Woke culture and its effects on society

[dmgtz96]

...comprimise on you both having your own ethno state, similar to the nazi's

They can both by all means have it by the way, as long as I don't have to live in either of them..

Would probably be the simplest issue to this crap unless the ethno states go to war with one another

 

[Jetflag]

Would probably be the simplest issue to this crap unless the ethno states go to war with one another

so, voluntary racial segregation with a neutrality act basically..

 

[dmgtz96]

I feel like we kept circling around the same points, so had to add some super liberal/radical thoughts to make things spicier. Playing devil's advocate here.

Real talk, if you want to make a more equitable society, you will need serious effort from colleges and employers:

• Ban race from being used in college admissions. Ban names, too. Assign each person a unique ID.
• Ban legacy admissions. These disproportionately benefit affluent white students.
• Place a higher weight on essays and (verifiable) extracurricular activities. Figure out how each applicant to the college could contribute to the campus community.
• Expand corporate recruiting to schools beyond the top tier. Goldman, Morgan Stanley, etc. can get top talent just as well from Historically Black Colleges and Universities. In fact, these changes are already happening.
  • Otherwise, corporations will just inherit the biases made by college admissions officers, as has happened over the previous several decades
• Expand educational and vocational opportunities for low income students in general, including low income white students.
• In job applications, ignore references to race and name.

so, voluntary racial segregation with a neutrality act basically..

This is already kinda happening with black students choosing Historically Black Colleges and Universities over traditionally elite institutions. HBCUs educate most of America's physicians and teachers. It can be argued that it's better to get your education in an environment where you will essentially never encounter microaggressions, are not a token, and never worry about trying to fit in because of your race.

 

[Jetflag]

I feel like we kept circling around the same points, so had to add some super liberal/radical thoughts to make things spicier. Playing devil's advocate here.

Real talk, if you want to make a more equitable society, you will need serious effort from colleges and employers:

• Ban race from being used in college admissions. Ban names, too. Assign each person a unique ID.
• Ban legacy admissions. These disproportionately benefit affluent white students.
• Place a higher weight on essays and (verifiable) extracurricular activities. Figure out how each applicant to the college could contribute to the campus community.
• Expand corporate recruiting to schools beyond the top tier. Goldman, Morgan Stanley, etc. can get top talent just as well from Historically Black Colleges and Universities. In fact, these changes are already happening.
  • Otherwise, corporations will just inherit the biases made by college admissions officers, as has happened over the previous several decades
• Expand educational and vocational opportunities for low income students in general, including low income white students.
• In job applications, ignore references to race and name.

Actually I would deem most of these ideas significantly Anti-woke and not even all that radical..

they but all revolve around fairness.. not equity/equality of outcome

* ban race from being used in college admission: yup. 100% agree. the way to get rid of racism is to make it utterly and completely irrelevant, instead of Woke culture's hyper-focus on it.
* ban legacy admissions: again 100% agreed. fully on board with Gordon Ramsey on this. Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps.. no depending on daddy for admission.
* Place a higher weight on essays and (verifiable) extracurricular activities: too loose of a concept íf your goal is equity. but since i'm not in favor of equity as opposed to freedom and fairness (so the harder you work, which you're free to do or not, the more you earn) i'm in favor
* no problem with that either. the larger the talent pool and more fair the selective procedure the more well placed people you will get at their respective places.
* In favor, though I would like to add to that a uni degree is and shouldn't be the most important thing in life, this is regardless of the type of houshold income someone comes from, society also needs its plumbers
* 100% agreed. and unlike most Wokists, in favor of blind resume's

 

[dmgtz96]

* Place a higher weight on essays and (verifiable) extracurricular activities: too loose of a concept íf your goal is equity. but since i'm not in favor of equity as opposed to freedom and fairness (so the harder you work, which you're free to do or not, the more you earn) i'm in favor

Some country-specific context: In the US, test scores for admissions are only one part of the package.

Schools have applicants write essays to show why they are interested in their school, why they chose their major, and so on. Placing a higher weight on essays lets schools screen for applicants that would be a good fit for the school or that have a direction in life (ex. you want to study English Literature and you're applying for the University of Chicago? cool!). Essays can also be used to screen for unique circumstances, like hardships in life and what the applicant learned. If this sounds vague, check out the Personal Insights page at UC Berkeley.
For extracurricular activities, that can also be vague, but it depends on what the school needs. The cookie-cutter profile is high school student council president that founded a club, which is fine but you don't want a campus full of those students. You also want students with unique interests (ex. good oboe player, star ice hockey player... etc). You also don't want to discriminate against students who worked their way throughout high school.

* In favor, though I would like to add to that a uni degree is and shouldn't be the most important thing in life, this is regardless of the type of houshold income someone comes from, society also needs its plumbers

Exactly, hence why you also need to improve access to vocational opportunities.

 

[Julian Del Agranda]

unlike most Wokists, in favor of blind resume's

Why would most "wokees" not like blind job applications?

It sounds like a good idea to me. Downside is though, that if it comes to a meeting, there might still be judgement based on for example skin color, or the country someone's born in. But at least you get to see a character and charisma too, besides a name on a paper.

 

[Julian Del Agranda]

are you also ok with it

If the playing field is, like you sketched, fair, then yeah, any outcome is the outcome.

There might be differences, biological, pshycological, interests, and what not, that will shine through, and result in (small?) differences in certain jobs/sports, even in a fair playing field.

I don't see the advantage of still altering the 'diversity' balance in that scenario.

 

[dmgtz96]

Why would most "wokees" not like blind job applications?

It sounds like a good idea to me. Downside is though, that if it comes to a meeting, there might still be judgement based on for example skin color, or the country someone's born in. But at least you get to see a character and charisma too, besides a name on a paper.

Probably because that flies in the face of "Diversity & Inclusion" initiatives that are currently trending within corporations.
In practice, I've never heard of anyone explicitly supporting the use of race in job applications, even from my radical woke classmates. I would say affirmative action is, by and large, concerned with college admissions as opposed to job applications.

 

[Jetflag]

Why would most "wokees" not like blind job applications?

It sounds like a good idea to me. Downside is though, that if it comes to a meeting, there might still be judgement based on for example skin color, or the country someone's born in. But at least you get to see a character and charisma too, besides a name on a paper.

because it does not guarantee equality of outcome, which is what the "wokees" want.

it guarantees fairness, which is what the liberal wants.

 

[Jetflag]

Probably because that flies in the face of "Diversity & Inclusion" initiatives that are currently trending within corporations.
In practice, I've never heard of anyone explicitly supporting the use of race in job applications, even from my radical woke classmates. I would say affirmative action is, by and large, concerned with college admissions as opposed to job applications.

no its not. its also in job applications. The company where my wife works for instance, one of the Big Four financially, is actively and openly engaging in it.

 

[Jetflag]

If the playing field is, like you sketched, fair, then yeah, any outcome is the outcome.

There might be differences, biological, pshycological, interests, and what not, that will shine through, and result in (small?) differences in certain jobs/sports, even in a fair playing field.

I don't see the advantage of still altering the 'diversity' balance in that scenario.

helder. i mean, clear. so by what criteria do you measure the unfairness of the scenario you sketched earlier. that of majority old white male CEO's? how did you determine that they must have gotten there via unfair means?

 

[Jetflag]

Exactly, hence why you also need to improve access to vocational opportunities.

One thing that i'm also a proponent of (although i don't think it will be very effective but still, all little bits help,) is a campain to try and get rid of the "stigma" of being working class. I don't know how the US functions on this but up till recently in NL there's this culture where (certain) parents are "sad" that their kid turns out to be far more of a handyman/practical type, then an intellectual type.

the shortage (and hence market demand) of craftsmen/women has somewhat eliviated that stigma in recent years though.

the drywaller I hired to fix my bathroom out earns me hourly twofold over lol.

 

[Hensmon]

@jetflag been thinking about this more and I'm still confused at which men exactly are the ones shouldering the burden of the woke soap opera. If left-leaning males like myself are shielded from the idealogical pressures due to a natural affinity with it's ideas - as you suggested I was when I went unscathed at my left-leaning university - then are you saying that instead it's the right-leaning white males who are the one's susceptible to the feeling's of victimisation, discrimination and pressures, which then lead to their depression/suicide?

Wouldn't the opposite be true? It's clearly right-wing males who are more likely to reject the ideas of woke culture and therefore reject the pressures that supposedly come with it. If someone were to say 'white males are oppressive', their response is that's stupid or inaccurate. How does that rejection then translate to depression if they believe the sentiment and rhetoric to be false? There is no burden they shoulder emotionally because they don't believe it to begin with. Wouldn't it be the left-leaning white males, who adopt the beliefs that they are indeed born with unfair privilege and natural oppressive tendencies, that would feel the guilt or shame that leads to a depression state?

 

[dmgtz96]

@jetflag been thinking about this more and I'm still confused at which men exactly are the ones shouldering the burden of the woke soap opera. If left-leaning males like myself are shielded from the idealogical pressures due to a natural affinity with it's ideas - as you suggested I was when I went unscathed at my left-leaning university - then are you saying that instead it's the right-leaning white males who are the one's susceptible to the feeling's of victimisation, discrimination and pressures, which then lead to their depression/suicide?

Wouldn't the opposite be true? It's clearly right-wing males who are more likely to reject the ideas of woke culture and therefore reject the pressures that supposedly come with it. If someone were to say 'white males are oppressive', their response is that's stupid or inaccurate. How does that rejection then translate to depression if they believe the sentiment and rhetoric to be false? There is no burden they shoulder emotionally because they don't believe it to begin with. Wouldn't it be the left-leaning white males, who adopt the beliefs that they are indeed born with unfair privilege and natural oppressive tendencies, that would feel the guilt or shame that leads to a depression state?

Hmm just because right-wing males reject the ideas of woke culture that doesn't mean their actions go without consequences. You can look at r/byebyejob for examples. Usually it's some idiot who comes forward about their politics in a professional environment, like the former Tripwire Studios CEO. Alternately, it could be someone that acted stupid in public and went viral, like the good Christian that harassed women in a beach.
Left-leaning males (white or not) tend to be aware of what is, and isn't socially acceptable in a leftist society. They are unlikely to face the same consequences as right-leaning males because the former are unlikely to put themselves in risky, not socially acceptable situations.

 

[Jetflag]

@jetflag been thinking about this more and I'm still confused at which men exactly are the ones shouldering the burden of the woke soap opera. If left-leaning males like myself are shielded from the idealogical pressures due to a natural affinity with it's ideas - as you suggested I was when I went unscathed at my left-leaning university - then are you saying that instead it's the right-leaning white males who are the one's susceptible to the feeling's of victimisation, discrimination and pressures, which then lead to their depression/suicide?

Wouldn't the opposite be true? It's clearly right-wing males who are more likely to reject the ideas of woke culture and therefore reject the pressures that supposedly come with it. If someone were to say 'white males are oppressive', their response is that's stupid or inaccurate. How does that rejection then translate to depression if they believe the sentiment and rhetoric to be false? There is no burden they shoulder emotionally because they don't believe it to begin with. Wouldn't it be the left-leaning white males, who adopt the beliefs that they are indeed born with unfair privilege and natural oppressive tendencies, that would feel the guilt or shame that leads to a depression state?

its the type of (young) men, who are easily impressionable, score high on the neurotic end of the spectrum and usually occupy a place that isn't very high up in the hierarchy and are such (already) easily prone to depression.

politics barely enters it if at all. Woke culture does not or at the very best barely acknowledges the (prefered) politics of the subject in question. On a scale of 0 to 10. a classical liberal like myself would be considered a 0, whereas you might be a 1 or 2, but never say a 9 regardless of your virtues. Woke culture is all about groups and not about the individual, and so because as a group, the white cis male is seen as "the dominant privileged force" the individual, regardless of their own personal brain chemistry (from a woke-ideological perspective) go utterly f themselves. They're white, have a penis, and as such the bad guy.

so even if we're talking about someone being a labour or liberal democrat voter. In the eyes of "the woke" he will still be the problematic white-cis-normative oppressor, He's the race and sex to blame for all the woes of the world. He's occupying all the space etc. and, and this is important, will never be pure enough to be warranted some form of genuine acceptance over someone who's higher up the woke oppression ladder.

 

[Jetflag]

also: I love how you brought this thread back from the grave @Hensmon

I totally forgot about it

 

[Hensmon]

I’d say then that the root of the problem is whatever’s driving the neurotic states to begin with, because eliminating that will allow the individual to handle or mitigate the external factors which become stressors. Not just ideological but the various economical and social ones too.

And we already know so many of the drivers behind neurotic states, it’s extensive and well studied. There’s clear things to focus on and that would have a great effect on young men's happiness, not just young white males, but males and females in general. Real small things that could make a huge difference.

In contrast we don’t have any quantifiable indication of what woke cultures effects are. It’s even hard to define what woke means. Ask the random people off the street and they will give you different definitions.

Remember the whole reason you started this thread was because you were putting woke culture on this pedal-stool, making it the culprit of white male depression. You’re arguing that its so bad that it’s worth of more attention than the long list of other factors that drives depression and anxiety, ones which in my mind are obviously more pervasive, understood and all encompassing when compared to the relatively small list of woke scenarios you’ve described (which from my own experiences discount heavily). If the approach is to be completely pragmatic, reducing depression in as much people as possible, in the most effective ways, how can the claims that woke culture is one of the fundamental problems be taken seriously? And in a way that doesn’t feel like it’s been derived from idealogical tribalism, rather than evidence, pragmatism and genuine concern for the depressed.

A nice example would be the politicians in the UK who have taken to twitter to lambast wokeness, yet push policy that heavily cuts funding into mental health and social care. What’s going to impact mens heath more, available services that support them or attacking wokeness on the social soap opera?

 

[Jetflag]

I’d say then that the root of the problem is whatever’s driving the neurotic states to begin with, because eliminating that will allow the individual to handle or mitigate the external factors which become stressors. Not just ideological but the various economical and social ones too.

eh..I never argued that it wasn’t. what I argued was that is not helpfull to have a very resentfull and dominating cultural layer present.
Do you think it is helpful?

And we already know so many of the drivers behind neurotic states, it’s extensive and well studied. There’s clear things to focus on and that would have a great effect on young men's happiness, not just young white males, but males and females in general. Real small things that could make a huge difference.

yes I whole heartily agree. And one of those drivers, is as we agreed upon earlier in this thread, an unreasonable set of expectations placed on an individual by (part of) society and its main ideological force. Whether that be religious conversion therapy for gays or the constant western-white-man-satan-do-better rethorik by woke culture.

now its not the only one, and I never said it was. but its a bit like climate change. yes the anthropogenic exhaust pales in comparison to what say...axial tilt and solar activity can muster, but its, especially in this day and age. Still a relevant factor and whats more and increasing one. hence its a good idea to adress it, forthrightly.

In contrast we don’t have any quantifiable indication of what woke cultures effects are. It’s even hard to define what woke means. Ask the random people off the street and they will give you different definitions.

Accenine argument. you can make exactly one similar about Islam, or religious fundamentalism and the aforementioned gay conversion therapy if you where say, a Mormon apologist.

“well our doctrine is not exactly measurable in a lab or quantifiable and people are different therefor haha. “

Yeah. No

Remember the whole reason you started this thread was because you were putting woke culture on this pedal-stool, making it the culprit of white male depression.

no, the whole reason I started this thread is because you specifically, got extremely defensive óf woke culture and indignant over me saying something as simple as: “it doesn't help if everything you do or don't do is deemed "toxic" by a certain ideology that has dominated the institutions for the last 30 years.” As part of a quicky multi analysis/oppinion on why suicides rates for men are higher then for women.

I know right? How dare I suggest that that might not be helpful.

You’re arguing that its so bad that it’s worth of more attention than the long list of other factors that drives depression and anxiety, ones which in my mind are obviously more pervasive, understood and all encompassing when compared to the relatively small list of woke scenarios you’ve described (which from my own experiences discount heavily). If the approach is to be completely pragmatic, reducing depression in as much people as possible, in the most effective ways, how can the claims that woke culture is one of the fundamental problems be taken seriously? And in a way that doesn’t feel like it’s been derived from idealogical tribalism, rather than evidence, pragmatism and genuine concern for the depressed.

I never argued that it’s the fundamental problem, I said it doesn’t help. and I think I’ve sufficiently backed up WHY I think it doesn’t help and I didn’t do so with “ideological tribalism” as opposed to evidence.

What you need to ask yourself is why you got so emotionally invested and tribalistic in defending woke culture and its resentfull doctrines over such a small and mundaine sentence, And if you would have done so had the topic been about any other ideological or religious drive on society or part of society? I've noticed you keep bringing up "tribalism" in these kind of debates and i'm seriously suspecting projection atm.

A nice example would be the politicians in the UK who have taken to twitter to lambast wokeness, yet push policy that heavily cuts funding into mental health and social care. What’s going to impact mens heath more, available services that support them or attacking wokeness on the social soap opera?

yep, and on the other side of the twitter isle you have people allegedly being all concerned and empathetic about mental health issues and “equality”whilst at the same time partaking in mass-demonization of one particular race and sex subset. Politicians, left or right, are by enlarge hypocrites.

So what? I’m not a UK politician and neither are you at least by my knowledge and I think its us having the conversation here, not them.

 

[Br8k L3gnd]

Go woke go broke Lets go brandon