Pedo state
woke is when I can’t say the n word -nytimes
The nyt was literally foubded in a fit of reaction. They are always on the wrong side of history.
Theyre asking the questions their fascist masters want them to ask
RECENTLY?? Did you not see the 2 years of, “Biden incompetent because old, Kamila incompetent because woman” articles? It’s blatantly been run by, or at least edited by, conservatives just based on the open front and center messaging. All legacy media is seemly operated by Republicans constantly thrashing the left and empowering the right. Making the left comfortable with openly supporting the fascist right has been their number 1 goal for the last several years.
Waging the war on words is one of the preferred liberals’ passe-temps though lol on par with being offended
One of the dumbest hills to die on, with so many victimes
The NYT’s editorial board is the CIA, change my mind.
Has been since Bush.
Has been since forever. Remember when NYT ran an article that Hitler was a changed man after being imprisoned?
NYT has like articles from the 1850s being on the wrong side of history. Its tradition at this point.
The evil black lesbians did this (and Biden).
Whoah how did you type those words that are illegal to say? You must be so brave
Iranian propaganda is making better and more informative content than NYT
NYT’s job has always been to protect bullies and attack decent people.
I did the thing. I read the transcript (it’s a video chat/debate). Most of the woke they talk about hating is the older stuff that is super cringe or feels racist, like “person of color” or micro aggressions. It does cover that the anti-woke crowd is mostly about being openly racist/sexist or getting to say slurs.
The answer here seems to be leaning towards yes. The creations of labels that the people you were labeling didn’t even like led to backlash, see Latinx or BIPOC. Coming up with euphemisms to justify removing white people from conferences or panels because there weren’t minorities, instead of focusing on the opinions and thoughts represented. The woke crowd created problems that pushed people away that may have mostly agreed with them.
Ultimately it seems like you’re opinion of woke and the definition you give it depends on when you became politically conscious. If it was in the 90e and early 2000s, it’s a more negative view of the progressive definition of woke. If it was during the Obama years, you think it’s more of a maga creation as a way to be more openly racist.
The LatinX stuff is almost entirely manufactured agitprop, just like the CRT shit. Actual Hispanic people do sometimes use a soft “eh” instead of of a hard “o” or “a” for disambiguation and the latinX thing was more an observation and academic discussion of this than any real attempt at prescriptive language. Literally the only people who pushed that narrative were the ones trying to weaponize it.
There’s been an effort to downplay the attempts made after massive backlash, especially with Latinx. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
Nah, I was there. I remember it. At best it was a broader conversation about whether language should be more inclusive, which conservatives took as a personal attack because they lack the ability to understand abstract concepts. And there may have been a handful of people who made a personal decision to adopt the term. There was never anyone scolding people for not saying LatinX.
I doubt anyone was ever shamed for not using Latinx, the problem there was more a mass amount of people that felt it was a way to erase their culture. It’s a very wasp thing to create a term for a people and declare the most inclusive term without actually consulting anyone it addresses.
Is the “woke crowd” in the room with us right now or have a few convenient fringe cases been cherry-picked to fit the fascist propaganda narrative?
Those who used woke as a pejorative never did so in good faith, it has always been overt racism.
There were plenty that used woke as a non perjorative term.
Doesn’t seem nearly as bad as OOP or others here in the comments are making it out to be.
It’s really not. There’s definitely blame to be assigned, but the woke crowd of the 2010s isn’t solely responsible for Trump.
Woke is now a made up term. It no longer has a clear definition. It no longer has a consistent meaning. It does not “depend on when you became politically conscious.” it depends on if you understand and recognize yellow journalism as a thought terminating practice rather than an intelligent one.
There is no debate here. The entire conversation in the article is based on a false perspective of history as determined by the propaganda written about it rather than true events.
This article might as well be titled, “Did Jews leave us worse off?”
Because it’s literally written from the same falsely framed perspective as that statement is, and you unfortunately carried it further.
Specifically, from your summary:
“The woke crowd created problems that pushed people away that may have mostly agreed with them.”
Is not a real thing that happened. This is history as perceived by its oppressors. You might as well be stating, “The Jews created problems that pushed people away that may have mostly agreed with them.”
That problem Jews created? Existing. The problem “woke” created? Existing.
Same with “Illegal Immigrants.” Same with “Trans” Same with every single marginalized group our current oligarchs can easily blame to shift the conversation away from them stealing your tax dollars through Reagonomics to start a international child sex trafficking network.
They’re framing history as if the actions of these people and concepts are bad, despite the bad actions ONLY existing within the Propaganda they created.
Did trans people create bathroom problems that pushed people into passing bathroom laws and banning them? Or did they exist at a time there was a constant stream of propaganda saying they were?
Okay. Now ask yourself the same about “woke.” Did they actually create problems? Or did their voices exist at a time when there was a constant stream of propaganda saying they were creating a problem?
That’s why there’s a negative shift in perspective between the 90’s and 2000’s. That’s when Fox News and post 9-11 conservative propaganda started. There was no magical political awakening. It was when the fairness doctrine died and letting idiots on TV say the dumbest most un-American and unintelligent things imaginable became legal. Now to the point where propaganda is the primary perspective coming from nearly all our news channels, so we as a society can no longer easily determine what’s real from what’s a paid talking point.
So that’s why Science is now questionable. Why our Education is now questionable. And the sustainability of our economy is now questionable.
Having intelligent discussions about all of those things was what “woke” started as. And our oligarchs hated that it always boiled down to them needing to pay more to improve them. So instead of paying for a country with better science, education, and a healthy economy, they paid to convince you all those things weren’t needed, or were under attack by “woke” and that’s why they were deteriorating.
So now we can’t have a sincere discussion about politics without needing to first overcome the needlessly unintelligent shit people believe is real.
Like the concept that “woke” pushed anyone away instead of the manufactured propaganda around it that did. We’re cooked if every political conversation needs to start with a discussion on whats real or paid propaganda, but here we are.
EDIT: Updated my opening statement to be more clear on my position and that there is indeed an actual real meaning to woke.
Woke is a made up term. It has no definition. It has no consistent meaning.
There is a lot of good stuff in your comment, but this opening is extremely problematic. Woke was created in the 1930s with a clear intended definition, which was re-codified in court by DeSantis’ own fascist lawyers.
“The belief there are systemic injustices in America, and the need to address them.”
That is it. Anyone who uses a completely different definition — especially as a pejorative — is simply a racist, bigoted nazi slur. It’s as simple as that.
Woke was created in the 1930s with a clear intended definition, which was re-codified in court by DeSantis’ own fascist lawyers.
100% agree with this statement. I do not agree with the current definition from DeSantis’ fascist lawyers and failed to make that clear in my opening.
I SHOULD have described the word as follows instead:
Woke is NOW a made up term. It has no CLEAR definition anymore. It NOW has no consistent meaning.
That’s much more clear for what I was going for, so apologies for the confusion!
There’s literally a personal examples of “wokeness” pushing away the people that were intended to be helped on their discussion. If you want to pretend it’s not a thing that happened or it’s not a real movement then don’t expect much change.
You know how MAGA keeps voting for a guy that can’t keep his promises to help them? Almost like they keep making choices against their own best interests?
There’s examples of what you’re talking about everywhere, the difference is just in how exagerated it is in the media.
The personal examples you mentioned are all very likely propaganda created from basic human mistakes being exagerated into something extreme to be blamed on “wokeness.” If you feel otherwise, link an article about it, and I’ll point out how it’s propaganda.
Otherwsie, should I believe all MAGA are gullible idiots that spent the last decade making up excuses for a conman pedophile to have the power to destroy their county for the profit of the Epstein class?
If you want to talk about “INSERT BLANK” pushing away people it intended to help, we should start with the biggest one right?
OR! We can understand that our own human flaws are being exagerated into weaponized propaganda.
Just because the people in MAGA were gullible enough to believe Trump wanted to help them, doesn’t mean MAGA are gullible people. It means MAGA was designed for the gullible.
So just because “woke” policies have hurt some people in those groups, it doesn’t mean all people in those groups are being hurt by “woke” policies. It just means these policies are for those “woke” groups.
You’re falling for basic propaganda that blames human error on something it’s not.
I personally got told to the face that all men are predators so I just checked out of woke.
Kinda weird to take personal offence from one person as an excuse to not participate in making things better.
Like, if a conservative’s idea of a progressive came up to me and started saying I was a predator and demanding that white people be eradicated I’d just say they’re being fuckin’ weird and continue supporting progressive ideas. On the other hand, there are also the people who say “the left made me feel bad and I can’t take any criticism so I’m going to vote for Trump”.
Like, how thin does your skin have to be?
Well, you gotta pile that on top that I got falsely accused of rape and the pieces click a bit easier. But the predator thing was me firmly accepting that feminism has completely alienated me. The left and gender politics I personally dont really care much about but I do desire to leave the world a better place than how I found it.
Again, you were wronged by someone who even the vast majority of the left would be pissed at and so you don’t like “woke” now. Do you also hate democracy because the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is bad and has it in their name?
C’mon, dude. I’m sorry that happened to you but there’s zero logic in that stance.
This kind of behavior is both encouraged and downplayed. That’s exactly the problem and it has alienated lots of people.
labels that the people you were labeling didn’t even like
This is a silly criticism. “Latinx” and similar terms were used by some US kids of Latin-American descent and those people felt the “X”-ed words provided them better representation. Many native Spanish speakers didn’t feel represented and objected to the terms being applied to them. So: there were two (maybe even more???) groups of people and they didn’t agree on one label being applied to both of them.
It doesn’t make sense to say that this is a problem with “woke” (wtf does that even mean) because the “non-woke” alternative is to use labels that people don’t like… exactly the thing you’re complaining woke did wrong. It’s not a change making us worse off, it’s just a failure to deliver total success. (Maybe it failed to deliver even partial success here? That’s a conversation that might be worth having, but “worse off” seems like a straight hallucination.)
Now, if you want to say, “I have a big criticism of progressive movements: they do not succeed to the degree that they promise!” then sure. You should get in line behind literally every person who has ever considered themselves progressive, because all of them have also come up with this brilliant piece of insight and are eager to share it.
The problem with woke was that it tried to solve relatively minor issues with massive changes and shame anyone who disagreed. That unsurprisingly lead to backlash and alienation. Yes there’s some racist dudes who just want to use the N-word without problems, but that’s not enough to explain the cultural swing that happened.
The victim blaming is so disgusting. I heard people say shit like “Oh trans people asked for too much”. Too much? Like what? Basic human rights? The right to exist?
They really think that if bullies get what they want they would just stop being bullies.
Access to hormone medication, puberty blockers for minors without medical oversight is quite an extreme position. No other serious (mental) health issue is treated like that. The existence of detransitioners and their experience is routinely denied as well.
Criticize this and you get called a fascist.
Trans people wanted to play recreational sports and that was too much for some people to handle.
I don’t know if these people have encountered bullies on the playground
Dude, regular people barely get basic human rights. The main problem with the trans movement is them assuming everyone else is normal and happy and treated fairly all the time. Secondary to that is the fact that if you don’t agree with what trans people are saying, they exclude you from their spaces and conversations.
out of all the pain i had lived through in my life, nothing comes close to the one caused by gender dysphoria
seeing so many people just ignore that pain, hating on trans people with no benefit for themselves, dont you think that trans people may be a little more defensive and not talk to people they suspect hate them for not enduring that pain forever for no reason?Just because everyone you knew before treated you like shit for being who you want to be doesn’t mean everyone after will too. That’s not fair and you wouldn’t want others to treat you like that. Rejecting people for being inquisitive about a newly recognized condition and possible solutions seems short sighted to me.
Asking for basic rights doesnt mean you assume anything. Its not a zero sum game where trans people having rights means others have less, or that trans people cant have rights because other may not have them either. Thats a very weird way to make it “Us vs Them” when its just a basic ask all around.
Secondary to that is the fact that if you don’t agree with what trans people are saying, they exclude you from their spaces and conversations.
This is just JAQing off with more steps. Woe be it that the people whose mere existance is met with raw hostility dont put up with yet more bigotry or “just asking questions” rhetoric that they get literally everyday of their lives.
Does this derail what may be honest questions? Sure, but when you get 90% hate and 10% good faith and cant always parse the two, sometimes you filter out all 100% for your own safety.
I’m saying that “basic human rights” isn’t a real thing.
Am I supposed to go research whatever JAQing off means by the way? If you are trying to communicate something, feel free to say it plainly.
Edit: I see you added more already, though it makes no sense at all. Try again to make a point or leave me unreplied to.
How about the right to use a public bathroom, or the right to have a passport in some country, that allows them through security checkpoints unimpeded?
This plus the right to, yknow, live, which is rejected by a terrorist organization called the FBI; which literally classifies them as terrorists.
As far as I know, trans people are allowed to use public restrooms at least in any state in the US. They also are permitted to have passports but I’m not sure what you mean by the unimpeded part. I couldn’t find any verification that the FBI has labelled any trans people or any trans positive groups as terrorist groups either.
On the first one:
Using the bathroom of the gender assigned at birth: https://www.them.us/story/lucien-bates-round1-arcade-trans-man-bathroom-illinois
Using the bathroom of the gender not assigned at birth: https://reason.com/2025/04/10/florida-cops-arrest-transgender-woman-for-using-womens-bathroom/
They are, by circumstance, condemned for doing either. Effectively, they are barred from using any bathrooms, though the law does not like admitting that result.On the second:
The Trump admin now requires the gender of a passport to match the gender assigned at birth. Immigration control officers operate off of far less to enact “Kavanaugh stops” to target and harass anyone whose passport gender does not match their visual appearance. Think of it this way: If a black man could wave a magic wand to not be black for the duration of a traffic stop, do you think they would?On the third:
https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/fbi-readies-new-war-on-trans-peopleYour first example would work if one could be in both Florida and Illinois at the same time, but that is impossible. In both states, trans people are able to use public restrooms, whether its the one they want to use or not.
The second isn’t an example. I’m supposed to just take your word for it?
On the third, the FBI never did designate any trans related anything as violent extremists or terrorists. That article is simply reporting what two unnamed officials thought would happen in the future after the Kirk murder. Hardly evidence that the FBI is officially targeting trans people.
regular people barely get basic human rights
if you don’t agree with what trans people are saying, they exclude you from their spaces and conversations
This seems to align with what the OP was saying? Regular people barely get rights, trans people ask for those same paltry rights and that’s treated as an assault.
That’s not what I meant. I meant that we are all in the same boat wanting to be treated fairly. Being treated unfairly is not a uniquely trans experience.
This is why fighting for rights for those that don’t have them also results in better conditions for those who started in a slightly better position. Programs like the Black Prisoner’s Caucus create better conditions for white inmates as well. This concept is pretty common in activist spaces.
I don’t think that trans people are the vehicle that will bring basic human rights to all. I don’t think framing it in group-speak is helpful either.
Its awful that all of these people are struggling, but we can’t even agree on the cause of or solution for that suffering. I wish the community wasn’t so eager to defend positions that haven’t had time to be established as fact yet.
Oh look I found the bucket crab.
(Also for others passing by this person also thinks that ICE is keeping us safe from dangerous immigrants.)
I’ve never said that but good job with your reading comprehension.
It doesn’t take much to make an idiot feel smug does it? Enjoy your upvotes!
No, the Sociopathic MAGA response to kindness and empathy is the problem.
Anti-wokeness can be directly tied to many of society’s current problems. So maybe that means the answer is an indirect “yes”?
I mean if people are going to go around thinking and empathizing with others we wouldn’t be able to bomb the middle East every 20 years, would we?
But wokeness is something they made up to be a big problem so they could tear it down.
People still don’t understand this was an artificially inflated debate.
All the empathy in the world is just going to make us have sympathy for the devil before more bombings occur. Deep religious bloodfeuds spanning thousands of years isnt ever going to completely stop.
every 20 years
I think that’s a bit of an understatement. Perhaps every 20 weeks?
edit: Thanks Obama?
The NYT haven’t changed. They’ve been aligned with corporate greed and neo-conservative goals and attitudes for at least 40 years. Yes you can find individual articles that don’t, but editorially they always have.
Though they always presented their image as ‘social liberal progressive attitudes’ and ‘fiscal responsibility with social support’, if you look at their actual reporting track record they’ve helped manufacture consent for almost every US war of the last 30+ years, and have consistently sided with the desires of whatever government is currently in power and fiscal conservative attitudes throughout.
“Donald the dove. Hillary the hawk.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/01/opinion/sunday/donald-the-dove-hillary-the-hawk.html
I unsubscribed years ago when I finally saw them for what they are.
