zlacker

[return to "The Origins of Wokeness"]
1. JumpCr+0v[view] [source] 2025-01-13 15:11:17
>>crbela+(OP)
“Humor is one of the most powerful weapons against priggishness of any sort, because prigs, being humorless, can't respond in kind. Humor was what defeated Victorian prudishness, and by 2000 it seemed to have done the same thing to political correctness.

My younger son likes to imitate voices, and at one point when he was about seven I had to explain which accents it was currently safe to imitate publicly and which not. It took about ten minutes, and I still hadn't covered all the cases.

In 1986 the Supreme Court ruled that creating a hostile work environment could constitute sex discrimination, which in turn affected universities via Title IX. The court specified that the test of a hostile environment was whether it would bother a reasonable person, but since for a professor merely being the subject of a sexual harassment complaint would be a disaster whether the complainant was reasonable or not, in practice any joke or remark remotely connected with sex was now effectively forbidden. Which meant we'd now come full circle to Victorian codes of behavior, when there was a large class of things that might not be said ‘with ladies present.‘“

I’m linking two thoughts the essay doesn’t explicitly connect, but which I think is important to the thesis of why 2010-era cancel culture didn’t get cancelled itself, and that’s its almost autoimmune capacity to cancel comedians.

That said, Graham elides over how cancel culture was renamed “woke.” Was it the left or the right who did this? I suspect the latter, at which point we have to contend with the existence of two mind viruses, the cancel-culture/woke one and the anti-woke totem of the left.

Also, this requires more thought: “publishing online enabled — in fact probably forced — newspapers to switch to serving markets defined by ideology instead of geography. Most that remained in business fell in the direction they'd already been leaning: left.”

Why? And why have right-wing publications failed to gain comparable traction?

◧◩
2. scarfa+rA[view] [source] 2025-01-13 15:36:37
>>JumpCr+0v
> My younger son likes to imitate voices, and at one point when he was about seven I had to explain which accents it was currently safe to imitate publicly and which not

See how much pearl clutching you will get by southern “anti-woke” folks when someone imitates their voice or start saying the only thing they care about is “Gods and Guns”.

FWIW: I was born and raised in southern GA and have only lived in two states my entire life - GA and FL.

They are very sensitive if you talk about their way of life or say anything that can be interpreted as anti-Christian.

◧◩◪
3. kagaku+O91[view] [source] 2025-01-13 18:28:51
>>scarfa+rA
Fundamentalist Christians were the original prigs. It is amusing to see pg try and shoehorn the word on to the social justice movement.
◧◩◪◨
4. svieir+Mm1[view] [source] 2025-01-13 19:23:14
>>kagaku+O91
Puritans predate "Fundamentalists" in the American Christian sense of the term, and if we're just following _this_ line of thought (and no others) the Romans were busy setting Christians on fire for garden parties because they were not willing to conform to what the Empire demanded (worship of the Emperor and acknowledgement of many gods).
[go to top]