• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

“Woke”

“Eating kittens is just plain.. plain wrong! And no one should do it EVER!”

(TBF though that WAS in direct response to genuine pressure to eat a kitten so maybe it wasn’t woke but it’s probably still virtue signaling.)


"You know, evil comes in many forms, be it a man-eating cow or Joseph Stalin. But you can't let the package hide the pudding. Evil is just plain bad. You don't cotton to it. You gotta smack it on the nose with the rolled up newspaper of goodness. Bad dog! Bad dog!"

That was a great show...
 
And...how is this a bad thing? Showing empathy for others?

I think it's assumed to be bad because if one doesn't have the capacity for empathy (or pretends not to on the internet) then one can only interpret others showing empathy as merely acting, or manipulative attempts to win an argument. If the character has no ability to feel for others, then the character doesn't understand that others actually can genuinely feel empathy or oppose evil.
 

I was going to poke at you for getting your info about a private, tiny (students, faculty, and staff combined don't even reach 3,000! My high school was bigger!) Pennsylvanian College from a far right British tabloid, but a quick google shows that 1) only far right rags are talking about this, and 2) all the far right rags are promoting this.

It's just weird how hard the anti-woke crowd has to work to find these things, and then the whole 'taking a student's project at a tiny college and blowing it up to pretend it was a college event' on top looks like more work. Don't you guys have anything real to worry about that didn't require so much work to even find and then so much more work to distort into a caricature of your bogeyman?
 
I was going to poke at you for getting your info about a private, tiny (students, faculty, and staff combined don't even reach 3,000! My high school was bigger!) Pennsylvanian College from a far right British tabloid, but a quick google shows that 1) only far right rags are talking about this, and 2) all the far right rags are promoting this.

It's just weird how hard the anti-woke crowd has to work to find these things, and then the whole 'taking a student's project at a tiny college and blowing it up to pretend it was a college event' on top looks like more work. Don't you guys have anything real to worry about that didn't require so much work to even find and then so much more work to distort into a caricature of your bogeyman?

If you want to call running across my MSN newsfeed working hard to find these things, then have at it. No doubt it's only being covered by right wing rags is because the left wing rags are too embarrassed to print it.

So...is this woke or not woke?
 
If you want to call running across my MSN newsfeed working hard to find these things, then have at it. No doubt it's only being covered by right wing rags is because the left wing rags are too embarrassed to print it.

So...is this woke or not woke?

Yeah, no doubt this manufactroversy is only being covered by right wing rags because said right wing rags are the only ones not only shameless enough to present it, but also safe to print it in the knowledge that their gullible readers will accept their distortions as fact.
 
Right wing rags like The Independent...?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ettysburg-college-cis-white-men-b2225109.html

Stay tuned for even more circumstantial ad hominem.

Behind a paywall, but what is visible is demonstrably at odds with the claims made by Stout and his sources. Why, it's almost like getting your "news" from extremely biased sources won't give you accurate information, and pointing that out isn't an ad hom. But you go on swallowing the right wing manufactroversies like a good mark, if you'd like.
 
Yeah, no doubt this manufactroversy is only being covered by right wing rags because said right wing rags are the only ones not only shameless enough to present it, but also safe to print it in the knowledge that their gullible readers will accept their distortions as fact.

Oh just come out and say it. You support discrimination and bias based on race and gender identity. There, that wasn't so hard was it?
 
Oh look, another irrelevant story hyped by the right-wing media to sell themselves and obediently parroted by the gullible.
:rolleyes:

Were you planning on challenging the content of the story or are you just here to wave your arms about?
 
Oh just come out and say it. You support discrimination and bias based on race and gender identity. There, that wasn't so hard was it?

How in the world do you get that out of me pointing out your claims and your sources both are misleading and wrong?
 
Were you planning on challenging the content of the story or are you just here to wave your arms about?
It's a fairly common move (here and elsewhere) to address the source of the story rather than the content. So long as you can label the story as partisan manufactured controversy you can avoid having to think about it. That said, I've no idea why people here would avoid commenting on a story written up in a mainstream centre-left UK mag like The Independent.

Personally, I don't think the faculty or administration ought to have intervened in this instance unless there were already clear policies in place outlining what sorts of speech will not be tolerated, which does not appear to have been the case here.
 
Last edited:
It's a fairly common move (here and elsewhere) to address the source of the story rather than the content. So long as you can label the story as partisan manufactured controversy you can avoid having to think about it. That said, I've no idea why people here would avoid commenting on a story written up in a mainstream centre-left UK mag like The Independent.

Yes, I'm well aware of that, in fact I expect it to happen however I'm not inclined to limit my cites to "approved" sources. All attacking the political slant of a publication means is someone was unable to denounce the event in question as a hoax, so they use this as a last-ditch attempt to voice their displeasure at a story that makes them uncomfortable and runs contrary to their preferred world view.

Of course, I tried to blow holes in that Daily Mail story before I posted it.

Here's the story in The Gettysburgian, the student newspaper, where they attempt a little damage control.

Here's the YAF calling out the college and accusing them of spouting untruths.

Do we know who's telling the truth here? of course not and we probably never will.

The whole point being, of course, that characterizing woke with an overly simplistic slogan like "If you say racism and bigotry are BAD, you are woke in the right's opinion" is on the foolish side when there's plenty of examples of the woke engaging in the behavior they claim to oppose.

Guess I'm woke now. :)

Just for fun

Tom MacDonald - "Snowflakes" YouTube link Uh...trigger warning, probably unsafe for work if you're white collar OK if you're blue collar. Possible cultural appropriation, rough language, adult themes.
 
Right wing rags like The Independent...?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ettysburg-college-cis-white-men-b2225109.html

Stay tuned for even more circumstantial ad hominem.

Well, yes, ever since the tory party's favourite FSB agent bought it if not before. It's been a long time since the English Independent has been a campaigning independent newspaper.

Before Lebedev it was Tony O'Reilly's plaything and if you know anything about Ireland you'd know that media owned by the O'Reillys consistently took a hard right line.
 
It's a fairly common move (here and elsewhere) to address the source of the story rather than the content.
When the source of the story is known for fabrication and misleading slants, addressing the source of the story is a good idea. Well, if you want to play a gullible rube on the net, then it's probably better for you to swallow the story whole without considering the source at all.

So long as you can label the story as partisan manufactured controversy you can avoid having to think about it. That said, I've no idea why people here would avoid commenting on a story written up in a mainstream centre-left UK mag like The Independent.

Had you read your link and Stout's link, you would have swiftly come to the conclusion that the source of the story matters greatly to the accuracy of claims made. The fact that you're still feigning confusion about the source of a story mattering demonstrates that you have not actually read the links. As usual.
 
Had you read your link and Stout's link, you would have swiftly come to the conclusion that the source of the story matters greatly to the accuracy of claims made.
The claims made in The Independent seemed to align with those from the student paper. Not that I expect you to address any of them, but it might be fun for a change.
 
Last edited:

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom