Seeing as how the issue is about somebody being employed I looked at a careers site that helpfully discusses the nature of the word ‘woke’. It is a longish article, but brings some comfort to me that I am not the only person concerned about how the word is used and bandied about. In order to head the personals off at the pass, I invite anybody interested to read the article and discuss aspects of the content.
Anyone getting their knickers in a twist about who the next presenter of MOTD *might* be should cast their eyes over to the States and see who's being appointed to the various offices of the world's largest military. That should make you feel better
It’s not people with the right credentials is it? Whatever next.
It's the shocking levels of non binary representation.
Seeing as how the issue is about somebody being employed I looked at a careers site that helpfully discusses the nature of the word ‘woke’. It is a longish article, but brings some comfort to me that I am not the only person concerned about how the word is used and bandied about. In order to head the personals off at the pass, I invite anybody interested to read the article and discuss aspects of the content.
Unfortunately words that originally meant one thing can be used in different contexts and drift away from their original meaning.
If I called you "silly" you might be offended, but to do so illustrates the fact that you can't turn back the tide, because "silly" originally meant "blessed" or "happy".
Not that long ago, having a gay time would have meant the same as being silly, if we insisted on only taking the original meaning of words uttered by someone intending a rather different meaning, we simply cease communicating.
So it's possible to have a discussion about etymology, but arguing you should interpret words in their original meaning rather than what the words are intended to convey, is rather futile.
Woke is simply another word in transition from its original more noble meaning, to something rather more nuanced and barbed.
The article is an essay on the etymology of the word but does not try and deny the current meaning has changed, as used by those she says have weaponised the word.
I suggest it is the barb that comes with the word's new meaning that is core to the author's argument, but the theme of pointing out why the word is used wrongly will not alter the fact that the word means something rather different today, like it or not.
Seeing as how the issue is about somebody being employed I looked at a careers site that helpfully discusses the nature of the word ‘woke’. It is a longish article, but brings some comfort to me that I am not the only person concerned about how the word is used and bandied about. In order to head the personals off at the pass, I invite anybody interested to read the article and discuss aspects of the content.
Unfortunately words that originally meant one thing can be used in different contexts and drift away from their original meaning.
If I called you "silly" you might be offended, but to do so illustrates the fact that you can't turn back the tide, because "silly" originally meant "blessed" or "happy".
Not that long ago, having a gay time would have meant the same as being silly, if we insisted on only taking the original meaning of words uttered by someone intending a rather different meaning, we simply cease communicating.
So it's possible to have a discussion about etymology, but arguing you should interpret words in their original meaning rather than what the words are intended to convey, is rather futile.
Woke is simply another word in transition from its original more noble meaning, to something rather more nuanced and barbed.
The article is an essay on the etymology of the word but does not try and deny the current meaning has changed, as used by those she says have weaponised the word.
I suggest it is the barb that comes with the word's new meaning that is core to the author's argument, but the theme of pointing out why the word is used wrongly will not alter the fact that the word means something rather different today, like it or not.
Thank you for this reply. I fully appreciate that the meaning of words can develop from what they meant originally to something else. Although the ‘root’ meaning of most words is still valid. The problem with the word ‘woke’ to my mind is that it means something, but the scattergun use of the word has led it to mean nothing and everything. What is the current meaning? ‘Political correctness’?
From recent experience I have heard examples where people think women in the armed forces is ‘woke’, or not serving meat at a Diwali celebration is being ‘woke’, or players taking a knee before matches is ‘woke’, or having a beard and eating avocado is ‘woke’, or having a differently abled football presenter is ‘woke’.
It looks as if it has become a put down word for any random thing somebody doesn’t like. But which particular meaning does it have now? What irritates me is that the original meaning is there, it is recognised, it can be defined and explained, and what is more the original meaning is a very positive one about being against racism. Now the word seems to be used as a negative sneer towards being against racism.
To use what might be an Americanism, the word has been misappropriated. Misappropriated from being a very positive, originating in the black community in America to the opposite, a negative aimed at putting down standing up for the black community, or other communities subject to racism in words or actions. I have heard it said that police officers stopping burning down a hotel containing asylum seekers are being ‘woke’, or the RNLI rescuing migrants in the Channel are also being ‘woke’. Do you think those examples are what the word ‘woke’ means?
Seeing as how the issue is about somebody being employed I looked at a careers site that helpfully discusses the nature of the word ‘woke’. It is a longish article, but brings some comfort to me that I am not the only person concerned about how the word is used and bandied about. In order to head the personals off at the pass, I invite anybody interested to read the article and discuss aspects of the content.
Unfortunately words that originally meant one thing can be used in different contexts and drift away from their original meaning.
If I called you "silly" you might be offended, but to do so illustrates the fact that you can't turn back the tide, because "silly" originally meant "blessed" or "happy".
Not that long ago, having a gay time would have meant the same as being silly, if we insisted on only taking the original meaning of words uttered by someone intending a rather different meaning, we simply cease communicating.
So it's possible to have a discussion about etymology, but arguing you should interpret words in their original meaning rather than what the words are intended to convey, is rather futile.
Woke is simply another word in transition from its original more noble meaning, to something rather more nuanced and barbed.
The article is an essay on the etymology of the word but does not try and deny the current meaning has changed, as used by those she says have weaponised the word.
I suggest it is the barb that comes with the word's new meaning that is core to the author's argument, but the theme of pointing out why the word is used wrongly will not alter the fact that the word means something rather different today, like it or not.
Thank you for this reply. I fully appreciate that the meaning of words can develop from what they meant originally to something else. Although the ‘root’ meaning of most words is still valid. The problem with the word ‘woke’ to my mind is that it means something, but the scattergun use of the word has led it to mean nothing and everything. What is the current meaning? ‘Political correctness’?
From recent experience I have heard examples where people think women in the armed forces is ‘woke’, or not serving meat at a Diwali celebration is being ‘woke’, or players taking a knee before matches is ‘woke’, or having a beard and eating avocado is ‘woke’, or having a differently abled football presenter is ‘woke’.
It looks as if it has become a put down word for any random thing somebody doesn’t like. But which particular meaning does it have now? What irritates me is that the original meaning is there, it is recognised, it can be defined and explained, and what is more the original meaning is a very positive one about being against racism. Now the word seems to be used as a negative sneer towards being against racism.
To use what might be an Americanism, the word has been misappropriated. Misappropriated from being a very positive, originating in the black community in America to the opposite, a negative aimed at putting down standing up for the black community, or other communities subject to racism in words or actions. I have heard it said that police officers stopping burning down a hotel containing asylum seekers are being ‘woke’, or the RNLI rescuing migrants in the Channel are also being ‘woke’. Do you think those examples are what the word ‘woke’ means?
Why the BBC felt the need to pay Lineker £1m+ a year to basically say "Here's a football match" and "What did you think of that Alan?" is beyond me. There are youtube channels that do a better job of analysing football than Alan "zzzzzzzzzzzzzz" Shearer. BBC need to flush the whole thing out and start again
I'd bring Ian Wright back as host. He always makes good observations as a pundit. Seems to get on well with Shearer and most of the others (even Danny Murphy)...
If woke is antiracist then maybe for sandwich fillings it’s anti speciesist, therefore:
Dog & mustard Cat & cheese Rabbit, lettuce & tomato
The word ’woke’ I think was a misuse of English. Black Americans probably wanted to say ’awake’ as in awake to the inequalities in their society and therefore highlighting their need to be careful.
One day people will wake up to the speciesist attitude in our society. So many people make a fuss over their pets and then eat another species, based on one simply being soft and cuddly, and the other not. Racism was once considered normal but rightly not now. Speciesism is now considered normal but I’m sure it won’t be in the future.
If woke is antiracist then maybe for sandwich fillings it’s anti speciesist, therefore:
Dog & mustard Cat & cheese Rabbit, lettuce & tomato
The word ’woke’ I think was a misuse of English. Black Americans probably wanted to say ’awake’ as in awake to the inequalities in their society and therefore highlighting their need to be careful.
One day people will wake up to the speciesist attitude in our society. So many people make a fuss over their pets and then eat another species, based on one simply being soft and cuddly, and the other not. Racism was once considered normal but rightly not now. Speciesism is now considered normal but I’m sure it won’t be in the future.
My nomination for MOTD presenter is Dale Vince.
In fairness Rabbit, lettuce and tomato is actually quite nice.
There is a huge difference between being anti-racist which is the vast, vast majority and anti-tokenism
My thoughts for what they are worth, having an ex player would be good. Any piss-taking flows so much better. Peter Crouch would be a good shout seeing as the BBC love his schtick and I like him, personable guy and gets on with people, and I'd love Alan Shearer to give him a death stare whenever he dropped a bollock or tried test the elbowing, goal-scoring geordie. I doubt he would want to do it but Ian Wright is someone else who has a perfect attitude for TV
In terms of the best people for the job @Rothko hit the only nail on the head worth hitting. James Richardson. Served his apprenticeship many moons ago and has an immaculate delivery
Mark Chapman is very decent too, it wouldn't be a travesty iftf he got the gig
The BBC ruined the more fun stuff like football focus and 606 by employing people unfit for the jobs and a production team insistent on ticking boxes rather than making entertaining shows about football. Fucking DJ spoony doing 606, Robbie Savage was just as bad. That show was great when done by Danny Baker and I get he is a difficult act to follow but it isn't an impossible formula.
Comments
It is a longish article, but brings some comfort to me that I am not the only person concerned about how the word is used and bandied about.
In order to head the personals off at the pass, I invite anybody interested to read the article and discuss aspects of the content.
Well we gave it a go, guess this was inevitable
It's the shocking levels of non binary representation.
If I called you "silly" you might be offended, but to do so illustrates the fact that you can't turn back the tide, because "silly" originally meant "blessed" or "happy".
Not that long ago, having a gay time would have meant the same as being silly, if we insisted on only taking the original meaning of words uttered by someone intending a rather different meaning, we simply cease communicating.
So it's possible to have a discussion about etymology, but arguing you should interpret words in their original meaning rather than what the words are intended to convey, is rather futile.
Woke is simply another word in transition from its original more noble meaning, to something rather more nuanced and barbed.
The article is an essay on the etymology of the word but does not try and deny the current meaning has changed, as used by those she says have weaponised the word.
I suggest it is the barb that comes with the word's new meaning that is core to the author's argument, but the theme of pointing out why the word is used wrongly will not alter the fact that the word means something rather different today, like it or not.
I fully appreciate that the meaning of words can develop from what they meant originally to something else. Although the ‘root’ meaning of most words is still valid.
The problem with the word ‘woke’ to my mind is that it means something, but the scattergun use of the word has led it to mean nothing and everything.
What is the current meaning? ‘Political correctness’?
What irritates me is that the original meaning is there, it is recognised, it can be defined and explained, and what is more the original meaning is a very positive one about being against racism.
Now the word seems to be used as a negative sneer towards being against racism.
I have heard it said that police officers stopping burning down a hotel containing asylum seekers are being ‘woke’, or the RNLI rescuing migrants in the Channel are also being ‘woke’. Do you think those examples are what the word ‘woke’ means?
BLM ☑️
Wish someone would tell us….
Dog & mustard
Cat & cheese
Rabbit, lettuce & tomato
The word ’woke’ I think was a misuse of English. Black Americans probably wanted to say ’awake’ as in awake to the inequalities in their society and therefore highlighting their need to be careful.
One day people will wake up to the speciesist attitude in our society. So many people make a fuss over their pets and then eat another species, based on one simply being soft and cuddly, and the other not. Racism was once considered normal but rightly not now. Speciesism is now considered normal but I’m sure it won’t be in the future.
My nomination for MOTD presenter is Dale Vince.
My thoughts for what they are worth, having an ex player would be good. Any piss-taking flows so much better. Peter Crouch would be a good shout seeing as the BBC love his schtick and I like him, personable guy and gets on with people, and I'd love Alan Shearer to give him a death stare whenever he dropped a bollock or tried test the elbowing, goal-scoring geordie. I doubt he would want to do it but Ian Wright is someone else who has a perfect attitude for TV
In terms of the best people for the job @Rothko hit the only nail on the head worth hitting. James Richardson. Served his apprenticeship many moons ago and has an immaculate delivery
Mark Chapman is very decent too, it wouldn't be a travesty iftf he got the gig
The BBC ruined the more fun stuff like football focus and 606 by employing people unfit for the jobs and a production team insistent on ticking boxes rather than making entertaining shows about football. Fucking DJ spoony doing 606, Robbie Savage was just as bad. That show was great when done by Danny Baker and I get he is a difficult act to follow but it isn't an impossible formula.