Have We Turned the Corner on Woke?

Some signs:

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting is no more.

DEI seems to be in retreat on multiple fronts.

A chorus of viewers with outrage attacked a series of blue jeans ads as white supremacy dog whistles. Instead of getting the groveling apology they were looking for, they just got laughed at.

Washington State’s law to force priests to inform on people confessing sins is, for the moment at least, stopped by injunction.

Paramount canned Colbert, but South Park abides.

They’re remaking The Naked Gun.

I am sad our neighbors to the north seem be getting more entrenched in it. I like that country. It’s so pretty and the people are nice.

The UK seems to be battling, but their Supreme court decision defining “woman “as an adult human female for purposes of their Equality Act is a good starting point to beat back the crazy. UK folks are increasingly unhappy with their numbers of illegal immigrants. Outrage is manifesting in street protests, and disrespect for Islamist propaganda is growing with concern about losing a cherished Western value of free speech. Of course the fairly recent exposure of rape gangs running amouk in the Muslim community is building.

But then, the Jew hatred in the UK is growing. I follow a contingent of young ( under age 40) male politically centrist (or conservative depending on your definition ) podcasters who are either Jewish or Jew adjacent. They are genuinely worried about their personal safety. These guys are not Ben Shapiro and they are not religious, but they have Jewish heritage or similar. There are Jewish symbols they would not dream of displaying on the street.

So I think it’s a mixed bag in the UK. I don’t think it’s a mixed bag in Canada.

As for the United States, man, we have so many states with different philosophies I don’t know where we have landed. One size is not fitting all, but certainly the woke culture is being beaten back in many jurisdictions.

I Only listen to NPR in the car anymore, and there were some sad justifications going on yesterday in my trip to St. Louis. They’re having a hard time with their new status.

Well, if I look on the positive side, it’s a great day to be someone like me - white, male and straight-presenting, Ivy League, in the 1%, in good health, yada yada yada. Living the life of Riley. I just need to set aside empathy and kindness.

I would use the term cancel culture over turned the corner.

I never consider NPR woke, just a little left of center. Semantics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bae

Well, if I look on the positive side, it’s a great day to be someone like me - white, male and straight-presenting, Ivy League, in the 1%, in good health, yada yada yada. Living the life of Riley. I just need to set aside empathy and kindness.

---

Oh my friend we could debate SO many points about rampant mean and hurtful actions of the woke brigade. Kind? Caring? Ha. Hahaha….

For one, I don’t think it’s at all kind to lead young and confused adolescents to body mutilation, not only lead them, but to insist there’s only one true path to keeping them from killing themselves. It is dispassionate and in my opinion borders on medical malpractice for certain patients.

there are many others, but I have to go deliver death notifications to our garden club groups so over and out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bae

I just need to set aside empathy and kindness.

---

I'm not sure it's particularly kind or empathetic to segment people into groups by race, sex, education, net worth, social status, etc., and then demand special rules that everyone must follow in their daily interactions with whatever group is most favored. I'd rather stick with the tried and true method of judging people by their character and believing that we're all part of the same group with our own individual backgrounds and idiosyncrasies. Woke won't allow that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogar

I would use the term cancel culture over turned the corner.

---

You have a point there. It may be more about the people and institutions who try to enforce wokeness losing influence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan

I'd rather stick with the tried and true method of judging people by their character and believing that we're all part of the same group with our own individual backgrounds and idiosyncrasies. Woke won't allow that.

---

One could say something similar about the far right, evangelicals, and other conservative groups who refuse alternate ideas in order to conform to their tribe, with a my way or the highway attitude. People in general tend to have preconceived opinions of others based on their tribal affiliations that bias the ability to judge others as unique individuals.

The online Websters defines woke as, "aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)." Current semantics seem to associate a more negative definition.

I think we have reverse wokeness going on now. Why we can't meet in the middle and quit talking about this stuff is a mystery to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pinkytoe

I think we have reverse wokeness going on now. Why we can't meet in the middle and quit talking about this stuff is a mystery to me.

---

OK, for example, what do you think is “the middle position” on medically transitioning minors?

I think it is:

1. keep legislation from hampering this medical treatment; any such treatment should be between the patient, the physician, and BOTH parents

BUT

2. an established time period for in depth therapy (say, 6 months? A year?) by a qualified therapist should proceed drugs and surgeries for minors…this should be the standard protocol for medical professionals

This seems reasonable to me yet most trans activists consider this position to be completely unacceptable.

It seems like common sense to me to legislate an age limit on "transitioning, ie 18 yrs. In the interim, certainly in-depth therapy. Adolescence is often a period of great confusion/emotions and not the best time to make life-changing decisions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pinkytoe

It seems like common sense to me to legislate an age limit on "transitioning, ie 18 yrs. In the interim, certainly in-depth therapy. Adolescence is often a period of great confusion/emotions and not the best time to make life-changing decisions.

---

I don’t think it’s common sense at all actually. I think it’s overreach of governments legislating this and it’s been deemed necessary by many only because the medical community is entirely captured by the cult of transgender. If the medical community and therapeutic professionals were doing their job, they would not be prescribing puberty blockers and hormones and etc. after one visit. They wouldn’t be performing surgeries on sex organs on minors.

the medical community thinks they’re doing the right thing. The assistant secretary of Health and Human Services under Joe Biden thought it was all peachy keen.

Not to be unkind, but just to point out you would be considered a transphobe spewing hate by many people in the trans community.

okay---woke. yeah--when i take the can opener out o' the drawer, the catts are woke and coming running around the corner. So yeah---i'd say so. Yup. Hope that answers your question. Thankk mee.

Oh well...I guess I'm transphobic though it is mostly just ignorance or avoidance of the topic. I was recently criticized for asking my niece how her sons were doing - a simple question with no intention. I was told I should address them as "theys" and not "hims or hes". Hmmm...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pinkytoe

Oh well...I guess I'm transphobic though it is mostly just ignorance or avoidance of the topic. I was recently criticized for asking my niece how her sons were doing - a simple question with no intention. I was told I should address them as "theys" and not "hims or hes". Hmmm...

---

It is unfortunately easy to achieve that status in today’s world.

Speaking of cancel culture I see where Trump has ordered the termination of two important satellites that collect information on atmospheric CO2. I suspect global warming will follow a similar path to wokism. One more nail in the weather monitoring NASA coffin.


https://www.npr.org/2025/08/04/nx-s1...ion-threatened

okay----yes, yes; i am very concerned about Global Warming. It is zackly the reason the glaciers that usta cover IWAH(the Meat State) have receded, and left nothing but dirt. Also, Zurra was underwater, 250 million years ago. So yeah--there's that. Hope that helps you some. Thankk mee.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogar

Speaking of cancel culture I see where Trump has ordered the termination of two important satellites that collect information on atmospheric CO2. I suspect global warming will follow a similar path to wokism. One more nail in the weather monitoring NASA coffin.


https://www.npr.org/2025/08/04/nx-s1...ion-threatened

---

I read the NPR article and it reminded me that you have to take absolutely everything you read with a liberal dose of salt. While it may have implied that "Trump has ordered the termination of two important satellites" it doesn't actually say that, but it does provide enough information to reach an entirely different conclusion. It mentioned that the congressionally approved funding for the two satellites is set to expire at the end of the fiscal year and may very well be approved for FY'26 when the '26 budget bill reaches congress. It also mentioned that the first outline of the new budget bill keeps NASA funding flat, although that may not be the case when the budget is officially introduced. There was also a mention that NASA is reaching out to private investors who benefit from the satellite's data to see if they might be interested in helping fund the program in return for the value they provide them.

When I put those data points together I might (and do) speculate that NASA is looking at ways to cut back spending in case next years budget doesn't provide additional funding and is researching sources of private funding as well as war planning potentially shutting down some cost centers.

Of course others are free to speculate differently but I don't see any reason to believe Trump is even aware of the two satellites mentioned in the article.

I’m holding budget hearings today to adjust my fire/ems agency’s budget for the rest of this year, and the projected budget for next year, due to….Making America Great Again. I also just filed the paperwork today for a measure on the November ballot for additional funding, which, if the voters approve it, will raise the property taxes by $266/year for the median-priced home on the island. Some of that additional funding is due to projected Federal cuts.

Alan, you are probably correct that Tump may not know anything about this. No surprise. I didn't find it in other legacy news so maybe NPR is making more of it that it should be. Or maybe it's a revenge article with distorted facts to get even...wait that's the other side. I can imagine without making a project out of it that it wouldn't be hard to find evidence of Trump administration involved in scientific climate data suppression or denial without evidence, but that's my take. All said I couldn't find any error of facts in the article's opening statement. Whether it is cost cutting or information suppression is up for debate.


The Trump administration has asked NASA employees to draw up plans to end at least two major satellite missions, according to current and former NASA staffers. If the plans are carried out, one of the missions would be permanently terminated, because the satellite would burn up in the atmosphere. Both missions, known as the Orbiting Carbon Observatories, measure carbon dioxide and plant growth around the globe. They use identical measurement devices, but one device is attached to a stand-alone satellite while the other is attached to the International Space Station.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rogar

Alan, you are probably correct that Tump may not know anything about this. No surprise. I didn't find it in other legacy news so maybe NPR is making more of it that it should be. Or maybe it's a revenge article with distorted facts to get even...wait that's the other side. I can imagine without making a project out of it that it wouldn't be hard to find evidence of Trump administration involved in scientific climate data suppression or denial without evidence, but that's my take. All said I couldn't find any error of facts in the article's opening statement. Whether it is cost cutting or information suppression is up for debate.


The Trump administration has asked NASA employees to draw up plans to end at least two major satellite missions, according to current and former NASA staffers. If the plans are carried out, one of the missions would be permanently terminated, because the satellite would burn up in the atmosphere. Both missions, known as the Orbiting Carbon Observatories, measure carbon dioxide and plant growth around the globe. They use identical measurement devices, but one device is attached to a stand-alone satellite while the other is attached to the International Space Station.

---

So are they pulling the shuttle out of retirement and spending a lot to refurbish it? That used to be a job of it to grab/repair/update satellites and bring them to an orbit to keep them from falling back to earth. Now the only shuttles we have, are the military ones that they don't publicize.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

I don’t think it’s common sense at all actually. I think it’s overreach of governments legislating this and it’s been deemed necessary by many only because the medical community is entirely captured by the cult of transgender. If the medical community and therapeutic professionals were doing their job, they would not be prescribing puberty blockers and hormones and etc. after one visit. They wouldn’t be performing surgeries on sex organs on minors.

the medical community thinks they’re doing the right thing. The assistant secretary of Health and Human Services under Joe Biden thought it was all peachy keen.

Not to be unkind, but just to point out you would be considered a transphobe spewing hate by many people in the trans community.

---

In theory we should be able to do whatever we want with our bodies. Women should be allowed to choose abortions. Biological males should be able to choose to transition to females and vice versa. All this without a lot of brouhaha. But it doesn't work that way. In a way, I blame the fact that you can't legislate kindness, compassion, and respect, so we step in with laws--which is the most contentious and cumbersome way to honor the rights of everyone.

I also believe that because our ethical and moral codes are in shreds, we have to rely on laws. And, I also blame our anemic spiritual traditions and rituals. I'm not talking about the rigid rites and man-made commandments that make most people "the other"--I'm talking about a core of community with the proper structures to support our inclinations to help each other out of mutual concern.

So we have wokeness on both sides, and overreach by both parties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

In theory we should be able to do whatever we want with our bodies. Women should be allowed to choose abortions. Biological males should be able to choose to transition to females and vice versa. All this without a lot of brouhaha. But it doesn't work that way. In a way, I blame the fact that you can't legislate kindness, compassion, and respect, so we step in with laws--which is the most contentious and cumbersome way to honor the rights of everyone.

I also believe that because our ethical and moral codes are in shreds, we have to rely on laws. And, I also blame our anemic spiritual traditions and rituals. I'm not talking about the rigid rites and man-made commandments that make most people "the other"--I'm talking about a core of community with the proper structures to support our inclinations to help each other out of mutual concern.

So we have wokeness on both sides, and overreach by both parties.

---

this is a really good summary of why laws are ineffective and are just second rate tools for guiding some behaviors in our society. And yes, for sure wokeness and overreach is performed by both political sides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan

I'm not sure it's particularly kind or empathetic to segment people into groups by race, sex, education, net worth, social status, etc., and then demand special rules that everyone must follow in their daily interactions with whatever group is most favored. I'd rather stick with the tried and true method of judging people by their character and believing that we're all part of the same group with our own individual backgrounds and idiosyncrasies. Woke won't allow that.

---

I guess everyone has their own experiences on how this translates. My experience has been that "woke" isn't that sinister, race awareness notwithstanding. If you are sitting in a corporate meeting with 200 employees and none are black (or women, or gay), I don't think it's crazy to ask yourself why is that? I guess you could just say well obviously all the best smartest hardest working people are universally straight white men, so no surprise we are all straight white men. The numbers will change someday when the minorities get smarter and quit being lazy. Or you could ask yourself are there other reasons why those segments are underrepresented. Of course denying there are differences makes it convenient, you don't have to explain any gaps or shortcomings in outcomes. But my experience is that (and yes, just my experience) there are historic soft hurdles to non straight white males accessing some career paths, and trying to lower those hurdles for qualified people benefits the majority. Maybe we can all agree that equality of opportunity ought to be the goal, not equality of outcomes. But if you aren't getting the outcomes I don't think it's wrong to be reflective about why.

Well stated, Yossarian.