Problem is, what you described would be characterized by those who use the terms as “an SJW trying to cancel someone at work.” How dare you tell anyone who might be able to do something about it!
I really can’t see any difference between how a non-racist would act at work and an SJW would act at work. The only difference is that an SJW actively fights, while a non-racist may not. I’d expect both to try and avoid racist crap, and to listen when you let them know that something came off badly.
For part of our training we had to brainstorm ways to integrate anti - racist values into our organization, and one of the suggestions was to make continued anti - racist work an ongoing part of performance evaluations. That would mean setting annual goals around dismantling racism and going through the regular disciplinary process if we fail to follow through on those goals. This would theoretically mean you could get fired for not being woke enough.
I have no idea if Senior Leadership will pick it up, but the employees in my breakout group all seemed to think it would be a great idea. There were other, more pragmatic ideas (clarifying policies for handling reports of racism, for example) but that one stood out to me.
The position being stated is the position of trans people. So you are saying that trans people haven’t not thought out their position–the core position–on the topic.
You’re not a woman. Fine. But you’re also not trans. If you think you have to defer to women, then why don’t you have to defer to trans people? And why is this opinion stated by a small subset of women being taken to be the position of all women?
Again, I point out that most feminists are trans-positive. They see how they were treated as women, and don’t want to do the same thing to other minorities. There is a reason why feminists who are trans exclusionary get a special title, while those who aren’t don’t. They are the exception.
The idea that you, someone who had apparently never heard of the topic before knows more than the people who live every day being trans is ridiculous. I’m not pushing a male position. I’m doing my job as an activist and echoing their position.
Are trans activists sometimes pushy? Sure. What do you think activists are? Feminists are often pushy. MLK was pushy. It’s just what happens when you fight for people’s rights. It’s not remotely an argument that they’re wrong. That they make say it’s unacceptable to be anti-trans is no different than those who say it is unacceptable to be anti-gay or racist. Feeling pressure can just mean that you’re the one behind the times, not that those putting pressure on you are wrong.
I don’t feel sorry for JKR because, when told that her actions were hurting trans people, her reaction was not one of trying to make them feel better. She even admits she could have written “trans rights are human rights” but didn’t. Instead, everything she wrote was all about her. It was all about painting her as the victim. She admits that she didn’t even know anything about the topic until she was doing “research” where she seems to have done it with certain groups, and not actually read anything by actual trans people.
She’s wrong. She doesn’t support trans people, because, if you support someone, you care if you hurt them. You care if you’re going against their greatest desire. You try to find a way to make it where both of you can be happy, like every other feminist, not come up with proof that they and their allies are the real bad guys.
It’s just what always happens.
man: woman is different from us. They must be out to seduce our men to ruin or make us be fathers! They are dangerous. We should dominate them with physical force and push a system where they are inferior to us!
white person: Those black people are different from us. They must be out to get our women! They’re scary. We should enslave them/segregate them to keep us safe!
straight person: those gay people are different from us. They must be out to turn us all gay! They’re dangerous! We’d better discriminate against them and keep them from getting married!
cis person: those trans people are different from us. They must be out to steal our sports/sexually harass us/take over women’s spaces! We’d better deny their gender and keep them segregated from us!
It’s the same game. Just different excuses to not try and work it out so that we can all live together happily. Gotta make the minority into the scary bad guys.
What does continued anti-racist work even mean? I know everyone in my office would be rolling their eyes right out of their heads if we were lumbered with such a requirement for performance reviews.
It seems to me that you are overly invested in “wokeness” and how a “woke” person ought to react. Which is part of my issue with the ideology and why I sometimes characterize it as an “-ism”. It’s down to my nature, I’m sure. I’m instinctively alarmed by anything that smacks of a group-think philosophy that dictates the correct way to feel about a given situation, leaving no room for difference of opinion and thus alienating people who are otherwise allies.
Please could you and @QuickSilver take this to the trans furore thread rather than hijacking this one?
This is the wrong thread for this conversation.
If something like this were inserted into my annual work plan, I don’t know what I would do with it. So it would kind of stress me out! If it does get picked up by your leadership, do you know what your annual goal will be?
I work for a progressive nonprofit, so the employees are hardly representative of your average workplace. One of the examples cited during the exercise was going through a workbook for examining your own racial biases (such things exist), but it could just as easily mean expanding access to services for people of color, facilitating a community conversation (we had like six of them this year - one focused on racial disparities in securing nonprofit resources, from the perspective of local black activists), or working to develop agency policy that is more responsive to racism in the workplace. There are a lot of things people can do to combat racism, some more useful than others.
I just wanted to give a real-life example of what diversity training and diversity initiatives can look like in leftist circles. If we want to talk about what “woke” means, I’m knee-deep in leftist activism on a near-daily basis. I know the best and the worst that it can be. I’ve already expressed my ambivalence toward certain aspects of the “woke” subculture, but I’ve also seen concrete and tangible good come from transforming local systems within the community, forming community alliances and designing programming that better addresses the needs of communities of color. People characterizing “woke” culture as some unilateral evil don’t give a damn about this kind of community work, they refuse to acknowledge that it is useful and good, and they don’t understand what “social justice” even means except on the most abstract level. Their understanding is limited to the lunatics on Twitter.
I’m trying to offer a more nuanced perspective, one that acknowledges the problematic aspects while providing examples of what it is professional “woke” activists actually do. Not that I would ever use that word to describe it.
Not a clue. Maybe I would go through the aforementioned workbook, or maybe I would join the diversity committee (we have 1,000 committees.) It would stress me out, too.
Okay, that makes more sense. Hopefully if they do go ahead with this they’ll help everyone come up with something useful and relevant to do rather than a box ticking exercise.
The thread title is ‘In defence of wokeness’, so your input is very relevant. I’ve seen some examples of diversity training (yes, on Twitter), that seemed pretty terrible, even counterproductive. But the one I did in my previous job was useful. It was to help us working with international colleagues, all about how different cultures do things. I recognised some of the things from the ‘American culture’ section in that ‘White culture’ chart that had a thread a while ago.
Yes, q.v., Trump. But the distance between “irrational zealot” and “lady wearing a joke skirt” is enormous, and you should be able to recognize that. The fact that you repeatedly claim that people like her want to kill Idaho babies does suggest something about irrational zealotry, but not what you think it suggests.
Say, for example, Taika Waititi’s portrayal of Hitler in his film Jojo Rabbit?
IMHO, “wokeness” and “political correctness” are just means to “weaponize” outrage. The message is that if you say or do or represent something that doesn’t fall within certain parameters, then you are at risk to be shouted down, fired from your job, boycotted and harassed.
IMHO it’s bullshit when they say that a movie like Blazing Saddles, Tropic Thunder, or Jojo Rabbit for that matter can’t be made today because people might get “offended”. Especially when those movies are making a satirical commentary about the very thing people are offended by.
Even if they remade The Dukes of Hazzard with the idiotic Confederate Flag shit, I’d consider two responses:
and–that’s a lie, I wouldn’t even come close to considering that second response.
If octopus looked at that woman and was like, “seriously, asshole, you’re gonna make light of mass murder?” I might agree with him. I certainly wouldn’t think that opinion was ridiculous.
It’s his incredible lack of perspective that depicts her as literally wanting to murder babies and torture JK Rowling to death that’s so staggeringly out of touch with reality, and indeed so much closer to the rhetoric of real-world tyrants than a pop-art skirt could ever hope to be.
Whenever people say this, I wonder if they even watch TV, movies or comedy today. Entertainment remains as provocative as ever. In the “racially charged satire” department, Sorry to Bother You comes to mind. That film was so popular that people were complaining that it didn’t get nominated for an Oscar.
ETA: I might be confusing the Oscar nominee kerfuffle with Black KKKlansman, another popular racially charged film. See, there are so many I can’t keep them all straight.
The trick is to remake Dukes of Hazzard with Johnny Knoxville, Steve Stifler and Jessica Simpson so the Confederate Flag on the roof of a Dodge Charger is the least idiot thing in the movie.
No. I have an issue with folks who wear imagery of Mao and Che and would also unironically exclaim that free speech is hate speech and have issue with others wearing what they choose or saying what they’d like. I’m sure that woman has no issue silencing those she disagrees with.
I don’t want to silence anyone. I don’t care what people have to say. I care when people use wokeness or social justiceness or other insidious forms of manipulation in order to mobilize mobs to silence people and deprive them of their fundamental rights.
The show “Black-ish” is racially provocative too. Hilariously so. It makes “All in the Family” look like “Barney and Friends.”
Of course you’re sure of that. You make up all kinds of things in your head to be sure of, without any evidence to support them. It’s something akin to conspiracy theory, but not exactly the same thing.
Disagreeable people also get paid more.
Their goals don’t change. Everything is simply a “step in the right direction”
This post doesn’t seem any more meaningful. At least @Velocity post points out a very noticeable phenomenon.
But that’s not “true” leftism. true lefitsm is all about achieving a country run on the principals of love and fairness and shit like that. The fact that they are trying to achieve this through doxxing, censorship, and discrimination are all necessary evils in the pursuit of paradise.
I’m pretty sure the cultural revolution actually happened, it is not a hypothetical.
Pretty much any ideology taken to an extreme leads to hell on earth. Men and women of good faith should stand against extremism whether from the right or the left. Instead we see this attitude that the best way of fighting extreme right ideology is with extreme left ideology.
A ton more. As a manager, I very much appreciate this training. It improves your interaction and relations with everyone, especially subordinates, it makes you seem wiser (or at least I have felt wiser) and it enhances your authority when you seem to know where the moral and ethical lines are (because you just took a 20 hour class on where the moral and ethical lines are. it’s almost like a self help class that you get paid for attending.
The SJW has a hair trigger on accusations of racism, sexism, etc. What a normal person would perceive as racism is different from what a SJW might perceive as racist.
How did they think they would measure that? And if there is racism in your organization, why haven’t they dismantled it already?
Holy shit. That is nothing like the diversity training I get. We sometimes get maybe one speaker who thinks that white man is the devil and once we get that speaker out of the way, we talk about things like mentoring, inappropriate speech/behavior from clients, etc.