It used to mean that when it was used by black activists. Now it’s been weaponized by the right and likened to offended white people calling for cancel and failed policies they try to paint as leftist policies.
Exact same thing with “being politically correct” to mean “treating people with respect”.
“Woke” has had many meanings over the years. Originally it was used as “watch out for racist police” in the black community.
Then it was picked up by right wing people, and it was given the meaning of “anti-racism” and being woke was being against racism. Being against woke became a way to say anti-anti-racism, so being pro-racism without explicitly saying so.
After that, more meaning was tacked on. It started being used for all kinds of LGBTQ+ stuff. Then it was also associated with anything leftist and eventually landed on “anything I don’t like”.
So yeah, it can now just as well being redefined as human rights, as right now anti-woke is just repressing other people’s rights.
Spot on. It’s a placeholder word for whatever vile shit they don’t want to say out loud. Same as DEI, which seems to be taking over more and more.
More than that it also gets to be about things outside of rights, like representation in media. They slap that shit on everything that acknowledges that someone who isn’t a very specific kind of person might exist. It’s not technically a right to have, say, a black super hero so they’re “able” to dodge around the entire human rights discussion to continue being just reall fuckin’ awful.
Regardless of the original message, reposting a screenshot with “yup” is a shitty tweet & Musk behavior.
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Never apologize for greatness
Fucking leaded gasoline
Don’t forget lead water mains and lead paint!
We’ve just replaced them with PFAS and microplastics.
Not replaced, added!
It’s just like a good seasoning, mix it all together and see what happens.
I’m here rallying against the other woke agenda.
How dare people expect me to have less than 12 hours of sleep?! Have they seen my bed? Have they felt it?? Most certainly not!
Eat a brownie and have a nap! The man has no jurisdiction under these comfy covers!!!How dare people expect me to have less than 12 hours of sleep?!
People, hell. My dogs expect me to give them treats by 6 am regardless of how I feel about it. It was more like 4:45 today.
Where the hell do I sign up?
Unfortunately I just can’t relate to this. I got a new mattress, which is great, but now my pillows are ever so slightly too short or too soft. Do you have any recommendations?
Get larger, firmer pillows?
Coincidentally these are the firmer pillows.
Try a knockoff 2-pack of my pillow.
You can adjust the loft, both through adding/removing fill and smooshing it up in different ways, and they are pretty damned stiff.
I had a regular chunk-memory-foam and loved that… these are somehow much stiffer… they have a mix of poly fill and the dense memory foam chunks… I find them unusable, because soft is my jam.
I’m afraid I cannot be of help, you see I had the same issue. My current pillow was obtained after years of searching, from perhaps thousands, if not billions of pillows tested.
I know not of its name, nor origins. It satisfies me, though I often wonder what would happen once this pillow meets the same fate as the others. Tagless, innards squished to where they shall expand no more… I would like to say this keeps me up at night, though it’s a decent pillow. Good luck on your quest.
Human rights for me, not for thee.
#metoo
Heard about the Cairo declaration?
Yup. human rights are not universal just because a handful of nations say so.
The opposite of woke is asleep.
The Woke Mind Virus is just ideas. Nothing is more contagious than a good idea.
Bad ideas seem to be more virulent actually
Did you know there is a word for that? It’s been bastardized by the internet but that’s a meme by its original definition.
I don’t necessarily have anything against human rights, but which rights, and for whom? Who decides, and then who enforces those rights? Rights are kind of meaningless without enforcement, and for that you need a state. In that regard, the rights that exist and are enforced, and for whom, depends primarily on who controls the state. That’s fine if the people who control the state share your ideas about which rights get priority, but it sucks if you and the state disagree.
Edit: I think this video essay explains it much better.
What human rights do you disagree with?
I didn’t say that I disagreed with anything, but I wouldn’t consider myself the biggest supporter of gun rights, for an example.
Guns are not a human right.
Well, I think some people would disagree. But, that’s my point. YOU think there are certain human rights that should be enforced, at least for certain people, but in order to do that, you need to be in a position of power to enforce those rights. There are people here in the US where I live that are in positions of power to enforce gun rights, and so gun rights exist.
Human rights would not be dependent upon a certain technology existing that didn’t exist for the vast majority of the time humans have existed.
Those people are idiots. Anyone who thinks guns are a human right is just confused because “right to bear arms” also has the word “right” in it.
I’m not the person you were originally discussing human rights with, but usually people who dedicate their education to ethics are the ones who write up a list of human rights.
And that list changes as we progress and develop new technologies.
For example The World Human Rights Commission reaches out to governments worldwide to get all countries as close to protecting humans rights as they can.
Unfortunately some countries choose to ignore them and continue harming people anyway for whatever reasons they want, if any at all. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t any qualified people in the world to answer that question. There are quite a few people like that working on them as we speak.
I think it’s great that academics and intellectuals are trying to come up with educated and informed human rights recommendations, but that’s all they are: recommendations. Like you said yourself, their recommendations are often ignored. That’s because there is an inherent power dynamic to human rights. Rights must necessarily be given by the powerful to the less powerful, and only when and if the powerful decide it is in their interests to give them. Many times, it takes prolonged, organized, often violent rebellion to convince the powerful that it is in their interest to grant rights to the people.
That fair, I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying. Unfortunately that is what it takes to establish human rights in some places.
I just wanted to share that there are people working very hard to create an ethical framework that can is be implemented if and when a country is ready to adapt it.
If you don’t know by now then I doubt you have anything productive to say on the matter.
Regardless: It is a term most often used when a piece of media acknowledges the existence of someone who isn’t a straight, white, able-bodied male. A woman main character? A gay character? A black person? Someone with even a little autism who we aren’t just calling “quirky” but actually admitting it this time? And if a transperson is within a mile of the thing there are far too many people who will shit their pants in rage. The opposite of woke is all the effort to force the destruction of media that does these things. It’s the effort to ban books, deny people care, and to simply just treat different people as people. The “anti-woke” are mad that those different from them have the gall to exist.
You can try to ramble it away as some deep philosophical connundrum but it’s just not that complicated.
All I’m saying is: if you really feel strongly about defending and enforcing the human rights of the historically marginalized groups you’ve mentioned, you will need to fight very, very hard to acquire and accrue as much power as possible to do it. It will probably require a fairly significant, prolonged, organized, possibly violent movement.
The sort of person who says “woke agenda” (or almost anything else involving the word “agenda”) is often someone I disagree with and find unpleasant, but that doesn’t mean that there isn’t a specific cluster of ideas that he’s referring to which I also often disagree with. I suppose I would refer to these ideas as “the social justice movement” or “modern leftism” rather than “woke”. Simply defining these ideas as “human rights” is disingenuous - you might as well define them as “the truth” if you’re going to simply assume that people who disagree with you cannot possibly even have a point sometimes.
So you’re against human rights for all. Got it.
That’s right. I’m evil simply for the sake of being evil, like Skeletor.
I don’t get it; ‘human rights’ are threatening children?
That’s right. The not getting it part. When those sort of things are said in that context and they don’t make any sense, it’s because the person making the claim is doing it in bad faith.
Changing it to human rights allows it to be easily exposed.
Sorry but you explained nothing what wasn’t already in the picture.
what do you mean by “threatening children”?
That’s part of the rhetoric of the right, no? Protecting the children from the woke agenda.
You’re so close. The point is that they are, in fact, claiming that human rights threaten children. They just won’t admit it.
part of my woke agenda is actually to obsolesce the language of “rights”, as I believe it is a flawed notion. instead, I advocate for equality and freedom.
Chat GPT end script malfunctioned? (Duplicate comment lmao)
I’ve done the same unintentionally because my Lemmy client says “post failed” and I hit submit a 2nd time.
Nah, duplicate comments are just a Lemmy bug or user error.
part of my woke agenda is actually to obsolesce the language of “rights”, as I believe it is a flawed notion. instead, I advocate for equality and freedom.
I agree with the idea that rights are weird. The history of rights is rooted in law. A right is enforced by a state or similar entity. Freedom can exist outside of institutional power but rights historically require it.
That said, most people who advocate for rights are not much concerned about who will enforce those rights. It’s often used more as a synonym for freedom. As with all social constructs, there is no material reality behind it
equality and freedom
…aka rights
but rights are a fiction. we can actually observe equality and freedom.
Show me an atom of equality, or a molecule of freedom. They don’t exist in the universe. Just like rights, they are a lie made true by our common belief in them.
The idea of Rights is embedded in society. That embedding has a lot of value. It stops people riding roughshod over them.
you can observe equality. you can see whether people are treated equally.
rights are routinely ignored or revoked.
so you can observe the freedom in same sex marriages, but you can’t observe the right to be in a same sex marriage? I don’t follow, it’s the same thing.
you can see whether someone is free, but i can’t see a right.
If it’s a right encoded in law, you can see it written down in the text of the relevant law. Freedom is no less abstract than rights.
freedom can be observed. laws don’t protect rights anyway.
You can observe someone exercising their freedom exactly as much as you can observe someone exercising their rights. What you can’t see is a freedom written down, unless it’s in the form of legal rights. Laws don’t protect freedoms any more than they protect rights. You like the word freedom, you don’t like the word right. They’re both abstract concepts.
