They’ll often play an ace card which is in fact a joker. To illustrate, I voiced an opinion on LinkedIn that pro-choice activists should avoid defiant, strident language about their own abortion history so as not to alienate people in the middle on the issue. I was quickly piled on for being a man telling women what to do.
As an argument ‘having an opinion on pro-life persuasion techniques while not in possession of a uterus’ has no epistemic weight. But it isn’t meant to. It is intended to shame and exclude. I wrote about it, should anyone fancy taking a look.
“You need to check your privilege” “your white fragility is showing” and “ you are afraid to lose your white privilege” are some of the lines associated with this tactic. I don’t always talk about my racial/ethic identity in these conversations (an argument should stand on its own without resorting to identity, as the woke do) but it is effective when I bring up the fact that I am an immigrant woman with brown skin. Some appear to be very baffled by the notion that liberals/registered democrats and/or individuals of diverse racial/ethnic identities may oppose this ideology. It is effective to bring up specific examples of how Asian families have disagreed with and spoken against woke curricula in both SF and Loudoun county, and they were very quickly dismissed as “white supremacists” or “white adjacent”.
"They usually will not straight up accuse someone of a crime, rather, they will use subtle insinuations to accuse the person of having selfish, underhanded motives and “being in it only for themselves.”" - I disagree, at least in the context of the debates over what it means to be a woman and trans rights.
The most common tactic I've seen the woke use for anyone expressing even the most carefully expressed and rational disagreement with the idea that trans women literally are women or gender self identification is simply to accuse them of being (at best) bigoted, most commonly transphobic or a TERF and sometimes even to accuse them of wishing genocide on trans people. That might still come under the rubric of questioning one's motives but it's doing so via accusing people of being prejudiced, hate-filled or genocidal bigots, rather than merely holding on to some unfair advantage they're posited to have in society. You're a NAZI is not exactly a subtle insinuation....
I your articles! Thank you for these great lessons!
Question: I find the actions of the woke to almost always be completely the opposite of what they say, which I imagine is intentional. So anti-racist =racist, gender equality = destruction of women’s rights etc.
Do you also find this to be the case? And is this a good way to argue against the woke, by bringing this up & noting their hypocrisy? For example, I think when they bring up wanting to ‘end oppression’ it’s odd given woke ideology is devised & pushed by elite White progressives (the very oppressors they rail against). How are they ending oppression when the ONLY people who push this are the biggest oppressors & most privileged people who’ve ever walked the face of the earth?
They’ll often play an ace card which is in fact a joker. To illustrate, I voiced an opinion on LinkedIn that pro-choice activists should avoid defiant, strident language about their own abortion history so as not to alienate people in the middle on the issue. I was quickly piled on for being a man telling women what to do.
As an argument ‘having an opinion on pro-life persuasion techniques while not in possession of a uterus’ has no epistemic weight. But it isn’t meant to. It is intended to shame and exclude. I wrote about it, should anyone fancy taking a look.
How was the opinion worded? If it was declarative or aggressive, the responses you received would make sense.
I worded it intentionally provocatively so that I could draw out the predicted response and then write about it tbh
“You need to check your privilege” “your white fragility is showing” and “ you are afraid to lose your white privilege” are some of the lines associated with this tactic. I don’t always talk about my racial/ethic identity in these conversations (an argument should stand on its own without resorting to identity, as the woke do) but it is effective when I bring up the fact that I am an immigrant woman with brown skin. Some appear to be very baffled by the notion that liberals/registered democrats and/or individuals of diverse racial/ethnic identities may oppose this ideology. It is effective to bring up specific examples of how Asian families have disagreed with and spoken against woke curricula in both SF and Loudoun county, and they were very quickly dismissed as “white supremacists” or “white adjacent”.
"They usually will not straight up accuse someone of a crime, rather, they will use subtle insinuations to accuse the person of having selfish, underhanded motives and “being in it only for themselves.”" - I disagree, at least in the context of the debates over what it means to be a woman and trans rights.
The most common tactic I've seen the woke use for anyone expressing even the most carefully expressed and rational disagreement with the idea that trans women literally are women or gender self identification is simply to accuse them of being (at best) bigoted, most commonly transphobic or a TERF and sometimes even to accuse them of wishing genocide on trans people. That might still come under the rubric of questioning one's motives but it's doing so via accusing people of being prejudiced, hate-filled or genocidal bigots, rather than merely holding on to some unfair advantage they're posited to have in society. You're a NAZI is not exactly a subtle insinuation....
I your articles! Thank you for these great lessons!
Question: I find the actions of the woke to almost always be completely the opposite of what they say, which I imagine is intentional. So anti-racist =racist, gender equality = destruction of women’s rights etc.
Do you also find this to be the case? And is this a good way to argue against the woke, by bringing this up & noting their hypocrisy? For example, I think when they bring up wanting to ‘end oppression’ it’s odd given woke ideology is devised & pushed by elite White progressives (the very oppressors they rail against). How are they ending oppression when the ONLY people who push this are the biggest oppressors & most privileged people who’ve ever walked the face of the earth?