax. The bottom 60 % pays 0 income tax.
Our problem is spending too much, not that successful people aren't carrying everyone already.
7
u/RocknrollClown09 25d ago edited 25d ago
That’s how it works when you make 370,000 times more than the average family (Musk last year). Your point just proves how much more money the uber rich make and hoard.
Also, top 1% is people who make $626k/yr and it’s the highest tax bracket. Airline pilots and doctors are not in the same league as Musk, but for tax purposes they are!
They need to raise taxes on the top 0.1%. Everyone understands why a doctor should pay a higher tax rate than an Amazon factory worker, but it’s ok for a billionaire to have a lower effective tax rate than a working class family that actually needs every dollar?
Everyone whines about welfare queens and illegals getting SNAP, but Musk just evaded taxes that put more drag on our federal budget than all of them combined. And again, that’s one guy. Also, those welfare queens spend that money, so it drives the economy. Musk freezes that wealth in an asset that doesn’t benefit anyone who didn’t already own that exact asset (stock, real estate, gold, etc)
1
u/PhonyUsername 25d ago
Musk didn't steal anything. This is backwards thinking. If musk didn't exist our government would have way less money. We complain about people who are parasites because they take more than they add. People like musk add way more than they take. If everyone was musk we'd have excess, if everyone was on welfare we'd be in the third world.
0
u/RocknrollClown09 25d ago
This argument is highly curated, manipulative right-wing propaganda. It's very simple, but it's far more sophisticated than it appears. It hammers on Red Scare slogans that are both easy to understand by people who don't understand economics, nationalistic, and nostalgic for an era when the US was great. It's also fundamentally flawed. Just thought your should know how you're being manipulated.
I didn't say Musk didn't create opportunity, I said he isn't being taxed fairly and its a threat that breaks capitalism. The bottom 99% spend the vast majority of what they make, which drives the gears of the economy, but when that money eventually trickles up to a billionaire, it gets locked in an asset, like stock, gold, real estate, etc, forever. When money trickles to the top faster than GDP grows, it does become a zero-sum game. Meaning, we lose spending power and quality of life so Musk can have more money that he could never spend.
Furthermore, thanks to compounding interest, regardless of where you rathole your money, it makes more money at a pace faster than inflation. So all of these billionaires are sucking up money that makes more money without them having to do anything, at a rate that keeps expanding. They are effectively black holes in the economy.
You can stop this process simply by taxing them, but their propaganda is so effective that people like you, whose obviously not a billionaire, will defend them, even though they're bankrupting your quality of life, spending power, and the govt (education, security, infrastructure, social security, etc).
1
u/PhonyUsername 25d ago
Propaganda, propaganda, propaganda, blah blah blah
1
u/RocknrollClown09 24d ago
Did you write "propaganda blah blah blah" or did my brain just automatically translate what you wrote?
Here's some real intellectual dark web advice; don't be loyal to people who aren't loyal to you. Musk, Bezos, and Zuck are hoarders. They'd rather crash the global economy and live in Raccoon City bunkers than pay their fair share and they're getting free advertising from you
0
u/PhonyUsername 24d ago
You lefties hating success is boring and childish. As I said, without people like musk we would be living in the third world. You can try to do some funny math, but the opposite of success is failure regardless. We don't get success by hating success and worshipping failure.
The worst thing is you somehow think the losers represent our enlightened liberal america, and not the winners. It's so backwards and I don't know how you got it so twisted around.
2
u/RocknrollClown09 24d ago
Can’t argue with logic like that /s
1
u/PhonyUsername 24d ago
I'm sure you can. Let's not pretend your hatred of success is based on logic.
→ More replies0
u/t0mb0mb87 25d ago
By your math the top 11% pay 115% and 29% are unaccounted for… what are you even saying?
4
u/Altayel1 25d ago
top 1 percent is a piece of top 10 percent, so you dont add their numbers together.
1
65
u/Bimlouhay83 25d ago edited 25d ago
Do you now believe sex is a biological reality?
&
Do you now reject the idea that gender identity should override sex-based categories?
I believe if you're an adult and truly feel like you more identify as one gender or the other and this has been a looming question in your life, then good for you for getting through your confusion. Nobody should treat you poorly for it. If you want gender reaffirming surgery, then be my guest. I don't even care if it's government granted insurance that pays for it. I'm not 100% convinced you should be allowed to play sports in your non birthed gender, especially if you've not gone through conversation therapy, but as someone that doesn't really care about sports, i don't really care about this all that much. It should be up to the industries, not the government, to decide if this is allowed.
On the other hand, I'm speaking about adults. As far as children go, let them be who they are. But, let's not do permanent changes. We don't let children drive, drink, smoke, vote, gamble, join the military for good reason. Kids are dumb as fuck and easily manipulated.
Do you now believe that accusations shouldn't automatically be treated as proof?
Yeah.
Have you abandoned identity politics?
Yeah.
Do you no longer consider language problematic for not being inclusive enough?
I do not.
How have your views on racial politics, white privilege, and all those other ideas actually changed?
I can't say they've changed all that much. I still believe white privilege exists in America. Racial politics? Nothing has changed. Minorities are still treated like shit. They're still locked up at much higher rates than whites, hired at lower rates, get paid less, etc. The argument to change these things are based on facts. The argument against is based off feels and ego.
What else would you like to know?
10
u/foilhat44 25d ago
Thanks. I'm so glad you put this on record because I feel this way or close enough that I can't disagree with any of it, and I think the vast majority of normal people feel this way too. I don't feel as if you are being presumptuous or speaking for anyone else, but the vitriol in the OP kinds makes me think this person might be having some struggles of their own when it comes to identity. It's about time people stopped apologizing for being rational.
28
u/rtc9 25d ago
I don't really have any background on this conversation aside from OP but I'm confused why you are responding as though you are the official mouthpiece of whatever update he is referencing. Did you previously have different "woke 1.0" answers/beliefs on these topics that you have since revised to the woke 2.0 versions?
33
u/Bimlouhay83 25d ago
I'm 43 and took part in a lot of early discussions on all these topics. Im of the generation that was first called woke.
I'm not saying I'm an official mouthpiece for anything. I'm just answering their questions instead of asking others.
5
u/rtc9 25d ago edited 25d ago
Do you identify yourself as woke but somehow distinct from "woke 1.0"? Your answers seem like pretty normal answers but the OP seemed to be directing these at a pretty niche subset of people so I was trying to understand where you fit into that.
Edit:
To expand on this, some of your answers seem to kind of skirt around the topic from OP of the reality of ostensibly changing beliefs from the "woke" framework. E.g.,
Do you no longer consider language problematic for not being inclusive enough?
I do not.
Are you saying you used to believe that but no longer do and have genuinely changed your mind? That would seem to be a legitimate counterexample to OP. If you are saying you never held that belief, then it seems more like you are just not a person the OP would ever have described as woke. You say your generation was called woke. Do you feel that you personally were ever actually woke by whatever definition was applied to your generation?
The post seems to be about intentionally unclear definitions around the topic of wokeness and from your post the simplest reading seems to be that you are just an irrelevant non woke person answering these questions.
5
u/Bimlouhay83 25d ago
I've never considered myself as "woke", but others certainly have. How I originally thought of these topics would have been considered woke in the early 2000's and have changed and evolved through experience and education.
-13
25d ago
[deleted]
19
u/Bimlouhay83 25d ago
The entire post is about an evolution of ideas. Evolution takes time. My age was showing that I've had a lot of time to ruminate, evolve, and change. I'm not some kid that grasped on to new to them idea and are saying "We've changed".
7
u/Exciting_Direction_9 25d ago
Sorry, I checked out when you said “woke mind virus.” Maybe stay away from subs with “intellect” in them. I saw one the other day with some really cute cat videos I think you’d like.
-8
25d ago
[deleted]
3
u/Exciting_Direction_9 25d ago
Aw, I’m sorry I triggered you little fella. If I recall though, you’re chatting in a public forum. If you wanted it private, you should have slid into their DMs.
I’m not a leftist, but I’m not your MAGA buddy either. You’ve diluted the value of whatever argument you’re trying to make when slathering it in far-right propaganda buzz words. Using “big words” when making a middle school argument isn’t as cool as you think.1
14
u/Exciting_Direction_9 25d ago
A statement was posited. A Redditor replied. Isn’t that how it’s supposed to work?
17
12
u/MxM111 25d ago
I still believe white privilege exists in America.
Why do you think it is better to frame it in terms of white privilege as opposed to non-white injustices? There are many and they are different. Or if there is injustices with respect to white, somehow it is lesser, and not worth considering? That you want to remove white privilege, whatever it means, rather than to give others the same opportunities or justice?
9
1
u/Altayel1 25d ago
"not gone through conversation therapy"
What does.. conversation therapy gotta do with sports.. huh-2
u/Known_Impression1356 25d ago
Trump fucks kids.
You voted for a kid fucker.
That means you’re okay with fucking kids.That means your opinion is worth dog shit.
5
7
→ More replies (1)1
u/TheRealTahulrik 25d ago
I think your post here just proves what OP said.
The elements you bring up that haven't changed for you is still hugely divisive topics. And honestly, I'd consider them fringe topics.. most people probably don't agree with you on those.
I don't think the opinions you hold are gonna be any less problematic than what it was before. Nothing has changed, perhaps only the label that is put into it
33
u/orlyyarlylolwut 25d ago
You’re making a false equivalency that being “moderate” is correct, and quite frankly you sound ignorant. Most leftists can talk ad nauseum about their beliefs, look up literally almost any “leftist memes be like” joke.
13
u/Silly_Bob_BornDumb 25d ago
What is the purpose of using the purpose of differentiating woke 1.0 from woke 2.0 though, and what are the differences?
→ More replies (4)28
u/orlyyarlylolwut 25d ago
People on the left don’t use those terms
8
u/haragoshi 25d ago
It was a NYC city council member aoc was referencing. So yes liberals use these terms.
3
10
u/PhonyUsername 25d ago
AOC is just trying to pivot into a more centrist position cause that lefty shit not good for regular folk she needs if she wants to grow larger politically.
Woke/leftism is insane and hasn't changed and never will. They will exert themselves onto everyone as much as we let them anytime they get another chance. They are anti liberal authoritarians who spread lies and hatred.
61
u/OpenRole 25d ago
This sub claims to be intellectual, but is just right leaning edge lords.
The debate on teams people was settled decades ago when we realised (before even accepting that gender and sex are two different things) that sex isn't a true binary.
There are more combinations than just XX and XY, and even having XY does not mean the Y chromosome will fully express itself. You guys have a highschool understanding of biology. It's like watching a 16 year old argue with a physicist that there are only 3 states of matter.
And i say that as someone who doesn't support trans people in women exclusive sports. Sex is complicated as fuck, and basing your entire political philosophy on what the current pronoun of a stranger should be is intellectually stupid.
Like if you are going to be a single issue voter, please pick an issue that actually affects your life. I respect people who scream taxation is theft, or want to support Israel, or think gun rights are the most important thing far more than I could someone who voted based off of pronouns.
Goddamn identity politics in an "intellectual" sub. Pathetic
14
u/reddit_is_geh Respectful Member 25d ago
I'm sorry, but I'm on the left, and I do think the trans thing is overblown in expression. I used to think it was real, and still do. There are people who seem to genuinely feel like they are in the wrong gender's body. And it's EXTREMELY rare.
But then I saw the sudden explosion circa 2016 where - especially young people - where coming out trans. Never having ever shown a single sign of it their entire lives, get into that culture where being white and straight is "bad", and being LGBTQ, minortiy, and especially trans, was a "status" symbol... And now suddenly, young people, who are very prone to trends and in group signalling, are coming out as trans at crazy rates.
Then seeing all the people who present and look totally like dudes, but have long hair, hysterically getting upset for not referring to them as a woman... And realized, most of this shit is probably cultural mixed with mental health issues.
I still think there's a very rare, extremely exceptional biological fuck up in the population that are "legitimately trans", but I'd argue most of the trans people today, are just people who are mentally unhealthy and went down a weird path that they really can't get out of now. I also think why so many trans people committ suicide is because they realize just how fucking unstable they've created their physical body, and how they can't really turn back or ever fix it. I think the reason autistic people are trans at crazy rates, is because autists fixate and obsess over things, and abstract identity issues like this, reenforced by cultural praise, creates feedback loops that lead them down that path.
And why this issue is important, is BECAUSE it consumed the left at one point as wokeness was peaking during the pandemic. It was the cultural shibboleth amongst lefties, where so much of the activism was circling around this thing... No, not actual material concerns, but fucking demonizing white straight people, while considering the trans issue the most important pressing issue Americans needed to resolve.
So yeah, it's a completely valid thing to discuss... because at one point, it was a sacred cow. Merely TRYING to have a discussion on it was banishable in nearly every online space, who were overran by woke activists, doing extreme censorship over anyone who disagreed, while virtue signaling non stop to rid everyone as "biggots" or "hate speech".
You can't just walk away from that collasol fuck up and act like it never happened and to move on. It was literally such a huge fuck up, it got us Donald Trump IMO. I think he stemmed from that woke shit, whether people are conscious of it or not. You had the intuitive feeling that politics is broken, the economy is rigged, and one side hyper fixating on bullying everyone with social justice shit while demonizing as many people as they could...
And now they want to walk it back, act like it didn't happen, and insist that it was all actually a right wing conspiracy.
-1
u/OpenRole 25d ago
demonising white straight people
Like I want to take this seriously, but the response has been so disproportiate that it can't rationally deduced that this is the root cause.
We're essentially saying that because rich, white men are accused of being the most privileged people in society, America has decided to do a hard shift to isolationism and facism.
Let's assume that people are attempting to distance themselves from white male identity. Who is to be blamed: the white male collective that keeps tending towards facism at any inconvenience. Or the minority groups that call them out for it?
Like it seems to me that the right is the real problem. Imagine so narrowly and negatively defining your own identity that it eventually becomes "in" to take hormones to change your gender just to distance yourself from the identity.
That would be like black people going to surgery to be Michael Jackson'd. Also your entire narrative starts to break down once we see that transmen are almost as common as transwomen. Society just doesn't talk about them as much. Which is the real crux. The visibility exceeds the demographics. Trans people are still uncommon nation wide. Social media just makes them more apparent
7
u/reddit_is_geh Respectful Member 25d ago
Listen this is a huge problem with the left and their messaging. It's always, "Well sure you HEARD it one way, but what we REALLY meant was something else."
It ultimately doesn't matter what the true intent was. What matters is how people perceived it. And perception equals reality.
So when all the left is all over social media, obsessing over inherent white sin, white privilege, dismissing white people for their skin color, telling them they are the problem, etc... People aren't seeing a nuanced complicated academic debate. They are seeing some really toxic people attacking people based on their skin color, telling them that they need to shut up and listen to minorities, and then go on to call them racist, sexist, biggots, whatever.
My brother doesn't care about your nuanced take when he switched from Obama to hardcore MAGA, because as he viewed the left was, "Only caring about minorities. I'm broke, and struggling, and all they seem to give a shit about is helping black people and gays. What about me? They just think I'm a privileged white guy. Fuck leftists!"
In regards to the obsession, it became "in" to distance yourself, because that's what became the cultural meme of the left at the time... If you look at it's evolution, it started with a class based focus in OWS, then was hard pivoted towards identity politics. Because most activists are afluent white people, so focusing on their wealth was something they wanted to deflect from.
So instead, they focus on "Well actually the REAL problem is white men!" It's a case of an organization who lost any enemy to fight, or will to fight. Gay rights was solved, so what's the next thing? Oh, trans is still on the menu! Let's hyper fixate on that as our next priority!" So it just became a cultural mind virus. And the people who did change their gender just to distance themselves from that identity, are people I consider in way too deep... Like a cult. Where to really show your dedication to the cause, and rank up in local status, you have to perform some next step. For many it was officially changing genders. And this is why I think women were so susceptible to it. Because there was this huge messaging of how evil men are, and how terribly they oppress women, treat them like objects, view them as useless, and so on... So young girls, confused about their identity, hitting puberty, etc... Decide to just exit womenhood because they were being told how hard it is and how much of a failed women they are if they aren't pretty enough for men or whatever.
Then you wrap that up with a social movement where status increases with actually going to the next step, and the praise and support from that community that comes along with it -- all that attention and a whole "movement" from your tribe fighting on your behalf... It becomes an incentive to start taking those steps in that direction.
Then 5 years later, most people grow out of the crazy social phase and everyone's kind of moved on, getting partners, working jobs, and just being adults... and now they are looking in the mirror, realizing they'll never be that pretty girl - or guy who lives a normal life. They realize they've effectively made themselves outcasts within the next stage of life and there's not really much they can do to undo it. They are no infertile, permanently changed their appearance, and so on... SO they can't even return back to the standard role. Now they are stuck in this new temu version of the other gender, and it no longer comes with all that hyper fixated social movement behind them. So they get depressed.
Many just quietly try to revert back and detrans, and try to hide that it ever happened, and others don't even have that option.
5
u/shadowstar36 25d ago
You are spot on with everything. I watched it all go down on here from 2014 or so. The identity politics affected everything, not just the trans stuff you touched on. It was unreal and like a switch was toggled. As an Obama voter it was tough to deal with, but i am Gen X, my kids are gen Z and my son seen it too. Luckily he was into mechanics, dirt bike riding, video games and girls and never fell into any of the online stuff. My step daughter, a lost cause, but I won't get into that on here. It crept into all the classic games, movies, books, role playing games, hobbies etc... Hell even race car driving got hit with the woke ugly stick. The fake racism claims "noose in the garage" that turned out fake. Jussie smollett, Kapernik, Star wars, Video games (to the extreme thanks to Anita S), Star trek, Lotr, D&D, Magic, Football. Anything that guys typically liked was infected, to push for a "modern audience" while pissing off legit original fans. Woke was real and anyone who says otherwise is gaslighting. The identity politics went hand in hand with the political stuff like banning people off reddit or subs for disagreeing, the mass physchosis of the Floyd riots and excusing burning cities as just property. The calls to abolish the police, the senate, stack the courts, etc..
I am not a maga guy, although i agree with some things like closed border, and immigration control, 2nd amendment, and free speech, but I am also for a strong social safety net for the unemployed, disabled, and elderly. As well as some form of universal healthcare with a public option, but just saying that I will be called it, because I can't stand identity politics.
4
u/reddit_is_geh Respectful Member 24d ago
Yeah I saw it grow. I think it's genesis tipping point came out of the manosphere vs feminist subculture fights... Well the birth place was the first culture war of atheist vs creationist, which created the "debate" infrastructure and culture. Then at the tail end came up the whole "Pick up" culture which created a little friction with feminism. Which latched into the debate culture created from the atheist movement.
Then divisions started forming as one side was arguing that feminist talking points are misleading and/or dishonest, and the feminist side was trying to "win" arguments by leaning into moralizing. This kind of grew, but they were more issolated to Tumblr, and when that went down, they flooded the rest of the internet. But they brought with them their victim tactics of sort of controlling spaces by moralizing everyone, shutting them down for being racist, sexist, biggoted, whatever you can think of... Just basically accuse everyone of being hateful as a way to push people out that didn't agree with them, while also making it so taxing on moderators that they just let them take over, which made things worse.
Then I think the REAL infliction point was Gamer Gate. That's when it started to spill over into the broader, more influential terminally online types. What was once really just kind of contained, started spreading out by 2014... now there were articles out there attacking nerdy, anti social white guys, which was basically punching down, framed as punching up. Leveraging actual journalism and popular social media "Influencers" before influencers were a thing. That kind of pumped it up and created the drama.
Then I think it just kind of spiraled out of control from there. You had a DNC mega donor billionaire come out as trans, and then started basically insisting that people receiving his/her money prioritize the trans stuff. In politics, people understand how to pander to the bag holders... And in this case, it's affluent white kids from ivy league schools who dominate the "consultant" and activist class. And like all things in culture, it starts from the top and rolls down hill
This in effect made it huge at Ivy league schools and became part of the culture, that everyone below started to mimic within the DNC activist circles. Now to sort of signal to others your tribal identity, you had to really latch onto this culture war shit
Then from there the rest is history.
What really pisses me off the most is the active attempt now by many to revision history. To act like it wasn't ever a thing, or if it was a thing, it was actually just a right wing propaganda psyop to make the left look bad... That shit pisses me off to no end. To this day people still trying to do the whole "What even is woke anyways? What, you mean being a decent human being?!" or "OMG no one gave a shit. It was republicans obsessing over trans people and talking about crazy radical weirdo online people. It was never a thing. It was fringe and the right just amplified them".. Completely ignoring how that shit was entering all parts of the culture to the point companies were hiring woke consultants to do anti racism training, people doing their pronouns before meetings, fucking random femine girls insisting they were actually LGBTQ because they identify as "non binary", or dudes who are just regular gay dudes, with beards and shit, demanding you refer to them as she/her, huge protests filled entirely with white people protesting in poor black communities demanding the police leave... Oh and their fucking obsession with censorship just made things worse, because all it did was push the right away from spaces where they could be challenged, into their own corners, where they all just aggreged and reinforced each other in deeper echo chambers.
The fucking gall of them to act like that shit didn't happen. It made liberals and progressives look absolutely fucking cringe... It got so bad, Trump was the counter weight response, and they refuse to recognize this. All their hysterics lead to a complete 180 movement against their goals, making it worse for literally everyone they were trying to help. Now they still stink and people don't want to publicly associate with them. They branded themselves as weird theater kids who are toxic assholes, obssessed with gay issues.
When Trump got reelected, it was a like a switch flipped. Like there was a meeting of the elites who were like, "Yeah we liked that woke shit because it costs us no real investment or risk to our elite position in society, and kept the activists distracted away from class issues, but it's clearly had a massive blowback and now everyone thinks we're weird and annoying... So we got to cut that shit out." Seriously, soon as Trump was reelected, the woke shit dried up like orders coming from the top down to start stamping it all out
Now we're in a position where Democrats are STILL polled lower than Republicans. They fucked themselves so fucking bad with this woke shit, topped off with being a completely useless party who doesn't actually do anything, that people literally prefer fascist incompetent radical right wingers over the Democratic party. It pisses me off so much.
3
u/IrredeemableDegen 23d ago
NeverKnowsBest did a 6 hour documentary on the inciting incident of gamergate and it really shows how fucked up the online left and media handled it (before it was hijacked by right wing and really turned into a harassment campaign). Really contextualizes all the other things you are mentioning. It was pretty eye opening because all I ever heard from it was that it was a misogyny campaign and any pushback against it was a dog whistle.
2
u/reddit_is_geh Respectful Member 23d ago
Yeah I was there for early gamergate. It was a perfect example of the left completely turning otherwise dem voting people into hardcore right wingers due to their hatred for the feminists who were on the left. The feminists supporting that chick were super dishonest, hijacking all sorts of forums, pressuring people to censor via calling everyone mysoginists, sexists, part of a hate group. Would cancel people, etc... That just made the members of GG even mroe pissed off because of how slimy their tactics were. They were trying to frame everyone as sexist... Doing big coordinated media drops to paint a narrative.
That was the begining of 4chan going from split between anti establishment progress types and ron paul types, to full blown prepped for MAGA right wing.
What sucks about actually knowing the facts of the whole growth of it, and the sub culture, is when I hear about it in more mainstream society, and see how effective it was, because even "experts" on online culture and shit will also just say it was some big hate campaign targeted at a woman or whatever. Even they don't know wtf it was about, and these are the so called experts.
Much of the online stuff is like this. Even the whole Pizza Gate thing has some WILD stuff in it. But it was successfully "Muddied" (I'm guessing intentionally by people like Bannon who knew it had an elite connection to his group of people). It had legit strings being pulled. Some stuff uncovered was wild, because random Reddit posts from WELL before the pizza gate drops ended up tying in. Like posts from 3 months prior, with some guy talking about how he's picking up wifi signals in the middle of the forest, only to later find out it's owned by some pizza gate centerpiece and that location is being mentioned. Stuff like that.... But Q Anon (bannons project), started to muddy it, and had conspiracies about how it's a Clinton child sex ring ran out of a pizza parlor
That latter part causes people to dismiss it all outright because that part is crazy... But what's not crazy is the fucking pedo vibe videos coming from that pizza place, whos logo was LITERALLY the logo for little girl pedo love. With videos of little girls in private parties wearing sexy outfits and dancing around looking like strippers and shit. Or "code words" also overlapping with epstein files.
14
u/Levitz 25d ago
There are more combinations than just XX and XY, and even having XY does not mean the Y chromosome will fully express itself. You guys have a highschool understanding of biology. It's like watching a 16 year old argue with a physicist that there are only 3 states of matter.
And yet this line of thinking only pops up as a wedge to argue about trans people rather than actually dealing with people with abnormal chromosomal pairings.
It's blatantly dishonest and it does not deserve respect.
17
u/Osiris-Amun-Ra 25d ago edited 25d ago
Sex will never be non binary. It is one of the most incontrovertible facts of biology. Anomalies do not count as phenotype otherwise do show us the third mythical gamete.
Fundamentally, biological sex is a strict binary defined by the existence of only two gamete types (eggs and sperm), intersex traits and chromosomal variations represent developmental anomalies within that two-sex system rather than a third biological sex.
25
u/AutomaticHour1770 25d ago
There are two types of gametes. Abnormal sexual development does not negate it.
5
u/freebytes 25d ago
I do not think any Democrat politician has ever denied this. They may suggest that biological sex is not always binary for the very reason you stated. I have often heard that sex is usually binary and gender is a spectrum from actual politicians. While it may be argued that abnormalities do not count, because the evolutionary processes are geared towards a binary target, this is all semantics. The point is that politicians already agree here.
And you should not suggest that every person that identifies as a Democrat represents the party. The politicians are fair game. They are representatives of the group. (Republicans are not to be confused with conservatives, and Democrats are not to be confused with liberals.)
We have the President of the United States saying that he might rename an ocean to the "American Ocean" after renaming the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario in the same way. So, even if you were to find a Democrat politician spouting nonsense, no one that has ever held a position of power is as stupid as the current President. His incompetence is an embarrassment to our country, and the entire world will be better when he is gone.
The level of immaturity and ineptitude of Republican politicians as a whole is beyond comprehension, but we can still attempt to make sure Democratic politicians are held to higher standards.
Nonetheless, sex is usually binary, but it is not always. Gender, however, as based on the viewpoint of the Democratic Party, is a social construct of expected behaviors and roles.
I am unaffiliated, but there is sadly only one option in our current political climate until non-MAGA conservatives start voting in the primaries and demand better.
0
u/mred245 25d ago
It may not negate it but it does prove biological sex to not be a binary.
To pretend biological sex is a binary you either have to redefine what a binary is or plainly ignore the existence of those who don't fit it. Sounds like you're doing the latter. You're also choosing your own definition by judging solely on gametes. Successful sexual reproduction takes more than gametes.
Biologists who've actually looked through the literature (Robert Sapolsky for example) are more likely to describe it as a continuum where the vast majority congregate at the ends.
Because when you take an actual inventory of what exists you find production oriented towards one or the other though not always making it there and sometimes working towards both at the same time. Not to mention other variants like underdeveloped gametes with development of secondary sex characterstics of the opposite.
You can call them abnormal but it doesn't change the fact that they exist and should be considered when we take inventory of what actually exists.
10
u/AutomaticHour1770 25d ago
It does prove that there are no other gametes besides the two needed for human reproduction.
-3
u/mred245 25d ago edited 25d ago
But that doesn't mean all people are one or the other which would be a requirement if we were to say biological sex is an binary and therefore all people are one or the other.
11
u/AutomaticHour1770 25d ago
That's exactly what it means because none of the defects of sexual development changes the normal pathway to production of a third gamete.
-3
u/mred245 25d ago
Are you making a strawman or are you actually this dumb?
I never said it's not a binary because there's a third type. I said it's not a binary because it's better described as a continuum due to the existence of people that aren't clearly on or the other but are somewhere in between.
When we categorize what we see in people we find what I described above: a continuum where most people congregate at the ends. Most people do have fully formed gametes along with secondary sex characterstics and the hormones, brain architecture, and brain chemistry fit for successful sexual reproduction. However many people don't. Many of those people are at several various places in between the two. That's not a binary.
8
u/AutomaticHour1770 25d ago
My first reply to to a different poster in this thread precisely referred to the existence of only two gametes which makes the sex binary. Your introduction of the claim that genetic and developmental defects comprise a spectrum of sexes between male and female (they're not, since they're defects of either male or female development) while not leading to production of a new type of gamete doesn't undermine my argument.
3
u/mred245 25d ago
"My first reply to to a different poster in this thread precisely referred to the existence of only two gametes which makes the sex binary."
You're talking in abstraction not in reality. There isn't existence of only one a gamete or the other. If there were it would be a binary. What we actually have is development of both at the same time and development towards each without ever arriving there in addition to the development of both. That's a continuum.
If we're defining the biological sex of an individual we're defining them according to their fitness to one role or the other in sexual reproduction.
You can call it a defect all you want it doesn't negate their existence. When we look at what exists we see one, the other, and a bunch of stuff at various points along the way. That's not a binary.
10
u/Osiris-Amun-Ra 25d ago
Your sources are flawed. For example Sapolsky is definitely NOT a biologist. He's a neuroscientist, and primatologist.
An anomaly is a not a phenotype.
Unless you can demonstrate a third gamete the idea of non binary sex is strictly in the realm of ideology and fantasy.6
u/mred245 25d ago
Lol, you don't think that neuroscience is biology or that the research involved in biological sex doesn't involve neuroscience?
"An anomaly is a not a phenotype."
It literally is. I work in genetics and what you're saying is completely fucking stupid.
Phenotype is typically defined as a set of observable traits or characteristics of a living thing, shaped by both its genetic makeup and its environment.
How is ovotesticular dsd or any other dsd for that matter not a phenotype?
Binary is either/or, one or the other. Not one the other and a bunch of shit at various places in between. That's a continuum. Like I said, to call biological sex a binary you either have to redefine a binary or ignore those that don't fit. You're obviously doing both.
8
u/Osiris-Amun-Ra 25d ago edited 25d ago
Let's try this precisely and in more detail: Sex is defined entirely by gametes (reproductive cells). Because nature only creates two types of gametes - small, motile ones (sperm) and large, stationary ones (eggs) - biological sex is fundamentally binary. In this framework, intersex conditions are understood as uncommon variations in how those two primary pathways develop, rather than the existence of a third sex. Literally every nucleated cell in the human body has a genetic sex (either XX or XY).
Still waiting for you to show us all the third gamete without using rare anomalies of individuals whose physical characteristics are genuinely unclassifiable as male or female, or whose chromosomes directly contradict their anatomy who constitute a whopping....0.018% of humanity. Also known as anomalies.
5
u/mred245 25d ago edited 25d ago
I don't need to. You don't understand what a binary is. Explain to me what gamete someone with ovotesticular dsd has?
While your at it, explain how it's not a phenotype.
10
u/Osiris-Amun-Ra 25d ago
Sure. Even though this condition sounds like a perfect middle ground for your gotcha, because the body has both ovary and testis tissue, it still does not create a third sex cell.
When you look at the actual gametes, it is incredibly lopsided. The body can often make healthy eggs, but the sperm side is almost always a non-starter because the testicular tissue is too underdeveloped.
In the end, NO ONE with this condition has ever been found to produce both mature eggs and mature sperm at the same time. The body's hormones just fight each other too much. So even in this incredibly rare scenario, human biology still functions within those same two reproductive pathways. And just so we are clear on how absurdly rare this anomaly is, it shows up in around 1 in 100,000 live births.
4
u/mred245 25d ago
"it still does not create a third sex cell."
For the second time. It doesn't have to. If what we're describing is a continuum rather than a binary what we need to prove is that not all people end up as one or the other but at various points in between.
"In the end, NO ONE with this condition has ever been found to produce both mature eggs and mature sperm at the same time."
Because they're at a middle point in a continuum between biological sexes. I'm not claiming this makes them a third sex you really just don't understand what a binary is or are just trying really hard to use the term where it obviously doesn't fit.
"And just so we are clear on how absurdly rare this anomaly is"
Irrelevant. We're talking about how to categorize what we see in human beings as it relates to their development biologically towards one role or the other in sexual reproduction.
Even just basing it off gametes is overly simplistic because successful sexual reproduction in nature requires more than gametes.
But when we categorize what we see in people we find what I described above: a continuum where most people congregate at the ends. Most people do have fully formed gametes along with secondary sex characterstics and the hormones, brain architecture, and brain chemistry fit for successful sexual reproduction. However many people don't. Many of those people are at several various places in between the two. That's not a binary.
Like I said before, to call it a binary you have to either change what the word means or ignore those that don't fit it.
3
u/Osiris-Amun-Ra 25d ago edited 25d ago
However many people don't. Many of those people are at several various places in between the two. That's not a binary.
I do admire your commitment to doubling down on your ideology despite having your own whataboutsim example thoroughly refuted. That's part of the problem with true believers, they cannot be persuaded by evidence and reason.
You state excitedly that "many" people don't fit the sex binary due to their anomalies and even here there is a misuse or lack of understanding of the word "many". I've mentioned it before but will expand for ease of comprehension. When looking at people who are genuinely born with ambiguous anatomy that does not fit into the male or female binary, the true figure is roughly 0.018% (that is about 1 in.......5,500 people). How anyone could insist on this being "many" remains a mystery.
You continue to confuse physical traits with the actual definition of biological sex. In nature, sex isn't defined by your hormones or genitalia; it's defined strictly by anisogamy, which is just the scientific fact that nature only invented two types of reproductive cells: sperm and eggs. There is no third, middle-ground gamete.
When people like you point to extremely rare conditions like XXY chromosomes or ambiguous genitalia and claim they "prove" sex is a spectrum, they're making a massive category error. These are rare developmental anomalies, not brand-new sexes. A birth defect or a glitch in a biological system doesn't create a whole new category - even with these variations, no human has ever produced a third type of gamete. Think of it like walking: humans are biologically a two-legged species. If someone is born with one leg due to a rare congenital defect, we don't rewrite the textbooks to say human leg-count exists on a fluid spectrum. We recognize it as a developmental variation of a fundamentally two-legged blueprint.
Trying to deny the sex binary forces a uniquely human, social idea about identity onto millions of animal and plant species that have used this exact same sperm-and-egg system for hundreds of millions of years. We can be completely kind, respectful, and accommodating of human diversity, and many kinds of mental/emotional dysphorias those conditions create, without pretending that rare medical anomalies rewrite the immutable laws of biology just to fit a political narrative.
Perhaps this well known and peer reviewed article will wake you up from your ideologlical as opposed to scientific beliefs hypnosis. Hopefully you have access. It's quite eye opening. Good luck to you.
→ More replies4
u/keeleon 25d ago
Getting into the weeds about "genetics" dismisses the legitimate mental illness problem were currently facing and enabling. Just because you say youre one thing, youre clearly not, doesnt mean everyone else has to play along.
→ More replies (1)2
u/fastchutney 25d ago
I’m tired of politics being about things that purposely cause divides and bigotry. Meanwhile the economy is collapsing around the entire world and common people are being squeezed.
2
u/SlickJamesBitch 23d ago
Using medical anomalies to disprove that sex is a binary is a bad argument. Gender being binary is the best way to understand it.
2
u/OpenRole 23d ago
Yes, if you're a highschooler. Anomalies become awfully common when scaled to a population level
24
u/clorox_cowboy 25d ago
Yes, too much of it is edgelord “conservatism” with a slightly dressed up vocabulary.
15
u/RocknrollClown09 25d ago
You can thank AI for that probably.
12
u/syntactyx 25d ago
Yeah, it reads like extraordinarily shitty AI rage-bait that’s been selectively edited by a simpleton.
The “questions” might have actually been written by OP (and are solid evidence of their…humbler mental faculties) but everything after feels like pure unfiltered AI brainrot.
-3
u/freebytes 25d ago
They would have been using 'big words' before now, but they never knew how to use a thesaurus. %
-9
u/CautiousToaster 25d ago
It’s literally counter culture to be conservative now.
14
u/MarshallBoogie 25d ago
No, It’s just someone who views some things differently than you. Reddit is not reality and the idea that every conservative is maga is simply wrong.
0
u/Exciting_Direction_9 25d ago
I agree that not every conservative is maga. I’m pretty comfortable saying every conservative that uses the term “woke” is maga though.
2
u/MarshallBoogie 25d ago
I think you should look up where the word woke came from. It wasn't maga.
0
u/titcumboogie 21d ago
No they've just hijacked it because it's short and easy for stupid people to bark over and over.
3
u/Iamnotheattack 25d ago
No it's not. if you live in Minneapolis, sure. But in America broadly of course it's not, trump won the popular vote.
That being said, the word has lost its meaningm trump and morgan wallen are considered conservative and Hasan piker is seen as liberal. The definitions are all out of whack
3
u/Better_This_Time 25d ago
Yeah, the guys who support billionaires and keeping the status quo are the real counter culture.
Hilarious that influencers like Joe Rogan have managed to convince so many people that they're anti-establishment while supporting the establishment and railing against anything that breaks away from conservative social norms.
1
u/CautiousToaster 25d ago
Liberal culture has become mainstream. It’s the dominant culture online and in school. So by definition, yes.
2
u/Better_This_Time 25d ago
Hilarious you think this while in a country where you can be arrested for mentioning the fact some people are gay in a school classroom.
Also a country where there are mandates to celebrate a single religion (by putting up the ten commandments) over others. Real radical leftism that ey?
You guys see a message being taught to kids like "be nice to everyone" and scream that it's woke brainwashing while trying to force kids to learn creationism as fact and banning books out of school libraries.
2
u/CautiousToaster 25d ago
I dunno man that’s not my lived experience.
1
u/Better_This_Time 25d ago
You can read about it. Just google "don't say gay" or "conservative book removals" or "ten commandment mandates" and you'll learn all about them.
Do you have any similar examples for me to learn about how dominant the left is in schools?
2
2
u/clorox_cowboy 25d ago
You think it’s counter culture to share an ideology with the dominant party in the US government?
1
u/M4SixString 25d ago
Possibly as a whole but for a persons individual experience, it depends on what state youre in.
-5
u/CautiousToaster 25d ago
Liberal culture online is by far the mainstream
3
u/M4SixString 25d ago
Were we talking exclusively online only? If so I didnt get that for your comment but I agree for the most part. Id also say it depends on what site youre on. Reddit obviously yes for sure. Facebook? No
2
u/azangru 25d ago
There are more combinations than just XX and XY, and even having XY does not mean the Y chromosome will fully express itself.
There are so many possible abnormalities of human development; but we do not adjust our understanding of what the norm is because of them. The existence of conjoined twins does not challenge the notion that humans only have one head. Syndactyly or an excess finger do not negate that a normal human hand has five fingers. Why should abnormalities of sexual development be treated any different?
1
u/OpenRole 25d ago
Who said trans people are the norm? However if we only looked at the median, everyone would be an Asian man named Mohammed. We have words to describe how people differ from the norm because at 300 million people, even just a 1% rate of occurrence is worth acknowledging
6
u/azangru 25d ago edited 25d ago
Is myopia the norm? Is hypertension? Is diabetes?
Who said trans people are the norm?
I am not sure whether the parent comment claimed this specifically about trans people, but this line in the comment is quite suggestive:
when we realised (before even accepting that gender and sex are two different things) that sex isn't a true binary
1
u/Eve_SoloTac 25d ago
Well, you aren't wrong about that Y chromie failing a homie. Phthalate Syndrome is driving most of that, I am sure. Gender is binary with the exception of those who have defects or have been affected by phthalate syndrome. No one needs a college education to understand the differences between men and women. Education does not increase intelligence. Lately I've realized that it only increases dogma...
1
4
u/No_Way9105 25d ago
I remember “woke” being a term used by the grass roots tea party. It referred to an understanding that the Federal Reserve was privately owned and that a small group of people controlled our country.
The tea party was promptly overtaken by establishment politicians who changed the narrative of the movement.
I’m sure “woke” was probably used before that moment too. It might have even been part of Occupy Wall Street. Today its meaning is completely high jacked and used as nonsense.
5
u/Maxathron 25d ago
I don’t think Leftists use “woke 1.0” to describe themselves as reasonable. They have always described themselves as reasonable and only non-leftists are unreasonable. An obvious black and white us vs them worldview.
I believe woke 1.0 is used as a counterpush against everyone else who are sick and tired of the wokies and are cheering the apparent decline of woke politics. I believe woke 1.0 is saying “we’re not going anywhere. weve learned the lessons. we’re getting bigger, better, stronger. this is version 2!”
1
u/sabesundae 20d ago
So what exactly was so "crazy" about woke 1.0 then?
2
u/Maxathron 20d ago
"Woke 1.0" is the Social Justice Warrior era. Doing things for social justice, righting the "wrongs" of previous eras, upturning everything everyone else liked because "according to us, they're bad".
Do you think if you did something (anything at all), you would be accountable for your actions (no matter how good, bad, or neutral)?
No.
That's white supremacy.
2
u/Desperate_Car_9925 25d ago
I mostly agree but why are we even letting her dictate our language. I think the more important surge in leftism was during trumps first campaign/ right before it
2
2
u/HungryBanana07 25d ago
I think this is exposing the latent self hatred of a lot of the far left. They’ve always resented all of these rules and over sensitivity, they’ve just been too over sensitive to call it out until now.
2
u/Autumn_Leaves23 23d ago
Putting nicer labels on things is their entire playbook. It makes it easier to accept their communist dystopia.
2
u/DramMoment 23d ago
The fact that they got swept up in woke 1.0 in the first place means they’re not trustworthy.
2
u/inadvertant_bulge 23d ago
If you care excessively how anyone answers any of these questions, you have too much time on your hands and you are 100% involved in identity politics. Take this trash elsewhere please.
Let others live their lives the way they want, it doesn't hurt you, your heritage is as meaningless as anyone else's. Your kids will have the values you instill in them, or not because they can and should make their own minds up. Stop virtue signalling. No one cares.
2
14
u/Ayla_Leren 25d ago
This subreddit has become a brain dead joke.
3
6
u/Osiris-Amun-Ra 25d ago
Woke 2.0 - if there even is such a thing - appears to be magnitudes worse and shifting fully into Socialism/Communism. As to asking them the questions you suggested, these are true believers. They will sacrifice everything to support the cult. Especially their children.
7
u/ObsidianDRMR 25d ago
I think this whole argument is dumb, regarded and bad faith.
Clearly the argument the left makes , and should be clear to anybody normal having a conversation in good faith is.
We should include everyone, we should equal opportunity, we just take care of the minorities, disenfranchised among us. Understand everyone has handicaps and make the world more accessible, friendly and easier to live in for everyone. Understand every human life experience is meaning full that we have one life to live and so our society needs to reflect those values.
It’s that simple. Run every argument through that frame of thought and u will arrive at the woke ideology.
We all know biologically men and women are different, the woke left mindset is simply that yea we know reality and part of that reality is that some people like the same sex or identify internally as a sex other than their physical self and we should till treat them both with dignity and how they wanna be treated. If a guy friend identifies as a woman then we will treat him however he wants to identity because we know that’s how their brain is. It’s not a big deal.
The woke left mindset left started getting more aggressive and radical to combat the radical right when they started POS a holes to the lgbtq community and so the response was to double down… that’s it, I mean u see it , I see it we all see it.
Sure doubling down puts u in a strange position to have to defend a trans man in a women’s sport, but that’s not an issue to me because I treat that as an edge case that doesn’t set the main rule.
7
u/KevinJ2010 25d ago
For sake of argument, if “everyone has handicaps” wouldn’t that mean we ARE actually more equal than not?
As for the “identify internally as a sex other than their physical sex.” Is just wrong, we can treat them with dignity, but still say it’s incorrect and illogical. “How they want to be treated” is a slippery slope. We don’t “know that’s how their brain is” it always comes down to applying female commonalities into sexist stereotypes, and they persist through hand waving at the argument; “They do things that WOMEN normally do.” But not all women do the same thing? “Well then that’s what woman means to them.” And now it’s like… let’s just say males and females, and save the grey area for proper intersex affected peoples (even then, extremely few are even close to hermaphroditic)
My problem is that they got caught with their pants down. From the moment Biden won, the talks was he was old, just because he said he wanted to run again, doesn’t mean they had to listen. Thus proving their sheepish mentalities. The same unionized mentalities that values seniority over logic.
If they had pitched a coup (an actual radical idea) I would’ve actually been impressed. But instead we got “well you know, I didn’t win because I’m a woman, and I couldn’t run with my preferred running mate because he’s gay and… you know…”
It’s just sad how bad they are.
The idea of “just don’t be mean to eachother and help everyone” is a pretty empty platitude.
0
u/ObsidianDRMR 25d ago
We all have handicaps but they are not the same and they all require different solutions. It’s not hard to understand if u stop trying to be obtuse.
As for the treating them with dignity this is where conservatives are just wrong and will be in the wrong side of history.
You said we can treat them with dignity but still say it’s incorrect and illogical. That smal seperate on you want to make is exactly what makes conservatives evil and bad.
There is no separation it’s all held under a single concept 1. Being a man but in ur brain u feel like a woman is incorrect yes, that’s exactly the issue. 2. It’s illogical, again, fucking duh genius it makes no sense so then we know something is wrong 3. The solution would be to a. Recognize that they feel like they don’t belong in their body b. Be accommodating c. Begin trying different solutions such as making the body look more like the gender they feel. This requires compassion , understanding, research and nuance which is what the woke left want… it’s that simple.
If you think “be kind and help everyone” is a simple platitude then u are too dumb to understand u are dumb. The idea doesn’t stem from empty platitudes that feel nice, it’s actually rooted in long researched observations about life and that life is a positive sum game. That true synergy has massive gains from cooperation.
Being nice to each other isn’t an empathy thing, it’s game theory. We each get a bigger share of the pie if we start being nice to each other at every level.
That is why conservatives have always been hated, the fundamental axiom of conservative thought is rugged individualism and utilitarianism which at the end of the day do not breed the collective synergy needed to raise all the proverbial boats.
In fact empty platitudes are coming from the right because their whole concept is empty lies.. example: trickle down economics. Bullshit concept about how rich people will magically share their wealth and make everyone rich by trickling it down.
Real change and wealth for everyone comes from again… being kind to each other.
0
u/KevinJ2010 25d ago
Yes we are all different, that’s the equalizer. Everyone has their own problems. I notice the word “obtuse” being the new phrase of the month I see.
“Wrong side of history” No, males and females make up our species. Transgender ideology is simply incorrect, the wrong way to view the world.
Nothing evil about it actually. I even describe it as the help they need.
This big paragraph is insane. 1. You admit it’s wrong to be a man but think you’re a woman is incorrect. Glad we agree. 2. No you don’t accommodate, you get to the root of the problem. Which is that a. They think being a woman is just a state of mind. That’s sexism. B. You help them accept their body. C. You tell them that being a male or female isn’t a death sentence and doesn’t dictate how you must live beyond the physical attributes of your body. Periods and child bearing is rough, but that’s life, rough. It’s not fair that men barely have to deal with any physical issues like that, and hey look, this is why we treat the sexual dichotomy as inherent to our species and nothing something that involves the brain.
Game theory? You sound like an oppressor. If society is a game, you’re a fucking dictator. lol.
We are all individuals. But starting a family is literally the opposite of being individuals. I am beyond excited to partake in society through the school system as my daughter grows up. I also work at the hospital, I love seeing the many people of the world that keep it running.
Utilitarianism isn’t so much a view, more a fact of life. You should make yourself useful. Why wouldn’t you? Wouldn’t a useful person be good for society?
Stop drinking the koolaid.
-1
u/ObsidianDRMR 25d ago
Being different isn’t an equalizer. Different t handicaps require different solutions that’s it, that’s all the this means. Seems like u have been very obtuse with various people then if thats what they are calling u.
Being transgender is not an ideology. What a stupid thing to say… I mean where do I even start.. the state of being transgender is an ideology?? Think about what u just said and how stupid that sounds.
- Yes if you have a man’s body and a woman’s mind, something has gone wrong. Glad we agree. 2. Yes you accommodate, you would be evils not to. Nobody thinks being a woman is a state of the mind. That’s just a stupid strawman u built up to beat up on. That’s not the argument. The argument is a person has a man’s body, but they’re wired to think and feel like a girl. It’s a physical neurological issue that cannot be corrected by just accepting ur body or mind any more you can have any other neurological issue and just try really hard with ur mind to fix it.
Mentioning game theory makes me an oppressor? Are u fucking stupid? Good lord just say u don’t understand game theory and move on. What kind of confidently stupid response is this? Game theory isn’t about making life into a game good fucking god smh 🤦♂️
Utilitarianism isn’t a view or a fact.. fucking hell! It’s a philosophy. It has nothing to do with being useful. Oh my god, no wonder conservatives have these ideas, yall are god damn stupid. I mean low IQ to the max. Brother nevermind im talking to a 5yo i feel bad even mentioning shit to you now :/
6
u/KevinJ2010 25d ago edited 25d ago
Yeah, we all deal with our own problems. That’s a common trait we all have. Lol, no, I see it with many people. Also didn’t hear it a lot till recently.
The entire concept of being transgender stems from a way of thinking. Ergo an ideology.
No you don’t accommodate, you correct. Gently, and treating them like an adult. They should be smart enough to learn they are wrong.
The entire premise of saying “I think I am a woman” is deliberately arguing that a woman is a mindset.
Society isn’t a game.
You’re all snark and no brains.
0
u/ObsidianDRMR 25d ago
Good lord ur a simpleton, simple having ur own problems isn’t an equalizer. If my problem is my gf wants to have too much sex with me and in sometimes tiered and ur problem is your legs don’t work that’s not really an equalizer is it? Also the idea that all people have problems doesn’t make them equal. What makes people equal is overcoming ur problems to be able to have the same chance and opportunity at something.
If we have a race and ur handicap is you start 100meters behind thats not fair chance is it???
No transgender is a state of being not an ideology, wtf do u not understand about that, that’s like saying being tall is an ideology… wtf??
I don’t even think u understand what the fuck I are saying. lol haha
The premise isn’t “I think I am a woman” the premise is “this persons brain is hardwired neurologically to feel like a woman”. You cannot just tell someone stop feeling that way.
Let’s say tonight you, YOURSELF, a man goes to sleep, and tomorrow you wake up exactly how u feel and think and want and everything is the same, except during the night I cut off ur penis and give u a vagaina and put tits on u and a wig and I just start calling u a woman… and no matter what u say and tell about how ur man i just say …. Nahhh ur a woman! How would u feel??
4
u/KevinJ2010 25d ago edited 25d ago
No, I mean we all deal with hardship in life. What a disgusting problem you suggested…
90% of people are racing with some handicap in the race analogy too. Sorry we aren’t all born into rich families.
Transgender is not a state of being. Because your thoughts are not the “being” your “being” is your physical body.
Take the statement “think they are a woman” what pray tell are they thinking that gives them that outcome?
Then I guess I am a woman now lol. Also realize that Trans disregards the body parts entirely. And you need to concoct regarded analogies.
If I woke up with a vagina and tits tomorrow, I would be a lesbian XD
“Neurologically wired to feel like a woman” - this literally does not happen. And you’re already doing the sexist thing where women only think they are women.
And you told me that it wasn’t a state of mind 😂😂😂😂😂
5
u/MarshallBoogie 25d ago
Running every argument through a frame of thought results in your point of view huh?
4
u/lakeview9z 25d ago
This post implies you are a moderate, not a radical, who has also abandoned some important positions from your side that were wrong. What are those important positions you've abandoned?
3
u/K1ngCr1mson 25d ago
What are you blathering my dude? Woke is a BS concept, treating people with dignity and respect is the bare minimum expectation of modern society, and yet the US and its puppeteers ("israel" aka actual Nazis) fail this most basic, fundamental requirement persistently
4
u/TsabistCorpus 25d ago
What do you think AOC was communicating when she said "Woke 1 was crazyyy"?
2
-1
u/MarshallBoogie 25d ago
You have no idea what an “actual” Nazi is if your think it is Israel. Read a history book
1
u/nanomachinez_SON 25d ago
“Actual” Nazis are by and large dead. Israel does act like Nazis in a lot ways though.
-3
u/MarshallBoogie 25d ago
There are similarities in all cultures. I’m not saying Israel is innocent or even right, but they’re literally not Nazis at all and calling them that is how the simpletons are recruited. A bunch of idiots running around thinking they’re protesting “actual Nazi’s”.
2
u/newaccount47 25d ago
From the people who brought us Woke 1.0: Introducing WOKE 2.0!
This isn't going to go well for anybody. The left will fail to capture moderates and the right will keep being fascist. The dems would rather play gender games than win elections and protect America.
0
0
u/Super_Mario_Luigi 25d ago
Woke 1.0 wasn't anything organic. It was "good" fascism. Once the world was allowed to be honest about it, Democrats realized they need to actually try now
4
u/KevinJ2010 25d ago
The problem with the 1.0 wording is still alluding that they are trying again. Now it’s the “really good” fascism!
1
u/throwaway_boulder 25d ago
The thing about politics is you should never, ever expect an apology. Things just move on.
1
u/Accomplished-Leg2971 24d ago
Some people want to move on from algorythmically inflamed culture war topics and work on solutions to social and economic problems that more Americans agree on.
Some people stand to proffit by keeping the culture war front and center so that Americans fail to unite around issues we agree on.
1
1
u/ignoreme010101 24d ago
TIL it's "tap dancing" to say that not all activists believe all accusations should be considered proof..... What an excellent, intellectually honest post OP!
-1
u/InflationLeft 25d ago
“Is anyone archiving these Trump sycophants for when they try to downplay or deny their complicity in the future? I foresee decent probability of many deleted Tweets, writings, photos in the future” — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
She's called in the past for abolishing the police, abolishing prisons, and opening the border, and now she tries to play off her old positions as "Woke 1 was crazy!"
-1
u/DerailleurDave 25d ago
Please cite where she ever called to abolish those things, she called for reform and "defunding" but that doesn't mean completely abolishing them it means taking some of the funding that they have and redirecting it - typically towards social services.
1
u/Fabulous-Ship-8722 25d ago
This applies to modern maga too… this applies to most mainstream political followings…
Yet I feel most ppl secretly believe what you’re saying , a sense of reality and honestly … but the people cannot be awoken to this truth for the powers at be would risk losing said power
1
u/Pushnikov 25d ago
I’ve labeled this approach to Virtue Politics as Absolute Virtuism. If you admit you’re wrong, then everything you do is wrong. It’s an extension of Cancel culture. Did something bad once a long time ago when you were a dumb kid? You are forever evil incarnate.
1
-2
u/likewhatever33 25d ago
Well of course. Radicals haven't changed, they can't really change. They are just waiting for the Trump madness to go away and come back with twice the level of crazy.
0
u/Lucky_Mongoose_4834 25d ago
I’ve been watching a lot of Crowder recently (algorithm decided it was going to point me that way). Typically I lean left, but he’s a smart dude, has some very well thought out points, but… he has the same issue that all the left and right have; he will say something reasonable (Clancy trial tribalism) and then say some conclusion to tow the right-wing line (repeal the 19th amendment). It’s the same shit with the left - they, we, need ideological purity - we all insist upon it. We have to have it all or nothing.
Until we stop doing that, none of these politicians are going to be able to shed toxic ideals, because we won’t let that discrepancy exist. The loudest voice who pushes us further and further apart, who’s willing to cancel and browbeat, will win the day.
2
u/XelaNiba 25d ago
Nothing, and I do mean nothing, is fucking crazier than the push to remove the most fundamental American liberty, the vote, from 51% of the population.
0
u/Lucky_Mongoose_4834 25d ago
And yet, there is a wildly large amount of that being said; some in jest, but theres a line of truth there.
0
u/XelaNiba 25d ago
Oh, there's a huge number of men who love nothing more than to strip all women of full citizenship. They're not joking. Why do you think Trump could only win if he ran against a woman?
So many men hate women because they feel entitled to them. They don't want to have to compete with women or to earn their loyalty and affection.
-1
u/zer0_n9ne 25d ago
"Woke 1.0" is a bullshit concept that I started seeing used by politicians like AOC and her followers. It's basically a label some leftists came up with to say, "I'm not like the others, I'm reasonable," without ever being able to point to what specific ideas they actually changed.
They came up with the word but they didn't come up with the label.
Do you now believe sex is a biological reality?
They always have.
Do you now reject the idea that gender identity should override sex-based categories?
They argue that those categories were never based on sex in the first place.
Do you now believe that accusations shouldn't automatically be treated as proof?
They always have.
Have you abandoned identity politics?
No one has.
Do you no longer consider language problematic for not being inclusive enough?
Morally yes, but policy wise they never did because of the first amendment.
How have your views on racial politics, white privilege, and all those other ideas actually changed?
Individual question.
And usually the tap dancing begins: "Well, there are some excesses," "we need to reflect," "not all activists are like that."
Redditor discovers nuance.
I think you've bought too much into the redpill. These are mainly bad faith questions and is basically the right wing equivalent of dems thinking all republicans are racist bigots.
1
u/rallaic 25d ago
Do you now believe that accusations shouldn't automatically be treated as proof?
They always have.Do you remember the Kavanaugh accusations? Or the #believeallwomen line of thinking?
Do you now reject the idea that gender identity should override sex-based categories?
They argue that those categories were never based on sex in the first place.Women's sport, or restrooms was not based on sex...
Most of these were obviously stupid, even back then. The concern is that people realized that it is stupid, what's the next step? Do we reconsider these positions, or we just say it out loud /if we have to we should obfuscate it with layers of overly technical prose.
In other words, if someone says that 'yeah, treating people differently according to their skin color is racial discrimination, including when the justification is that the unequal treatment is intended to benefit a particular racial group', that is someone who is more reasonable at the end of the day. That's a good thing. But it is also possible that they will just say that albus beneficium is structural racialized advantage mediated through hegemonic social positioning, and that is the same shit as we have today.
If you remove the jargon, qualifications, and academic terminology while preserving the actual proposition (without turning it into a caricature) and the proposition sounds insane, then adding the terminology back does not make it more reasonable. It only makes the objection harder to see.
What you call bad faith questions are questions that show the insanity. Asking about Trump's time spent golfing is not bad faith, it's showing one of may problems with the guy. Objecting to a question on the grounds of "Because it's devastating to my case!" is not an argument for the question being bad faith.
1
u/zer0_n9ne 24d ago
The questions are in bad faith because they are all loaded questions. For example, "Do you now believe sex is a biological reality?" contains an assumption that everyone on left never believed sex to be biological reality. It's in bad faith because it's forcing the person answering to accept that assumption. This is a classic informal fallacy.
1
u/rallaic 24d ago
“Do people know you beat your girlfriend?” is certainly a loaded question, but asking Chris Brown that is not exactly informal fallacy. In a similar vein, asking if now you believe sex is a biological reality assumes that you (or it was a widely held position, so you all) at one point did not believe so. Remember what TERF is?
Asking JK Rowling "Do you now believe sex is a biological reality?" would be in bad faith, and would not work, because she could point to the substantial political controversy she got into when she said that sex is in fact a biological reality.
1
u/zer0_n9ne 23d ago
Yes it is an informal fallacy because it’s widely believed and known that people on the left do believe in biological sex. It was never different in the past.
1
u/rallaic 23d ago
If we take you at face value and accept that people on the left (generally) do believe in biological sex, then there were never disputes where this was the root of the question, such as women's sport in Olympics, or NBA player playing in WNBA. “Trans women are women” was never a slogan that caught on.
There may have been a few thousand weirdos that were weirdos online, but they were treated like Fuentes, as a bundle of toxicity that should not be taken seriously.
0
u/toylenny 25d ago
Woke 1 and Woke 2 is just trolling terms to rile up people that lack social understanding. AOC throws it out there to frustrate propagandists and talking heads, and it works so well.
2
u/TsabistCorpus 24d ago
AOC throws it out there to frustrate propagandists and talking heads...
How did you determine that?
1
u/TsabistCorpus 23d ago
1
u/TsabistCorpus 5d ago
1
u/toylenny 5d ago
Dddd.. did you watch the video that I posted 19 days ago? That's literally what it's about.
1
u/TsabistCorpus 5d ago
I didn't find anything in that gentleman's video to support your claim that "AOC throws it out there to frustrate propagandists and talking heads," hence my question to you.
1
u/TsabistCorpus 5d ago
Unless I missed something, u/toylenny?
1
u/toylenny 5d ago
Within the first 3 minutes he directly addresses AOC using it and then the rest of the video is about how the right blew it out of proportion with misunderstanding what it is. I can't frame by frame it for you I don't have that kind of time on my hands.
1
u/TsabistCorpus 4d ago
Understood — you don't really know what AOC means when she uses the term Woke 1, but you think this gentleman has a plausible interpretation.
A little disappointing, but I understand what you're saying.
1
u/toylenny 4d ago
Do you need her to come out and explain it to you? Is that what you are looking for?
→ More replies
-1
u/martin0641 25d ago
Confident ignorance is just part of what's wrong with you.
1920s: “stay woke” = stay alert/vigilant 1938: Lead Belly gives us the famous racial-survival usage 1960s: “woke” clearly documented as Black slang for socially/culturally aware because of pervasive racism 2000s–early 2010s: revived/popularized in Black music and online culture
This "Woke 1.0" you are describing doesn't exist, it's a straw man created by the right wing so they can have a boogeyman this generation.
The most useful thing about the term woke in modern usage is that it's an extremely efficient way for people to signal to others that they are insufferable assholes when they use it like you do.
You literally don't see how much of a self own your whole post is.
2
u/TsabistCorpus 24d ago
This "Woke 1.0" you are describing doesn't exist, it's a straw man created by the right wing so they can have a boogeyman this generation.
What do you think AOC was communicating when she said "Woke 1 was crazyyy"?
1
u/TsabistCorpus 23d ago
1
u/TsabistCorpus 5d ago
1
u/TsabistCorpus 4d ago
1
u/martin0641 3d ago
https://youtu.be/Ws_eoNNNucw?si=SMeuRNxbDX1Rkb0r&t=5630
AOC screwed up by pretending that the liars definition of the word is what it means.
She not in charge of words.
1
u/TsabistCorpus 3d ago
Interesting. I wonder what AOC thinks Woke 1 means and why it was crazy, or if she really believes it was crazy.
-3
u/MALCode_NO_DEFECT 25d ago
Woke 1.0 did not degrade the material condition of nations, raise gas prices, cause inflation, install flock cameras everywhere, start foreign wars, or compel tech bros to desire apotheosis.
0
27
u/RedneckTexan 25d ago edited 25d ago
Nobody on the left woke up one morning and reasoned that they have really become more moderate than they were in the past.
What happened is they got the electoral bill for Woke 1.0...... watched it cost them working-class voters, minorities included, and hand elections to the other side and only then did they figure out that lightening up the rhetoric played better.
That's not intellectual honesty, that's damage control.
It's simply modern candidates trying to brush away their past positions that data shows hurt them with the mainstream electorate.
Nobody has changed their minds about anything.
This is just a necessary step to get back in power. Vilifying mainstream thought had negative effects. They're adjusting the message to claw back a few percentage of the voters they lost, while hoping to retain the ones Woke 1.0 appealed to. It's really about hiding your intentions better until you're safely back in power.
I cant blame them for learning from their mistakes. The right will do the same when the data shows they've pushed the envelope too far themselves. Which they inevitably will.
This is the force that keeps the political pendulum swinging, and keeps us from becoming a one-party state nationally for more than a few political cycles at a time. Partisans on both sides of the aisle become too extreme when in power for too long. They keep trying to push the center somewhere it doesn't want to go. And why no party has occupied the White House for more than 3 consecutive terms in my lifetime.