>

As with gays before. It's more insidious when it includes a term no one can really define. Scarier that way.
I just wish everyone using the term "woke" was required to define it before using it. >

Whenever a person describes anything as "woke" I immediately make a judgement call about that person. Not a good one. >

Had someone in my store say something about me (52, cis white male) and being woke and I said "I  try to be as woke as possible, yes!".  He left quickly. 
Apparently I wasn't the kindred spirit he hoped. >

Yeah I think of woke as a complement too. >

I don't get how it's not. The opposite of woke is sleeping, as in oblivious to the world. >

Don’t be obtuse.
If you’ve paid any attention to behaviour of those who describe themselves as woke you’ll know they’re disgusting. >

Can you give an example of what you mean?
What does "woke" mean, for you, exactly? >

Authoritarianism
Silencing speakers you don’t agree with or like.
Getting people fired from their professions for pretty basic takes.
Equating words with violence - and so excusing censorship and even normalising censorship.
Dictating the words and language people can use. Dictating the clothing people can wear.
Overt racism.
NOW, that’s not to say there isn’t genuine people who want social justice who describe themselves as woke. There is.
But time and time again we’ve seen people act in such a disgusting manner, who say they’re being woke, or align themselves with the word, that it’s made people hostile to people like that.
If you’re interested there’s a streamer I dip into on occasion who discussed this.
He’s a very leftwing progressive, but he highlights some issues. >

Can you give me some examples of people being silenced for "pretty basic takes"? >

You’ve mixed up two points.
Getting professors fired for basic takes - Kathleen Stock.
Silencing speakers - there’s plenty of evidence of universities or organisations arranging for speakers to give a talk and having death threats, bomb threats or fire alarms pulled.
If you’re going to do the “oh, so they can still say them - just elsewhere”
Then OK, yeah, sure. But they’re still preventing people from speaking at specific areas - it is a form of silencing.
These are all “woke” people doing it. It’s garbage behaviour and should be outright condemned. >

“This has lifelong benefits for children and young people by teaching them about healthy and positive relationships, empowering them to recognise abuse and learn about their rights to be kept safe and healthy.”
"Yes, and we're outraged!" >

The people who are outraged benefit a lot from children being unable to identify harmful relationships, abuse, and their own personal space or rights.
If children knew about those things, whatever would  the religious conservatives do? They'd have to traumatize their children even worse to compensate. >

How is this a difficult conversation? My four year old knows the proper names for all anatomy, that he came from cells from me and my husband, grew in a uterus and born out of a vagina, that there are many family types, identity exists outside of a binary, and people love differently. People treat kids like they’re stupid instead of ignorant and needing education, and/or can’t say the word “penis” in front of their child. >

Here's the thing. Internet porn is easy to access, and it's insane how violent a lot of the mainstream stuff is, usually toward women. Choking, slapping, hair pulling, rough anal with no preparation (there's literally a genre called "painal"), ass to vagina with no washing in between, ass to mouth with no washing in between, dudes forcing their cocks so far down their partner's throat that she's choking, crying, and vomiting, gangbangs... It goes on and on. 
A ten year old boy can one day think to himself "Man, boobs are kinda neat", type "boobs" into Google image search, and within a few clicks have this shit in front of his face.
He can then go get on roblox or fortnite or whatever else they're obsessed with these days and tell his other 9 and 10 year old friends "Guys, look what I found!" and they won't even have to do the work themselves to see it. Maybe they'll have to figure out how to bypass a filter or something, but they'll do it. 
You think ten is too young to know what anal sex is? Well too fucking bad, because thanks to the internet, they're gonna find out real fuckin' quick. I'd be surprised if the average kid who's allowed mostly free internet use and regularly engages in online gaming or chat didn't know about all the freaky shit people can get up to in bed, to be frank. 
Somebody has to be telling these kids that these sex acts are NOT SAFE and that it's all fake bullshit that in no way resembles healthy sex. We cannot allow young children to get to their sexually active years thinking that choking, slapping, rough oral, and anal is just how sex works. 
You think the parents who are flipping out about basic sex ed are having tough conversations about violent porn? No, of course not. So it's up to schools. Somebody has to intervene, because letting them go on watching it on the sly with nothing to keep them grounded in reality is gonna fuck them up. >

So true. The same parents who are complaining about this, are the same parents who give their kids unrestricted access to the Internet. >

Or assume that restricting access will protect their kids 100%. It won't. >

“Woke” sex ed.
So, sex ed? >

It's Wales. The parents are upset that the kids are being taught that a sheep cannot give consent. /S >

Conservatives everywhere need to understand that keeping children in the dark just because they're uncomfortable to talk about something only harms the kids. We don't need to lie about a stork or use euphemisms, they just need to know this stuff so they don't wind up pregnant teenagers or thinking they're wrong in any way for normal bodily functions >

I just don't get this. Like at all.  My 4yo knows he has a penis and that I have labias. He also now knows that most boys have a penis and most girls have labias, but sometimes not. It doesn't even phase him. >

Conservatives get big mad for schools just stating that LGBTQ people exist. Kinda sad really. >

You don't have to mention sexual acts when discussing LGBTQ relationships. It's just like explaining heterosexual relations like married couples. Conservatives however hyperfocus on the sexual aspect of gay and lesbian relationships and transgender people. >

Conservatives and TERFS will say "no one will have sex with you because you're trans" and then when you refute that and say otherwise, they say "its just a fetish" or whatever or call you a porn addict. Sorry, I have sex with my fiancée like any other adult. 🤨 >


Kim Isherwood, one of the claimants and the chair of the Public Child Protection Wales campaign, accused the Labour-led Welsh government of an “overreach of power”, adding: “We asked the court to help us protect our children from future emotional, physical, and psychological harm.”

Over reacting or what supposedly "emotional, physical, and psychological harm.” all from sex education... Our kids will be so much safer if we keep them ignorant

She said they would appeal. “We look forward to another court hearing in the coming weeks where we will fight all the harder to protect our children from a dangerous woke agenda gone off the rails.”

Doubling down and wasting even more time with their brainwashed, fucked up "woke" BS
Anyone that uses the term "Woke" in any legal argument should have the case simply thrown out for utter stupidity and a total lack of understanding reality and charged the costs for wasting everyone time.
Bunch of self entitled, fucked up idiots that have no clue about anything other than how to manufacture outrage over any little detail they don't like and demand everyone must live as they demand >

That’s literally not how it works. >

Yes, you have to read the rest of the text around that. If you literally harass someone by incessantly using the wrong pronouns, you may be in trouble for it. Simply using the wrong pronoun, even repeatedly on accident, is not enough to get you in trouble. You have to be doing it intentionally and repeatedly to cause harm. Basically don’t go out of your way to be an asshole and you’re fine. >

Thanks for your demonstration of reading vs comprehending. >

From the sounds of it, the curriculum boils down to 'different people exist, which is fine, don't be a twat about it'. 
But no, "wOkE AgENdA!!1!1!!eleven!"
The way these mouth breathing reprobates go on you'd think they're teaching our 7 year olds technique... >

It's funny because it actually IS woke, and that's a good thing. When conservatives say they're anti woke, they are telling you they're against fixing societal injustice. >

The issue isn't left wing indoctrination. The issue is that they are deprogramming the indoctrination of fear, hate, and self-loathing they have been given at home. >

"Woke" sex?  Is that like where the teachers actually explain what it is, how it works and potential consequences?
Cause all need to get woke then.  Before we become extinct doing stupid stuff. >

In elementary school, it's "Yes, Bobby has two dads, and that's okay."
ARRGGHHH!!!!!  NOOOOO!!!!  The Horror!!! >

Apparently the definition of woke is now is anything a right wing extremist dislikes. >

AlwaysHasBeen.jpg >

How are we expected to fix society if children learn anything other than Jesus hand delivers the sperm into the egg and then it’s a baby in that moment who personally knows Jesus? >

If someone uses the word "woke" unironically that's a red flag. You can safely assume they're a fucking moron. >


saying relationships curriculum does not advocate any one gender identity

That's WHY these fascists are complaining though; they want the curriculum to only promote cishets. >

wOkE aGeNdA.
WEeeeeeeeeeeeee. Just throw that word at everything now I guess. >

"Woke agenda" has mostly replaced "gay agenda" as a right-wing fearmongering catch-all term for anything they don't like. >

Saying "woke agenda" now means "I hate trans-people who harm me in no way."