Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Why does 'wokeness' annoy people so much?

999 replies

twwindow · 27/12/2021 20:18

Isn't it just trying to make the world a better place but making people feel accepted no matter their race, gender etc?

It seems to wind some people up so bad - and it's usually those that are part of a majority group that gets wound up most by it (usually white/men) - is it because they feel threatened?

Whenever anyone stands up for a cause they are automatically called woke - and it's now as if it's a bad thing.

It's sad, I see people fed up with 'wokeness' as code for 'we can't get away with our racist, sexist BS anymore as people are calling us out'.

OP posts:
JohnHuffam1812 · 28/12/2021 01:10

"No, I'd say it was a campaign to get people fired, deplatformed or removed from things. And you've been given examples of suchlike."

Actually no I haven't.

The one removal was a mistake and there was a public apology.

One lecturer recieved the backing of her VC and hundreds of colleagues and peers.

JK Rowling was given as an example, but hasn't been cancelled.

Magnited · 28/12/2021 01:10

@Georgeskitchen

Basically the good old intolerance of tolerance, as the saying goes. Roughly translated as "agree with my opinion or I will destroy you ":
^ This. And in this regard its thousands of years old.
JohnHuffam1812 · 28/12/2021 01:11

@Furries

What is my agenda?

And no, people aren't trying to cancel JK Rowling, they just publically disagree with her.

She hasn't been cancelled.

SantaClawsServiette · 28/12/2021 01:12

@JohnHuffam1812

"It's destroying universities, it's destroying comedy and the arts, it makes for really shit tv, it's destroying publishing and literature. It produces and encourages bad history, as Adolph Reed demonstrates. It justifies denying people entry to places like Harvard on the basis of their race and calls it progress."

Really? Give me an example of how peope are being denied entry to places like Harvard.

It isn't destroying universities, or TV or anything else.

This was a huge story, perhaps if you don't remember it you aren't in a position to be commenting in the way you are.

It came out, much to Harvard's embarrassment, they they purposefully weighted their entrance criteria in such a way that Asia students were severely disadvantaged. And not just Harvard but other Ivy Legue universities - Asian students needed to score about 140 points higher than white students to be admitted, while white students needed to score higher than black or hispanic students. This was finangled by systematically scoring candidates on personal qualities in a way that favoured members of groups with fewer qualified applicants.

The problems in academia have also been very well documented and if you ask academics about it they will tell you straight out what is going on, many of them are deeply worried and many looking to get out of the academy. It is affecting research topics, funding, academics being no-platformed, it's really very serious.

The same with the arts, funding and subject matter are being distorted, and those artists who are not famous enough to weather controversy will not get hired, not get asked to sit on boards, not get offered shows.

Many famous comedians have spoken out about it - Chris Rock IIRC says he won't play university campuses because of it. And again, it's the ones who are starting out, who aren't yet rich, who are most affected.

What is really fascinating is that the people speaking out against this are hardly obviously the people who are supposedly so bad according to the woke. Many of them are members of racial minorities, not heterosexual, women, etc. Many of them are in fact artists, comics, writers, academics, scientists. If you look at polling in the US some of the people most concerned are Native Americans and Hispanics, particularly those who are working class.

And then we get these people who seem to think if they keep saying nothing is going on everyone will not notice.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/12/2021 01:14

Let's look at uberwoke author Damian Barr, a man who ran a cancel campaign against Baroness Emma Nicholson which got her removed from the Booker prize committee, for "homophobia" when she spoke up for women's sex based rights. Her crime was that she had, like very many peers and MPs, voted against same sex marriage in 2013. It subsequently emerged that Barr himself had tweeted about "tittering sickly" at an MTF trans person trying and failing to hang themselves. Nice bloke. His career hasn't suffered.

NoNotMeNoSiree · 28/12/2021 01:14

For those at the back, or late to the thread, the lesbians and cocks point was originally put to me.
I was talking about racism and should it not be called out?
Got this as a reply.
Now it seems to be framed as a question to avoid answering anything else.
Just talk about cocks and lesbians and ignore everything else that was being said.
Anyone care to answer the actual comment about racism?
Anyone?
Bueller?
Bueller?!
Bueller.....

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/12/2021 01:15

You’re right - she hasn’t been cancelled in the truest sense. But the attempts to do so are continuous. And you are doing every twist and turn possible to refute that. Your agenda is quite clear.

YY.

Furries · 28/12/2021 01:16

[quote JohnHuffam1812]@Furries

What is my agenda?

And no, people aren't trying to cancel JK Rowling, they just publically disagree with her.

She hasn't been cancelled.[/quote]
Am not engaging anymore. And not because I can’t argue my point, but because there is literally no point.

Have fun

wanders off musing over whether Dickens was an insufferable twat back in the day

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/12/2021 01:17

It's always instructive how people don't want to answer certain questions, though, and it doesn't stop being so when they try to deflect and minimise it.

foxgoosefinch · 28/12/2021 01:19

@JohnHuffam1812

"No, I'd say it was a campaign to get people fired, deplatformed or removed from things. And you've been given examples of suchlike."

Actually no I haven't.

The one removal was a mistake and there was a public apology.

One lecturer recieved the backing of her VC and hundreds of colleagues and peers.

JK Rowling was given as an example, but hasn't been cancelled.

Ah, I see, the fact that she spent three years being bullied at work, and wasn't able to physically go into her office without gangs of masked student protestors letting off smoke flares and chanting is just fine then.

This is exactly why people talk about "the woke". People who want to accuse others of "misrepresenting" situations - but do exactly the same themselves in the most blatant terms. People who bleat about "racism and homophobia" but think lesbians who object to being told they are "phobic" if they don't sleep with penises have "bigoted views". People who like to play down death threats towards women, who don't believe middle aged children's authors have been targeted unless they see evidence, but are happy to believe a Tory MP on their say-so without any evidence at all.

You could not get a better demonstration on this thread of how - leaving aside the issue of race, which is very different - the entire package of "woke" ideas comes wrapped in exactly what I described earlier -- hypocrisy, going along with what they think progressive is even when it isn't, calling people who have a better knowledge of the issues names (eg "bigoted"), if their views don't fall in line; total refusal to think about the actual effect of these ideas, and a deep veneration for and envy of the capitalist establishment (especially when a Tory MP is involved).

You could hardly make it up if these posters were plants out to sabotage their own case.

JohnHuffam1812 · 28/12/2021 01:21

You realise that the Harvard Lawsuit you are talking about ended with the judgement that the admissions policy did not unduly discrimiate against Asian Americans right?

As far as I remember the court case didn't mention black or other students but compared the Asian students to white ones.

I have many friends in Academia who don't think its an issue at all, and actually find the "freedom of speech" crisis in universities to be very manufacutred by certain politicians and newspapers. In fact this is a view often repeated by people publically when the freedom of speech issue is raised by the government.

Chris Rock ? That story is about 9 years old!

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/12/2021 01:24

I have many friends in Academia who don't think its an issue at all

Fascinating. Clearly other academic opinions are available.

Furries · 28/12/2021 01:24

@foxgoosefinch - thankfully, we have eloquent people like you who take the time to put their point across like this.

I think I need to make it mynew year’s resolution, for the time being I’m just in grumpy ODFOD mode!

JohnHuffam1812 · 28/12/2021 01:25

:Ah, I see, the fact that she spent three years being bullied at work, and wasn't able to physically go into her office without gangs of masked student protestors letting off smoke flares and chanting is just fine then."

Didn't say that, again misrepresenting.

Said she wasn't cancelled. No one fired her, she wasn't asked to leave, and her colleagues backed her.

You could hardly make it up that you've had to use fallacies, loaded questions and misrepresentation to try to get a "win" in this debate.

Great example here:

"People who like to play down death threats towards women, who don't believe middle aged children's authors have been targeted unless they see evidence, but are happy to believe a Tory MP on their say-so without any evidence at all."

No one plated down death threats, or said they didn't believe people had been targeted.

Oh actually yes they did, that was you.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/12/2021 01:25

People who like to play down death threats towards women, who don't believe middle aged children's authors have been targeted unless they see evidence, but are happy to believe a Tory MP on their say-so without any evidence at all.

Quite.

foxgoosefinch · 28/12/2021 01:26

@NoNotMeNoSiree

For those at the back, or late to the thread, the lesbians and cocks point was originally put to me. I was talking about racism and should it not be called out? Got this as a reply. Now it seems to be framed as a question to avoid answering anything else. Just talk about cocks and lesbians and ignore everything else that was being said. Anyone care to answer the actual comment about racism? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?! Bueller.....
Ah, shall I just repost your actual post below then, so we can remind ourselves of why I referenced homophobia in my reply to you?

Your post in full:

"cancel culture” is the attempt to silence dissenting views which is a form of bullying and (imo) very bad for society as a whole.
Sorry, but if you (not you personally, just in general) are going to air say racist or homophobic views, you're going to come across views that disagree, and challenge yours.
For example, I was with a close family member spouting racist shite a few days ago.
I love him but I can't just sit there and listen to his bollocks, I had to say something.
He probably felt silenced as felt the mood of his audience and wandered off, should we just have let him get on with it and not said anything, just passively agreed by not saying anything?
If speaking up makes me woke then good, I don't care.

----

Right, so can you see now why I asked you a question about homophobia in response? Because you specifically referenced it yourself.

Should I just passively agree and not say anything when homophobes tell me I must sleep with cocks?

Or don't you think that's homophobia? Still evading the question I see, you can't complain people are evading yours if you're evading mine really, because that would make you a hypocrite, wouldn't it?

You didn't comment on my point about woke racism in universities either from earlier in the thread, in which white students get to tell others what racism is, did you?

NoNotMeNoSiree · 28/12/2021 01:27

@Ereshkigalangcleg

It's always instructive how people don't want to answer certain questions, though, and it doesn't stop being so when they try to deflect and minimise it.
You're darn tootling right, it is! Grin Why was my question on racism quoted, but batted away with whataboutery? Which is now being touted as the Question That Must Be Answered? Sorry for the flippant tone, but honestly it gets beyond ridiculous on here.
JohnHuffam1812 · 28/12/2021 01:27

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Yes you can find people saying it in the news all the time when the governments freedom of speech in universities agenda is brought up.

JohnHuffam1812 · 28/12/2021 01:28

@Furries

What's my agenda?

Come on.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/12/2021 01:29

or said they didn't believe people had been targeted.

Yes you did, John

"I know of at least three middle aged female children's authors who have been pushed out of their jobs."

Oh wow, an anecdote from an anonymous person on the internet, I really think this is a trustworthy source of evidence.

foxgoosefinch · 28/12/2021 01:30

Said she wasn't cancelled. No one fired her, she wasn't asked to leave, and her colleagues backed her.

Her colleagues didn't. A few tenured professors in other universities wrote an open letter in support. If you actually knew anything about the case, you'd know bullying from her colleagues was one fo the specific reasons for her resigning. Never heard of constructive dismissal?

You give out all this stuff with very little knowledge of the issues. As I said before, you're clearly very hard of thinking and unfortunately everything you've posted on this thread is a perfect demonstration of "woke" views. Faux progressive on the surface - but actually in support of misogyny, Tory MPs and workplace bullying. The perfect epitome of cancel culture, in fact.

SantaClawsServiette · 28/12/2021 01:30

Woody Allan is an intersting case because I think he illustrates both attempts to cancel and also a much more justifiable set of circumstances.

Basically there are two things going on with WA. The first one being that he was accused of a serious and repugnant crime, and, had he been found guilty, his career would have been over if for no other reason than he would be in prison. Even if he'd gotten out the chance that anyone would want to work with him after that would be slim to none. Nor watch his new films. That's not being canceled.

However, he also was not found guilty, and as much as some people like to claim that this was a clear miscarriage of justice, it's really not very clear at all. There were all kinds of questions about opportunity, about the motives of those making claims, also various accounts from different sources about what happened, some of the witnesses were unreliable. It was impossible for the court to come to any clear conclusion and the public likely never will either.

Now many people think he was guilty nonetheless or find him distasteful in other ways and so choose not to watch his films. And if enough people felt that way, he would likely not be able to make them any more. That's not canceling him either.

What is cancel culture is not so much toward WA at all, more often it is telling other people they must not watch his films, and if they do they are bad and beyond the pale, or trying to punish actors who work with him by getting them removed from other projects, or telling theaters that they shouldn't show his films and trying to get demonstrations etc against them if they do.

It's pressuring the funding or livelihood or platform to speak of people who disagree about something like the guilt or innocence of a person like WA, or about a political cause, or any number of things that people may disagree about.

JohnHuffam1812 · 28/12/2021 01:32

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Yes someone making anonymous claims on the internet is not a trustworthy source.

I gave a person who had publically said they had been targeted and then others said they didn't believe.

There is a difference.

Sorry that this needed to be pointed out to you.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 28/12/2021 01:33

Why was my question on racism quoted, but batted away with whataboutery?

I don't know, ask that person, I'm merely remarking that some people who pride themselves on their moral rectitude aren't going to say it's ok to call out homophobia when it's about lesbians getting shit for saying that they won't sleep with "trans lesbians" because they are not women.

NoNotMeNoSiree · 28/12/2021 01:33

Ah OK, see where the homophobia reply came from.
I referenced a racism situation and was expecting a reply to that.
I did mention homophobia as well though, agreed

Should I just passively agree and not say anything when homophobes tell me I must sleep with cocks?
You're entitled to sleep with whoever you want /are attracted to.
Saying not sleeping with you as you're trans/ black etc, not so much.
As that would make you bigoted.