Recently I saw the criticism of "you guys call anything with a female or minority woke", and I foolishly engaged this person in an argument. This person was in their late teens (yes I know it was stupid to bother but I thought I could make him see he was wrong). He just stopped responding to me when I pointed out that there are plenty of female/minority characters that were liked across the board but now we live in a time where we are told that we have to like garbage movies or shows or we are bad poeple.
Honestly to me Woke means endless race/gender swaps, overhyping something because it was written or directed by a female/minority, and the ridiculous overrepresentation of lgbt.
My question is, is it even worth trying to fight against all this or just do like I do and mainly watch or read stuff from 2014 and prior? I follow certain youtubers and if they recommend a new show I'll check it out, but I do wonder what purpose it serves to go after DC, Disney, Star Trek, etc since they have shown that they hate us. One of my favorite nerd rants last year was when Eric July was pissed about the lady who was in charge of the Scarlet Witch show because she said she never read comic books and didn't know who Mephisto was. Stuff like this just pisses me off because if we suggest that maybe she do some research into the lore behind her show we are sexists.
So is it worth it to keep fighting?
The struggle is always for self sustenance; not against others (temptation to ignore self).
The fight you perceive represents a division (reason) caused by your consent to a suggestion (DC, Disney, Star Trek, etc.) Your consent to "not want" what they suggest (woke shit) will put you into a conflict with all those who consent to "want" the suggested. What the majority is being deceived to ignore; is that a) the few suggest to divide the many into reasoning (want vs not want) among each other, and b) either choice (wanting or not wanting the suggested information by others) represents the choice to ignore perceived inspiration; needed for self sustenance.
In other words...before you make the choice to want or not want anything suggested; you make a choice in response to balance (need/want) under natural law.
Your comment is pretty much impossible to understand. You okay? I see parts of your comment that are reasonable and that make sense, but some parts are almost word salad.
That's because you view it as suggested information (want or not want); instead of perceived inspiration (need). Understanding (comprehension) can only be grown by adaptation to KNOWL'EDGE, noun - "perception of that which exists".
You're being deceived to view what others suggest as knowledge; while ignoring the only perceived source of everything for it. For example...your senses perceive sound; while the choice of others allows them to shape perceived sound into suggestible meaning (words; brands; idols). When you consent to suggested information (words) you corrupt yourself to ignore the source of perceived inspiration (sound).
Others cannot give you understanding; you falling for the temptation of their suggested information tricks you to "stand under" them aka submitting your will to the suggestion made by their will.
As for impossible...each one represents form (life) within flow (inception towards death) aka resistance within velocity aka temporary growth within ongoing loss aka potential within potentiality...ALL is possible; yet each ONE within needs to grow the potential to utilize it; which requires the growth of comprehension (potential) out of perceived (potentiality); while resisting suggested (impotence).
I represent temporary chaos (form) within ongoing order (flow); hence struggling to sustain self; while resisting the temptation of others. Other than that...I'm fine.
a) you already perceived with your senses the written words; upon which you then chose to respond to by suggesting them to be senseless. Instead of trying to judge meaning by suggesting it to others; ask yourself if perceived inspiration represents ALL value; while choice based response represents ONEs evaluation thereof?
b) reason represents conflict (want vs not want) caused by consent to suggestion aka an imbalance that ignores perceived balance (need/want). The parasitic few use suggestion (-isms) to cause division (reason) among the many.
c) your choice of suggested information (want or not want) over perceived inspiration (need or want) is what corrupts you to perceive reality through the filter of a suggested conflict (want vs not want aka reason). Ask yourself...do you need to reason about water; food and shelter or do you need to adapt to thirst; hunger and lack of shelter no matter how much you want or not want it?
What if words are the issue that corrupt communication. What if suggested information like "insane person" can deceive you to consent to idolized meaning; while you ignore perceived meaning aka Insane (in sanus aka within sound) Person (per sonos aka by sound)?
What if real communication represents choice resonating with balance; instead of reasoning (agreement vs disagreement) over suggested choices (dissonance)? What if words as suggestible idols of meaning are used by the parasitic few as spell-craft to corrupt comprehension of perceived communication aka a tool to domesticate free will of choice?
Are you in control over your choice? Can you wield it to allow yourself to question any of the written above without choosing ignorance (want over need) once again? Your choice.