#not because they're realistic depictions of destructive human behavior

[galadrieljones]

How did this start? What is the template for this? Has this person ever read a book? How do they deal? Where do they draw the line? This is actually terrifying

This tweet is just... Odd. Very odd.

Like... You live like this? You write like this? You think like this??

[bonefall]

I don’t know if the Erin’s are romanticizing abuse, don’t realize they’re writing it, or both because this is genuinely getting concerning

They’ve written how many abusive husbands and then said that those husbands are actually great people who deserve everything?

Well, let's apply Occam's Razor. Which of these makes the most sense;

The writing team has accidentally written at least 3 (more like 5) realistic depictions of domestic abuse, and just happen to be consistently more sympathetic to the men in the relationships, and find that romantic involvement makes a character humanizing in general Or

The writing team has a warped perception of what healthy love is supposed to look like, and think that the behaviors they depict are normal and just part of relationships.

I think the phrase "romanticizing abuse" is kind of unhelpful tbh, because it's not totally accurate. Most people believe they're doing the right thing. It's not likely that they KNOW what they're doing is destructive, and are secretly twirling an evil mustache as they write it into a teenage cat book series in the hopes of making more victims.

It's not entirely romanticism/glorification, it's deeper. It's the idea that these behaviors are normal, understandable, and they as writers either a total disinterest in the internal lives of the victims (Turtle, Bumble) or the desire to "explore" the relationship as if both sides are on equal footing/mutually toxic (Squilf)

And Tom... Tom's redemption ties into the narrative about blood that DOTC tells. It says that having children produces a goodness in men, and biological connection (even to people you don't know) is an intrinsic, sometimes tragic fact of life. The only time Tom ever does something that wasn't actively malicious was saving his daughter, Sparrow Fur.

For that, and that alone, he is redeemed. And thus deserves a cutesy reward in his afterlife.

[mitigatedchaos]

"Woke (pejorative)" has an effective definition, and that's the point of using it as an overbroad snarl.

The broad meaning of "Nazi" is "anyone or anything I dislike." The narrow meaning is the actual National Socialist German Workers' Party, as lead by Hitler, that pushed the world into a World War and killed millions of people.

The broad meaning of "Fascist" is "anyone I deem insufficiently left-wing," and the narrow meaning is more like the specific authoritarian right-wing nationalist governments of Japan, Italy, and Germany during World War 2. (It's inherently more vague.)

Personally I go by the ideological mechanics, and so when I say something is "Fascist," I mean an ideological component that treats the national super-organism as fundamentally superior to the individual human beings that compose it, rather than existing in a reciprocal relationship. (@samueldays will probably want to argue about that) It should go above and beyond just allowing harms to pass through from the environment.

"Woke (pejorative)" means "illiberal left-identitarian," which is a thing that is actually bad, since it has awful ideological mechanics. As I've said before, it's based on a form of sub-par race science that it doesn't permit questioning.

We know it's "illiberal left-identitarianism," because that's the thing that differentiates it from liberalism ("illiberal"), conventional Communism ("identitarianism"), and right-identitarianism (such as majority-race racial nationalism).

The destruction and oppression brought about by Communism created legitimacy for its opponents, but a lot of that legitimacy was spent by e.g. libcon capitalists. This includes the Republican party back during the W. Bush years calling everything "socialist." (Libcons telling people to e.g. 'just get a new job by learning to code lol' is not realistic for a number of people.)

For that reason a lot of their previous snarls aren't working, so they have to borrow one from the populists and try to paint (I'll assume collapsedsquid is reasonably accurately describing the situation here) "non-competes suck" as "woke," when it isn't.

"Social Justice Warrior" is a predecessor from before the contemporary woke ideology was as developed, and refers to, for instance, the kind of person that shows up to your fic to argue something ridiculous, like I dunno that depicting walking a dog is "problematic" because "some people have been traumatized by dogs, especially [favored racial group] who--" -- or the "I'm not here to educate you" types, and so on and so forth.

"SJW" derives its bite from the kind of person that does this being legitimately annoying, wildly disproportionately to the evidence they're working off of, and turning everything political.

In a certain sense it's more likely for people to use this kind of category fuckery the less the example actually matches. The attempted race rationing was legitimately "woke (pejorative)" but I don't feel the need to call it "woke" because it's so self-evidently bad.

"Woke" got swapped out for "SJW" because the underlying ideology and behavior being described became more dangerous and more influential.

Saw people riff of Hardspace: Shipbreaker being “Too Woke“ but so far the labor politics of it are not substantially different from a 2002 Slashdot poster.  Has “corporations will screw you over and the boss sucks and you should fight him“ become “woke?”