To think that "wokeism" is for the privileged few?

[Mooscow]

Wokeism and identity politics seems rife at the moment in the UK. But Canada and the US seem even worse. There is this massive push to avoid the possibility of ever offending anyone, ever. For example, I work for a North American company and we've just been given a long list of words never to use. This includes "female", "blind", "deaf", "blacklist", "homeless", "rule of thumb" and it goes on and on and on. So you can't say things like "turn a blind eye" or "tone deaf" etc. any more in case it offends a blind or deaf person. Really?!

I've just read an article in the FT (sorry can't share) that says the US has only sent 111million out of its pledge to send 1 billion vaccines to poorer countries. The US has 2 and a half times the amount of vaccines it needs for itself and Canada has ordered 8 times what it needs.

I know that vaccines and wokeism has little in common but it just struck me how so much effort is put into this new purity culture whilst at the same time demonstrating utter selfishness and lack of compassion for anyone else.

It's also like the push to remove the word women from healthcare such as cervical screening in case a transman, as a "cervix haver" 🤮 is offended at being grouped with women, while 40% of women (especially those without English as a first language and those in lower socio-economic groups) don't even know what a cervix is. But screw them, let's let them get cervical cancer while we pat ourselves on the back and virtue signal at making sure we don't offend by telling the truth the tiny, tiny proportion of trans people.

I wonder if the whole work/identity politics stuff is based in the fact that privileged people can effortlessly virtue signal to feel better about themselves whilst remaining selfish, uncaring and apathetic towards people who are actually in need or vulnerable. AIBU?

* It was also the dream for women to compete in the same sports teams as men, but I see that history's been rewritten as well...*

Women have always wanted to compete in the same sports as men, but no woman is daft enough to think that they can compete with men in these sports.

think @334bu means me.

Well yes, she did specifically quote you, not Fanny can't you both recognise your own posts?

@DameFanny

And transwomen don't have 'male bodies', they have their own bodies, whatever they look like. This is denial of trans existence which is hate speech.

What about the denial of women to be allowed to be referred to as women? I’m not CIA, I am not a “cervix haver”. I am a woman and if that causes offence or hurts a handful of people because they have problems with their identity then so be it.

CIA, I meant CIS

And transwomen don't have 'male bodies', they have their own bodies, whatever they look like. This is denial of trans existence which is hate speech.

Nobody is denying that trans people exist and have done so for millennia.
However, saying that someone stating a biological reality when discussing health care is indulging in hate speech is not acceptable.

Women are allowed to be referred to as women. When has anyone stopped you calling yourself a woman? Inclusive language on an article doesn't stop you calling yourself anything you like @Dontgetyerknicksinatwist

Some are, but they're labelled 'woke' and 'virtue signallers' so other people can feel better about not making the attempt

Many of the people who puff themselves up with their virtue, are some of the nastiest, least kind people you're ever likely to come across. It's an identity. No need to practice what you preach. Making people tiptoe round you on eggshells and be shouted at when they use common phrases like "rule of thumb" is coercive controlling behaviour.

It's not hate speech to recognise someone's sex. It's one of the protected characteristics in the Equality Act, after all, and crucial in a medical setting.

@334bu

* It was also the dream for women to compete in the same sports teams as men, but I see that history's been rewritten as well...*

Women have always wanted to compete in the same sports as men, but no woman is daft enough to think that they can compete with men in these sports.

There was a move for it, especially in the sports that weren't so reliant on muscle. And you get exceptional women in every sport that could compete.

Not that I was ever fussed, sport is mostly an overrated way to put some people off physical activity for life, encourage others to wreck their bodies and still others to gamble. Meh.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Some are, but they're labelled 'woke' and 'virtue signallers' so other people can feel better about not making the attempt

Many of the people who puff themselves up with their virtue, are some of the nastiest, least kind people you're ever likely to come across. It's an identity. No need to practice what you preach. Making people tiptoe round you on eggshells and be shouted at when they use common phrases like "rule of thumb" is coercive controlling behaviour.

Who are those very specific people then? That's your problem, not the people who are trying to do good. But you're dismissing them all under the same sneers.

i loathe the phrase 'differently-abled' i'm disabled, and i have no issue in using that.

Who are those very specific people then?

What are you expecting, Fanny, a list? This is a thread in AIBU, not a court case. I'm simply making an observation.

@EmotionalSupportBear

i loathe the phrase 'differently-abled' i'm disabled, and i have no issue in using that.

Agree, and ditto. But some people prefer it and it's no skin off my nose.

@CityMumma78

I wholeheartedly agree with everything you have written! People are falling over themselves to be “woke” and inclusive for the tiny majority while totally disregarding the majority. Priorities are all wrong!!

It's becoming ridiculous, nobody even knows what anyone is talking about anymore. I've decided it's offensive to me as a woman not to be referred to as a woman so where does that leave me? Everything can't all be in favour of 'inclusivity' when it's causing confusion for the majority. How many people are we talking about would really truly be offended and why can we not just change the language used in relation to them?

This isn't a medical setting, you, @alfonsotheunrepentant and @334bu are making blanket statements denying transwomen's existence.

The majority of MTF trans people are legally male in all respects. So not sure why you omitted the other part of my post, about the Equality Act?

There was a move for it, especially in the sports that weren't so reliant on muscle. And you get exceptional women in every sport that could compete.
Hardly any sports don't require muscle
Moreover, in most sports even the most exceptional women can't even compete against adolescent boys.

Hush now, 334bu, Fanny thinks sport is a waste of time so women being shoved out of it by male people doesn't matter a jot.

This isn't a medical setting, you, @alfonsotheunrepentant and @334bu are making blanket statements denying transwomen's existence.

Since when was talking about prostate cancer not something to do with medicine. If transwomen didn't have male bodies, they wouldn't need prostate cancer screening.

If transwomen didn't have prostates they wouldn't need prostate cancer screening. Not all of them do.

Fixed that for you

No idea which post you're saying I'm ignoring?

The point seems to have sailed right over your head and into the stratosphere, Fanny.

@334bu

*There was a move for it, especially in the sports that weren't so reliant on muscle. And you get exceptional women in every sport that could compete.* Hardly any sports don't require muscle Moreover, in most sports even the most exceptional women can't even compete against adolescent boys.

I suspect if you didn't recognise Megan Rapinoe you'd be wanting to exclude her from the John Lewis ladies without a knicker inspection

@Ereshkigalangcleg

The point seems to have sailed right over your head and into the stratosphere, Fanny.

Make it clear?

the whole work/identity politics stuff is based in the fact that privileged people can effortlessly virtue signal to feel better about themselves whilst remaining selfish, uncaring and apathetic towards people who are actually in need or vulnerable. AIBU?

Sounds about right to me, OP. Especially given that it seems the more privileged people are the more vigorously they want to police other people's speech, thought, expression etc. Much of this comes from academia. And of course academia is full of the relatively privileged.

There are massive societal issues that need fixing. But maybe it's easier to try and push over a statue than think about how to avert or mitigate climate change. I don't know, humans are odd creatures.