I agree
I don’t
Or maybe we stop trying to view every policy on a one dimensional sliding scale. Maybe we could start engaging with the actual policies rather than picking sides.
No, but there are plenty of articles that aren’t written specifically to elicit an angry emotional response, or use specific inflammatory rhetorical language.
Regarding Mount Sinai specifically, perhaps anyone would be better served reading these articles from them instead of focusing on their ‘wokeness’.
Oh look. Articles that are actually interesting and weren’t just written to make you more mad at half the population. And are ACTUALLY relevant to the real work done at the hospital in question. Neato.
1 Like
What was the specific inflammatory rhetorical language? “Woke”?
yes.
1 Like
Can I ask what other term should be used to describe woke ideals without saying “woke” then? I’m honestly not sure how else one would describe these ideals, as it appears the self-proclaimed term “woke” is now inflammatory.
you seriously don’t know how the word ‘woke’ could have easily been omitted? How about literally just removing the word from the sentence? ‘Mount Sinai’s Blueprint for Medicine’. And then you write an article about their blueprint for medicine.
If this article was not meant to simply be an attack on woke-ism, and was instead meant to just be about a particular hospital’s medical policies/direction, that is what it would have been. The fact that the word ‘woke’ is in the title IMMEDIATELY tells me that this is article is far more about woke-ness than it is about hospitals and medical care.
1 Like
there are several words in the English language that, when used by one group as self-identification, mean one thing, and mean quite another when used by a group that doesn’t particularly like them. I bet you can think of a few. Let’s be genuine here, there’s no reason to throw your hands up and say ‘well that’s what THEY call themselves, why can’t we??’ Context matters, and we both know the context here.
1 Like
And for the record in ALL of this. Just so we’re clear. I’m not defending ‘woke ideology’, in any way. I’m attacking shitty journalism.
1 Like
I think the article was written explicitly to cover the change in approach this school is undertaking. I agree that the title could have been worded differently, and the article could have omitted everything about these new ideals, but then there would be no article either. There were no changes in how they intend to teach medicine outside of these subjects specifically; being that the article was covering these changes - I don’t believe there is a good way of effectively stating the purpose of this article without using the term “woke”.
I do agree though, that the article is inflammatory in its’ purpose.
Agree here as well, but i don’t think this necessarily fits with the “woke” term though. I was going to be vague about terms here but I don’t think I can without the intent being lost…
An opinion I once heard justifying the continued use of the N-word by the black population is that the term is used to effectively gain power over the word that was once used to degrade them (again, this is not my opinion). Everyone knows who can and cannot say the N-word, but that term was originally used by their oppressors against them - and to my knowledge was also created by the oppressors (please correct me if I’m wrong here).
Where this falls short of the “woke” term usage is that the term became popular effectively meaning to “wake up” without any bearing on political ideologies, but started becoming popular to the far lefts’ narrative of “waking up” against the current system. They then started self-identifying as “woke”. I am lacking an understanding of what other term could be used to describe these musings other than “short-sighted”, “illiberal”, or “just plain stupid”, but I also believe that woke ideologies are completely fucked and fundamentally/factually wrong.
Translation:
“Yeah, the source is crap. Therefore I am off the hook for providing an argument, you’re just a mean oppressor.”
So your superior? By what metric?
That’s one way to not answer the question.
Only if it is not true…
How dare you make sense!
And you believe science.org is not a slanted source?
I wonder which way they lean? Hmmm, they have an articles entitled “Transgender rights rely on inclusive language”, " Brazil’s deception threatens climate goals", “News stories must account for gender bias”, “STEM disparities we must measure”.
lol… dude, seriously, this is your counter source? Just because they call themselves ‘science’ does not make them even remotely neutral or unpolitical. That collection took me less than 5 seconds to find. They are woke as shit.
Well, if the boot fits… What’s wrong with ‘woke’? It really doesn’t matter what you call it, it’s still post-modernist, neo-marxist garbage.
I prefer “the cult” myself. It’s more fitting anyway. As you have to be have braindead to believe in post-modernist, neo-marxist horseshit and resembles nothing equating being awake and aware. Not of reality at least.
Translation: “I am attacking anything that doesn’t fit the cult narrative.”
And this is the formula.
I guess you missed the post where I said, quite specifically, that I am not making any argument whatsoever to support woke ideals. I’ll go ahead and repeat it here.
I believe that the specific articles I posted are not slanted towards a particular political narrative. When you get a chance to read them, you can tell me if you agree.
1 Like
You posted a scientific synopsis about the opinion that they believe they found a neural mechanism for supporting advanced cognitive abilities. And they may have, but it has nothing at all to do with the topic. So I really cannot see the point. You made no argument that the AMA did not go woke. So, did you concede that point?
Yes it does.
I am making the point that spending all your fucking time whining about woke-ism and seeking out articles about how annoyingly woke certain American institutions are is a waste of fucking time, and the journalists who write these articles are an embarrassment to the profession.
Nor did I ever fucking intend to. I said the journalism is crappy. Standing by that. I give zero fucks if Mount Sinai is ‘woke’ or not. Why do you?
1 Like
I am still unsure how these recommendations from the AMA to medical practitioners will negatively affect folks in this thread.
1 Like
Distracts from things the AMA and doctors should be focusing on.
1 Like
Idk, mental health is a big new focus of most GPs (IME), and this would seem to be another tool in the belt to use as they see fit.
Building trust with patients is hugely important as well. A patient that trusts and feels that their GP is invested in their well-being is more likely to follow the medical advice given. This is a way to connect with and build trust with individuals who may currently lack a positive relationship with their medical practitioner.
Some respond well to tough love. Others need to be handled with kiddy gloves. These AMA recommendatuons are for use with people that need more coddling. The end goal is to help each individual patient, not to weed out the weak ones.
It would be terrible if people somehow got distracted by unimportant things.
2 Likes
SCIENCE
I don’t spend all my time whining about wokism, just aa decent amount. And it matters because it’s a mind virus that is actually causing harm to people. So it must be met with harsh resistance. And I will continue to whine, moan, and complain until it’s dead.
It seems like you give a huge fuck, given the tirade you went on. I give a fuck if they are woke because woke is inherently discriminatory. And it’s mandated lying. How do you treat patients if you can’t even ascertain their gender? Kind of important in medicine. How can you practice medicine if you have to dance around the topics that matter in order not to give offense to a small minority of maniacs. This shit bleeding into institutions is detrimental.
And you are playing games. You don’t like “the journalism” because it doesn’t fit your narrative. If it were CNN you would not have made 20 posts regarding the ‘source’. I don’t gladly suffer hypocrisy, which this is.
I’m going to regret asking this, but what harm is it causing people?
Again, I’m going to regret asking this, but why is “wokeness” inherently discriminatory?
Do you feel this way about everything that causes harm to people?
Very brave of you. I’m sure your whining, moaning and complaining online has done great work pulling the world back from the woke abyss.