On "Wokeness" and the Wheel of Time - Be Thoughtful in Responding

[Guest Wolfbrother31]

But I am also saying ... 

Yes. I believe that only sex between a husband and a wife within marriage is morally right. 

And yes. I believe that we were created as male and female - both infinitely valuable. Humanity. 

 

(Which is what religious Jewish people, Muslims, and Christians all believe) ... So are Muslims, Jews, and Christians not welcome on DM?? 

 

And no. I don't think having those convictions makes me homophobic.

As I said... 

 

I can 100% love you as a person. And cherish you and your humanity. And want to be your friend. And celebrate your existence. You make my life better (even if we disagree). 

 

As I said...my dad is Transgender. I have many LGBTQ+ friends. I really like (most of the DM community). 

And hopefully we can have honoring conversations and appreciate each other and disagree. Without being labeled and dismissed and having our value/humanity diminished.

 

My previous posts were about accurately defining what I think (and I think that many other people think) is "woke". Some of that, is WoT ... and will turn people off and others will like it ... My take on it (which I hope I made clear) is that I just want a well told WoT adaptation ... So some of that is part of what I think of Woke & some is not. 

 

What would annoy me is if they make a bunch of changes to push that agenda rather than just let WoT be WoT and there's enough there for a whole bunch of ppl from very different backgrounds to like it. Which is great about DM community too. I love the diversity (and the casting too - that doesn't bother me - just have the best actors you can!!) 

 

Why alienate tons of people who don't want to have the "woke" agenda as I defined it (I don't agree hardly at all with how @Elder haman framed "woke" but @Beidomon already pointed that out) pushed on them?? Let WoT be WoT. It's a magnificent and complex story!! 

Edited November 15, 2021 by Wolfbrother31

[Siberian Rat]

It is only natural that an adaptation to a mass market conforms more to the predominant morals and values in the society it is intended for, than the society the source material was produced for.

Also, isn’t “woke” just another way of saying “(socio-)politically correct”?

[AusLeviathan]

2 hours ago, Siberian Rat said:

It seemes very prudish about it though, not much non-heteronormative stuff going on, at least not openly. The closest is the vague hints at the equivalent of English public school... activities.

There are more references to it occurring than just that, not much but enough that it becomes clear that no one in WOT seems to have a problem with it, there doesn't seem to really be a concept of homophobia in the WOT world.

 

49 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

And no. I don't think having those convictions makes me homophobic.

Actually it does, homophobia is defined as having a dislike or prejudice against homosexuality, basically any stance that is against the existence of homosexuality. When you say that you believe that homosexuality is a sin you are acknowledging your own homophobia.

 

Don't hide behind religion and pretend it absolves you. In the end you're still only just following a translation of a translation of a set of cherry picked texts that were themselves simply based (and changed multiple times) from older missing texts and oral tradition (and which contain a lot of assertions based on ideas at the time which we know now to not be true), they're also followed in full by very few people (because their laws are based on how a person lived thousands of years ago and not something most would want to subject themselves to in the present day).

 

If you want to spout homophobic views because of that then that's your right but if you're going to do so then at least follow through and acknowledge that you are being homophobic.

[king of nowhere]

56 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

But I am also saying ... 

Yes. I believe that only sex between a husband and a wife within marriage is morally right. 

And yes. I believe that we were created as male and female - both infinitely valuable. Humanity. 

 

(Which is what religious Jewish people, Muslims, and Christians all believe) ... So are Muslims, Jews, and Christians not welcome on DM??

depends.

the basic principle of the state-church separation is that religious people can apply religious law in their thinking, but it does not dictate the law of the state.

So, religious people have every right to personally disapprove of what other people do. though a lot of those religious people are actually very tolerant. brandon sanderson has a lot to say on the argument.

on the other hand, the lgbt community asks to be free. to be able to reveal themselves as who you are, to go out with their partner, without facing discrimination.

 

it took me a long time to understand this thing about coming out. I never felt the need to tell people "I am heterosexual", after all, and i could not get why the lgbt had to tell others of their orientation. But your identity is generally made of what sets you apart from other people. being hetero is not part of our identity because most people are, while those that stand out feel that the trait that makes them stand out is important. white people in the wester world don't identify themselves as white, unless they come from some racist background. but a white guy in africa would probably do, while black people there wouldn't think anything of being black, because it would not make them stand out.

I think?

 

anyway, all the lgbt community asks is to be seen and accepted. you can believe what they do is sinful, as long as you also believe that they have a right to be as they are.

this is where it gets complicated. you have a right to your beliefs, including the right to think them sinful. but they have a right to exhist, including the right to exhist without having a large portion of the population point them as sinful. It really is a big mess; I am not sure where the line should be drawn

 

But for your definition of wokeness, you can stay safe that women and minorities are not going to be shown perfect. valda is a black guy, padan fain too. and unless they find some way to make elaida a man, there will be women villains.

[dorotea]

On 11/10/2021 at 4:19 PM, Rose said:

 

 If your soul HAS to be male or female to be able to channel saidin or saidar, then non-binary people can't exist.

No, with this kind of approach the non-binary 'channelers' can't exist. The people that cannot channel are majority anyway. If you are too gender-fluid you cannot really master either side of the one power because they are describes as so different in the way they need to be handled. RJ made some serious effort to describe how each side is handled - you need to either surrender to saidar or master saidin. I assume that if you try to do both at the same time you will just burn out.

[king of nowhere]

19 minutes ago, AusLeviathan said:

 

Actually it does, homophobia is defined as having a dislike or prejudice against homosexuality, basically any stance that is against the existence of homosexuality.

 

I don't like that stance, though.

There is a vast gulf between "look, two men kissing! let's beat them up!" homophobia, and "i don't like that, but they are free to do it" homophobia. in fact, using the same word for both things is misleading.

 

Not liking people is NOT a crime. There's plenty of people I don't like, for a moltitude of reasons.

when members of the lgbt community ask to not be persecuted, not be hated, not be condemned, they are asking for their sacrosanct right. but when they pretend that they are not even disliked, they cross a border into censorship and thought control.

A witch hunt against homophobes isn't helping anyone. Indeed, I know people who wouldn't give a damn about the whole issue and are "homophobes" solely because they fear this witch hunt.

Edited November 15, 2021 by king of nowhere

[AusLeviathan]

19 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

Not liking people is NOT a crime.

Homophobia isn't a crime, it's a negative attitude against a specific group of people for who they are. A person becomes homophobic simply by engaging in such a negative attitude regardless of their reasons for doing so.

 

Now I'm just your average straight guy from a white working class family and I don't generally care too much about what people say, free speech and all that, it's your right to speak whatever way you want to. However actions do have consequences and if I hear hate from someone about a specific group of people based on prejudice like this then I'm 100% going to tear into that person's thought process and let them know exactly what I think of people like them and their justification.

 

This is really the best way to handle it in my opinion. People get away with hate because they aren't challenged, once challenged and actually forced to examine themselves I find that most back down pretty quick.

Edited November 15, 2021 by AusLeviathan

[Guest Wolfbrother31]

51 minutes ago, AusLeviathan said:

Actually it does, homophobia is defined as having a dislike or prejudice against homosexuality, basically any stance that is against the existence of homosexuality. When you say that you believe that homosexuality is a sin you are acknowledging your own homophobia.

 

Incorrect. I do not dislike homosexuals (you completely misread/lack nuance). As I said... I actually LOVE homosexuals and transgender people. And I still think them sinners (those ancient texts that are translations of translations - are the most reliable historical documents on the planet ... Yes, I studied textual criticism. We have about 10 Greek copies of Homer, we have 5,000 or so copies of the N.T, and yes, I read Koine Greek and am not backing down) those texts say that all humans are sinners. And that God (the highest ideal) so loved sinners that he became human (he probably knows better than anyone what it's like to not feel like you're in the right body) and died in the place of sinners. 

 

So no. Not homophobic. Do not dislike or fear homosexuals. Once again, I will repeat ... My own father is Trans. 

 

Even so. To have a category of sexual immorality you have to first have a standard or sexual morality (what is sexually right or good or godly- the ideal) and yes, I've studied at length and actually written a theological paper including the textual criticism of the Hebrew texts ... The Jewish/Christian scriptures consistently define sexual morality as sex between a husband and wife within marriage. Everything else is defined as sexual immorality. Pornography. Lust of any kind. Adultery. Homosexuality. Beastiality. Ect... All sexual sin. 

 

I fall into that category. Nevertheless... I believe that God loves me. And my dad. And Rose. And whoever else. 

 

So seriously, rather than straw-man dismiss or attack people who have Christian values. Maybe listen? Maybe extend some kindness and grace? Maybe, actually study the message? 

 

The current (and ever changing) cultural sexual ethic ... And every culture ever has had both sexual legislation and taboo elements... Is mostly centered around consent (and incest is still both illegal and taboo). The people who believe quite reliable religious texts that they believe are inspired by God (like myself) believe the sexual ethic should be defined by a higher law than what people at the time think right. 

[Guest Wolfbrother31]

11 minutes ago, NightWolf said:

28 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

time think right. 

Unfortunately, some people will not come to the table and have a mature dialogue. Any attempt in open discussion, especially if the parties involved have some varying views, typically (but not always) results in requited fire. It doesn't matter how kindly or how carefully you approach it (like you did) some will automatically make assumptions and take immediate offense. It's probably best to just let it go.

 

I hope not. Because how we grow ... and I want to grow, know the truth, be free ... Is to kindly discuss, have different opinions, be challenged in our thinking ... I love people who challenge me. Especially when they're kind about it. 

 

There's so much thoughtless dismissing and logical fallacies these days... Once free speech/civil dialogue is gone, we'll become very one sided and immature. 

 

Hopefully we can be kind and challenge one another. It's important enough to not let go.

 

DM in my experience has been great about letting their be varied opinions on WoT. 

 

I find that healthy - even when it's sometimes a downer for some people - 

 

I would really feel like we've experienced a great loss at DM if @Rose is really gone. She was very positive in her outlook - picked me up on occasion when my fears about the show were spiraling.blockquote widget

Edited November 15, 2021 by Wolfbrother31

[Skipp]

Well this topic has spiraled out of control. I hope @Rose comes back as I have enjoyed their thoughts on many subjects.

 

29 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

 

As I said... I actually LOVE homosexuals and transgender people.

 

you have said a lot here Wolfbrother but this statement is the racist equivalent to "I'm not racist because have I friends who are Black" 

 

You are entirely welcome to your views and your beliefs.  We all have our own that we each hold dear.  Some of your beliefs tell you that homosexuals are inherently sinners.  They are sinners for whom they are born as and not something they have a choice in.  That is why that belief is homophobic.  But you are allowed to hold that belief because no one has the right to tell you otherwise.

 

But if the Wheel of Time production decides to include more gay characters, or trans characters and that bothers you because of your beliefs.  Unfortunately that is on you and not them.  You would be free to watch or not watch as you wish.  Same as I would if they included something that went against my core beliefs.

 

One last thing, I believe in God but I do not believe in the Bible, The Hebrew Scriptures, or the Quran.  While I believe they could have been divinely inspired they were ultimately written by man and hence immediately fallible.  And it's not like a Bible was ever rewritten with changes that someone in power approved of.

[AusLeviathan]

A scholar who reads the old Greek texts (still a lot of translations in there but alright) and fully believes in God and is in favor of not presenting ideas to people not explicitly allowed by God but who is themselves an admitted sinner that loves other people they believe to be sinners? I'd be very interested in hearing the story of how a person gets to that point.

 

59 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

are the most reliable historical documents on the planet

They are not in the slightest bit reliable. They contain a ton of outright fabrications and inaccuracies because they are in many case stories that were told and changed depending on where and when they were being told in a better attempt to sell their message.

 

We can go back millions of years and see direct evidence of how humans evolved and even the existence of animals from hundreds of millions of years ago. Yet we have no direct evidence of even many of the more plausible things in the bible because they were stories, in at least one case a blatant fanfiction of three previous books and even a satire containing allusions to famous figures at the time that was never meant to be taken seriously .

 

The little evidence we have is all indirect, references made well after the texts were created which were almost certainly drawing upon them or the existence of some historical figures mentioned in the bible, notably not the ones that the stories are about though, almost like they were added to make the story more recognizable to people.

 

59 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

So no. Not homophobic. Do not dislike or fear homosexuals.

You hold a prejudice though and that's what makes you homophobic, that's the definition of the word, you can't change it because you don't like it.

 

59 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

Maybe extend some kindness and grace? Maybe, actually study the message?

Twelve years in catholic school, not once was I told by the people teaching me to hate homosexuals, likely because they realized how horrible it would be to pass a hateful prejudice on to someone else.

 

I extend kindness to those who deserve it, I have no respect for homophobic people.

 

59 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

The people who believe quite reliable religious texts that they believe are inspired by God (like myself)

They were inspired by whoever wrote them which was in almost all cases a man (this is easy to see because they tend to focus on being very advantageous towards men). They are all the words of man. Notice how by saying it's the word of God you immediately try to take the pressure off yourself. Since no one can talk to this God then no one has to answer for your beliefs, it's almost like that's the entire point isn't it. Freedom to do whatever you want and pass the responsibility for dealing with those actions onto something intangible.

 

To summarize, you are homophobic no matter how much you try to justify your prejudice and you should probably do some further study to understand exactly what makes something reliable (hint, outright provable fabrications are a good sign something isn't reliable).

Edited November 15, 2021 by AusLeviathan

[DaddyFinn]

@Wolfbrother31 please go preach somewhere else

[Wraith235]

from everything Ive read over the last few days I think I know what this boils down to
its all about respect, BOTH Ways 

you have the loyal fanbase saying that these changes are not respecting the property- (I'm personally here)
you have the new fanbase saying that not including these topics is not respecting them - 

 

Personally I believe that inclusion for the sake of inclusion is Horribly insulting (token Black guy trope anyone?)
and I feel that if your messing with someone else's property who didn't have these topics in the original  and you include these things then it is just that ....inclusion for the sake of it .... and that's wrong and it cheapens everything that those people have gone through .... and has the potential to make the fans of the original work Bitter and resentful of the people that the changes represent and by extension those that drove said change, and that benefits no-one 

that's the issue with Hollywood and all of these race/gender/sexuality swap reboots, its Pandering and insulting, and Lazy writing... 

Edited November 15, 2021 by Wraith235

[Lemming4lyfe]

I was involved in post production. I have been obsessed with WoT since high school,would never have dreamed I would work on a visual media adaptation,ever at any point. The following is my personal opinion only,as a fan who has seen significant portions of all 8 episodes of S1. They pillaged the source material. There are multiple characters acting,well,out of character. At no point did I feel like the source material was treated by someone who got the subtleties of the Female/Male realtionships as Jordan wrote them. The story has been appropriated by outsiders and it shows. That being said it was an extremely nice paycheck so I hope it's successful so I can potentially finish paying off my mortgage.

[DaddyFinn]

I was involved in post production too. Everything I saw was on point. Characters were well written, dialogue was great etc.

 

?

 

 

[Morani]

This thread makes me really sad to read. @NightWolf and @Wolfbrother31 - including people who are NOT white men, are NOT the same as saying that white men are less than. You have gotten so used to a world where you are pandered to, that you are mistaking equality for negative treatment. White men still hold most of the economical and political power in this world, and until that has changed, we have far from an equal society.  Including gay characters are not "woke", it is not "reflecting our society today". We have had gay people since the dawn of time. In some cultures it has been perfectly fine (like being gay in ancient Rome, or being trans in the Hawaii Islands) and in some it really has not. Judeo Christian culture has ben AWFUL towards LGBTQ people through the ages. They have been rooted out, murdered and tortured in the name of your god. You have quite a lot of history to atone for. Keep that in mind when you speak of sin. 

 

Including more LGBTQ people in randland, where LGBTQ does not seem to be a sin, according to how characters react to it in the books, will NOT make it "woke", is NOT a breach from the book - it is simply a way of broadening the world a bit more, without changing it. 

 

Including things you do not like is not an attack on you. This is your problem. Stop thinking everything is about you. I know you have been used to it being that way, but thankfully we are at least slowly approaching a reality where that is not always the case.

 

And @Rose - your posts are my favorite. Please do not let them scare you away. I think the reason this thread has been poorly moderated it that moderators are afraid some will cry "CANCELED" as soon as they tell people off for being hateful.

Edited November 15, 2021 by Morani
Spelling

[Siberian Rat]

8 hours ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

I don't think having those convictions makes me homophobic.

It kinda does though. What you’re expressing is pretty much the standard definition of homophobia. 

 

6 hours ago, AusLeviathan said:

enough that it becomes clear that no one in WOT seems to have a problem with it,

As I remember those parts, it was treated as something you were supposed to “grow out of”, 

Spoiler

hence the subplot where Cadsuane blackmails the Windfinder.

But perhaps other subtleties flew under my gaydar. 

-I have no problem with the TV show gaying it up a couple (or several) notches though. 

Spoiler

 

 

Edited November 15, 2021 by Siberian Rat

[Anders_nilsson]

I'm 45 years old and grew up with this books (and a lot other fantasy) and we always regarded wheel of time as somewhat "high fantasy". The roles of women and men are somewhat different than other fantasty but it's still easy to divide the world in male/famale, yin yang and so on. It was also clear that Jordan took inspiration from the world that he knew. A somewhat europeen battleground with eastern influenced filosophies.

 

The problem I battle with when it comes to "woke" and this tv-adaption is att Jordan hardly was "woke". The main reason is that this phenomenon did not even exist when he wrote these books. It's not unclear in the books whether all characters have different skin color. It's not unclear that the dragon is a man. It's not unclear that the books were written in the 90s by a white, middle aged man.

 

With that said, should tv-show makers of today feel free to change whatever they want? Ofc they are, but it comes with a high risk that the show don't resemble the source at all. As a viewer i feel that someone thinks I'm a dumb racist and there for they feel the need to picture every single character with different skin colour even though the come from a small rural village in the middle of nowhere. It's weird! ?

[notpropaganda73]

I have to say, I've only been on this board a short amount of time and have appreciated good discussion on the show and possible changes/speculation... but some of the posts over the last couple of days in particular are pretty upsetting. 

 

[Guest Wolfbrother31]

6 hours ago, DaddyFinn said:

@Wolfbrother31 please go preach somewhere else

 

If my beliefs are being attacked, I don't have a right to try to defend them here without it being preaching?? What do you call it when you or anybody else shares what they believe?? 

 

"To summarize, you are homophobic no matter how much you try to justify your prejudice."

 

Prejudice means that you favor one group over against another. I do not. I believe all groups to equally be sinners. But I don't think I get to define what sin is. 

 

7 hours ago, AusLeviathan said:

They were inspired by whoever wrote them which was in almost all cases a man (this is easy to see because they tend to focus on being very advantageous towards men). They are all the words of man.

 

The Bible claims multiple times to be the Word of God - inspired by God and written by man. I'm not making that claim to take pressure off myself - it makes that claim. 

If you're Catholic (or was slightly trained in catholic school) you know that it's very similar to the perspective they have on a Virgin birth resulting in a fully God, fully man (Jesus) - perfect though its God working through mankind. 

7 hours ago, AusLeviathan said:

The little evidence we have is all indirect, references made well after the texts were created which were almost certainly drawing upon them or the existence of some historical figures mentioned in the bible, notably not the ones that the stories are about though, almost like they were added to make the story more recognizable to people.

 

Your information here is actually all inaccurate. The New Testament (not all of it but most) was written within 60 years and all in Koine Greek (not translations of translations). The Hebrew text tradition is also remarkable. Why? Because the Hebrew scholars/scribes believe it was God's Word - so if their were any errors they'd start over. A way that they insured that there were not errors is that they wrote down how many words were in the manuscript they were about to copy and then they wrote down the middle word of the document and then the middle letter. If you didn't have the right number of words and middle word and middle letter you started over.

 

So, yes, most reliable historical documents on the planet by any scholarly metric. 

And so, even the harshest critics - like Bart Erhman will admit that. 

And even lawyers and scholars honestly searching for mistakes or something wrong with it will admit that. 

 

7 hours ago, AusLeviathan said:

Twelve years in catholic school, not once was I told by the people teaching me to hate homosexuals, likely because they realized how horrible it would be to pass a hateful prejudice on to someone else.

 

Nobody who seriously reads/follows the teaching of the Bible would hate anybody. Because we're called to love even our enemies. And because we are ALL sinners. I.E. not favoring one group over against the other. 

 

We are all born with certain desires - I have a desire (like most men) to have sex with any woman I find attractive ... That desire, though born with it, does not define who I am, nor should it just be accepted as right just because I desire it. 

 

"White men still hold most of the economical and political power in this world, and until that has changed, we have far from an equal society." 

 

I suggest you listen to a podcast by Jordan Peterson on Economic principles...it's really good, but I'll summarize if you don't want to listen to it: in any trading game you play (think Monopoly but it applies to resources/money/the economy) all the resources are going to funnel. A few people at the top will end up with a lot and the majority of people end up with close to or 0. That's true of every society that trades and every economic system (think Egyptian tombs- long, long before "white guys hold most the money/power). It's a deep problem.

 

Now you could take all the resources from the white guys (and maybe we should do that) and give it to everyone else ... but eventually it's still going to funnel and have huge disparity. So...

We should be in favor of equal opportunities, but it's impossible to have equal outcomes (and probably not desirable either- how lame would a game of Monopoly be if after every round you started back over and gave everybody equal property and money). 

 

In some ways it's spiraled ... but good, challenging dialogue needs to happen somewhere. 

But I think there's been a misunderstanding (I was trying to define what I think of as woke and what I think people around me think of as woke - I'm, less so, commenting on that than if WoT will be that or not). Because some of "that" is canon - plenty of material there in WoT, and I still really like it (just as I really genuinely like a bunch of stuff and people I don't agree with). 

 

Edited November 15, 2021 by Wolfbrother31

[SinisterDeath]

4 minutes ago, Wolfbrother31 said:

I suggest you listen to a podcast by Jordan Peterson on Economic principles

Ahahahhahahahha! No.

 

Thread is Locked.

"Woke" Discussion is done, you've all had an opportunity to vent it out, and we lost a member because of it.

 

Starting Today, any posts that start talking about woke will be removed/edited.

Don't like it, take it up with the other admins.