Woke Is a Hell of a Long Way From Awakened

Woke is the new derogatory term for anyone with an interest in the past or a hope for the future. I guess that pretty much precludes any argument about its meaning. Woke doesn’t like argument, because debate requires a definition for the two opposing views and no one yet has come up with a reasonable definition for the term. Ask someone who is screaming at you, finger pointed accusingly, that you are woke, what exactly they mean and their face dissolves into stuttering and stammering, neither of which will win an argument.

So I have one for your approval (as you no doubt knew I would)

To me, ‘woke’ is the linguistic equivalent to grabbing a conversational opponent by the shirt-front, shaking them senseless and either dropping them to the floor or slamming them up against a metaphoric wall. Accusation is the point, response is hardly expected, as those doing the slamming have no argument. “You’re damned well woke, so live with it.” Although it’s interesting to ask them, in the most controlled and inquisitive voice you can muster, what exactly they mean.

And by the way, if you take the time to look up the origin of the word the book-banners would call you and me, Woke is an adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English meaning "alert to racial prejudice and discrimination.”

Yeah, bring it on. I don’t mind being called that at all.

Contrast that with ‘awakened’

Awakened is generous and care-giving, a metaphoric offer of orange juice, toast and coffee while you’re still in your lounging pajamas. It expects a reply when you’ve tasted what’s on offer, recovered your thoughts and perhaps have actually paid attention to what was said. Nothing diffuses anger and bigotry like kindness.

One can awaken an interest in history or the prospect of future events, possibly even finding areas of agreement that are seldom found with one’s back against the wall. To awaken an interest in what someone else proposes, even if the proposal is miserably inadequate, is to guarantee a soft conversational landing. “Well, you have awakened an interest in me, can you tell me exactly what you mean by woke?”

It seems that might include understanding the reality of your country’s history

If you’re an American, that comes with a fair amount of baggage. It seems our early economic progress was based on the ownership of slaves and that knowledge could make some of the more delicate of our young people uncomfortable. But apparently that understanding is woke and it is all the rage these days to protect our children from and memory of unpleasant circumstances.

Then there’s the matter of an American genocide against out native Indian population, but let’s not wander too far afield.

Here's a Banned Book Data Snapshot. From July 2021 to June 2022, PEN America’s Index of School Book Bans lists 2,532 instances of individual books being banned, affecting 1,648 unique book titles. The 1,648 titles are by 1,261 different authors, 290 illustrators, and 18 translators, impacting the literary, scholarly, and creative work of 1,553 people altogether.

Should I care? My kids are way past school age and maybe I don’t have a monkey in this circus

I guess that depends upon how much you care about other people’s kids, but it’s an increasingly ‘fact attacked’ world out there. Here are just a few of the titles:

The Catcher in the Rye, J. D. Salinger, 1951; To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee, 1960; Brave New World, Aldous Huxley, 1932; Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell, 1949; Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck, 1937; The Color Purple, Alice Walker, 1982; Animal Farm, George Orwell, 1945, Beloved, Toni Morrison, 1987; Lord of the Flies, William Golding, 1954; The Grapes of Wrath, John Steinbeck, 1939; The Satanic Verses, Salman Rushdie, 1988; Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Mark Twain, 1884; Slaughterhouse-Five, Kurt Vonnegut, 1969; I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, Maya Angelou, 1969; A Farewell to Arms, Ernest Hemingway, 1929; The Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald, 1925; Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, J. K. Rowling, 1997; One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Ken Kesey, 1962.

Call me sentimental if you wish, but my eyes misted over as I copied the list. Orwell, Steinbeck, Vonnegut, Hemingway and Twain?

Really?

One can only wonder what those terrified parents kids were accessing otherwise

It’s no longer a dog-eared copy of Playboy hidden under the mattress.

(CNN) A new study found most kids are seeing adult material online by the age of 12. Nowadays, it’s easier for kids to access. So easy - it is now a regular part of many teens’ everyday lives. According to a groundbreaking new report by Common Sense, a nonprofit media company focused on kids and families, a majority of teens age 13 to 17 have seen pornography online either intentionally or accidentally.

A majority, huh? Well, thank god they weren’t catching up on Harry Potter.

Jim Steyer, Common Sense CEO, called the numbers “mind boggling. I was pretty shocked to know that 73% of all teenagers in the United States are exposed to pornography. Online pornography is everywhere, and kids are accessing it early.”

The report, based on a national survey of more than 1,300 teens, found the average age kids first saw online pornography was 12 years old - with some 15 percent seeing it by age 10 or younger. About eight in 10 teens who watched porn said they did so to learn how to have sex, with many saying they felt online porn provided helpful information. But more than half said they had seen porn that included depictions of rape, choking or someone in pain, making porn a growing concern for parents.

Well, I guess not all parents. They have not yet awakened to this more obvious threat.

Woke (if they can figure a way to define it) is an easier target. Besides that, if I know anything at all about those who rage at school board meetings, it’s that they probably leave a bit early to get home in time to watch a little porn.