1 1
winsor

Woke is a Joke

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Actually I do have some Native American gens via the Oklahoma Hutchings apparently.

What is also apparent, is that you don’t know the the definition of expatriate.

Oh I do. But I didn't want to point how you are wrong as usual. I was born in Toronto, Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, brenthutch said:

You must have a guilty conscience.  I never said YOU were an expatriate.

Ah, so in your response to me, exactly which European expatriates bloviating did you try and reference? Is this a large group that often causes problems? I rarely hear about his on the news, maybe you can point me to some examples?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, brenthutch said:

https://southpark.cc.com/video-clips/q6xm2c/south-park-the-canadians-of-europe

I think this ties up the European/Canadian nexus quite nicely 
 

I doubt you are able to point out Denmark on an unmarked map, considering many of your fellow countrymen cannot find the US on a map.

Maybe if it was on a cartoon first?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/17/2021 at 12:19 PM, SkyDekker said:

I doubt you are able to point out Denmark on an unmarked map, considering many of your fellow countrymen cannot find the US on a map.

Maybe if it was on a cartoon first?

Having lived in Europe for more than a half a decade and have been in 15+ countries, I’ll take my chances. From Lithuania to Spain to Scotland to Turkey and everything in between I think I have Europe covered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Having lived in Europe for more than a half a decade and have been in 15+ countries, I’ll take my chances. From Lithuania to Spain to Scotland to Turkey and everything in between I think I have Europe covered.

5 years spread over 15 countries averages 4 months per country. Yeah I am sure you are a true expert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

5 years spread over 15 countries averages 4 months per country. Yeah I am sure you are a true expert.

 

4 hours ago, olofscience said:

How long do schoolchildren spend studying percentages?

 

10 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

It averages :rofl::rofl:

Thats some funny s*#t.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All you guys (and it's guys here on this forum) who think woke is a joke -- how much of it is because you find that it means that your opinion isn't listened for and respected anymore?

Now, consider how that's the reality since, well, forever, for women and minorities. They had to earn their place at the table by being better than any of the men -- after all, as long as you could point to how one of the usuals was more qualified in one point, that made the rest irrelevant.

The thing is, that depends on your opinion mattering. And it no longer matters in many contexts, any more than mine matters.

If you're still working, at the next mixed-gender and mixed-race meeting, actively count the number of times people are interrupted in the meeting. Then look and see who's interrupting, and who's being interrupted. In most cases (though certainly not all), it'll be an alpha male doing the interrupting. And it won't be an alpha male being interrupted.

Wendy P.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wmw999 said:

All you guys (and it's guys here on this forum) who think woke is a joke -- how much of it is because you find that it means that your opinion isn't listened for and respected anymore?

My opinion on what?  Respected where?  Your question above is vague to me and hence difficult to answer.  Pretty much anyone can find a place where their opinions are heard and respected, such as within their own choir. In my circumstance;  a confidence in my own viewpoints does not depend on a consensus of my own viewpoints. If I needed to feel a constant warm & fuzzy affirmation from this forum, as an example, then I wouldn't be posting right-of-centre political commentary here.

I would find it curious if you're equating an 'alpha' personality with poor basic etiquette (such as interrupting others in conversation). I don't see those traits as synonymous and it's regrettable (as a reflection on those individuals, not you) if you have noticed it differently. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, metalslug said:

I would find it curious if you're equating an 'alpha' personality with poor basic etiquette (such as interrupting others in conversation). I don't see those traits as synonymous and it's regrettable (as a reflection on those individuals, not you) if you have noticed it differently. 

The two aren't equal, but are related.  "Alphas" see their opinion as more important, and more relevant, than other people's.  Hence, interrupting some beta when he (or she) is talking is not poor etiquette; it is simply a timesaving feature that improves the quality of the meeting (in their eyes.)

Consider having a meeting with several other people including your CEO.  When he makes a noise like he's about to speak, all other conversation generally stops - because since his opinion will be the one that's most important after the meeting, his opinion IS more relevant.  Many people (and 99% of the time they are male) value their own opinions as much as others value that CEO's opinion.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, metalslug said:

My opinion on what?  Respected where?  Your question above is vague to me and hence difficult to answer.  Pretty much anyone can find a place where their opinions are heard and respected, such as within their own choir. 

That's exactly the point. For some people 'their choir' is the dominant ruling class of society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, billvon said:

The two aren't equal, but are related.  "Alphas" see their opinion as more important, and more relevant, than other people's.  Hence, interrupting some beta when he (or she) is talking is not poor etiquette; it is simply a timesaving feature that improves the quality of the meeting (in their eyes.)

This

Wendy P.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, airdvr said:

This too shall pass. 

This too shall become part of our culture - and yes, then pass.  Remember back when Kirk kissing a black woman was a big deal?  Or when the first sitcom showed a woman living with a gay man?  Or when Rosa Parks got everyone's knickers in a twist?

None of those things even blip the radar any more.  If you showed 99.9% of the people today that Star Trek episode they'd say "uh . . OK.  So what?"

Today the big stinks are over transgender people and nonbinary people.  In 30 years no one will care who changes their gender to what, and no one will be confused trying to figure out which bathroom to go to.

Quote

I don't think Woke and Capitalism are going to play nice together.

They have before; they will again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, billvon said:

The two aren't equal, but are related.  "Alphas" see their opinion as more important, and more relevant, than other people's.  Hence, interrupting some beta when he (or she) is talking is not poor etiquette; it is simply a timesaving feature that improves the quality of the meeting (in their eyes.)

Consider having a meeting with several other people including your CEO.  When he makes a noise like he's about to speak, all other conversation generally stops - because since his opinion will be the one that's most important after the meeting, his opinion IS more relevant.  Many people (and 99% of the time they are male) value their own opinions as much as others value that CEO's opinion.

I agree with most of this, but I also think it's a very manageable 'problem'. A person's opinion is only as important as the weight that you give it, not that they do. Hearing and respecting other's opinions does not necessarily imply adopting their opinions, people are still entitled to disagree and it's generally a democratic outcome. 

Within a formal workplace, as you have said, the CEO is the most important voice. No problem there. Within other formalised meetings there is typically a moderator or chair that assigns equal time for speaking. If alpha's dominate then that's a failure of moderation. Consider a session of parliament during 'question time'; pretty much every person present is an alpha type and yet the speaker can usually moderate fair time and evict repeat transgressors. In less formal social settings, water will seek it's own level; don't associate with alphas if they make you uncomfortable, there's a wide world of other people out there to replace them. Five 'Trumpians' loudly returning from Nascar in their monster-truck somehow make it work between them and still want to see each other next week.

If you are actually are asking alphas to 'not be alpha' then that's outright hypocritical, since you seem to favour the woke movement's right to behave in any way they choose and expect others to get onboard with that and to be referenced according the fantasy names and fantasy genders that they have chosen for themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, metalslug said:

Within a formal workplace, as you have said, the CEO is the most important voice. No problem there. Within other formalised meetings there is typically a moderator or chair that assigns equal time for speaking. If alpha's dominate then that's a failure of moderation. Consider a session of parliament during 'question time'; pretty much every person present is an alpha type and yet the speaker can usually moderate fair time and evict repeat transgressors.

I have been to such talks.  At trade conferences, for example, they will do a round table discussion with (for example) me and four other people from similar companies, talking about wireless power or something.  There's a moderator and an audience and time slots and someone who chooses who in the audience gets to ask the next question (generally decided by the person walking the microphone around.)

But that's the exception, not the rule.  Most meetings I've been to in my life have a loose agenda, and the person who called it tries to run it so as to stick somewhat to the agenda.  When I was running such meetings it was always a bit of a struggle to get more input from the people who were more timid, while keeping the louder more alpha types from taking all the time.  The closer-knit the team was the easier it was to manage, because after a while everyone knew Clara had a lot to contribute even if she was quiet and didn't volunteer much - and they'd let her talk, and ask her about the issue when it was her area of expertise.

But the worst were larger meetings where the people didn't know each other, and who were higher ranked.  One of the "alphas" would always try to take over, and if it was my meeting I'd have to find more and more creative ways of "let's get back to the purpose of the meeting, which is X."  Evicting people wasn't an option there, because you need their buy-in for whatever you're doing.  A director isn't going to be able to evict the Chief Scientist just because he goes on and on about his latest pet peeve.  And yes, in his mind he really WAS making good use of his time, educating people on how stupid Ericsson's decision on frequency allocation was.

That, I think, is a problem for a lot of people.  It can be managed, but it's still a problem.

Quote

If you are actually are asking alphas to 'not be alpha' then that's outright hypocritical

If "alpha" means "tries to take charge and dominate the discussion" then yes, I ask them to not be alpha for the period of the meeting.

If "alpha" is a descriptor they like to refer to themselves by, then I am just fine with that.

Quote

you seem to favour the woke movement's right to behave in any way they choose and expect others to get onboard with that

Nope.  In such meetings, I'd ask the same of them - to participate when it made sense, and when it didn't to let other people speak.  From what I've seen, more "woke" people don't have a problem with that. 

("Woke" is in quotes because people here seem to have all sorts of definitions of it.  I am using the common definition of "someone who is aware of prejudice and discrimination around them.")

Quote

and to be referenced according the fantasy names and fantasy genders that they have chosen for themselves

I refer to people by the names they wish to be referred to.  When Natalie got married, I started referring to her by her married name - even though I had known her a long time before that, and I initially got it wrong a lot.  (And even though there was a different name on her birth certificate.)  I referred to Linda as Linda even though she had a different name and different gender on her birth certificate.  I referred to Charles as Chuck, and Pavel as Paul, and Francis as Jake (abbreviation of his middle name) even though, again, those weren't the names on their birth certificates - because that's what they wanted to be called.

I suspect you are exactly the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, billvon said:

I refer to people by the names they wish to be referred to.  When Natalie got married, I started referring to her by her married name - even though I had known her a long time before that, and I initially got it wrong a lot.  (And even though there was a different name on her birth certificate.)  I referred to Linda as Linda even though she had a different name and different gender on her birth certificate. 

I suspect you are exactly the same way.

We've beaten this one to death already, but I'll venture one more go; There's definitely a social and legal context to this, IMO.  People legally change their names for many reasons over a lifetime and I'm more interested in the name on their passport or equivalent current legal document than the name on their birth certificate. Try entering a courtroom and demand that the court refer to you by a name other than that. Several countries require one to produce a certificate (digital or otherwise) of their Covid vaccination status prior to certain kinds of services or public access, and a verified name on that certificate becomes rather important.  In very informal social settings, if someone wants to be called something else; yes, I'd be OK with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, metalslug said:

We've beaten this one to death already, but I'll venture one more go; There's definitely a social and legal context to this, IMO.  People legally change their names for many reasons over a lifetime and I'm more interested in the name on their passport or equivalent current legal document than the name on their birth certificate. Try entering a courtroom and demand that the court refer to you by a name other than that.

If it's a question of legal name?  I agree; if they are uniquely identifying a defendant, for example, they would use their legal name.  Paul becomes Pavel and I become William.

But that's not usually enforced unless it has to be.  The last four or five times I served on jury duty, the lawyer doing voir dire asked me "do you prefer William or Bill?"  And they were fine with Bill.  I imagine if I said "call me Bud" or even "call me Cindy" they'd look at me funny - but call me that.

(And maybe dismiss me based on that . . . that might be an idea for next time . . .)

Quote

In very informal social settings, if someone wants to be called something else; yes, I'd be OK with that.

Me too.  For me, that includes the people I work and skydive with.  I imagine if you met that guy named Jake at your business and you looked up his paperwork and said "sorry, your legal name is Francis and I am going to call you that" you would likely get away with it - but I have a feeling you'd still call him Jake, because that's what he prefers.  And with all his colleagues calling him a different name, you'd be sowing a fair amount of confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, metalslug said:

There's definitely a social and legal context to this, IMO.  People legally change their names for many reasons over a lifetime and I'm more interested in the name on their passport or equivalent current legal document than the name on their birth certificate. Try entering a courtroom and demand that the court refer to you by a name other than that. 

So? People can legally change to what you called their fantasy gender and have it on their current legal documents. So ultimately they can get the courts to refer to them by whatever name and gender they want. And given the amount of emphasis you just put on the legality of the process, I'm going to have to assume you're totally fine with that.

Quote

In very informal social settings, if someone wants to be called something else; yes, I'd be OK with that.

Lol, really? Only a very informal setting? So if you're in meeting at work you would insist on calling your boss Jonathan even if you knew he hated it and preferred Jon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, billvon said:

...I refer to people by the names they wish to be referred to.  When Natalie got married, I started referring to her by her married name - even though I had known her a long time before that, and I initially got it wrong a lot.  (And even though there was a different name on her birth certificate.)  I referred to Linda as Linda even though she had a different name and different gender on her birth certificate.  I referred to Charles as Chuck, and Pavel as Paul, and Francis as Jake (abbreviation of his middle name) even though, again, those weren't the names on their birth certificates - because that's what they wanted to be called.

I suspect you are exactly the same way.

^This.

I volunteer at a local cat rescue.

Due to some really good luck (and some excellent planning by the leadership), we now have a Veterinarian on staff. It makes a lot of things a lot easier.

When I first met her, one of my first questions was "How do you want me to address you?"
She was comfortable with either "Dr Emily" or "Dr Basten". She said something to the effect of "When I was up in Minnesota, everyone called me "Dr Emily", but down in Texas, they were more formal and called me "Dr Basten".

So we agreed that "Dr Emily" was what I would call her.

In the past week or so, I was informed by others that she has changed her mind and does not want to be called "Dr Emily".

I asked her about it and she said that she was generally fine with "Dr Emily", but too many people calling her that were 'forgetting' the "Dr" part and just calling her "Emily", and she wasn't ok with that.

So we agreed that, moving forward, I will call her "Dr Basten".
And I'm fine with that.

She's a fully trained and qualified veterinarian. 
She's earned the right to be addressed as she wishes.

Out of courtesy and respect, I'll address pretty much anyone however they wish, within reason.

My legal name is "Joseph", I generally go by Joe. Either is fine.
don't like the nickname "Joey" and those who use that are so informed.

Its kinda funny, that some assholes then taunt me by calling me that. 
I wonder which side of this argument they would fall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

^This.

I volunteer at a local cat rescue.

Due to some really good luck (and some excellent planning by the leadership), we now have a Veterinarian on staff. It makes a lot of things a lot easier.

When I first met her, one of my first questions was "How do you want me to address you?"
She was comfortable with either "Dr Emily" or "Dr Basten". She said something to the effect of "When I was up in Minnesota, everyone called me "Dr Emily", but down in Texas, they were more formal and called me "Dr Basten".

So we agreed that "Dr Emily" was what I would call her.

In the past week or so, I was informed by others that she has changed her mind and does not want to be called "Dr Emily".

I asked her about it and she said that she was generally fine with "Dr Emily", but too many people calling her that were 'forgetting' the "Dr" part and just calling her "Emily", and she wasn't ok with that.

So we agreed that, moving forward, I will call her "Dr Basten".
And I'm fine with that.

She's a fully trained and qualified veterinarian. 
She's earned the right to be addressed as she wishes.

Out of courtesy and respect, I'll address pretty much anyone however they wish, within reason.

My legal name is "Joseph", I generally go by Joe. Either is fine.
don't like the nickname "Joey" and those who use that are so informed.

Its kinda funny, that some assholes then taunt me by calling me that. 
I wonder which side of this argument they would fall.

Hi Joe,

Great post; I could not have put it better.

Re:  My legal name is "Joseph", I generally go by Joe. Either is fine.
don't like the nickname "Joey" and those who use that are so informed.

I am legally Gerald; a name that I truly despise.  I am 'almost' always called Jerry; my preferred name.  I do not like to be called Jer; I really despise that one.

All of you are warned.  ;P

'Jerry' Baumchen

PS)  I do my very best to call someone just what they prefer to be called.  I would consider that just being respectful.  

PPS)  I named both of my children ( with my then wife's approval ) with names that are very difficult to turn into nicknames.  Their names are short, simple & very distinct.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1