You are looking way too much, it’s just an observation from a minority looking into popular American and international popular culture.
You act like the term was niche and insignificant
That’s really not it. Look in the mirror, your insecurities are showing. Just because it is not popular in popular culture does not mean it is niche or insignificant. Reality is not a popularity contest, the only place popularity is important is in regards to general awareness.
it wasn’t just a catch all term
That implies that you admit it’s a catch all term now, just that it’s inception has been founded on -
a dog whistle fog horn, aimed directly and minimizing the struggles of marginalized people
True, but irrelevant in regards to why it has become popular (because it is a catch all term that now everyone is being exposed to). Dog whistles themselves don’t become popular by themselves, most people are not aware of them precisely because they are not popular knowledge and are supposed to identify only those in the know. It came from the people who had a problem with the movements that used the term, but most MAGA members who know the term won’t even know about its history. Hard disagree again.
There are plenty of people in MAGA who don’t know the origins of the term woke, just what it means now, and if you don’t believe that, I don’t know, have a tirade with the other people in the thread who have pointed it out. Those people have definitely been influenced by the people who have raged against these groups - they are in their social networks and are several degrees closer to the exposure of their propaganda but, as you even acknowledge, they are “aimed directly and minimizing the struggles of marginalized people; a declaration of being against exactly what the word had always meant in the first place”. Most of MAGA are useful pawns of bigotry, hate, and selfishness to differing degrees, what mattered is that they enabled their objective, not dog whistle identification.
But that also meant they made the term woke popular in popular culture as a result.
And because MAGA is a mask for bigotry, hate, and selfishness, even though they may not know the history of the term and just use it as a label, they are still outing their bigotry, hatred, and selfishness. The very fact that most of them are outing what is behind the label makes the whole idea of using “anti-woke” as a dogwhistle meaningless - everyone, inside and outside their group, can identify their bigotry.
there should be anyone playing defence for them … plausible deniability, which you grant them wholesale.
Who is? Sheesh, that’s some Olympic grade mental gymnastics to accuse me of “playing defense” by just pointing out that MAGA has made the term popular when it wasn’t before.
So how does them making the term so popular that it outs them as bigots work into the term being a dog whistle? Because I’m going to have to say, I don’t think you know what the meaning and use of a dog whistles is either if you are claiming this. Pointing out that they are bigots and that they themselves have been the cause for the popularity of the term that identifies as such is not "grant"ing “plausible deniability” - pretty bold strategy to claim that someone who identifies them as bigots is granting them plausible deniability by pointing out they themselves have now made the term that identifies them popular. When a dog whistle identifies both the people who know and the people who don’t know of being the same thing, it is no longer a dog whistle.
I have taken some verbal abuse elsewhere in the thread because this also made someone else insecure. In your case, I would say it is provoking something akin to a hyperimmune response.
it’s just an observation from a minority looking into popular American and international popular culture.
Just this phrasing alone indicates not black, and probably not darker in skin tone, otherwise you’d have mentioned it and well, quite frankly, I feel it is much less likely you’d hold the opinions you currently do.
That’s really not it. Look in the mirror, your insecurities are showing. Just because it is not popular in popular culture does not mean it is niche or insignificant. Reality is not a popularity contest, the only place popularity is important is in regards to general awareness.
What a mess of a self contradicting attempt at an character attack.
That implies that you admit it’s a catch all term now, just that it’s inception has been founded on -
No, no it does not. This is me literally pointing out that when being used in the current context, it was intentionally not a catch all term. That’s literally the entire point of the paragraph you are trying to form a gotcha out of. There is no way for me to read this other than being in obvious bad faith.
True, but irrelevant in regards to why it has become popular
This sentence is paradoxical. How could it be true that its irrelevant when its stated that this is its primary draw and goal? You can’t agree and then disagree with those statements. That just doesn’t make sense. They contradict each other. Admitting the first is true, inherently means that it is very much so relevant to how they “became popular” which you still haven’t addressed the criticism of the weal word usage of by the way.
It came from the people who had a problem with the movements that used the term, but most MAGA members who know the term won’t even know about its history. Hard disagree again.
They wouldn’t need to know its history to know its meaning. You are literally first admitting that its meaning is exactly as I said, contradicting what you’ve already said earlier in this comment, then, arguing a non sequitur in that somehow them being unaware of the full history of the term means that they aren’t using the term with the meaning you’ve already admitted is the meaning they’re using it with.
Literally all of your comment has been so self contradictory to this points its verging on absurd.
I’m starting to believe I am just being trolled by you TheObviousSolution.
But that also meant they made the term woke popular in popular culture as a result.
This is you now recognizing that popular and popular in popular culture aare different after previously standing your case on them being the same.
Who is?
You are. Thats literally been your point. Your point has literally been that “oh they don’t really know what the word means” with constant streams of contradicting statements following that point, which I think you know has always been false.
by just
No, Im not letting you play the “just” game where you pretend what you were actually saying was something different than the clear text exclaimed.
Literally in this very comment right here, you attempt to find a gotcha, where you say that the definition has changed:
That implies that you admit it’s a catch all term now
You said this… right in this comment…
So how does them making the term so popular that it outs them as bigots work into the term being a dog whistle? Because I’m going to have to say, I don’t think you know what the meaning and use of a dog whistles is either if you are claiming this.
This point straight up doesn’t make any sense at all.
I called it a fog horn, pointing out the fact that its stretching the limits of what a dog whistle is.
Related to one, and a key element of my point, this matters because it literally only works in that folks that have similar opinions to you, think that the definition is now a catch all rather than the extremely blatant and obvious bigotry it is.
I have taken some verbal abuse elsewhere in the thread because this also made someone else insecure. In your case, I would say it is provoking something akin to a hyperimmune response.
This is just an elaborate way of you claiming you’ve “triggered” me, making me pretty certain that you are a troll at this point, but I’ll still leave this comment in the hoptes that at least someone else who reads this gets the logic of why your argument is faulty and helps defend maga members.
Given the clear bad faith, I don’t forsee future responses being useful to anyone past this point though, as I don’t imagine anyone will be reading past this comment anyways.
You are looking way too much, it’s just an observation from a minority looking into popular American and international popular culture.
That’s really not it. Look in the mirror, your insecurities are showing. Just because it is not popular in popular culture does not mean it is niche or insignificant. Reality is not a popularity contest, the only place popularity is important is in regards to general awareness.
That implies that you admit it’s a catch all term now, just that it’s inception has been founded on -
True, but irrelevant in regards to why it has become popular (because it is a catch all term that now everyone is being exposed to). Dog whistles themselves don’t become popular by themselves, most people are not aware of them precisely because they are not popular knowledge and are supposed to identify only those in the know. It came from the people who had a problem with the movements that used the term, but most MAGA members who know the term won’t even know about its history. Hard disagree again.
There are plenty of people in MAGA who don’t know the origins of the term woke, just what it means now, and if you don’t believe that, I don’t know, have a tirade with the other people in the thread who have pointed it out. Those people have definitely been influenced by the people who have raged against these groups - they are in their social networks and are several degrees closer to the exposure of their propaganda but, as you even acknowledge, they are “aimed directly and minimizing the struggles of marginalized people; a declaration of being against exactly what the word had always meant in the first place”. Most of MAGA are useful pawns of bigotry, hate, and selfishness to differing degrees, what mattered is that they enabled their objective, not dog whistle identification.
But that also meant they made the term woke popular in popular culture as a result.
And because MAGA is a mask for bigotry, hate, and selfishness, even though they may not know the history of the term and just use it as a label, they are still outing their bigotry, hatred, and selfishness. The very fact that most of them are outing what is behind the label makes the whole idea of using “anti-woke” as a dogwhistle meaningless - everyone, inside and outside their group, can identify their bigotry.
Who is? Sheesh, that’s some Olympic grade mental gymnastics to accuse me of “playing defense” by just pointing out that MAGA has made the term popular when it wasn’t before.
So how does them making the term so popular that it outs them as bigots work into the term being a dog whistle? Because I’m going to have to say, I don’t think you know what the meaning and use of a dog whistles is either if you are claiming this. Pointing out that they are bigots and that they themselves have been the cause for the popularity of the term that identifies as such is not "grant"ing “plausible deniability” - pretty bold strategy to claim that someone who identifies them as bigots is granting them plausible deniability by pointing out they themselves have now made the term that identifies them popular. When a dog whistle identifies both the people who know and the people who don’t know of being the same thing, it is no longer a dog whistle.
I have taken some verbal abuse elsewhere in the thread because this also made someone else insecure. In your case, I would say it is provoking something akin to a hyperimmune response.
What does this even mean???
Just this phrasing alone indicates not black, and probably not darker in skin tone, otherwise you’d have mentioned it and well, quite frankly, I feel it is much less likely you’d hold the opinions you currently do.
What a mess of a self contradicting attempt at an character attack.
No, no it does not. This is me literally pointing out that when being used in the current context, it was intentionally not a catch all term. That’s literally the entire point of the paragraph you are trying to form a gotcha out of. There is no way for me to read this other than being in obvious bad faith.
This sentence is paradoxical. How could it be true that its irrelevant when its stated that this is its primary draw and goal? You can’t agree and then disagree with those statements. That just doesn’t make sense. They contradict each other. Admitting the first is true, inherently means that it is very much so relevant to how they “became popular” which you still haven’t addressed the criticism of the weal word usage of by the way.
They wouldn’t need to know its history to know its meaning. You are literally first admitting that its meaning is exactly as I said, contradicting what you’ve already said earlier in this comment, then, arguing a non sequitur in that somehow them being unaware of the full history of the term means that they aren’t using the term with the meaning you’ve already admitted is the meaning they’re using it with.
Literally all of your comment has been so self contradictory to this points its verging on absurd.
I’m starting to believe I am just being trolled by you TheObviousSolution.
This is you now recognizing that popular and popular in popular culture aare different after previously standing your case on them being the same.
You are. Thats literally been your point. Your point has literally been that “oh they don’t really know what the word means” with constant streams of contradicting statements following that point, which I think you know has always been false.
No, Im not letting you play the “just” game where you pretend what you were actually saying was something different than the clear text exclaimed.
Literally in this very comment right here, you attempt to find a gotcha, where you say that the definition has changed:
You said this… right in this comment…
This point straight up doesn’t make any sense at all.
I called it a fog horn, pointing out the fact that its stretching the limits of what a dog whistle is.
Related to one, and a key element of my point, this matters because it literally only works in that folks that have similar opinions to you, think that the definition is now a catch all rather than the extremely blatant and obvious bigotry it is.
This is just an elaborate way of you claiming you’ve “triggered” me, making me pretty certain that you are a troll at this point, but I’ll still leave this comment in the hoptes that at least someone else who reads this gets the logic of why your argument is faulty and helps defend maga members.
Given the clear bad faith, I don’t forsee future responses being useful to anyone past this point though, as I don’t imagine anyone will be reading past this comment anyways.