Jump to content

The WOKE Thread (Merged from WTF?)


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, arg said:

This is pretty good.

 

Jonathan Pie, a fictional political correspondent character created and portrayed by English comedian Tom Walker.

Pie appears in a series of online videos in which he rants and explodes in anger about the state of British, American and Australian politics with the videos being presented as though he were a real reporter speaking his personal opinions to the camera before or after filming a regular news segment.

https://www.jonathanpie.com/

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Wokeness training is cancelled. Signed - POTUS.  https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/M-20-34.pdf   

Did anyone really believe he would get a fair trial or impartial jury?  Dude was good as guilty before the opening statements started.  He'd have been better off fleeing the country.     To

I've taken part in use of force scenario training a few times, and each time I had my eyes opened a little wider to what law enforcement deals with. If your local department ever offers it, please tak

Posted Images

57 minutes ago, M2 said:

 

The thing I've never understood about "cultural appropriation" is that the same people who will drag a white guy over the coals for wearing a sombrero will complain about the lack of representation in the media.

Of course it isn't represented...you want to fence off culture based on race, rather than share it with the rest of the population.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing I've never understood about "cultural appropriation" is that the same people who will drag a white guy over the coals for wearing a sombrero will complain about the lack of representation in the media.
Of course it isn't represented...you want to fence off culture based on race, rather than share it with the rest of the population.


It's also interesting to look back through history and see how different cultures borrow from other cultures, and how there are some pretty off the wall appropriations that may not be initially apparent.

Like tacos al pastor, typically thought of now as a Mexican dish, was borrowed from Lebanese immigrants to Mexico.

Stereotypes are the same; can often be good or acceptable, but can be used badly. But eliminating the stereotypes for a certain group in media means applying/assigning other stereotypes to that group, usually from a majority group.
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, M2 said:

Jonathan Pie, a fictional political correspondent character created and portrayed by English comedian Tom Walker.

Pie appears in a series of online videos in which he rants and explodes in anger about the state of British, American and Australian politics with the videos being presented as though he were a real reporter speaking his personal opinions to the camera before or after filming a regular news segment.

https://www.jonathanpie.com/

There's an Aussie that does something like this too. Can't remember his name.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2021 at 8:22 AM, M2 said:

 

It's one part depressing and one part amazing how many people will say just about anything with supreme confidence, then completely fall apart when you simply ask "why?"

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Army testing showed women failed the ACFT at a consistent 65% rate, while men failed at about a 10% rate, according to Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who sought the pause on the service’s implementation of the ACFT.

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/army-considers-change-to-combat-fitness-test-scoring-for-male-female-soldiers-1.662045

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, StoleIt said:

Army testing showed women failed the ACFT at a consistent 65% rate, while men failed at about a 10% rate, according to Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who sought the pause on the service’s implementation of the ACFT.

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/army-considers-change-to-combat-fitness-test-scoring-for-male-female-soldiers-1.662045

For a brand-new test that's still in the "data-gathering" phase of  implementation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, StoleIt said:

Army testing showed women failed the ACFT at a consistent 65% rate, while men failed at about a 10% rate, according to Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., who sought the pause on the service’s implementation of the ACFT.

https://www.stripes.com/news/us/army-considers-change-to-combat-fitness-test-scoring-for-male-female-soldiers-1.662045

Wait .... are you suggesting there may be actual physiological differences between men and women. Weird 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, pawnman said:

For a brand-new test that's still in the "data-gathering" phase of  implementation. 

I'm not sure if you're being held at gunpoint or something, but what's your point?

 

Any physical fitness test that applies the same standards to males and females will yield a similar result. It is a silly and counterproductive rebellion against reality to expect otherwise. Women are weaker than men. 

 

If we came up with tests for cellulite prevalence, congenital heart failure, osteoporosis, or visceral fat, we would have similarly disparate outcomes. 

 

Women and men are not the same. We have done a rather marvelous job separating out the military specialities that do not rely on the specifically-male attributes of the species, and getting women in there. Infantry-and-the-like will remain a male specialty until they are replaced by robots. 

 

I'm sure you'll be back suggesting we are bitter androgynists for favoring the robots when we criticize President Beiber for unveiling the latest DOD combat banana hammocks at his first press conference in the middle of the droid wars on Venus.

Edited by Lord Ratner
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

I'm not sure if you're being held at gunpoint or something, but what's your point?

 

Any physical fitness test that applies the same standards to males and females will yield a similar result. It is a silly and counterproductive rebellion against reality to expect otherwise. Women are weaker than men. 

 

If we came up with tests for cellulite prevalence, congenital heart failure, osteoporosis, or visceral fat, we would have similarly disparate outcomes. 

 

Women and men are not the same. We have done a rather marvelous job separating out the military specialities that do not rely on the specifically-male attributes of the species, and getting women in there. Infantry-and-the-like will remain a male specialty until they are replaced by robots. 

 

I'm sure you'll be back suggesting we are bitter androgynists for favoring the robots when we criticize President Beiber for unveiling the latest DOD combat banana hammocks at his first press conference in the middle of the droid wars on Venus.

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly.  I'm just saying that the failure of women to complete this specific test doesn't mean they are somehow lesser or ineffective in combat roles, that the test itself is brand-new, and that many men will bitch and complain that fitness tests don't truly measure combat capability...until you start including women.  But if women struggle more than men, that some test that "doesn't measure combat capability" is suddenly evidence that women don't belong in combat.  As if they haven't been there for years.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, pawnman said:

Oh, I agree wholeheartedly.  I'm just saying that the failure of women to complete this specific test doesn't mean they are somehow lesser or ineffective in combat roles, that the test itself is brand-new, and that many men will bitch and complain that fitness tests don't truly measure combat capability...until you start including women.  But if women struggle more than men, that some test that "doesn't measure combat capability" is suddenly evidence that women don't belong in combat.  As if they haven't been there for years.

Ok, but they *are* lesser or ineffective in certain combat roles. Those roles are quite specifically the ones requiring brute strength or extreme stamina. No test is needed, beyond common sense, but if you have doubts, I believe the Marine Infantry Officer Course was opened to women a few years ago with a predictable outcome.

 

Fighter pilots? Cool. Navy SEALS? Nope.

 

The story with the Army test is that they specifically attempted to create a test that would be gender neutral, yet still women are being overwhelmingly outperformed by men. And why was such a test constructed, with a goal of removing gender-based scoring metrics? I suspect because "gender-based" is a political hot potato when one half of our government is making a serious-yet-absurd argument that gender does not actually exist. 

Except most women aren't interested in fighting reality either, and they don't want lower PT scores on their evaluations because some SJW professor of reptilian rape culture considers it patriarchal to have different scoring criteria. We are allowing a very small number of very stupid people to create a tremendous amount of work and wasted effort in the well-intentioned desire to be inclusive. But there is such a thing as "too far."

 

  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Except most women aren't interested in fighting reality either, and they don't want lower PT scores on their evaluations because some SJW professor of reptilian rape culture considers it patriarchal to have different scoring criteria. We are allowing a very small number of very stupid people to create a tremendous amount of work and wasted effort in the well-intentioned desire to be inclusive. But there is such a thing as "too far."

 

This struck me as a funny viewing of the SJW type. I'd venture most champion different scoring criteria for the identities other than white male.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, FlyingWolf said:

This struck me as a funny viewing of the SJW type. I'd venture most champion different scoring criteria for the identities other than white male.

 

 

They want to manipulate the outcome in pursuit of "equity," but doing so with differential scoring criteria is to highlight the very differences they claim don't exist.

 

The demonization of test scores in academia is evidence of this. Affirmative action in University admissions has been around forever, and that's just a form of differential scoring. Not good enough. So now we get rid of grades, leaving group identity rather than performance as the metric for measuring worth. Ugly stuff.

 

As soon as you realize that the whole philosophy is corrupt, and the leaders of the movement know it, understanding the policy gets a lot easier. There's a reason the thought-leaders on the left have all but completely stopped engaging in debates with their counterparts on the right. They're lying, and you don't promote a lie by giving your opposition a platform to call you out on it.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

 

Agree, in general, CRT and the like are inconsistent, self-contradictory, and destructive... so I wont waste enegry trying to steel-man them.

Edited by FlyingWolf
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, pbar said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9387769/F-22-stealth-fighter-pilot-reveals-forced-Air-Force-racism.html

I didn't see anything like this with the African-Americans I flew with or served with.  Heck, most of them did better than I did and went to USAFWS, SAAS, AWC, and made O-6...  YMMV though.

I'd be interested to hear from anyone here who knows more about the situation with this guy. My initial read is that something is a little fishy here. How does a supposedly shit hot raptor pilot/Harvard grad land himself as a line IP at the Randolph IFF squadron doing some innovation ball wash for AETC..

Is it because the organization with POC as the secdef, csaf, and cmsaf is viciously racist? Or is it because he pissed the wrong person off or was a douche in his community and was put out to pasture like so many other iron majors before him?
 

Sorry dude, I know it hurts. But it's happened to white dudes too. In fact.. almost exclusively white dudes. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, pbar said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9387769/F-22-stealth-fighter-pilot-reveals-forced-Air-Force-racism.html

I didn't see anything like this with the African-Americans I flew with or served with.  Heck, most of them did better than I did and went to USAFWS, SAAS, AWC, and made O-6...  YMMV though.

This is just another opportunity to put drama in front of the public (in the flavor of the day).  It received attention, and the Daily Mail profited from the story - mission accomplished.

Could they have found five Caucasian guys with the same (or close story), and get them to whine?  Quite probably.  But it's not the flavor of the day, and the media can't profit from it, so we don't hear about it.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked a buddy who flies 38s with the Raptors if he had heard any rumblings about this guy. 
 

“Oh yeah, everyone here says that guy was an awful pilot.”

And...

”Apparently he Q3’d an evaluation up at Elmendorf so they sent him to IFF”

So yeah, there’s more to the story. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...