"Taliswoman"...

[DaveC426913]

Ummmmm not exactly a one to one match

Part of problem, male segment 1 syllable, female replacement, 3 syllables (polite version). Non polite version would never fly

And yet, the "World Wide Web" (three syllables) has the contraction WWW (nine syllables) - so....

 

[Michael 345]

According to Google, "woke" means "alert to injustice in society, especially racism."

I'm gonna say that's a good thing.

Poor ol' woke was tortured in meaning such

Let it go back to meaning no longer asleep

 

[Michael 345]

And yet, the "World Wide Web" (three syllables) has the contraction WWW (nine syllables) - so....

Poor comparison
Contraction? Think not
WWW more a acronym

Problem, getting back to gynaecology, it is not a name of the part, and the breath of its meaning encompasses more than just the diseases which affect said part

 

[RainbowSingularity]

Poor ol' woke was tortured in meaning such

Let it go back to meaning no longer asleep

i see that "woke" has now been hijacked by the alt right conspiracy types to mean aware of the conspiracy's
lol

 

[Michael 345]

i see that "woke" has now been hijacked by the alt right conspiracy types to mean aware of the conspiracy's
lol

Hey Jack Lenny woke up

So he knows about the conspiracies?

No he now knows women want to be treated equal to men

Oh. Is that a thing?

Woke up Jack

 

[Tiassa]

Non polite version would never fly

See, it's not impossible that we might occasionally fail to disagree.

 

[foghorn]

Positive dumbing down is simplifying important complex scientific matters so that more people can understand them, for example. Trying to be PC with a word that doesn't deserve it is just... dumb.

In one way perhaps. But, what about young people seeing these words for the first time and then spreading them so they become the norm, true history forgotten or conveniently 'never was' ??
I like the way you consigned ''dumbing down'' to conplex scientific matters. If the word 'seems' to fit elsewhere, use it. If it gets others ruffled so be it.

 

[Michael 345]

so they become the norm, true history forgotten or conveniently 'never was

Anything on the internet will likely have a few to numerous copies around

Something at the edge of memory may be passed down

After a number of passings it maybe at a stage where a further passing could be it's last

Salvation may arrive, in what would be in the future the equivalent of the newspaper under the carpet



How much old, over 200 years old, history could survive on these?

 

[foghorn]

The old written in silicon stone metalloid.

 

[sideshowbob]

I think there's an argument for that, referring to it as a possibly transient situation rather than a defining characteristic, etc.

I think emphasizing temporary-ness makes it worse, not better. It's like saying, "It's temporary. Get over it."

And they also refer to "people experiencing disabilities" - so I doubt that they've thought it through.

 

[sideshowbob]

According to Google, "woke" means "alert to injustice in society, especially racism."

According to Wikipedia, "By 2021, woke had become used almost exclusively as a pejorative...." - i.e. people showing off their superior wokeness.

 

[exchemist]

Ummmmm not exactly a one to one match

Part of problem, male segment 1 syllable, female replacement, 3 syllables (polite version). Non polite version would never fly

Twationary?

 

[DaveC426913]

I think emphasizing temporary-ness makes it worse, not better. It's like saying, "It's temporary. Get over it."

The point is that they are "People. With. A condition."; not "A condition".

 

[Michael 345]

Twationary?

OKKKay

I like Twationary

Merriam-Webster's Twationary. Ummmmm has a nice ring to it


booktopia

Make that "Shakespeare's Twationary"

 

[DaveC426913]

According to Wikipedia, "By 2021, woke had become used almost exclusively as a pejorative...." - i.e. people showing off their superior wokeness.

It has. But that doesn't mean the dig is retroactive.

You didn't quote the other part: "Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities such as sexism..."


i.e. Just because a bunch of people have decided that the term "woke" means "ego complex" to them, does not mean that people who are alert to social and racial injustice have an "ego complex".

The perjorative is essentially a strawman (or poisoning the well, if you prefer).

 

[sideshowbob]

The point is that they are "People. With. A condition."; not "A condition".

My point is that emphasizing a "temporary condition" doesn't help the homeless at all. It sounds (to them) like an excuse for doing nothing about it.

 

[Michael 345]

See, it's not impossible that we might occasionally fail to disagree.

I could (can) go with occasional disagree

To many would become bland, boring

Keep occasional

 

[sideshowbob]

You didn't quote the other part: "Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities such as sexism..."

I quoted the part about the most recent usage. If Chaucer used it differently, that isn't really relevant.

The perjorative is essentially a strawman (or poisoning the well, if you prefer).

And yet it is the "almost exclusive" usage.

 

[DaveC426913]

My point is that emphasizing a "temporary condition" doesn't help the homeless at all.

I agree - inasmuch as I think Sarkus' "temporary condition" theory is wrong.

My assertion - that they are people first and homeless second - is the correct reason. I'm pretty sure that will be borne out if we could find a source.

 

[DaveC426913]

If Chaucer used it differently, that isn't really relevant.

"Beginning in the 2010s" is pretty relevant.


But let's recap where this started:

In post 16, Michael says he wishes the "woke" people would "go back to sleep".

Who exactly is he wishing that on?* The people who apparently have an ego complex? Or the people who are alert to social and racial injustice?
*(we don't need to ask Michael specifically. This is an "all of us" issue.)

So it raises some questions:
Is the perjorative use real? Does it apply to real people? Are there people who identify as having superior egos?

Or is it a label, made by third parties, and slyly referring to that shadowy, hypothetical "they"? Is it nothing more than a way to invalidate being alert to social and racial injustice? Is it a way to dilute the real world problems of injustice by drowning it in the semantic discussion of weasel-words?