Poll of the Day > I think both "woke" and "anti-woke" have gone too far.

(+) Yeah! (+)

I understand that pandering is stupid. I have no interest in the 2016 Ghostbusters movie, for example.
But I find that there seems to be an increasing crowd of people who think that just because a movie has a female main character or person of color that makes it "woke".
I watched the new movie in the Predator franchise yesterday "Prey" and I enjoyed it. It would probably be my 3rd favorite in the franchise. There was zero "wokeness" to this movie.
In the 80s nobody said Ripley from Aliens was woke or that the movie was pandering. Prey should be no different.
I think people should try to have a more level head going into these things.

Eh, some pundits probably thought it was "woke" when studios stopped casting white actors as Native Americans in Western movies.

If you dont pay attention to politics then you just get to judge movies based on their content.

It's kinda dope, and it helped me realize that the MCU is actually pretty garbage

Vampire_Chicken posted...

Eh, some pundits probably thought it was "woke" when studios stopped casting white actors as Native Americans in Western movies.

they thought it was "woke" when people started going "hey, uh, maybe blackface ain't cool"

They still think it's "woke" when people go "hey maybe blackface isn't cool."

Unless it's Trudeau, then they all agree that it's terrible and consider it to be a good reason to remove him from office.

If a movie is sometimes bad or has a character in it who maybe didn't need to be a black woman, thats not really a problem. Oh boohoo GB2016 sucked, get over it.

But the "anti woke" crowd honestly seems to be trying to drive minorities or political messaging out of films entirely, which is an issue on a whole different scale.

Prey has a huge amount of "anti woke" buzz around it when you could change the protagonist into a teenage boy and the film would be almost completely unaltered aside from that. That tells me pretty much everything I need to know about the motives.

DietSchmendrake posted...

If you dont pay attention to politics then you just get to judge movies based on their content.

It's kinda dope, and it helped me realize that the MCU is actually pretty garbage

Oh this is an unrelated thing but why the fuck has the MCU become the bogeyman of woke films when the entire first two phases were headlined by white men.

because there was like one character who you saw for like a second that might have been gay/trans in an iron man movie from 20 years ago

Blightzkrieg posted...

That tells me pretty much everything I need to know about the motives.

It's not even necessarily a misogyny thing. I expect more of it is "this is what the libs want so we oppose it."

Now all we need to do is organize a campaign to advertise how much the libs like breathing, and the problem will solve itself.

If it makes sense with the plot, then I am fine with it.

If it is something like "we need to cast a female James Bond because reasons", then it probably won't work.

Also:

Ferarri619 posted...

In the 80s nobody said Ripley from Aliens was woke or that the movie was pandering.

Probably because Ripley was well established in the 70's movie Alien and made sense to show up in the sequel.

hera posted...

because there was like one character who you saw for like a second that might have been gay/trans in an iron man movie from 20 years ago

It was a little ham fisted in Iron Man 3 when the kid helped Tony and he was like "thanks Kid" and the kid was like "Kid is just my nickname, my given name is Joe Robin Biden".

the forests are all burning down, were facing the worst droughts in recorded history, no one can afford the good bagels, and these potato heads are spending all their time outraged that there arent enough cis white guys in their game and show

Just make the characters good and not token minorities, they need more than their race/gender/sexuality

DietSchmendrake posted...

If you dont pay attention to politics then you just get to judge movies based on their content.

Yep, I can speak from personal experience that it makes things so much more enjoyable.

Ignoring the world's problems does tend to be more pleasant than taking an interest in them, yes.

adjl posted...

Ignoring the world's problems does tend to be more pleasant than taking an interest in them, yes.

Its just movies lmao

It's quite a bit more than just movies, but again, I can see the appeal in burying your head in the sand and ignoring that.

woke isn't really that big of a problem to me, because it isn't as 'universal' as all the fearmongerers would like you to believe. sensitivity training can seem pretty stupid in the workplace, but I'd rather see it taken seriously than deal with a bunch of fucking assholes in the workplace. you can still communicate forcefully and with weight without being offensive. therefore, I really don't care about the 'anti-woke' at all, since they're basically just arguing for the right to say the N-word in the workplace, at the end of the day.

I can still see offensive movies and comedy if I want. I think a 'woke' environment for work/school/professional settings is vastly preferable to simply enabling assholes to be assholes. I'll take 'woke' over 'anti-woke' any day, because the 'anti-wokists' are far more dangerous, and far more inclined to force their perspective on everyone.

Adjl is just salty that I didnt want to read his novel lol

it's pretty funny that all your examples are movies. just ignore the bad movies and watch some good ones. that's how life has always been. like, 'oh no, society made a film I don't enjoy'. like, great - society will hopefully be able to wipe your bum for you soon too.

ReturnOfFa posted...

I can still see offensive movies and comedy if I want. I think a 'woke' environment for work/school/professional settings is vastly preferable to simply enabling assholes to be assholes. I'll take 'woke' over 'anti-woke' any day, because the 'anti-wokists' are far more dangerous, and far more inclined to force their perspective on everyone.

Lol, nice job contradicting yourself.

Muscles posted...

Lol, nice job contradicting yourself.

failing to see the contradiction there

yeah there's no contradiction there lmao

Corporations engaging in "wokeness" is just a byproduct of capitalism. Anti-wokers need to grow the fuck up; if you don't think a product appeals to you for reasons as shallow as "it has a woman main character" "it has a poc supporting character" "it has a gay/trans background character," don't buy it. Creators are under no obligation to exclusively make products that only appeal to whiny bigots.

adjl posted...

It's not even necessarily a misogyny thing. I expect more of it is "this is what the libs want so we oppose it."

Reactionary behavior, yes.

Yeah right wing capitalism lovers missing the fact that companies are going woke because they think it will make them more money

Muscles posted...

Lol, nice job contradicting yourself.

I don't see it. Explain further?

*edit, surprised a couple of people backed me lmfao

Zareth posted...

Yeah right wing capitalism lovers missing the fact that companies are going woke because they think it will make them more money

Nah. They tend to listen more to people who don't even consume the type of media that the people on Twitter are complaining about. Like the Valhalla burn victim where only one person complained about it and were clearly trolling anyway.

DietSchmendrake posted...

Adjl is just salty that I didnt want to read his novel lol

Okay.

Zareth posted...

Yeah right wing capitalism lovers missing the fact that companies are going woke because they think it will make them more money

"If you don't like something, vote with your wallet and encourage others to do the same and let the free market decide whether or not it's worth listening to you. Don't call for it to be banned."
"Cancel culture is so horrible!"

Who could possibly have guessed that they didn't actually want the free market to decide that gay people are okay and homophobia isn't and were instead just expecting that they'd get a free pass to be homophobic if they used enough nice-sounding libertarian rhetoric?

ReturnOfFa posted...

I don't see it. Explain further?

*edit, surprised a couple of people backed me lmfao

I'm guessing he's going for "the only reason offensive movies/comedy exist for you to see if you want is because of the anti-wokists you think are dangerous." That's obviously not true, since you can very easily produce offensive material without losing your mind over the existence of a gay protagonist, but I'm pretty sure that's the logic.

Revelation34 posted...

Nah. They tend to listen more to people who don't even consume the type of media that the people on Twitter are complaining about. Like the Valhalla burn victim where only one person complained about it and were clearly trolling anyway.

It's objectively true that companies make these decisions because they think it will make them more money. Whether or not they're correct to think that is sometimes in question, but that is almost always the rationale behind it. Very few corporations (especially large media ones) are actually altruistic enough to do something they expect will cost them money for the sake of what they believe is right.

Watched Prey last night. Was very good. Best Predator movie since the first one.

adjl posted...

I'm guessing he's going for "the only reason offensive movies/comedy exist for you to see if you want is because of the anti-wokists you think are dangerous." That's obviously not true, since you can very easily produce offensive material without losing your mind over the existence of a gay protagonist, but I'm pretty sure that's the logic.

Thanks for the interpretation, hopefully Muscles will back up that explanation just to confirm. Makes sense, I can find it a bit difficult to read between the lines when things aren't directly spelled out.

That's the thing, a lot of the most offensive acts I can think of are semi-associated with other 'woke' acts...like, I find Neil Hamburger to be overall a lot more offensive than Dave Chappelle. Then Neil's associated with Tim Heidecker, whom a lot of people would describe as 'woke', but who has done a lot of super offensive comedy.

People are more offended by Chappelle because he's famous, and the groups he lampoons are larger, generalized groups. I personally find Chappelle's comedy to be less of 'jokes' now; currently it mostly encompasses storytelling with a lot of personal exposition, which, a lot of comedians do. Although I personally find a lot of his material to be what I'd qualify as 'general complaining'. I like my comedy with more jokes.

adjl posted...

I'm guessing he's going for "the only reason offensive movies/comedy exist for you to see if you want is because of the anti-wokists you think are dangerous." That's obviously not true, since you can very easily produce offensive material without losing your mind over the existence of a gay protagonist, but I'm pretty sure that's the logic.

More like "the woke crowd wants to get rid of offensive things, so if you let them take over they would get rid of said offensive things you enjoy"

maybe you shouldn't enjoy white power against the evil gays then

Muscles posted...

More like "the woke crowd wants to get rid of offensive things, so if you let them take over they would get rid of said offensive things you enjoy"

Like I said, I personally find the claim that 'the woke crowd' are looking to eliminate all offensive things to be incorrect or at the very best overinflated.

Woke people are the horniest mfers imaginable

You don't get polyjuice potion erotica written by Marco Rubio

adjl posted...

Ignoring the world's problems does tend to be more pleasant than taking an interest in them, yes.

Politics isn't 'the world's problems' it is usually just people arguing about why their hot take is better than someone else's to help them sleep at night. 99.9% of the time people in politics are just blowing hot air.

It's a complete waste of time just like discussing religion.

ReturnOfFa posted...

Like I said, I personally find the claim that 'the woke crowd' are looking to eliminate all offensive things to be incorrect or at the very best overinflated.

I think too many things are labeled as woke tbh, being accepting of gay people is not woke, being accepting of Trans people is not woke, wanting to silence comedians is woke, wanting to get rid of "offensive" movies/music/whatever is woke.

Muscles posted...

I think too many things are labeled as woke tbh, being accepting of gay people is not woke, being accepting of Trans people is not woke, wanting to silence comedians is woke, wanting to get rid of "offensive" movies/music/whatever is woke.

You're welcome to think that, but you're going to find that you have difficulty communicating on the matter if you use that definition because it doesn't line up very well with how everyone else is using the word. When things are called "woke," it's overwhelmingly because they include diversity or are otherwise more politically correct than the speaker wants them to be, usually with little regard for whether or not it's a genuine example of tokenism making for a less enjoyable piece of media. Attempting to censor offensive content can fall under that umbrella, but it's a very small piece of the overall picture and isn't nearly as common as the anti-PC pearl clutchers like to think it is (outside of stuff that's offensive for the sake of being malicious, in which case it's not being called out for being offensive, it's called out for being malicious).

adjl posted...

You're welcome to think that, but you're going to find that you have difficulty communicating on the matter if you use that definition because it doesn't line up very well with how everyone else is using the word. When things are called "woke," it's overwhelmingly because they include diversity or are otherwise more politically correct than the speaker wants them to be, usually with little regard for whether or not it's a genuine example of tokenism making for a less enjoyable piece of media. Attempting to censor offensive content can fall under that umbrella, but it's a very small piece of the overall picture and isn't nearly as common as the anti-PC pearl clutchers like to think it is (outside of stuff that's offensive for the sake of being malicious, in which case it's not being called out for being offensive, it's called out for being malicious).

A lot of people are accepting of other races/sexualities/genders without being woke, I think it could easily be argued that more people accepting of diversity aren't woke than are given the fact that woke people are a vocal minority. Just because you aren't a bigoted piece of shit doesn't mean you are automatically woke.

Muscles posted...

I think too many things are labeled as woke tbh, being accepting of gay people is not woke, being accepting of Trans people is not woke, wanting to silence comedians is woke, wanting to get rid of "offensive" movies/music/whatever is woke.

See, I can't place all those things in those categories like you. A lot of 'anti-woke' people are Christians that are also into banning "offensive" music. All of the 'woke' and 'non-woke' labelling makes little sense. I agree with your first bit that too many things are labeled as woke, but then you proceed to label a bunch of things. Not saying those labels aren't mostly 90% accurate, but there's a lot of gray area for all of them, so it almost seems contradictory for you to suggest 'too many labels' and then label things.

I'll also point out that an 'anti-woke' Conservative may claim to be accepting of other races/sexualities/genders and then actively vote against their interests, or even against the interests of that Conservative; I'd use banning trans people in the military as an example. So ultimately, the 'anti-woke' label really doesn't matter, and neither do their claims.

Muscles posted...

A lot of people are accepting of other races/sexualities/genders without being woke, I think it could easily be argued that more people accepting of diversity aren't woke than are given the fact that woke people are a vocal minority. Just because you aren't a bigoted piece of shit doesn't mean you are automatically woke.

"Woke" really is just a scary trigger-word here. Sorry, but society has been pushing towards "woke" for decades, especially in places like the workplace. It's simply more efficient in the workplace when people are discouraged from 'joking around' using race/sexuality/gender. You're likely right that a it's a vocal minority that actually identify as 'woke'. However, I think without the buzzword, the majority of people will end up agreeing with general values of 'being woke' - ie respecting people in the workplace, recognizing structural oppression, blah blah blah.

Hope nobody is construing this as an argument, I think it's just a good discussion.

Muscles posted...

A lot of people are accepting of other races/sexualities/genders without being woke, I think it could easily be argued that more people accepting of diversity aren't woke than are given the fact that woke people are a vocal minority. Just because you aren't a bigoted piece of shit doesn't mean you are automatically woke.

Nobody actually uses the word "woke" unironically except to complain about women in their video games, though. Again, however you want to define the word, it's come to be used to describe pretty much any examples of a pro-diversity message in media, almost exclusively by people who want zero pro-diversity messages in their media.

11110111011 posted...

Politics isn't 'the world's problems'

A political opinion is an opinion on the state of society and the world. That's it, and that means politics are indeed "the world's problems." Even the enlightened centrist position of "I don't care about politics" is a political opinion, because it amounts to "I'm okay with the status quo and would rather ignore it than try to change it in any way." Whether or not expressing opinions on the state of society will actually change anything is easy to question, of course, since nice words on the Internet don't do much, but the position you're promoting is one of ignoring the world's problems so you can enjoy consuming media more mindlessly. That is your prerogative, and I quite understand that it's more enjoyable than flailing futilely against issues you can't actually change, but you need to at least recognize that that's what you're doing.

In truth, I fully expect that almost every piece of media you've consumed has had some sort of political message, and there have definitely been politically significant issues at work behind the scenes. You've just chosen not to acknowledge it.

adjl posted...

it's come to be used to describe pretty much any examples of a pro-diversity message in media, almost exclusively by people who want zero pro-diversity messages in their media.

Yep

ReturnOfFa posted...

See, I can't place all those things in those categories like you. A lot of 'anti-woke' people are Christians that are also into banning "offensive" music. All of the 'woke' and 'non-woke' labelling makes little sense. I agree with your first bit that too many things are labeled as woke, but then you proceed to label a bunch of things. Not saying those labels aren't mostly 90% accurate, but there's a lot of gray area for all of them, so it almost seems contradictory for you to suggest 'too many labels' and then label things.

I'll also point out that an 'anti-woke' Conservative may claim to be accepting of other races/sexualities/genders and then actively vote against their interests, or even against the interests of that Conservative; I'd use banning trans people in the military as an example. So ultimately, the 'anti-woke' label really doesn't matter, and neither do their claims.

Censorship from the religious right is just as bad as censorship from the woke liberals, I listen to Rock and Metal music so I know of their stupid bs in that regard. I also know that there are people out there that only claim to be accepting but actually aren't, that doesn't mean there aren't plenty of good people out there that do actually accept others without buying into the woke cancel culture.

ReturnOfFa posted...

"Woke" really is just a scary trigger-word here. Sorry, but society has been pushing towards "woke" for decades, especially in places like the workplace. It's simply more efficient in the workplace when people are discouraged from 'joking around' using race/sexuality/gender. You're likely right that a it's a vocal minority that actually identify as 'woke'. However, I think without the buzzword, the majority of people will end up agreeing with general values of 'being woke' - ie respecting people in the workplace, recognizing structural oppression, blah blah blah.

Hope nobody is construing this as an argument, I think it's just a good discussion.

There is a big difference between that and wanting to cancel Dave Chapelle for some Trans jokes or other "offensive" media. And I think it is a good discussion as well.

adjl posted...

Nobody actually uses the word "woke" unironically except to complain about women in their video games, though. Again, however you want to define the word, it's come to be used to describe pretty much any examples of a pro-diversity message in media, almost exclusively by people who want zero pro-diversity messages in their media.

When I think woke I think of some snotty college kid protesting a comedian or a keyboard warrior trying to push a narrative of white guilt or race/gender swapping for no reason.

white people should feel guilty lol

**edit, and I don't mean in some 'woe is me' way, but taking accountability for real history - any level of denial is infantile. most people are in denial about history, especially Americans.

as for a 'snotty college kid protesting a comedian'...just ignore it. I know this might just be a difference in taste, but I think Dave Chappelle just primarily complains these days as opposed to focusing on comedy. if some 'snotty college kid' wants to protest a comedian, are they not free to? are you not free to ignore them? everyone seems to conflate the stuff that social media pushes at them as 'reality', but you can literally just turn it off and go to a Chappelle show if you like. is he 'cancelled'? are the couple of venue re-schedules that he's dealt with really that different from what the average comedian/band/musician goes through while booking a tour?

ReturnOfFa posted...

white people should feel guilty lol

Trying to make people feel guilty for something they didnt even do (because it happened before they were even born) seems like such a psychotic take to me \_()_/

rexcrk posted...

Trying to make people feel guilty for something they didnt even do (because it happened before they were even born) seems like such a psychotic take to me \_()_/

If I was German, I think I'd be reflective of what my grandparents took part in. I do not consider this psychotic. I am white, so I consider how my ancestors effected the people on the land I live, and it was negatively. I don't need to lash myself or anything, but I'm definitely not going to make the disgusting jokes about natives that I've heard other white people make. Could you imagine a Jewish person asking a German person if they felt guilty for the Holocaust, and the German answering 'no', or just trying to act like someone was 'psychotic' for wishing to discuss it?

I don't know how you process guilt, I don't really think acknowledging guilt is especially arduous.

Most of my native friends definitely don't consider this as something that 'happened before they were even born' because the effects of colonization are still with them and still occurring. Their lands are still being raped, their women still murdered, and the investigations still ignored. As a Canadian, I feel guilty for this, but it's not in whatever way you seem to feel process guilt and feel adverse to it.

It happened in the past! So, so long ago!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saskatoon_freezing_deaths

https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/new-light-on-saskatoons-starlight-tours/

ReturnOfFa posted...

If I was German, I think I'd be reflective of what my grandparents took part in. I do not consider this psychotic. I am white, so I consider how my ancestors effected the people on the land I live, and it was negatively. I don't need to lash myself or anything, but I'm definitely not going to make the disgusting jokes about natives that I've heard other white people make. Could you imagine a Jewish person asking a German person if they felt guilty for the Holocaust, and the German answering 'no', or just trying to act like someone was 'psychotic' for wishing to discuss it?

I don't know how you process guilt, I don't really think acknowledging guilt is especially arduous.

Most of my native friends definitely don't consider this as something that 'happened before they were even born' because the effects of colonization are still with them and still occurring. Their lands are still being raped, their women still murdered, and the investigations still ignored. As a Canadian, I feel guilty for this, but it's not in whatever way you seem to feel process guilt and feel adverse to it.

I get what youre saying but yeah Im not gonna feel bad about something I didnt do.

That doesnt mean Im not going to not feel bad about what has happened, but Im not gonna be like Im such a horrible person because of what someone else did either (especially to try and get Internet Good Boy Points )

rexcrk posted...

I get what youre saying but yeah Im not gonna feel bad about something I didnt do.

That doesnt mean Im not going to not feel bad about what has happened, but Im not gonna be like Im such a horrible person because of what someone else did either

Fair enough that we can get close to on the same page but not quite.

I will say, I don't think ANY 'progressive', self-identifying 'SJW', or 'woke' person would want anyone to consider themself a 'horrible person because of what someone else did'. I think it's the fact that a large segment of the population are in complete denial about how the past transpired - this is why 'progressives' etc are still hammering on about 'white guilt'.

Just putting it out there...

I would far rather deal with someone telling me not to make fun of women and gay people in the workplace.

In contrast to a racist, or sexist or homophobe being given free reign to 'be themselves'. I have dealt with these people in the workplace. I've had them fired. They aren't helpful or productive in the workplace and actively drag down everyone else.

Meanwhile, I can still listen to comedy that makes fun of women and gay people, should I wish.