4 ms·

This is a problem across charities it seems - political activism is not necessarily bad, but when it's all generic woke stuff that has nothing to do with the ch

This is a problem across charities it seems - political activism is not necessarily bad, but when it's all generic woke stuff that has nothing to do with the charity's mission, it becomes really frustrating. The ACLU is another obvious example (as is Canada's equivalent the CCLA that I stopped supporting). But even a hospital I used to support has gotten into the business of pronouns and stuff, and regardless of the merit of that sort of thing, it's not anywhere near the top of causes people expect their hospital donations to go to. It would be nice to see charities much better stick with their mandates and not have this creep that happens where the current thing is somehow automatically an issue for them Edit: I'm also very interested in the way this story has been ranked on Hn. It's had a lot of votes in a short time that would normally get it right up to the top, yet it's currently on the second page. I know enough that there's not some nefarious thing happening, though it's curious whatever quirk of the algorithm / moderation is keeping the story down in the ranking

greyface- 4y ago
> Edit: I'm also very interested in the way this story has been ranked on Hn. It was submitted and flagkilled a few hours ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33167393 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33167393 I wouldn't be surprised if The Algorithm punished this for being a duplicate.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
jwmcq 4y ago
- sieabahlpark 4y ago
- mortenjorck 4y ago
  ”Woke” is a flawed term for a sprawling movement, but the best I’ve read on it is Wesley Yang's framework of successor ideology. As it would happen, Wikipedia actually has a pretty good overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Successor_ideology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Successor_ideology
  - jwmcq 4y ago
    Wow, what a theory. Please, tell me more about the authoritarianism of the least powerful people in society. To be fair, I was being glib there. This probably is the best attempt I've seen to define it - certainly better than when I usually ask the question that I did. In truth, though, I believe there is no 'woke' movement. I'm old enough to remember when people moaning about this stuff called it "political correctness gone mad" and, just like then, I have seen very little to convince me that 'wokism' and 'wokeness' are not just terms used by reactionaries who enter the 'free marketplace of ideas' and lose.
    - chudmeister 4y ago
      [flagged]
  - version_five 4y ago
    See what happens when you reply to "could you define it" comments? It's just a rhetorical device to set you up to then start debating your definition. Better to just ignore
    - jwmcq 4y ago
      Heaven forbid someone asks you to define the terms you're arguing from. You're right, though, it's absolutely a rhetorical device. But I'll continue to use it because it's quite effective - I've yet to see a definition from someone complaining about 'wokeness' that doesn't devolve into "I just want to continue making things worse for marginialised people, and will complain when a large enough number of people tell me off for it". I am absolutely open to you setting me straight on this, by the way, but I genuinely don't see much of a difference betweeen the reaction against what is currently called 'woke' and the complaints in the 1980/90s about the 'political correctness' of not being able to use racial slurs or sexist language on TV or in print any more. We know who was on the right side of history there, I'd like to think.
- TraceWoodgrains 4y ago
  He means this: https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/please-just-fucking-tell-me-what https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/please-just-fucking-tel...
vba616 4y ago
>the business of pronouns and stuff, and regardless of the merit of that sort of >thing, it's not anywhere near the top of causes people expect their hospital >donations to go to If I received a complaint along these lines, I would earnestly explain that we are looking into an electron recycling initiative to compensate for the extra letters in email signatures.
tootie 4y ago
I work at a nonprofit that is all in on pronoun affirmation. It doesn't mean we've spent a millions of donor funds on pronoun consultants, we just added a field on our active directory. Employees demanded it.
- 20after4 4y ago
  Wikimedia likely has spent quite a lot of donor funds on pronoun consultants. I sat in on some of the meetings. - Former employee of Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Opinions and pronouns are my own.
hondo77 4y ago
> But even a hospital I used to support has gotten into the business of pronouns and stuff, and regardless of the merit of that sort of thing, it's not anywhere near the top of causes people expect their hospital donations to go to. You're kidding, right? You won't donate to a hospital because "pronouns and stuff" isn't part of "their mandates"? How about sexual harassment? Should they turn a blind eye to that in the workplace because it's not part of their mandates. Lunch breaks? Birthday parties? Seriously, if pronouns is the reason you stopped donating to an otherwise worthy cause, I don't see the hospital as the problem.
- version_five 4y ago
  A smug dismissal doesn't change people's minds. You can accept that many people don't go in for their donations being spent this way, try to hide it from them, or write them off as donors. This sort of condescension doesn't do anything.
- agensaequivocum 4y ago
  Yes because the notion that one can choose his pronouns is one of the most insidious lies in contemporary culture.
onos 4y ago
Agree. There are many causes that people across the political spectrum would support a la carte, but for some reason many institutions have recently collapsed into a “must support all of the above” posture. Bring back the single issue institution!

greyface- 4y ago

> Edit: I'm also very interested in the way this story has been ranked on Hn. It was submitted and flagkilled a few hours ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33167393 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33167393 I wouldn't be surprised if The Algorithm punished this for being a duplicate.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

jwmcq 4y ago

sieabahlpark 4y ago
mortenjorck 4y ago
”Woke” is a flawed term for a sprawling movement, but the best I’ve read on it is Wesley Yang's framework of successor ideology. As it would happen, Wikipedia actually has a pretty good overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Successor_ideology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Successor_ideology
- jwmcq 4y ago
  Wow, what a theory. Please, tell me more about the authoritarianism of the least powerful people in society. To be fair, I was being glib there. This probably is the best attempt I've seen to define it - certainly better than when I usually ask the question that I did. In truth, though, I believe there is no 'woke' movement. I'm old enough to remember when people moaning about this stuff called it "political correctness gone mad" and, just like then, I have seen very little to convince me that 'wokism' and 'wokeness' are not just terms used by reactionaries who enter the 'free marketplace of ideas' and lose.
  - chudmeister 4y ago
    [flagged]
- version_five 4y ago
  See what happens when you reply to "could you define it" comments? It's just a rhetorical device to set you up to then start debating your definition. Better to just ignore
  - jwmcq 4y ago
    Heaven forbid someone asks you to define the terms you're arguing from. You're right, though, it's absolutely a rhetorical device. But I'll continue to use it because it's quite effective - I've yet to see a definition from someone complaining about 'wokeness' that doesn't devolve into "I just want to continue making things worse for marginialised people, and will complain when a large enough number of people tell me off for it". I am absolutely open to you setting me straight on this, by the way, but I genuinely don't see much of a difference betweeen the reaction against what is currently called 'woke' and the complaints in the 1980/90s about the 'political correctness' of not being able to use racial slurs or sexist language on TV or in print any more. We know who was on the right side of history there, I'd like to think.
TraceWoodgrains 4y ago
He means this: https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/please-just-fucking-tell-me-what https://freddiedeboer.substack.com/p/please-just-fucking-tel...

vba616 4y ago

>the business of pronouns and stuff, and regardless of the merit of that sort of >thing, it's not anywhere near the top of causes people expect their hospital >donations to go to If I received a complaint along these lines, I would earnestly explain that we are looking into an electron recycling initiative to compensate for the extra letters in email signatures.

tootie 4y ago

I work at a nonprofit that is all in on pronoun affirmation. It doesn't mean we've spent a millions of donor funds on pronoun consultants, we just added a field on our active directory. Employees demanded it.

20after4 4y ago
Wikimedia likely has spent quite a lot of donor funds on pronoun consultants. I sat in on some of the meetings. - Former employee of Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Opinions and pronouns are my own.

hondo77 4y ago

> But even a hospital I used to support has gotten into the business of pronouns and stuff, and regardless of the merit of that sort of thing, it's not anywhere near the top of causes people expect their hospital donations to go to. You're kidding, right? You won't donate to a hospital because "pronouns and stuff" isn't part of "their mandates"? How about sexual harassment? Should they turn a blind eye to that in the workplace because it's not part of their mandates. Lunch breaks? Birthday parties? Seriously, if pronouns is the reason you stopped donating to an otherwise worthy cause, I don't see the hospital as the problem.

version_five 4y ago
A smug dismissal doesn't change people's minds. You can accept that many people don't go in for their donations being spent this way, try to hide it from them, or write them off as donors. This sort of condescension doesn't do anything.
agensaequivocum 4y ago
Yes because the notion that one can choose his pronouns is one of the most insidious lies in contemporary culture.

onos 4y ago

Agree. There are many causes that people across the political spectrum would support a la carte, but for some reason many institutions have recently collapsed into a “must support all of the above” posture. Bring back the single issue institution!