If you read it you will see she found a snake pit so deep and and full of poisonous creatures that it makes the pit at the end of "True Grit" look like a fucking child friendly petting zoo.

If you think its going after non woke poeple you are mistaken. Or you are a wokey and don't want it being seen.

In response to the assertion that the referenced text targets non-woke individuals, it is imperative to critically examine the underlying logic and assumptions embedded within such a claim. The notion that a text can be inherently biased against a specific group based solely on its content is a dangerous and simplistic oversimplification. Meaning and interpretation are subjective and highly contextual, and reducing a text's significance to a binary categorization of woke versus non-woke grossly oversimplifies the complexities of human expression and understanding. The assertion that the text specifically targets non-woke individuals is not only unsubstantiated but also perpetuates harmful divisions and stereotypes. It implies that there is a monolithic group of non-woke individuals who share a uniform set of beliefs and values, which is not only inaccurate but also dismissive of the diverse perspectives and experiences that exist within any population. Furthermore, labeling a text as anti-non-woke reinforces the idea that there is an inherent conflict between different societal groups, which can further entrench polarization and hinder meaningful dialogue. It is crucial to approach any text with a critical and open mind, acknowledging the potential for multiple interpretations and perspectives. Dismissing a text outright based on a perceived bias against a particular group not only stifles intellectual discourse but also limits our ability to engage with complex ideas and challenge our own assumptions. Furthermore, the claim that the text is targeting non-woke individuals rests on the assumption that there is a clear and universally agreed-upon definition of woke. However, the term woke itself is highly contested and subject to various interpretations. What one person may consider woke, another may perceive as overly sensitive or even radical. Therefore, using woke as a litmus test to determine a text's intent or value is fundamentally flawed. Moreover, the assertion that the text is anti-non-woke implies that non-woke individuals are inherently opposed to progress, inclusivity, and social justice. This is a gross generalization that not only disrespects the diversity of thought and experience within the non-woke population but also perpetuates harmful stereotypes. It is essential to recognize that individuals' beliefs and values exist on a spectrum, and labeling an entire group as anti-woke is both inaccurate and divisive. In conclusion, the claim that the referenced text targets non-woke individuals is not only unsubstantiated but also perpetuates harmful divisions, stereotypes, and oversimplifications. Approaching any text with a critical and open mind, acknowledging the potential for multiple interpretations and perspectives, is crucial for fostering meaningful dialogue and intellectual growth. Dismissing a text based on a perceived bias against a particular group limits our ability to engage with complex ideas and challenge our own assumptions.