Forum needs to be active so let's talk political.

[YAPN]

How about avoiding labels altogether, and talking about the actual topic, and specifics where it will help? Would me throwing the "bigot" label around in response to a couple of comments in this thread add anything constructive to the discussion? Obviously not, derogatory labels are the antithesis to constructive dialogue.

And humour hasn't been "cancelled", only bad (or past it) comedians who don't know how to write good jokes anymore. Punching down was never funny, the only difference now is that people are being called out on it (which is actually what many are whining about, having to take responsibility for their words). Good comedy is still thriving as it always has!

Unfortunately you seem to have misunderstood everything I wrote. I'm happy that you have decided to engage with this thread and I think you probably have knowledge to share.

I use woke as a label. Previously, now and in the future. Labels are necessary for communication. For instance, in this sentence

"Even if many white males can't recongnise that, and have no real idea of what it's like to be discriminated against even while they complain about "wokeness" (the most misused term in history potentially, maybe up there with "politically correct")."

you have used 'white male' as a label. What matters is context. I could use the term 'woke' in a negative fashion, or positive, or simply as a descriptor. Maybe I should have added more context when I used the word, but my question was honest.

The specifics were about humour being cancelled. It is. Your statement that humour hasn't been cancelled is incorrect. Sure there is a lot of new stuff to laugh at, Get Krackin' was a gem, but there was never any need to cancel old stuff like The Paul Hogan Show. Because his jokes were not nasty, he wasn't punching down. Just because I laugh at that Monty Python punchline "...and his dear wife Incontinentia Bowles." does not mean that I'm hating on people with fecal incontinence. Even people with fecal incontinence might laugh at the joke. But not too vigorously, I hope.

 

[deeve007]

Unfortunately you seem to have misunderstood everything I wrote. I'm happy that you have decided to engage with this thread and I think you probably have knowledge to share.

I use woke as a label. Previously, now and in the future. Labels are necessary for communication. For instance, in this sentence

"Even if many white males can't recongnise that, and have no real idea of what it's like to be discriminated against even while they complain about "wokeness" (the most misused term in history potentially, maybe up there with "politically correct")."

you have used 'white male' as a label. What matters is context. I could use the term 'woke' in a negative fashion, or positive, or simply as a descriptor. Maybe I should have added more context when I used the word, but my question was honest.

The specifics were about humour being cancelled. It is. Your statement that humour hasn't been cancelled is incorrect. Sure there is a lot of new stuff to laugh at, Get Krackin' was a gem, but there was never any need to cancel old stuff like The Paul Hogan Show. Because his jokes were not nasty, he wasn't punching down. Just because I laugh at that Monty Python punchline "...and his dear wife Incontinentia Bowles." does not mean that I'm hating on people with fecal incontinence. Even people with fecal incontinence might laugh at the joke. But not too vigorously, I hope.

Let's not be disengenous. "White male" is an objective descriptor. "Woke" is a subjective insult, just as "nazi" would be to insult someone just because they, say, voted for One Nation.

And no, humour hasn't been cancelled. But this isn't the place to delve beyond name calling and mud slinging it's becoming clear (like most online platforms, to be fair), so time for me to bow out.

 

[deeve007]

Taking down statues, suppression of people's ideas and opinions especially in academia should not be allowed. We are in a age of regression, culturally and academically, what good does the regressive left do other than push ridiculous policy, play free speech police and ignore history.
You speak of thousands of years of white oppression, what about https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansa_Musa#:~:text=Mansa%20Musa%20(about%201280%20%E2%80%93%20about,person%20to%20have%20ever%20lived.&ved=2ahUKEwi4_Zat4az4AhXaR2wGHRAqBMQQFnoECBUQBQ&usg=AOvVaw3kuqavoYmJu4WxJJPeClx_ Manda Musa what about all the people of colour that enslaved there own people and still do

I'll cross "whataboutism" off my pointless online discussions bingo card!

 

[Feldon]

 

[Dave70]

Just something different than the same old same old would be nice. But as you may note from the comments following mine, too many believe we've had no issues we need to address, and should just continue doing what we've always done. Whereas in reality, for all we still need to do, the lives of many millions of people have improved due to what many have fought for over the past decades (and longer in some aspects). Even if many white males can't recongnise that, and have no real idea of what it's like to be discriminated against even while they complain about "wokeness" (the most misused term in history potentially, maybe up there with "politically correct").

Kind of reinforcing my original comment of course.

The implication being there's something inherently bad about 'old white men'. Using catch-all terms is simply unsophisticated and lazy thinking that reinforces stereotypes. Can you not see the irony here?

Not all 'old white men' are puritanical right wing conservatives. What you're espousing here is just another form of discrimination.
Its (we're) a work in progress to be sure, but as a society, we are objectively less racist, homophobic, and any other phobic you care to mention than at any point in history. As Neil deGrasse Tyson said, the scariest thing you could to to a black person is put them in a time machine that travels backwards - or words to that effect. The same could be said for the LGBT community.

Most of the axes being ground against 'woke' culture, at least from more thoughtful circles take umbrage with its purblind embrace of identity politics.
And its a fcuking dead end that seeds the ground for populism. Don't believe me? Think of Trump.

If the goal is for a future, and it should be, is a world where somebody's gender / sexual orientation / race is as insignificant and their hair colour, we aren't going to get there by arbitrarily displacing meritocracy with a blue haired lesbians just in the name of 'equality' and bleating endlessly how white males cant empathize.

 

[deeve007]

but as a society, we are objectively less racist, homophobic, and any other phobic you care to mention than at any point in history.

And how have we got there? By changing what we did in the past, quite significantly in some instances. And you're right, things are much better for most if not all minorities than in the past, but you (and others) write/talk as if we have reached a point of equality for all today, for which there are objective measurements proving we have not and are still a very long way from for many. Hence we must continue that change, moving on from the old white men who are the ones who hold the vast majority of power globally - again that is simply stating a fact of who they are, not their politically leanings, only who controls the power within our society at present.

And the terms being used as insults have come directly from those in power (or from the segment represented by those in power) as a very overt attempt to diminish valid views that should be the focus of any constructive discussions. Instead of "woke" let's use "giving a **** about others", and for "political correctness" how about "not being a ****"? But then it's not so easy to be dismissive is it? And unfortunately - due very overtly from political discourse over the past decade - most online "debate" is now about being insulting, dismissive and point scoring, with very little openness to the valid reasons why change still needs to happen in so many areas. As I wrote, I'll switch off just as much from someone throwing out the "nazi" insult as much as the "woke" insult, as neither contributes constructively to any discussion.

Anyway, the world is moving away - forward - from the loudest angry voices online, even if glacially at times, hence why I should stick to allocating my rare spare time offline rather than these online discussions. My bad.

 

[Dave70]

And how have we got there? By changing what we did in the past, quite significantly in some instances. And you're right, things are much better for most if not all minorities than in the past, but you (and others) write/talk as if we have reached a point of equality for all today, for which there are objective measurements proving we have not and are still a very long way from for many. Hence we must continue that change, moving on from the old white men who are the ones who hold the vast majority of power globally - again that is simply stating a fact of who they are, not their politically leanings, only who controls the power within our society at present.

And the terms being used as insults have come directly from those in power (or from the segment represented by those in power) as a very overt attempt to diminish valid views that should be the focus of any constructive discussions. Instead of "woke" let's use "giving a **** about others", and for "political correctness" how about "not being a ****"? But then it's not so easy to be dismissive is it? And unfortunately - due very overtly from political discourse over the past decade - most online "debate" is now about being insulting, dismissive and point scoring, with very little openness to the valid reasons why change still needs to happen in so many areas. As I wrote, I'll switch off just as much from someone throwing out the "nazi" insult as much as the "woke" insult, as neither contributes constructively to any discussion.

Anyway, the world is moving away - forward - from the loudest angry voices online, even if glacially at times, hence why I should stick to allocating my rare spare time offline rather than these online discussions. My bad.

You:
but you (and others) write/talk as if we have reached a point of equality for all today,
Me
Its (we're) a work in progress to be sure,
Just in case you missed it.

That aside, you agree 'things are much better' and rhetorically ask 'how have we got there' then go on to say 'old white men who are the ones who hold the vast majority of power globally'. So presumably, this bettering happened on their watch? What about countries led by old black men, or old Asian men? Are things demonstrably better or worse in terms of human rights?

Can't you realise by assigning unfavorable traits to an entire socio demographic you're just perpetuating the same ********?
You may fee more justified because you're 'punching up' as it were, its just a rose by another name.

 

[deeve007]

So presumably, this bettering happened on their watch?

It happened because they were forced to change due to voters and other pressures, and for the most part happened much slower than it should have due to no real desire on their part for change. Time for the kids to take over, and for us older folk to step aside.

 

[Dave70]

It happened because they were forced to change due to voters and other pressures, and for the most part happened much slower than it should have due to no real desire on their part for change. Time for the kids to take over, and for us older folk to step aside.

Progress is progress. Women are now permitted to drive in Saudi Arabia, since 2018. Hallelujah. What a world..
Politics selects for a specific personality type. Always has. Those 'kids', regardless of their ethnicity and what they identify as, will eventually become the 'old white men' - and women of tomorrow.

 

[Paddy Melon]

I found this funny, with some good reasoning behind some of it.

 

[deeve007]

Progress is progress. Women are now permitted to drive in Saudi Arabia, since 2018. Hallelujah. What a world..
Politics selects for a specific personality type. Always has.

So those being discriminated against, those in some instances facing real harm from how they're being treated or restricted, they just have to wait until those in power deem it's time to do something? That's been our problem for centuries, and you know what they say about repeating the same mistakes, and yet we continue to do so.

Those 'kids', regardless of their ethnicity and what they identify as, will eventually become the 'old white men' - and women of tomorrow.

And they too will face a time it might be better to move aside for the next generation. There's a minimum age limit for running for office, why not a maximum age limit too, for differing but equally valid reasons?

 

[YAPN]

Sorry deeve, but your mind is as closed as those of whom you rail against. If you looked for consensus on this thread you would have found some.
But it's all about the ****-stirring isn't it?

I have to admit I was quite wrong when I wrote this...

"I think you probably have knowledge to share."

 

[deeve007]

If the consensus of this thread meant anything aside from faceless individuals ranting (myself included) the last election certainly wouldn't have gone the way it did. In case you missed it, the majority of Aussie voters don't want the same old, same old, they're impatient for change. And I'm fairly sure those under 18 aren't wanting less than that.

 

[YAPN]

I found this funny, with some good reasoning behind some of it.

Gotta love Bill Maher. Don't always agree with him but I watch his show every week.

 

[YAPN]

 

[CapnClunks]

Unfortunately you seem to have misunderstood everything I wrote. I'm happy that you have decided to engage with this thread and I think you probably have knowledge to share.

I use woke as a label. Previously, now and in the future. Labels are necessary for communication. For instance, in this sentence

"Even if many white males can't recongnise that, and have no real idea of what it's like to be discriminated against even while they complain about "wokeness" (the most misused term in history potentially, maybe up there with "politically correct")."

you have used 'white male' as a label. What matters is context. I could use the term 'woke' in a negative fashion, or positive, or simply as a descriptor. Maybe I should have added more context when I used the word, but my question was honest.

The specifics were about humour being cancelled. It is. Your statement that humour hasn't been cancelled is incorrect. Sure there is a lot of new stuff to laugh at, Get Krackin' was a gem, but there was never any need to cancel old stuff like The Paul Hogan Show. Because his jokes were not nasty, he wasn't punching down. Just because I laugh at that Monty Python punchline "...and his dear wife Incontinentia Bowles." does not mean that I'm hating on people with fecal incontinence. Even people with fecal incontinence might laugh at the joke. But not too vigorously, I hope.

 

[CapnClunks]

I'll cross "whataboutism" off my pointless online discussions bingo card!

Call me old but wtf is whataboutism it seems every day that passes a new word is invented to discribe 10 words that already exist

 

[CapnClunks]

It happened because they were forced to change due to voters and other pressures, and for the most part happened much slower than it should have due to no real desire on their part for change. Time for the kids to take over, and for us older folk to step aside.

Mate I voted greens, what more you want a rainbow tattoo and myself to say I'm pansexual or something, I'm not trying to be your enemy. You might be younger than most of us here but there's no bigots here.
Before my time but look at mhb and wide-eyed and legless both two very knowledgeable blokes but both will disagree but they still get along.
If you ignore your bias you can see good in everything, I personally don't like being told what to do or what to say.
It's not that we disagree essentially, we are not bigots, we have a difference in opinion.
We just don't like being told what to do or say, do you understand that individual human freedom is a thing, we are not ants we aren't a hivemind.
In this message failing mate, relax don't worry have a home brew!!!

 

[CapnClunks]

So those being discriminated against, those in some instances facing real harm from how they're being treated or restricted, they just have to wait until those in power deem it's time to do something? That's been our problem for centuries, and you know what they say about repeating the same mistakes, and yet we continue to do so.



And they too will face a time it might be better to move aside for the next generation. There's a minimum age limit for running for office, why not a maximum age limit too, for differing but equally valid reasons?

Honestly if everything is equal and you are a minority, and you are worrying about something even 150 years ago this is how you end up on heroin.
I had a rough childhood mate, my dad was a junkie and my pretty much my entire family, my cousin is northern Irish, he saw the troubles, but you know one thing, me and my cousin didn't do end up blaming everything else and end as addicts.
Maybe we are both pissheads true, but mate put your mind into anything.
I left school year 9 at 15, working in foundries, now I'm a mature age accounting student wanting to be an actuary.
I don't owe society anything, but I can't lie to myself

 

[YAPN]

Honestly if everything is equal and you are a minority, and you are worrying about something even 150 years ago this is how you end up on heroin.
I had a rough childhood mate my dad was a junkie and my pretty much my entire family, my cousin is northern Irish, he saw the troubles, but you know one thing me and my cousin didn't do end up blaming everything else and ending addicts.
Maybe we are both pissheads true, but mate put your mind into anything.
I left school year 9 at 15, working in foundry's now I'm a mature age accounting student wanting to be a actuary.
I don't owe society anything but I can't lie to myself

Don't bother with him Capn, he's only doing it to bait you.