To be woke is to be prepared to stand up to racism.
AND bore the arse off of everyone...
There is stuff you just ain't allowed to do, I would be more worried that the educator in question, didn't realise he would kop shit for it!
But strangely enough it's only people on the right who talk about woke so who's the boring ones?
Plum is on the right?
No but he wasn’t the first to mention woke . @R0TW did in the original thread title but he changed it . Seth was just explaining what it is to be woke. I don’t always agree with him but I do with him on this . Why woke is seen as an insult is beyond me .
See above. When it becomes akin to a religious belief requiring total, unquestioning adherence to utter nonsense on pain of excommunication (which it has), then it needs to be reasoned and ridiculed out of existence.
MLK made sense intellectually, empirically and morally. 'Woke' post-modernists attempting to 'update' his beliefs are intellectually, empirically and morally deficient. They have brought the contempt upon themselves.
That’s not woke . That’s extremism but somehow the word woke fits some people’s agenda.
Is it the kind of nonsense that only someone with the IQ of a 5-day old croissant would believe? Does it give them the opportunity to constantly bring it to the attention of everyone within squealing distance as a way of bringing attention to themselves and their superior moral constitution? Is it an employment creation scheme for those with worthless degrees from indoctrination centres (posing as educational establishments) who possess limitless credulity and zero intellectual curiosity or ability for independent thought? Does it pose as rebellion whilst aligning with the views of both the corporations, international globalist financiers, the Government, law enforcement and the judiciary, i.e the epitome of establishment conformity? Does it do (considerably more) harm than good to society in the grand scheme of things, despite claiming to do the opposite?
Then to me it's woke.
I can agree with you that despite being the establishment mainstream approved narrative, I also find it to be the preserve of extremists, so there is some common ground, I suppose!
Just to clarify a few points. My son and his class have officially left school. The IB results were issued two weeks ago on line. He smashed it getting 5 x 7s, and one 6. The important 7 was maths which has now got him a place at LSE. The maths teacher knew how much it meant to his class, and the whole class agreed to meet in the pub on the main road that does pizzas (Rose & Crown). Nothing too sinister. The agreement was a couple of hours as a simple congratulation gathering. They are all 18 years old and no doubt recently voted in the elections. I think they should be capable of making a decision of this nature without putting their excellent teachers career in jeopardy.
It was the deputy head at his infant school who set him on his way though mate!!
I thought the word "woke" was originally intended to label people who got offended by words like "manhole" or "man size" tissues, and has then evolved from there.
FFS man up.
Not possible since a bang on the head I received up Blackpool a while ago
Oy. Don't blame me mate Plus as far as I remember you have never been up me.
To be woke is to be prepared to stand up to racism.
AND bore the arse off of everyone...
There is stuff you just ain't allowed to do, I would be more worried that the educator in question, didn't realise he would kop shit for it!
But strangely enough it's only people on the right who talk about woke so who's the boring ones?
Plum is on the right?
No but he wasn’t the first to mention woke . @R0TW did in the original thread title but he changed it . Seth was just explaining what it is to be woke. I don’t always agree with him but I do with him on this . Why woke is seen as an insult is beyond me .
See above. When it becomes akin to a religious belief requiring total, unquestioning adherence to utter nonsense on pain of excommunication (which it has), then it needs to be reasoned and ridiculed out of existence.
MLK made sense intellectually, empirically and morally. 'Woke' post-modernists attempting to 'update' his beliefs are intellectually, empirically and morally deficient. They have brought the contempt upon themselves.
That’s not woke . That’s extremism but somehow the word woke fits some people’s agenda.
Is it the kind of nonsense that only someone with the IQ of a 5-day old croissant would believe? Does it give them the opportunity to constantly bring it to the attention of everyone within squealing distance as a way of bringing attention to themselves and their superior moral constitution? Is it an employment creation scheme for those with worthless degrees from indoctrination centres (posing as educational establishments) who possess limitless credulity and zero intellectual curiosity or ability for independent thought? Does it pose as rebellion whilst aligning with the views of both the corporations, international globalist financiers, the Government, law enforcement and the judiciary, i.e the epitome of establishment conformity? Does it do (considerably more) harm than good to society in the grand scheme of things, despite claiming to do the opposite?
Then to me it's woke.
I can agree with you that despite being the establishment mainstream approved narrative, I also find it to be the preserve of extremists, so there is some common ground, I suppose!
To be woke is to be prepared to stand up to racism.
AND bore the arse off of everyone...
There is stuff you just ain't allowed to do, I would be more worried that the educator in question, didn't realise he would kop shit for it!
I don’t find racism against my wife, children or grandchildren particularly boring. It is closer to threatening. Stay woke everybody, the racists are all around, often in disguise.
Not seen anyone mention racists in this thread except you, albeit I do agree with what you just said 100%.
Maybe just stick to the original subject eh?
I believe the misuse of the word woke as a catch all term diminishes the word as purely (and originally) a word about staying awake to racism. Then applying the word ‘woke’ to silly things undermines the strength of the term as being about standing up to racists. A teacher being warned or stopped from being over familiar with students is it’s own issue about power relationships and so on, it is nothing to do with wokeness as has been suggested.
To be woke is to be prepared to stand up to racism.
AND bore the arse off of everyone...
There is stuff you just ain't allowed to do, I would be more worried that the educator in question, didn't realise he would kop shit for it!
But strangely enough it's only people on the right who talk about woke so who's the boring ones?
Plum is on the right?
No but he wasn’t the first to mention woke . @R0TW did in the original thread title but he changed it . Seth was just explaining what it is to be woke. I don’t always agree with him but I do with him on this . Why woke is seen as an insult is beyond me .
It gave a rather outdated explanation, as evidenced by the dictionary.
Had I been of this generation and that group, I certainly wouldn't have been allowed to be there and to drink alcohol as my birthday is the end of August - as would roughly two of every average sized group of 24 pupils. But as has been stated categorically by the opening poster they all were so, presumably, that was checked already by the pupils and the teacher (assuming the teacher actually has access to that information and didn't just ask them all). It is something that both my sons have found an issue in past when going to venues that call for 18 (or 21) to be the age of entry. At least one of their peer group hasn't been old enough to do so.
Notwithstanding that, it is a real shame that the get together wasn't allowed to go ahead. It is indicative of the times that rules are set in place that go beyond a duty of care but one has to accept that if they are broken then it is the teacher's career that has a black mark against it and not the pupils'. We live in times when every single person has to ensure that they do everything to the letter of the Law because if they don't then there are repercussions. Whether we like it or not. What if an incident had happened such as a fight? The headlines would not have been mostly about the pupils though the mention of the school's name would have brought reputational damage. It would have been about the teacher and with the advent of mobile phones and social media, there really is no hiding place. "Teacher at Bexley Grammar arranges pxxx up for pupils that descends into full blown brawl".
Times have, as I say, moved on and so much so since what was deemed as something that could be shown a blind eye to - my school mates and I used to take our school ties off at lunchtimes and pop into the Old Black Horse in Half Way Street, Sidcup for a pint and a game of darts! We were a few years older and the forerunners of the group a few years later that infamously became known as "Sozzlehurst and Hiccup" in the national press: https://www.raggedclown.com/2009/03/26/sozzlehurst-and-hiccup/
Most of all, though, the saddest thing of all is that this incident has been allowed to descend into a full blown argument about the definition of "woke" on here. Threads have been closed for less. I know because I've started one or two of them!
No one has yet answered the question whether they'd be happy for their 18 year old daughter and a few female mates to go out drinking with someone who was their teacher a week or two previously?
I can't help think there's a touch of treating young lads differently coming through.
I can see both sides of this but, as above, there's a dozen ways in which this could have gone pear shaped.
It was only a matter of weeks ago that a female teacher was jailed for having sex with two of her male pupils. So it probably best to have some strict boundaries.
Once again @Stu_of_Kunming has wanted to dehumanise me by calling me an ‘it’. Twice yesterday on this thread, then again today and on several occasions in the past. The ironic thing is that @Stu_of_Kunming will position himself as a superior poster, indulging in virtual backslapping with those others on here who personalise and show enmity towards me whenever and whatever I post. Even more ironic is that people will sneer if I mention it by saying I am ‘playing the victim’.
If @Stu_of_Kunming is encouraged to call me an ‘it’ and it is allowable, I wonder if it is allowable to call him the c**t that as far as I am concerned he is. The moderators would allow one insult but not the other I reckon.
My cautious choice of pronoun has a been explained several times, it’s absolutely nothing to do with dehumanising, you, once again choose to ignore that though, in order to, as always, play the victim.
Feel free to call me a c**t, it wouldn’t bother me in slightest, I certainly wouldn’t resort to tagging you multiple times within the same post. (You are aware only one notification can be sent per post, right?)
I’ve also never claimed superiority to anyone on this forum, your inferiority complex obviously comes from within, I’m sure there are professionals around that can help you with that, although I’d suggest you have more pressing issues to deal with first.
Once again @Stu_of_Kunming has wanted to dehumanise me by calling me an ‘it’. Twice yesterday on this thread, then again today and on several occasions in the past. The ironic thing is that @Stu_of_Kunming will position himself as a superior poster, indulging in virtual backslapping with those others on here who personalise and show enmity towards me whenever and whatever I post. Even more ironic is that people will sneer if I mention it by saying I am ‘playing the victim’.
If @Stu_of_Kunming is encouraged to call me an ‘it’ and it is allowable, I wonder if it is allowable to call him the c**t that as far as I am concerned he is. The moderators would allow one insult but not the other I reckon.
Haters going to hate - and you have expressed your visceral hatred for me. You have stated that you work on the basis that all white people are racists. You have actually named people you think are racist (Fiona Bruce, the TV presenter and BBC journalist, for example). You have your recurrent hobby horse themes that you regularly force into any reasonable conversation, even if it's not connected. You have have played a key part in having whole sections of this forum closed down.
But Stu is the problem.
It maybe inappropriate and you may see it as a "pile on", but he is calling out the identity politics "game" that you rely on and fall back on so regularly.
Have you ever considered why this "pile on" might happen so frequently, and almost uniquely on this board?
A few months ago I took a 6 week sabbatical - I didn't open Charltonlife in that whole time. The first couple of weeks were tough, but after a while it became easier, and I realised how easy it was to step back and out of conversations when they were spiralling. Occasionally I find myself sucked back in again (like here), but I would thoroughly recommend a sabbatical...
My cautious choice of pronoun has a been explained several times, it’s absolutely nothing to do with dehumanising, you, once again choose to ignore that though, in order to, as always, play the victim.
Feel free to call me a c**t, it wouldn’t bother me in slightest, I certainly wouldn’t resort to tagging you multiple times within the same post. (You are aware only one notification can be sent per post, right?)
I’ve also never claimed superiority to anyone on this forum, your inferiority complex obviously comes from within, I’m sure there are professionals around that can help you with that, although I’d suggest you have more pressing issues to deal with first.
Once again @Stu_of_Kunming has wanted to dehumanise me by calling me an ‘it’. Twice yesterday on this thread, then again today and on several occasions in the past. The ironic thing is that @Stu_of_Kunming will position himself as a superior poster, indulging in virtual backslapping with those others on here who personalise and show enmity towards me whenever and whatever I post. Even more ironic is that people will sneer if I mention it by saying I am ‘playing the victim’.
If @Stu_of_Kunming is encouraged to call me an ‘it’ and it is allowable, I wonder if it is allowable to call him the c**t that as far as I am concerned he is. The moderators would allow one insult but not the other I reckon.
Haters going to hate - and you have expressed your visceral hatred for me. You have stated that you work on the basis that all white people are racists. You have actually named people you think are racist (Fiona Bruce, the TV presenter and BBC journalist, for example). You have your recurrent hobby horse themes that you regularly force into any reasonable conversation, even if it's not connected. You have have played a key part in having whole sections of this forum closed down.
But Stu is the problem.
It maybe inappropriate and you may see it as a "pile on", but he is calling out the identity politics "game" that you rely on and fall back on so regularly.
Have you ever considered why this "pile on" might happen so frequently, and almost uniquely on this board?
A few months ago I took a 6 week sabbatical - I didn't open Charltonlife in that whole time. The first couple of weeks were tough, but after a while it became easier, and I realised how easy it was to step back and out of conversations when they were spiralling. Occasionally I find myself sucked back in again (like here), but I would thoroughly recommend a sabbatical...
You are wrong when you say I work on the basis that all white people are racists. Something I have never said. As for saying that I have stated my visceral hatred for you personally you will have to remind me by showing the evidence for that, or is it you who is playing the victim? @Stu_of_Kunming was asked by a moderator as long ago as November 2023 not to dehumanise by calling a person an ‘it’, but persists.
No one has yet answered the question whether they'd be happy for their 18 year old daughter and a few female mates to go out drinking with someone who was their teacher a week or two previously?
I can't help think there's a touch of treating young lads differently coming through.
I can see both sides of this but, as above, there's a dozen ways in which this could have gone pear shaped.
I don't have kids, but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't bother me in the slightest. As long as it was all transparent and not done in secret, and there was a genuine reason for the piss up.
I think that, sometimes, you just have to give people the benefit of doubt and assume they're not up to no good.
Once again @Stu_of_Kunming has wanted to dehumanise me by calling me an ‘it’. Twice yesterday on this thread, then again today and on several occasions in the past. The ironic thing is that @Stu_of_Kunming will position himself as a superior poster, indulging in virtual backslapping with those others on here who personalise and show enmity towards me whenever and whatever I post. Even more ironic is that people will sneer if I mention it by saying I am ‘playing the victim’.
If @Stu_of_Kunming is encouraged to call me an ‘it’ and it is allowable, I wonder if it is allowable to call him the c**t that as far as I am concerned he is. The moderators would allow one insult but not the other I reckon.
Haters going to hate - and you have expressed your visceral hatred for me. You have stated that you work on the basis that all white people are racists. You have actually named people you think are racist (Fiona Bruce, the TV presenter and BBC journalist, for example). You have your recurrent hobby horse themes that you regularly force into any reasonable conversation, even if it's not connected. You have have played a key part in having whole sections of this forum closed down.
But Stu is the problem.
It maybe inappropriate and you may see it as a "pile on", but he is calling out the identity politics "game" that you rely on and fall back on so regularly.
Have you ever considered why this "pile on" might happen so frequently, and almost uniquely on this board?
A few months ago I took a 6 week sabbatical - I didn't open Charltonlife in that whole time. The first couple of weeks were tough, but after a while it became easier, and I realised how easy it was to step back and out of conversations when they were spiralling. Occasionally I find myself sucked back in again (like here), but I would thoroughly recommend a sabbatical...
You are wrong when you say I work on the basis that all white people are racists. Something I have never said. As for saying that I have stated my visceral hatred for you personally you will have to remind me by showing the evidence for that, or is it you who is playing the victim. @Stu_of_Kunming was asked by a moderator as long ago as November 2023 not to dehumanise by calling a person an ‘it’, but persists.
I apologise...I misquoted you in the strictest sense.
"It won't diminish look how many millions chose to vote for a racist government with such enthusiasm. A lot of people are simply like that to the point that I assume everybody is a racist until I feel in some way reassured that they're not. I might add that being Chinese, or black or brown or Jewish or whatever does not stop someone being racist. However I am more wary of white English people than any other group (I don't live in America, Australia or South Africa).
Once again @Stu_of_Kunming has wanted to dehumanise me by calling me an ‘it’. Twice yesterday on this thread, then again today and on several occasions in the past. The ironic thing is that @Stu_of_Kunming will position himself as a superior poster, indulging in virtual backslapping with those others on here who personalise and show enmity towards me whenever and whatever I post. Even more ironic is that people will sneer if I mention it by saying I am ‘playing the victim’.
If @Stu_of_Kunming is encouraged to call me an ‘it’ and it is allowable, I wonder if it is allowable to call him the c**t that as far as I am concerned he is. The moderators would allow one insult but not the other I reckon.
Haters going to hate - and you have expressed your visceral hatred for me. You have stated that you work on the basis that all white people are racists. You have actually named people you think are racist (Fiona Bruce, the TV presenter and BBC journalist, for example). You have your recurrent hobby horse themes that you regularly force into any reasonable conversation, even if it's not connected. You have have played a key part in having whole sections of this forum closed down.
But Stu is the problem.
It maybe inappropriate and you may see it as a "pile on", but he is calling out the identity politics "game" that you rely on and fall back on so regularly.
Have you ever considered why this "pile on" might happen so frequently, and almost uniquely on this board?
A few months ago I took a 6 week sabbatical - I didn't open Charltonlife in that whole time. The first couple of weeks were tough, but after a while it became easier, and I realised how easy it was to step back and out of conversations when they were spiralling. Occasionally I find myself sucked back in again (like here), but I would thoroughly recommend a sabbatical...
You are wrong when you say I work on the basis that all white people are racists. Something I have never said. As for saying that I have stated my visceral hatred for you personally you will have to remind me by showing the evidence for that, or is it you who is playing the victim. @Stu_of_Kunming was asked by a moderator as long ago as November 2023 not to dehumanise by calling a person an ‘it’, but persists.
I apologise...I misquoted you in the strictest sense.
"It won't diminish look how many millions chose to vote for a racist government with such enthusiasm. A lot of people are simply like that to the point that I assume everybody is a racist until I feel in some way reassured that they're not. I might add that being Chinese, or black or brown or Jewish or whatever does not stop someone being racist. However I am more wary of white English people than any other group (I don't live in America, Australia or South Africa).
Comments
Is it the kind of nonsense that only someone with the IQ of a 5-day old croissant would believe?
Does it give them the opportunity to constantly bring it to the attention of everyone within squealing distance as a way of bringing attention to themselves and their superior moral constitution?
Is it an employment creation scheme for those with worthless degrees from indoctrination centres (posing as educational establishments) who possess limitless credulity and zero intellectual curiosity or ability for independent thought?
Does it pose as rebellion whilst aligning with the views of both the corporations, international globalist financiers, the Government, law enforcement and the judiciary, i.e the epitome of establishment conformity?
Does it do (considerably more) harm than good to society in the grand scheme of things, despite claiming to do the opposite?
Then to me it's woke.
I can agree with you that despite being the establishment mainstream approved narrative, I also find it to be the preserve of extremists, so there is some common ground, I suppose!
Don't blame me mate
Plus as far as I remember you have never been up me.
You should try it some time; if you're capable of it, that is.
what are IBs?
Notwithstanding that, it is a real shame that the get together wasn't allowed to go ahead. It is indicative of the times that rules are set in place that go beyond a duty of care but one has to accept that if they are broken then it is the teacher's career that has a black mark against it and not the pupils'. We live in times when every single person has to ensure that they do everything to the letter of the Law because if they don't then there are repercussions. Whether we like it or not. What if an incident had happened such as a fight? The headlines would not have been mostly about the pupils though the mention of the school's name would have brought reputational damage. It would have been about the teacher and with the advent of mobile phones and social media, there really is no hiding place. "Teacher at Bexley Grammar arranges pxxx up for pupils that descends into full blown brawl".
Times have, as I say, moved on and so much so since what was deemed as something that could be shown a blind eye to - my school mates and I used to take our school ties off at lunchtimes and pop into the Old Black Horse in Half Way Street, Sidcup for a pint and a game of darts! We were a few years older and the forerunners of the group a few years later that infamously became known as "Sozzlehurst and Hiccup" in the national press: https://www.raggedclown.com/2009/03/26/sozzlehurst-and-hiccup/
Most of all, though, the saddest thing of all is that this incident has been allowed to descend into a full blown argument about the definition of "woke" on here. Threads have been closed for less. I know because I've started one or two of them!
I can't help think there's a touch of treating young lads differently coming through.
I can see both sides of this but, as above, there's a dozen ways in which this could have gone pear shaped.
The ironic thing is that @Stu_of_Kunming will position himself as a superior poster, indulging in virtual backslapping with those others on here who personalise and show enmity towards me whenever and whatever I post.
Even more ironic is that people will sneer if I mention it by saying I am ‘playing the victim’.
The moderators would allow one insult but not the other I reckon.
Feel free to call me a c**t, it wouldn’t bother me in slightest, I certainly wouldn’t resort to tagging you multiple times within the same post. (You are aware only one notification can be sent per post, right?)
I’ve also never claimed superiority to anyone on this forum, your inferiority complex obviously comes from within, I’m sure there are professionals around that can help you with that, although I’d suggest you have more pressing issues to deal with first.
But Stu is the problem.
It maybe inappropriate and you may see it as a "pile on", but he is calling out the identity politics "game" that you rely on and fall back on so regularly.
Have you ever considered why this "pile on" might happen so frequently, and almost uniquely on this board?
A few months ago I took a 6 week sabbatical - I didn't open Charltonlife in that whole time. The first couple of weeks were tough, but after a while it became easier, and I realised how easy it was to step back and out of conversations when they were spiralling. Occasionally I find myself sucked back in again (like here), but I would thoroughly recommend a sabbatical...
Something I have never said.
As for saying that I have stated my visceral hatred for you personally you will have to remind me by showing the evidence for that, or is it you who is playing the victim?
@Stu_of_Kunming was asked by a moderator as long ago as November 2023 not to dehumanise by calling a person an ‘it’, but persists.
I think that, sometimes, you just have to give people the benefit of doubt and assume they're not up to no good.
"It won't diminish look how many millions chose to vote for a racist government with such enthusiasm.
A lot of people are simply like that to the point that I assume everybody is a racist until I feel in some way reassured that they're not.
I might add that being Chinese, or black or brown or Jewish or whatever does not stop someone being racist. However I am more wary of white English people than any other group (I don't live in America, Australia or South Africa).
One.
With a long and frequent history of calling fellow Charlton fans names, however he will spuriously now deny doing so.
I am glad you have cleared that up.