If I was to make an excuse I suppose it would be that I just don’t hear leftists using this term much in its original form. It has been twisted and hijacked and that is sad.

Maybe we should take it back but IMO I’d rather just call an issue what it is rather than create umbrella terms that encapsulate a variety of really complex topics.

If it’s a feminist issue it’s a feminist issue.

If it’s a representation issue it’s a representation issue.

If it’s a systemic racism issue it’s a systemic racism issue.

I’d rather we call it what it is than ‘woke’ but fully open to criticism of this position based on the fact this is ignoring its origin.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You're also not wrong, it is widely used on the right to discredit it.

I appreciate your thoughtful reply, and I hope you didn't feel like I was trying to act like you're a bad person or something. I've definitely done similar things, and glossed over origins. I guess I was just thinking about it, and trying to not minimize the history of it.

Also, considering black Americans are only something like 12% of the total population, of course more right wingers are using it because there's sadly apparently more shitty right-wing dinguses in the US than there are black people. Which means traditional use of "woke" is simply just drowned out by the right.

Anyway, cheers.

[–] Custoslibera@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

Haha no I didn’t think you were saying I’m a bad person.

I honestly don’t mind if you did, I’ve been called much worse.

I’m genuinely appreciative of being called out. Challenge what anyone says IMO.

I really was ignorant of how far back the term was used (I was aware of the 2010’s usage etc) so it’s important context for me to learn this.

So much of black American culture is squashed and by me saying that ‘you shouldn’t use woke because right wingers use it’ is in some ways me being racist or at least culturally imperialist.

To be clear though that wasn’t my intent when I made up my original comment about ‘woke’ I was really just expressing my frustration that the right have adopted it so wholeheartedly seemingly every time it’s mentioned it’s always a ‘wink wink nudge nudge’ you know what we really mean when we say it and I’m pissed off about it to the point whenever I hear anyone use the term I immediately try to get to the bottom of what they really mean when they use it because invariably it’s the racist/sexist/xenophobic etc usage rather than the originally intended one.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If it’s a feminist issue it’s a feminist issue.

If it’s a representation issue it’s a representation issue.

If it’s a systemic racism issue it’s a systemic racism issue.

I see how that makes sense on the surface. In effect, though, intersectionality is a vital thing to keep in mind.

Otherwise we end up fighting the same enemies separately, basically wasting time, energy and public attention by competing against each other when we should be cooperating.

[–] Custoslibera@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Yes you’re correct.

I have read and had to cite multiple times Crenshaw’s paper on intersectionality so I should have been clearer with my language and known better.

What I should have said is I want specificity in the language of describing who and what problem is trying to be addressed so it could very well be a feminist, systematically racist issue affecting African American women, rather than simply ‘it’s woke’.

[–] mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

'Woke' wasn't defended by the left b/c the AAVE community didn't want white people using it.

So the only white people that used it were the ones that didn't care about the opinions of black people.

[–] riwo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

I’d rather just call an issue what it is rather than create umbrella terms that encapsulate a variety of really complex topics.

while i like this approach of calling things by what they are, i dont know if it helps with the problem at hand or is even achievable.

critical race theory, while not necessairily being immediatly obvious in its meaning, is relatively specific and that still did not stop rightist from making it up to be some big evil. i doubt that even something direct like "fighting systemic racism" could not be coopted.

about the achievability, social justice causes have a very obvious relationship, highlighted even more by discussions of intersectionality. i think people will keep using umbrella terms cor these causes because they make it easier to communicated valued quickly and find people sharing these values.