@noodlemaz words have many meanings, many connotations and denotations in actual usage. “woke[ness]” is an aggressively politicized term. yes it has its historical initial meaning, and other meanings, and proponents of various meanings are politically opposed to one another, rendering use in any sense inherently controversial, inherently offensive to one community or another. 1/

@noodlemaz but also, perhaps paradoxically, in some contexts the very controversy contributes to the clarity of what one is communicating. to refer, as i did, to “excess” wokeness as censorious invites the kind of controversy reflected in this exchange. i think that’s a feature, not a bug, because it communicates precisely what i am commenting on, a censoriousness both claimed and contested. 2/

@noodlemaz i myself am sympathetic to both the claim and the contestation. i identify more closely, politically and otherwise, with the community that would contest, but i view the claim has having a degree (an often exaggerated degree to be sure) of useful descriptiveness. i do think i’ve considered, no doubt imperfectly, the issues around my word choices. of course one can still take issue with them! /fin

@noodlemaz ( some meditation on this stuff — that one might definitely take issue with of course — here. https://drafts.interfluidity.com/2023/04/10/systemic-means-its-not-your-fault/index.html )