No, it isn’t; a dogwhistle is a message that isn’t detectable by someone unaware of it. Using lizard person like that isn’t an antisemitic dog whistle because people have been using it to disparagingly refer to the wealthy/politicians/etc. irrespective of their heritage for decades at the very least. Whether the term used to be used a specific way, or even how it originated isn’t actually relevant to the question.
Basically what I’m saying is you need to calm down and figure out the difference between being woke and being a wokescold. It’s hard to strike that ballance, but the first step is realizing you haven’t done it yet.
Hahaha, I think the only person getting worked up here is yourself. I mean really, what’s cringier than “wokescold”? Next you’ll be calling me a “wokewitch.” For the high crime of checking Wikipedia. Put down the torch and pitchfork, sweetie, you’ll hurt yourself.
Yeah, things like calling me “sweetie” and implying that my mild criticism is me acting like you committed a high crime are not exactly going to change my mind. Telling other people what to do based on a misplaced notion of what’s harmful is exactly what I mean. It reminds me of that really creepy phase of internet discourse when a large ammount of people started insisting on saying “Latinx” as a gender-neutral inclusive version of “latino” or “latina”. The worst part about that was it was an exonym that was being forced on a minority community by a bunch of white liberals who had a notion of what was wrong with someone else’s culture and were actively trying to fix it. So instead of being slightly annoying and unhelpful they were being actively harmful in their ignorance. BTW, for anyone wondering: I’ve learned through speaking with people that the preferred term is “Latine”.
Now, obviously the same damage is not being done in this instance, but it illustrates why I’m saying this, and shows the dangers of bandwagoning as soon as you think something might be perpetuating oppression. No doubt that it’s good to be aware of how our behavior affects others and to adjust accordingly, but what I see here is people defending a billionaire against a term by saying that it’s antisemitic without being educated on it by the wider Jewish community beforehand, and so I find it largely unconvincing. If I see further discourse about it I’ll investigate, and if one of my friends starts talking to me about it I’ll heed their concerns. However, a small number of strangers on the internet saying something isn’t enough to change my mind, especially not without a good argument.
There’s billions of reasons to hate those guys that have nothing to do with their religion.
And using “woke” as a pejorative? Woke is simply having basic human decency and a modicum of common sense, so nobody who finds it used about them really minds. “Scold” has been used for centuries to shove outspoken and/or educated women into submission. It’s a label I’ll be proud to wear.
As for your defending dehumanization, and calling some people’s attempts to be gender-inclusive “creepy” rather than simply ungrammatical? Gee, sorry you find even the merest reference to anything other than heterosexual-male humanity so icky you can’t even.
Supporting the Reptilian Conspiracy puts you squarely in the same camp as David Icke, follower of Robert E. Howard, who referred to the “Kosher Nostra” and said powerful men in the Bible couldn’t have been really Jewish, but must have been “Aryan, like myself.”
I am not using woke as a pejorative, but as a descriptor; it’s good to be woke.
“Woke scolding” is what you are in the process of doing, and it damages the cause. You’re misrepresenting me in ways that don’t make sense given the context and you’re bringing up history of terms that don’t reflect their present meaning to evoke unwarranted feelings of shame. If we were in a more public forum while you were arguing this disingenuously using the language of we who are aware of and opposed to oppression it would risk turing away once potential allies and further radicalizing individuals who have only been shown clips of visually identifiable “leftists” screaming while a chud pretends to be a reasonable centrist instead of a fascist who was just distributing Qanon pamphlets. I urge you to be more conscientious with your rhetoric.
I’m over here laughing, you’re completely playing out the “man can’t handle being corrected by a woman so he resorts to loading on the multisyllabic jargon in order to pretend his arguments are too complex for her to understand instead of facing his own prejudice.” You’re still supporting antisemitism. And that’s all there is to it. I’m not even Jewish, but bigotry is bigotry.
I’m autistic, asshole. It’s how I communicate because I have a disability.
I have no way to know you’re a woman, and you don’t even know if I’m a man. You’re assuming I’m straight you’re lying about my argument, and this shit is un-fucking-acceptable. You’re a bigot appropriating language. Fuck off.
You are strawmanning hard.
You are ignoring their main argument and attacking their character, it’s not persuasive to anyone reading.
It only servers to make you look like an asshat.
He’s correct and the more defensive you get the more I feel like you just wanna keep using the term. This is coming from someone who didn’t know any of this and won’t use the term in the future. I can always call Zucc a robot instead 🤖
I asked some friends what they thought, and one of them mentioned they were accused of being antisemitic for doing exactly that. So what is true about the lizard joke that’s definitely not true about the robot one that you think determines antisemitism?
No, it isn’t; a dogwhistle is a message that isn’t detectable by someone unaware of it. Using lizard person like that isn’t an antisemitic dog whistle because people have been using it to disparagingly refer to the wealthy/politicians/etc. irrespective of their heritage for decades at the very least. Whether the term used to be used a specific way, or even how it originated isn’t actually relevant to the question.
Basically what I’m saying is you need to calm down and figure out the difference between being woke and being a wokescold. It’s hard to strike that ballance, but the first step is realizing you haven’t done it yet.
Hahaha, I think the only person getting worked up here is yourself. I mean really, what’s cringier than “wokescold”? Next you’ll be calling me a “wokewitch.” For the high crime of checking Wikipedia. Put down the torch and pitchfork, sweetie, you’ll hurt yourself.
Yeah, things like calling me “sweetie” and implying that my mild criticism is me acting like you committed a high crime are not exactly going to change my mind. Telling other people what to do based on a misplaced notion of what’s harmful is exactly what I mean. It reminds me of that really creepy phase of internet discourse when a large ammount of people started insisting on saying “Latinx” as a gender-neutral inclusive version of “latino” or “latina”. The worst part about that was it was an exonym that was being forced on a minority community by a bunch of white liberals who had a notion of what was wrong with someone else’s culture and were actively trying to fix it. So instead of being slightly annoying and unhelpful they were being actively harmful in their ignorance. BTW, for anyone wondering: I’ve learned through speaking with people that the preferred term is “Latine”.
Now, obviously the same damage is not being done in this instance, but it illustrates why I’m saying this, and shows the dangers of bandwagoning as soon as you think something might be perpetuating oppression. No doubt that it’s good to be aware of how our behavior affects others and to adjust accordingly, but what I see here is people defending a billionaire against a term by saying that it’s antisemitic without being educated on it by the wider Jewish community beforehand, and so I find it largely unconvincing. If I see further discourse about it I’ll investigate, and if one of my friends starts talking to me about it I’ll heed their concerns. However, a small number of strangers on the internet saying something isn’t enough to change my mind, especially not without a good argument.
There’s billions of reasons to hate those guys that have nothing to do with their religion.
And using “woke” as a pejorative? Woke is simply having basic human decency and a modicum of common sense, so nobody who finds it used about them really minds. “Scold” has been used for centuries to shove outspoken and/or educated women into submission. It’s a label I’ll be proud to wear.
As for your defending dehumanization, and calling some people’s attempts to be gender-inclusive “creepy” rather than simply ungrammatical? Gee, sorry you find even the merest reference to anything other than heterosexual-male humanity so icky you can’t even.
Supporting the Reptilian Conspiracy puts you squarely in the same camp as David Icke, follower of Robert E. Howard, who referred to the “Kosher Nostra” and said powerful men in the Bible couldn’t have been really Jewish, but must have been “Aryan, like myself.”
You’ve told us who you are, and I believe you.
I am not using woke as a pejorative, but as a descriptor; it’s good to be woke.
“Woke scolding” is what you are in the process of doing, and it damages the cause. You’re misrepresenting me in ways that don’t make sense given the context and you’re bringing up history of terms that don’t reflect their present meaning to evoke unwarranted feelings of shame. If we were in a more public forum while you were arguing this disingenuously using the language of we who are aware of and opposed to oppression it would risk turing away once potential allies and further radicalizing individuals who have only been shown clips of visually identifiable “leftists” screaming while a chud pretends to be a reasonable centrist instead of a fascist who was just distributing Qanon pamphlets. I urge you to be more conscientious with your rhetoric.
I’m over here laughing, you’re completely playing out the “man can’t handle being corrected by a woman so he resorts to loading on the multisyllabic jargon in order to pretend his arguments are too complex for her to understand instead of facing his own prejudice.” You’re still supporting antisemitism. And that’s all there is to it. I’m not even Jewish, but bigotry is bigotry.
I’m autistic, asshole. It’s how I communicate because I have a disability.
I have no way to know you’re a woman, and you don’t even know if I’m a man. You’re assuming I’m straight you’re lying about my argument, and this shit is un-fucking-acceptable. You’re a bigot appropriating language. Fuck off.
You are strawmanning hard. You are ignoring their main argument and attacking their character, it’s not persuasive to anyone reading. It only servers to make you look like an asshat.
He’s correct and the more defensive you get the more I feel like you just wanna keep using the term. This is coming from someone who didn’t know any of this and won’t use the term in the future. I can always call Zucc a robot instead 🤖
I asked some friends what they thought, and one of them mentioned they were accused of being antisemitic for doing exactly that. So what is true about the lizard joke that’s definitely not true about the robot one that you think determines antisemitism?