IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 24th February 2021, 05:49 PM   #1361
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,674
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I have no problem with canceling Griffin...to a point.
We're going to have to disagree on this. Her portrayal of violence was clearly artistic/symbolic and was (A) not intended to inspire political violence and (B) did not actually inspire political violence. The appropriate level of cancellation for that sort of display is to shrug and move on.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
He also took in criticism of how he was going about it and changed his behavior accordingly. He went from sitting on the bench to taking a knee.
A strong point in his favor, too often overlooked.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 24th February 2021 at 05:51 PM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 06:08 PM   #1362
dirtywick
Illuminator
 
dirtywick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,316
Originally Posted by mumblethrax View Post
It's precisely because people have agency that it's possible to critique, abhor, or contemn their decisions; if they had no agency, they would not be morally blameworthy. It's a truism that people will do what they will do, but why would that prevent me from commenting on what they ultimately decide to do, particularly if what they decide to do is horrible, misguided, or ill-advised? Respecting other people's autonomy doesn't mean we're bound respect the decisions they make. Sometimes people **** up, even judging them only by their own standards.
I agree. Good description of why I’m not opposed to cancel culture.
dirtywick is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 07:37 PM   #1363
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 28,585
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
We're going to have to disagree on this. Her portrayal of violence was clearly artistic/symbolic and was (A) not intended to inspire political violence and (B) did not actually inspire political violence. The appropriate level of cancellation for that sort of display is to shrug and move on.
You're right, we will have to disagree.

I have no tolerance for implied threats of violence. One of the things I despise is how people think their finely crafted veils over something awful somehow makes it ok.

It doesn't.

Now Griffin is a comic and as one, she pushes our boundaries. I tend to look the other way, but man was that offensive. I can't blame people for being upset.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 07:40 PM   #1364
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,674
People being upset is not a reason to change anything, IMO. People get upset when I tell them Jesus was just another first century itinerant faith healer. Am I supposed to worry about their feelings?
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 08:11 PM   #1365
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,652
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
People being upset is not a reason to change anything, IMO.
Now apply that standard to everyone complaining about “cancel culture”, and we can probably close this thread.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 08:18 PM   #1366
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,652
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
I kind of miss the point of all of these "look at all these examples of how bad cancel culture (which doesn't exist) is!!, it totally proves what a good thing cancel culture (which doesn't exist) is!!" arguments as well.
It’s proves that what people are claiming is this new, terrible thing called “cancel culture” is neither new nor all that terrible, relatively speaking. It also proves that the people who complain the loudest are also the biggest advocates of it when it suits them, and are generally just full of **** and not to be taken seriously.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 08:22 PM   #1367
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 28,585
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
People being upset is not a reason to change anything, IMO. People get upset when I tell them Jesus was just another first century itinerant faith healer. Am I supposed to worry about their feelings?
No. and you don't have to be. But they also have a right to express their feelings.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 08:30 PM   #1368
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,652
Hollywood’s insidious purge of conservatives continues. Noted Republican and Trump supporter Kelsey Grammer has been... *checks notes* ... given the lead role in his own series...

Huh.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 08:33 PM   #1369
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 59,729
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
People being upset is not a reason to change anything, IMO. People get upset when I tell them Jesus was just another first century itinerant faith healer. Am I supposed to worry about their feelings?
Jesus tried to cancel the Pharisees, IIRC. Then he got cancelled in turn when someone complained to the Romans. Then it was centuries of various denominations and heretical sects cancelling each other. Christianity is pretty much built on cancel culture. Cancel the sinners, cancel Satan, cancel heathens, cancel the denominations who have too many statues, cancel the denominations that don't have enough statues, and so forth.

If someone were to actually succeed in cancelling cancel culture they'd be cancelling culture itself. It's all cancellations! The whole damn system is cancellations, and if we cancel the system it's even more!!
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 09:11 PM   #1370
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 28,585
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
Hollywood’s insidious purge of conservatives continues. Noted Republican and Trump supporter Kelsey Grammer has been... *checks notes* ... given the lead role in his own series...

Huh.
They always blame the liberal left for their failures. Tom Selleck has never had problems getting a job. Or Tim Allen, or Clint Eastwood. Although Allen complained that his show Last man standing was canceled because he's a rightie not his middling (not totally terrible, but not great either) ratings.

My experience is when it comes to making money, companies will excuse all manner of sins. And if you're not making them much money, any trifling offense, will justify them letting you go. That never changes.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 10:11 PM   #1371
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 14,033
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
First of all, let’s leave death threats out of it. Death threats are illegal, should be treated as so, and nobody here is advocating for death threats. Death threats are neither a defining characteristic of nor unique to “cancel culture” as we’re discussing it here.
Not really. Mob mentality is the root of cancel culture, and death threats are frequently a mob's calling card. Also, I'm not sure just how clear we are in defining cancelling. It's convenient to accept light cancelling (why, we just don't allow his kind on facebook) while downplaying the darker side.

Quote:
Aside from that, do you deny that the conduct surrounding “cancel culture” (e.g. calling for someone to be fired) is an expression of free speech, and therefore is protected under the First Amendment?
Free speech? Not really. More like a targeted harassment, which doesn't enjoy much 1A protection.

Quote:
If so, why should this expression of free speech be tolerated any less than hate speech, conspiracy theories, and other odious expressions of free speech we are told we must tolerate?
I think expressing goofy or hateful ideas and opinions is one thing, and pressuring someone to take away someone else's livelihood is another. Try it on for size: would you accept being fired because some rando didn't like your tweets?
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 10:20 PM   #1372
dirtywick
Illuminator
 
dirtywick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,316
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
I think expressing goofy or hateful ideas and opinions is one thing, and pressuring someone to take away someone else's livelihood is another. Try it on for size: would you accept being fired because some rando didn't like your tweets?
It's the employer that doesn't like the tweets.

I mean let's be real, millions of people don't like millions of other people's tweets at any given moment. Pretty rare that it matters.
dirtywick is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 10:30 PM   #1373
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 14,033
Originally Posted by dirtywick View Post
It's the employer that doesn't like the tweets.

I mean let's be real, millions of people don't like millions of other people's tweets at any given moment. Pretty rare that it matters.
Yeah, but jk asked about a hypothetical calling for someone to be fired, not the boss deciding it.

A boss firing you because you bring direct harm to his business might be defensible. But a mob (+/-) calling for cancelling and a boss bending to that absent a threat of harm to his business (ie: those calling for the firing are not his customers) taint quite right.
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 10:43 PM   #1374
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 28,585
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yeah, but jk asked about a hypothetical calling for someone to be fired, not the boss deciding it.

A boss firing you because you bring direct harm to his business might be defensible. But a mob (+/-) calling for cancelling and a boss bending to that absent a threat of harm to his business (ie: those calling for the firing are not his customers) taint quite right.
Oh, c'mon. Let's get serious. It is almost always is about the business. The mob represents the customers. Or does it? The businesses determine if it does and take whatever steps they feel is necessary.

Both sides play this game. It's as prevalent on the right as it is on the left.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 10:47 PM   #1375
dirtywick
Illuminator
 
dirtywick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,316
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yeah, but jk asked about a hypothetical calling for someone to be fired, not the boss deciding it.
Yeah, but I don't care if anyone calls for my firing, I only care if my boss listens.

Quote:
A boss firing you because you bring direct harm to his business might be defensible. But a mob (+/-) calling for cancelling and a boss bending to that absent a threat of harm to his business (ie: those calling for the firing are not his customers) taint quite right.
Yeah, I agree it's not right. I'd imagine those tweets would have to be awfully offensive for a boss to take some action on it since the business or boss isn't being threatened, right?

Of course, I guess there's the rare case that the employee has written nothing offensive and still somehow mistakenly gotten a giant mob on the internet so mad at them that they're trying to get them fired and the boss, who's business is not effected in any way by the mob's calling for the firing, also somehow mistakenly agrees that this employee should be fired.

But that sounds crazy now that I wrote it out.
dirtywick is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 12:38 AM   #1376
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
HansMustermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 18,262
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Not really. Mob mentality is the root of cancel culture, and death threats are frequently a mob's calling card. Also, I'm not sure just how clear we are in defining cancelling. It's convenient to accept light cancelling (why, we just don't allow his kind on facebook) while downplaying the darker side.
That's still a textbook association fallacy. Which is to say, broken logic. That's what "fallacy" means.

What the BS peddlers have been doing through all this thread has basically been a texbook example of this:

P1: A is a B
P2: A is also a C
therefore
C: Therefore, all Bs are Cs

In this case

P1: some example of a tweet is a case of "cancel culture"
P2: same example of a tweet is morally or legally wrong (e.g., by being a death threat)
therefore
C: Therefore, all cases of "cancel culture" are morally or legally wrong

Or in more layman terms, for those who can't follow all this newfangled logic (after all, it's only been around for 2500 years, some people may still not have gotten the memo): almost anything can be associated with anything. More to the point, just about anything can be used in conjunction with something immoral or illegal. I could use a car or pickup truck to carry the explosives for a terrorist act, like Timothy McVeigh did. I could use a fork to stab the wife. (And in fact, fork wounds tend to be worse than knife wounds.) I could sic my dog on my ex. Etc.

But it would take someone really stonking stupid to deduce that if some people use cars to carry around bombs for terrorist attacks, then the whole driving culture is to blame. Or that the whole pet-owning culture is to blame for the last one.

Even in the case of death threats, people have sent them for pretty much every reason imaginable. E.g., some people literally sent death threats to, say, Stardock over their games' bugs and balance issues. (That's not a hypothetical, btw. I'm using a real company name because it's a case that actually happened.) E.g., anime companies routinely receive death threats: it turned out at one point that one single woman had sent literally 3,852 death threat emails to a bookstore chain that also sells anime and manga, while another chucklenuts escalated from sending death threats to Kyoto Animation to an actual arson attack that killed IIRC over 30 people.

But, again, it would take a complete idiot to deduce that if some people use death threats in conjunction with wanting a game patched, then the whole culture of expecting bugs to be patched is to blame. Or to blame the whole culture of cartoon fandom, because SOME are outright deranged fanboys or fangirls.

It's downright stupid to blame a whole category X just because sometimes it's done in conjunction with illegal activity Y... and a lot of times not.

Pretty much ANY movement or activity will include a number of deranged people, if it's grown past being just a couple of people. If nothing else, by sheer probabilities alone, 1% of the population at any given time are outright schizophrenic. You can find deranged people in everything from "cancel culture" to football to Star Wars fandom to politics to stamp collecting. ANYTHING you don't like can be painted as evil by picking some extreme example and pretending that everyone else in it is just the same. It's in fact THE most prevalent technique of dishonest and bigotted idiots and the like: try to handwave that every Muslim is just like Osama, every atheist is just like Stalin, every black rights activist is just like <insert deranged black supremacist>, and in this case apparently everyone who's ever criticized someone on twitter is EXACTLY like the few guys who've escalated it to death threats.

But then I guess when some people can't make their case otherwise, they also feel they're entitled to do fallacies and/or, as I've said before, to flat out lie about their premises.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?

Last edited by HansMustermann; 25th February 2021 at 12:58 AM.
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 02:06 AM   #1377
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,388
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yeah, but jk asked about a hypothetical calling for someone to be fired, not the boss deciding it.

A boss firing you because you bring direct harm to his business might be defensible. But a mob (+/-) calling for cancelling and a boss bending to that absent a threat of harm to his business (ie: those calling for the firing are not his customers) taint quite right.
I do have to wonder where all the Conservative crying was when Juli Briskman got fired.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 03:57 AM   #1378
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 31,395
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
It might come as something of a surprise to everyone here that the phrase "cancel culture" was apparently invented (or at least popularized) by "Black Twitter."
Here's the actual link, rather than a broken link to google. And I think you're misreading it.

Quote:
The idea of canceling—and as some have labeled it, cancel culture—has taken hold in recent years due to conversations prompted by #MeToo and other movements that demand greater accountability from public figures. The term has been credited to black users of Twitter, where it has been used as a hashtag. As troubling information comes to light regarding celebrities who were once popular, such as Bill Cosby, Michael Jackson, Roseanne Barr, and Louis C.K.—so come calls to cancel such figures. The cancellation is akin to a cancelled contract, a severing of the relationship that once linked a performer to their fans.
I don't think that's saying that "cancel culture" was used as a hashtag by black twitter users, but that black twitter users were using "cancel" hashtags (e.g. #CancelBillCosby or #BillCosbyIsCancelled).

For a supportive reference:

Quote:
In 2016, the hashtag #TaylorSwiftIsCanceled trended on Twitter after Kim Kardashian shared clips revealing that despite Swift’s claim that Kanye West did not warn her about his provocative lyrics, he actually did ask her permission and Swift thanked him.

It was the first popular use of “cancel” on Twitter, which Swift labeled as unfair because she was “falsely painted as a liar.”

But cancel culture’s biggest spark—the catalyst that would propel the whole movement—would occur a year later in 2017 when #MeToo became a global phenomenon. People called out public figures and demanded accountability for their alleged misdeeds and crimes, which mostly involved rape and sexual harassment in the workplace.

It was mainly African-Americans who pushed #Cancel to the top of Twitter’s trending topics, along with the hashtag #MeToo: #CancelBillCosby, #CancelHarveyWeinstein, #CancelKevinSpacey, #CancelMarioBatali, and a slew of other canceldt celebrities and public figures.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 06:01 AM   #1379
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,674
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
I don't think that's saying that "cancel culture" was used as a hashtag by black twitter users, but that black twitter users were using "cancel" hashtags (e.g. #CancelBillCosby or #BillCosbyIsCancelled).
I don't think it has to be one or the other, I get the sense that Black Twitter popularized the phrase "cancel culture" as well as the new meaning of the old verb.

Here are the earliest Tweets I could find with the entire phrase:

https://twitter.com/unicorninkk/stat...25338616418304

https://twitter.com/MikeOfDoom/statu...97742933987331

https://twitter.com/chazzsplash/stat...02406656077825

https://twitter.com/sharkyshood/stat...30052360536065

https://twitter.com/PumpkinSpPapi/st...54299939540993

https://twitter.com/MallamSawyerr/st...73798191325184

https://twitter.com/gatx_negrx/statu...16830302650368

https://twitter.com/DaShaunLH/status/867790661390651393

https://twitter.com/EyeSwear/status/868126577221042184

https://twitter.com/blaqueword/statu...89870184931329
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 06:04 AM   #1380
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,674
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
No. and you don't have to be. But they also have a right to express their feelings.
People had a legal right to express their negative feelings about Kaepernick, but that didn't make it morally right for them to do so.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 06:06 AM   #1381
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 97,771
What is "Black Twitter"?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 06:07 AM   #1382
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,674
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_..._United_States.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 06:09 AM   #1383
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 97,771
And to me this is the nearest we have to the alleged "cancel culture" these days: https://www.propublica.org/article/s...their-business
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 06:11 AM   #1384
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 97,771
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Thanks - may be missing something but isn't that simply describing how Twitter has self organised groupings?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 06:18 AM   #1385
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,674
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Thanks - may be missing something but isn't that simply describing how Twitter has self organised groupings?
I suppose so. Probably one could do a network analysis on the nodes/connections to see how tightly knit the community really is, compared to other spontaneous groupings based on shared interests e.g. "Skeptic Twitter."
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 07:04 AM   #1386
HansMustermann
Penultimate Amazing
 
HansMustermann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 18,262
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I suppose so. Probably one could do a network analysis on the nodes/connections to see how tightly knit the community really is, compared to other spontaneous groupings based on shared interests e.g. "Skeptic Twitter."
Probably someone COULD, but until one actually does such a study, there is no real reason to assume it's any different from the average group.
__________________
Which part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you understand?
HansMustermann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 07:07 AM   #1387
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,469
Again "the disenfranchised groups can now form social movements to the same degree as other groups" is not a problem.
__________________
Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question."
Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..."
Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 07:19 AM   #1388
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,482
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Again "the disenfranchised groups can now form social movements to the same degree as other groups" is not a problem.
Your point about the traditional gate keepers is what I keep thinking about the most in regards to this topic.

These seem to be the people howling the most about "cancel culture", and it's exactly like you say. These positions used to have unique power to shape the public narrative. Editors at newspapers, columnists, talking heads on TV, tenured professors at elite institutions, and so on, all used to be the gatekeepers of social norms and public discourse.

The advent of social media is challenging that. They go on twitter and some no-name account calls them a moron and there's nothing they can do about it. All the social capital they have accumulated amounts to little when it comes to dealing with the non-elite masses, and if enough of the unwashed rubes make a ruckus, it can cause them real problems and undermine their pseudo-authority. There's a much more free-wheeling discussion and inconvenient narratives can no longer be swept under the rug.

The public discourse now seems much more spontaneous, rising from the masses rather than being handed down from the top.

The polite deference that used to exist within the exclusive club of gatekeepers is being corroded. Uppity outsiders can now get their voices heard, and, horror of horrors, sometimes they even get listened to.
__________________
Gobble gobble

Last edited by SuburbanTurkey; 25th February 2021 at 07:25 AM.
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 07:23 AM   #1389
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,674
Originally Posted by HansMustermann View Post
Probably someone COULD, but until one actually does such a study, there is no real reason to assume it's any different from the average group.
Why does this matter, though? I think it's interesting that the phrase "cancel culture" appears to have been originally popularized within a particular subculture, but it doesn't actually tell us too much.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Again "the disenfranchised groups can now form social movements to the same degree as other groups" is not a problem.
Like, never? I thought it fairly problematic when a (relatively marginalized) group of unbelievers formed a heat-of-the-moment movement to drive a specific gelatiere out of business. Just because they were marginalized in the Bible Belt doesn't justify the collective action of driving online reviews down to one star based on a single short-lived incident.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 25th February 2021 at 07:35 AM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 07:41 AM   #1390
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,652
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Not really. Mob mentality is the root of cancel culture, and death threats are frequently a mob's calling card. Also, I'm not sure just how clear we are in defining cancelling. It's convenient to accept light cancelling (why, we just don't allow his kind on facebook) while downplaying the darker side.
If you insist on using death threats to define “cancel culture”, a lot of things previously considered “cancel culture” will stop being “cancel culture” and a lot of things not previously considered “cancel culture” now are.

Quote:
Free speech? Not really. More like a targeted harassment, which doesn't enjoy much 1A protection.
You’ll need to cite some case law to support your contention that calling for someone to be fired isn’t protected speech.

Quote:
I think expressing goofy or hateful ideas and opinions is one thing, and pressuring someone to take away someone else's livelihood is another. Try it on for size: would you accept being fired because some rando didn't like your tweets?
I’m not sure what you mean by “accept”, but I probably wouldn’t like it. That doesn’t mean it isn’t protected speech, which means in a free society I have to tolerate it. Just like I have to tolerate other types of free speech that I personally dislike.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 07:42 AM   #1391
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,659
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Your point about the traditional gate keepers is what I keep thinking about the most in regards to this topic.

These seem to be the people howling the most about "cancel culture", and it's exactly like you say. These positions used to have unique power to shape the public narrative. Editors at newspapers, columnists, talking heads on TV, tenured professors at elite institutions, and so on, all used to be the gatekeepers of social norms and public discourse.

The advent of social media is challenging that. They go on twitter and some no-name account calls them a moron and there's nothing they can do about it. All the social capital they have accumulated amounts to little when it comes to dealing with the non-elite masses, and if enough of the unwashed rubes make a ruckus, it can cause them real problems and undermine their pseudo-authority. There's a much more free-wheeling discussion and inconvenient narratives can no longer be swept under the rug.

The public discourse now seems much more spontaneous, rising from the masses rather than being handed down from the top.

The polite deference that used to exist within the exclusive club of gatekeepers is being corroded. Uppity outsiders can now get their voices heard, and, horror of horrors, sometimes they even get listened to.
I think now you and Joe may be overstating the difference of "cancel culture" from past accountability.

d4m10n made the point, and I agree, that for the most part, these "cancellings" aren't really the broadly grassroots as you're representing here.

Hundreds of thousands of people aren't randomly, organically stumbling across things and disseminating them tweet by tweet to their 20 followers at a time. AFAIK, the majority of these cancellings are still going through some gatekeepers, people or organizations playing a media role with large followings at some point in their viral journey.

Yes, the volume of the complaints are random regular folks, but that's not really a new thing. The little old ladies writing into the TV stations when they heard a word they didn't like were regular folks too, and they had an impact as well.

I don't see modern trends in accountability as a victory of the people over the gatekeepers. I think that's a narrative that makes people feel very good about themselves for participating.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 07:44 AM   #1392
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,469
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Your point about the traditional gate keepers is what I keep thinking about the most in regards to this topic.

These seem to be the people howling the most about "cancel culture", and it's exactly like you say. These positions used to have unique power to shape the public narrative. Editors at newspapers, columnists, talking heads on TV, tenured professors at elite institutions, and so on, all used to be the gatekeepers of social norms and public discourse.
Indeed.

Again nothing being complained about here is new or noteworthy in the slightest outside of who's using their opinions and influence to change society.

Old people writing "Letters to the Editor" aren't cancel culture but young people doing what amounts to the same thing on Twitter are. And as you say the only difference is one person using an "official" gatekeeping method and the other isn't.

That's why the people complaining have to keep referring to "The Mob" and "Mob Mentality" as if Twitter is somehow more driven by that then an HOA or a Political Party or literally anything else.

But this is what the Proudly Wrong always do.

When their house is burning down, the discussion is about how to put out the fire at their house.

When anyone else's house is burning down the discussion they demand we have is a broad philosophical debate about the what degree society is responsible for putting out house fires, or a sea-lioning "Oh I'm sorry when did we prove the fires were objectively bad?," or a hand wringing "Oh but if we let fire fighters just start pouring water on houses willy-nilly they could flood a house out if they go too far...." or some other parallel meta discussion designed to keep us as far away from putting out the other people's fire as possible.

And when called on it their response is always either a faux-innocent or huffy "Oh I can't talk about whatever I like."

"Cancel Culture" has not wielded its power to influence society any more (or less) responsibly then any other. It's not worth a new term, it's not worth becoming a society boogeyman.
__________________
Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question."
Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..."
Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 25th February 2021 at 07:49 AM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 07:46 AM   #1393
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,469
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Like, never?
D4m10n: "We should arrest all left handed people."
Me: "Why?"
D4m10n: "Oh so you're saying left handed people never commit crimes?"
__________________
Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question."
Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..."
Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 07:55 AM   #1394
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,652
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
People had a legal right to express their negative feelings about Kaepernick, but that didn't make it morally right for them to do so.
Is not caring how your behavior affects other people morally or ethically right?

Because you seem to want to preach morality and ethics to police other people’s behavior but grant yourself wide latitude for you own behavior. Seems... inconsistent.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 07:57 AM   #1395
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,652
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Indeed.

Again nothing being complained about here is new or noteworthy in the slightest outside of who's using their opinions and influence to change society.

Old people writing "Letters to the Editor" aren't cancel culture but young people doing what amounts to the same thing on Twitter are. And as you say the only difference is one person using an "official" gatekeeping method and the other isn't.

That's why the people complaining have to keep referring to "The Mob" and "Mob Mentality" as if Twitter is somehow more driven by that then an HOA or a Political Party or literally anything else.

But this is what the Proudly Wrong always do.

When their house is burning down, the discussion is about how to put out the fire at their house.

When anyone else's house is burning down the discussion they demand we have is a broad philosophical debate about the what degree society is responsible for putting out house fires, or a sea-lioning "Oh I'm sorry when did we prove the fires were objectively bad?," or a hand wringing "Oh but if we let fire fighters just start pouring water on houses willy-nilly they could flood a house out if they go too far...." or some other parallel meta discussion designed to keep us as far away from putting out the other people's fire as possible.

And when called on it their response is always either a faux-innocent or huffy "Oh I can't talk about whatever I like."

"Cancel Culture" has not wielded its power to influence society any more (or less) responsibly then any other. It's not worth a new term, it's not worth becoming a society boogeyman.
Particularly when so much of what gets defined as “cancel culture” can be avoided by simply not behaving like a jack ass in public.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 08:01 AM   #1396
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 14,033
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
If you insist on using death threats to define “cancel culture”, a lot of things previously considered “cancel culture” will stop being “cancel culture” and a lot of things not previously considered “cancel culture” now are.
Actually I don't define it as such, so non sequitur.

Quote:
You’ll need to cite some case law to support your contention that calling for someone to be fired isn’t protected speech.
Actually I don't need to do anything. You asked if I thought public harassment was 1A protected. I think not necessarily.

Quote:
I’m not sure what you mean by “accept”, but I probably wouldn’t like it. That doesn’t mean it isn’t protected speech, which means in a free society I have to tolerate it. Just like I have to tolerate other types of free speech that I personally dislike.
Holup: are you pulling paradox of tolerance now, and implying that hate speech and Nazis have to be tolerated as 1A protected? The vaccillation is making me dizzy.

Cancel culture, to me, means mob disenfranchisement, pure and simple. I don't think that's a great idea, because a mob can always be assembled to disenfranchise any speaker with any viewpoint.

So again: say your posts here got public attention. Someone made a clever tweet about your above assertion about the P of T and framed you as a Nazi apologist, and it went viral. You ok with being fired over that because of the negative attention you inadvertently brought to your employer, who doesn't care if it is true or not, but just wants no waves created in his business? That's cancel culture on the hoof.
__________________
We find comfort among those who agree with us, growth among those who don't -Frank A. Clark

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect -Mark Twain
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 08:04 AM   #1397
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 50,731
Originally Posted by johnny karate View Post
Is not caring how your behavior affects other people morally or ethically right?

Because you seem to want to preach morality and ethics to police other people’s behavior but grant yourself wide latitude for you own behavior. Seems... inconsistent.
Exactly they gays are all about equal rights and to not be offended but their mere existence offends so many, total hypocrisy in that. The blacks are the same.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 08:29 AM   #1398
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,652
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Actually I don't define it as such, so non sequitur.
Cool. Then we can drop the whole “death threats” canard.

Quote:
Actually I don't need to do anything. You asked if I thought public harassment was 1A protected. I think not necessarily.
I didn’t ask you that. Feel free to take another look at my post to see what I did ask you.

Quote:
Holup: are you pulling paradox of tolerance now, and implying that hate speech and Nazis have to be tolerated as 1A protected? The vaccillation is making me dizzy.
You have this habit of claiming I said things that I didn’t actually say. Please stop.

My point is that protected speech can be deemed offensive, but it’s still protected. How any of us personally feels about that speech is immaterial to its protected status.

Quote:
Cancel culture, to me, means mob disenfranchisement, pure and simple. I don't think that's a great idea, because a mob can always be assembled to disenfranchise any speaker with any viewpoint.
No, it can’t, actually. The “mob” doesn’t have magical powers that grant them the ability to disenfranchise. We see failed attempts at this all the time. The Almighty Mob is another fantasy wokescolds use to prop up their dubious narrative.

Quote:
So again: say your posts here got public attention. Someone made a clever tweet about your above assertion about the P of T and framed you as a Nazi apologist, and it went viral. You ok with being fired over that because of the negative attention you inadvertently brought to your employer, who doesn't care if it is true or not, but just wants no waves created in his business? That's cancel culture on the hoof.
Granted, it would be weird to get fired for Nazi apologism based on a post in which I don’t mention or reference Nazis, but I think in the end, I’d be happy to no longer work for someone so incredibly stupid and would be looking forward to the results of my unlawful termination lawsuit.

Is this farcical and wildly unrealistic scenario the best you can do to try to demonstrate how “cancel culture” might someday come for me? Because I remain unconcerned.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 08:55 AM   #1399
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,469
And how exactly a bunch of young people talking on the internet to promote a progressive value is any more or less of a "Mob" than a bunch of old people writing letters to the editor to promote a conservative value just aggressively remains unanswered.
__________________
Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question."
Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..."
Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th February 2021, 09:12 AM   #1400
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 6,674
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
D4m10n: "We should arrest all left handed people."
The analogous statement re: cancel culture would be something like "Cancellations facilitated by online shaming gone viral are invariably immoral." Since I've never made anything even approaching such a claim, it’s rather odd that you'd attribute such an analogous claim to me in particular.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
And how exactly a bunch of young people talking on the internet to promote a progressive value is any more or less of a "Mob" than a bunch of old people writing letters to the editor to promote a conservative value just aggressively remains unanswered.
I'd say these are analogous cases in most ways, but the interpostion of editorial gatekeepers seems likely to prevent virality in the more traditional print media scenario.
__________________
"Well, a statement like that is all the better for proof, but go on, anyway." - Salvor Hardin

Last edited by d4m10n; 25th February 2021 at 09:17 AM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:27 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.