SkipCaptcha
235
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
start article
'''Woke Fragility''' is a psychological condition that describes the predisposition of [[Woke]] folk to resist challenges to being woke. This condition was first described in a 2020 essay by a STEM graduate student writing under the pen name "I. Karamazov."<ref name=woke>{{cite web|url=https://medium.com/@crockoduck/woke-fragility-2338138e0b9e|title=Woke Fragility|date=August 13, 2020|accessdate=2020-08-31}}</ref>
Woke Fragility is defined as "discomfort and defensiveness of the part of a Woke person when confronted with information about racial inequality and injustice that isn’t flattering to their worldview. Woke Fragility is a state in which even a minimum amount of empirical or analytical stress on Woke ideology becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves. These moves include the outward display of emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt, and behaviors such as argumentation, silence, leaving the stress-inducing situation, and worst of all, satire."<ref name=woke/>
Woke Folk identify defects in society (e.g., poverty and racism) and then insist that the only possible solution to those problems is to turn over control of society to Woke Folks by placing them in positions of power. This believe ignores the empirical evidence that poverty and racism are improving without such a transfer of power. Woke Fragility blinds Woke Folk from seeing other options or the facts.
Woke Folk operated in an "echo chamber" of biased media that constantly reinforce a certain [[woke]] perspective regarding race relations and other sensitive topics. This provides a false sense of ideological comfort known as Woke Privilege. Woke Privilege, in turn, represents the ability to attack people holding contrary views so as to create a [[cancel culture]]. Because Woke Folk can get confused by the conflicting claims of various identity groups under [[intersectionality]], professional woke facilitators offer training (at a high fee) "to the development of empirical and analytical skill sets talk directly about how such skills can be used to challenge ideologies generally, and almost never discuss Woke privilege specifically."<ref name=woke/> Indeed, Robin DiAngelo's speaking fee runs between $10,000 to $15,000.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/28/white-liberals-profit-privilege|title=$12K A Day: How White Liberals Profit From Pushing ‘White Privilege’|work=Daily Caller|date=July 28, 2019|accessdate=2020-08-31}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://freebeacon.com/culture/the-wages-of-woke-2/|title=The Wages of Woke|date=July 25, 2020|accessdate=2020-08-31}}</ref> Woke Fragility explains why policymakers on many university campuses have used their Woke Privilege to enact "speech codes" that prohibit discussion of anti-woke viewpoints.
==Relationship with "White Fragility"==
According to Karmazov, woke fragility owes "its existence to Robin DiAngelo’s seminal 2011 paper on White Fragility, without which my theory of Woke Fragility would have been impossible to formulate."<ref name=woke/> Some people argue that the essay was intended as a satirical attack on DiAngelo's book ''White Fragility''.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrqGDrghnFg|title=Falsifying Wokeness with King Crocoduck|accessdate=2020-08-31}}</ref> Certainly, most white people find the attack on Woke Folk made by the Woke Fragility theory to be more valid and realistic than the attack on white people made by the White Fragility theory. However, by definition, neither theory offers any empirical way of validating or choosing one over the other. Given the critical epistemology theory of making everything relative to subjective viewpoints, Woke Fragility theory will win out over White Fragility theory because the world's population of white people is greater than the population of Woke Folk. Any effort to deny this obvious truth (or to delete it from this article) would be an improper exercise of Woke Privilege.
==References==
<references/>
[[Category:Bigotry]]
Woke Fragility is defined as "discomfort and defensiveness of the part of a Woke person when confronted with information about racial inequality and injustice that isn’t flattering to their worldview. Woke Fragility is a state in which even a minimum amount of empirical or analytical stress on Woke ideology becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves. These moves include the outward display of emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt, and behaviors such as argumentation, silence, leaving the stress-inducing situation, and worst of all, satire."<ref name=woke/>
Woke Folk identify defects in society (e.g., poverty and racism) and then insist that the only possible solution to those problems is to turn over control of society to Woke Folks by placing them in positions of power. This believe ignores the empirical evidence that poverty and racism are improving without such a transfer of power. Woke Fragility blinds Woke Folk from seeing other options or the facts.
Woke Folk operated in an "echo chamber" of biased media that constantly reinforce a certain [[woke]] perspective regarding race relations and other sensitive topics. This provides a false sense of ideological comfort known as Woke Privilege. Woke Privilege, in turn, represents the ability to attack people holding contrary views so as to create a [[cancel culture]]. Because Woke Folk can get confused by the conflicting claims of various identity groups under [[intersectionality]], professional woke facilitators offer training (at a high fee) "to the development of empirical and analytical skill sets talk directly about how such skills can be used to challenge ideologies generally, and almost never discuss Woke privilege specifically."<ref name=woke/> Indeed, Robin DiAngelo's speaking fee runs between $10,000 to $15,000.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://dailycaller.com/2019/07/28/white-liberals-profit-privilege|title=$12K A Day: How White Liberals Profit From Pushing ‘White Privilege’|work=Daily Caller|date=July 28, 2019|accessdate=2020-08-31}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://freebeacon.com/culture/the-wages-of-woke-2/|title=The Wages of Woke|date=July 25, 2020|accessdate=2020-08-31}}</ref> Woke Fragility explains why policymakers on many university campuses have used their Woke Privilege to enact "speech codes" that prohibit discussion of anti-woke viewpoints.
==Relationship with "White Fragility"==
According to Karmazov, woke fragility owes "its existence to Robin DiAngelo’s seminal 2011 paper on White Fragility, without which my theory of Woke Fragility would have been impossible to formulate."<ref name=woke/> Some people argue that the essay was intended as a satirical attack on DiAngelo's book ''White Fragility''.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrqGDrghnFg|title=Falsifying Wokeness with King Crocoduck|accessdate=2020-08-31}}</ref> Certainly, most white people find the attack on Woke Folk made by the Woke Fragility theory to be more valid and realistic than the attack on white people made by the White Fragility theory. However, by definition, neither theory offers any empirical way of validating or choosing one over the other. Given the critical epistemology theory of making everything relative to subjective viewpoints, Woke Fragility theory will win out over White Fragility theory because the world's population of white people is greater than the population of Woke Folk. Any effort to deny this obvious truth (or to delete it from this article) would be an improper exercise of Woke Privilege.
==References==
<references/>
[[Category:Bigotry]]