Talga TLG - General Discussion, page-179

@Skronkman Mate when I first replied I thought your 'woke nutters' comment was tongue in cheek.

Some people lately are particularly fixated on the Sami 'wokeness' which seems like a slightly unusual beef to have considering it's almost a solved problem? Even if you really don't like them, if the concern is risk then IMO there's plenty of other risks that carry more weight at this point.

And on the topic of 'wokeness", your admission about how you use the word is hard to ignore. Specifically using it as a pejorative because it's the "only form of the word that makes any sense" bit. In a nutshell, isn't that your misconception? Yes 'woke' is often used as a negative concept, but it didn't begin that way. Is used to be a good thing.

The original definition meant something along the lines of having a sense of understanding for social or political injustice. It represented thought ideas that were empathetic, socially aware, equitable, etc. There is nothing inherently bad about that. For one reason or another the meaning has warped and to other people it's primarily used as a label to slander people. Instead some use 'wokeness' to describe people or behaviors that are virtue-signalling, disruptive, ungrateful, victim complex's, etc.

So the weird thing about your admission is if you think your understanding is the only understanding, then you must not even realize why it works so well as a pejorative in the first place? The reason why the use of 'woke' as a negative carries any weight at all is because it subverts peoples expectations for what the word originally meant! If there was only one way to understand it, where does the controversy come from, why would people debate it? You must have been wondering why some people are reacting poorly, did you think they were just 'irrational"?