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.
Tags cancel culture

Reply
Old 26th January 2022, 01:13 PM   #1081
SuburbanTurkey
Penultimate Amazing
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 15,065
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I am a bit confused how video evidence of a crime being committed is being couched as a cancelation. I’m sure there was an online response, but what really hurt her was being prosecuted. Criminal background check is a basic pre-employment check for almost any job.

If she had not committed a crime and had lost her job and accreditation and been unable to find gainful employment simply for being a bit sharp tongued, then yeah, I’d have sympathy. It again, that’s not what happened here. She isn’t Kroger Andy so she doesn’t get to keep her job.

I assume the same will be true for smoothie assault guy.
As a matter of public record, I don't think she has a criminal background. She entered some diversion program that resulted in her charges being dropped upon completion, which seems appropriate for someone charged with a petty crime.
__________________
Gobble gobble
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 26th January 2022, 01:14 PM   #1082
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 24,893
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
As a matter of public record, I don't think she has a criminal background. She entered some diversion program that resulted in her charges being dropped upon completion, which seems appropriate for someone charged with a petty crime.
Fair enough. Thanks.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is online now   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 26th January 2022, 01:23 PM   #1083
SuburbanTurkey
Penultimate Amazing
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 15,065
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Fair enough. Thanks.
Although, as a response to her abhorrent behavior, laws were passed to make racist, false 911 calls a form of hate crime. Not sure Cooper 2.0 will be able to skate so easily.
__________________
Gobble gobble
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 26th January 2022, 03:31 PM   #1084
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 8,651
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Nope, you want to be able to 'rules lawyer' your way out of addressing the criticisms of the idea behind the phrase.
Not sure whether to file this under failed mind-reading or successful strawmanning. Either way, you'd be better off addressing arguments instead of imputing motives.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
They don't set definitions, they describe them, and are usually absurdly faux-neutrality biased.
I was with you until that last bit. Maybe you're correct about this faux-neutrality, but I've not seen evidence of it.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
But I know already what you claim your definition of 'cancel culture' is, and I know how it isn't consistent with your usage.
You could demonstrate this inconsistency by quoting a particular bit of usage and showing how "the popular practice of withdrawing support for public figures and companies...performed on social media in the form of group shaming" doesn't fit.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
This is not consistent with your argument since however.
Which of the many arguments I've made in this continuation thread is inconsistent with the idea that sometimes behavior can be so bad that we can "justify bringing it to an employer's attention," in your view? Please be specific, quotes would help.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Amy Cooper who was the one who made false statements, who is being talked about by almost every other poster for this page and the end of the last, who was cited by EC and lionking as someone whose life was 'ruined' by being cancelled.
You asked "Why is attempted assault the line when making false statements to the police to get someone arrested not?" as if I'd drawn that particular line. Have you confused me with other posters?

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
In general, what criteria are you using to know about an employer's internal considerations?
We can only speculate as to what facts they have considered amongst themselves.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Yes, an angry Twitter mob could be a consideration, but how would you know if it was in any given situation?
I wouldn't know, but I would say that a key driver of "cancel culture" is that corporations frequently do assent to the demands of said mob. Without that element, we'd have mere "callout culture" whereby people are shamed but get to keep on working.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Stronger employee protections and unions would help!
I've already agreed on this point.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
You're coming at the 'problems of cancel culture' from the wrong end. This is exactly the mistake you make with 'taking away someone's healthcare'. Losing your job shouldn't do that.
Of course it shouldn't, but it often does. Should the people trying to get folks fired (in the U.S.) take into consideration that it likely will?

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
You're putting the problem in the wrong spot!
I'm putting the onus on would-be cancelers to bear in mind the probable consequences of their actions, given that we've not yet passed universal health care.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
You're removing the agency from the employer, the employee, our moronic healthcare system, our coercive employment system, and putting it on *checks notes* people angry on Twitter.
Angry people on Twitter are moral agents just like everyone else. If they choose to leverage an economically unjust system to punish people who've given offense, they are morally accountable for the foreseeable consequences of their actions, just like everyone else.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Your endorsed definitions of 'cancel culture' are primarily made up of, 1 public condemnation or shaming, 2 withdrawing or threatening to withdraw support, both on account of, 3 socially or morally objectionable views or actions.
I've only endorsed one definition, but yes, those are all key elements.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
That is to say, it isn't 'cancelling' to publicly shame someone for illegal actions even if everything else is the same.
You've failed to consider an obvious possibility, that sometimes cancellations are indeed warranted; I've said as much before.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
More to the point, your contention over and over related primarily to a person's employment. That just isn't part of the definitions you claim you endorse but it is continually central to your objections and your examples.
Withdrawing support from an author like Rowling or an actor like Depp isn't going to put anyone out on the street; withdrawing support from random folks who were hitherto private figures is a much more serious step to take for reasons already discussed.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Through your usage, the term 'cancel culture' requires an attempt to get them fired.
My usage does not preclude cancellations of famous and wealthy people who cannot effectively be fired (e.g. boycotting R. Kelly, forsaking Hogwarts fandom) you're reading that in just because I don't usually find those cancellations particularly worrisome.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
And here is where you've been using it in a way you probably don't realize; that they (the 'cancellers') are trying to get people fired.
I've already given several examples of cancelers trying to get the OP offender "Kroger Andy" fired, and that was just a sampling.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Not that the effort could likely result in the termination of a person's employment, but that it's the goal.
I don't think it needs to be the goal if it's a foreseeable likely result.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Your objection is that jobs should be off limits.
I don't believe you've characterized any of my objections correctly at any point in this conversation. I never said off limits, I did say we should be hesitant about calling for someone's firing before we've heard all the facts. The people calling for Kroger Andy to be sacked didn't even stop to ask whether he was empowered by store policy to do more than he did in that situation.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Now I argue for restraint, chances, and proportionality, but I wouldn't put jobs off limits.
Nor did I, as an absolute rule. You're reading that part in, presumably because people tend to think in absolutes.
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

Last edited by d4m10n; 26th January 2022 at 03:50 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 26th January 2022, 04:38 PM   #1085
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 54,831
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I don't know what fuss you are referring to. Has someone been cancelled?

ETA: Okay, I have found it:



Link

Peter Dinklage should be cancelled and sent to Siberian gulags.

It's Latinx, Peter! Away to the Maoist re-education camps with you!

HBO, you must hereby CGI replace all scenes of Unperson P**** D********* in Game of Thrones with Warwick Davies immediately

(And other caricatures of Cancel Culture)
I am waiting for Dinklinge to find out about the Munchkins in "Wizard Of Oz."
I understand where Dinklage is coming from but I don't think launching an attack on a fairy tale is a smart move.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb 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 26th January 2022, 04:54 PM   #1086
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 24,893
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
I am waiting for Dinklinge to find out about the Munchkins in "Wizard Of Oz."
I understand where Dinklage is coming from but I don't think launching an attack on a fairy tale is a smart move.
That’s why he isn’t launching an attack on a fairytale, he is attacking the movie that is being planned. In 2022. But hey, maybe they’ll find a way to make it not offensive. Maybe.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is online now   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 26th January 2022, 05:11 PM   #1087
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 32,753
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
I am waiting for Dinklinge to find out about the Munchkins in "Wizard Of Oz."
I understand where Dinklage is coming from but I don't think launching an attack on a fairy tale is a smart move.
Huh?

I don't really understand what you are arguing. Could you please spell out the complaint you are making about Dinklage's complaint.
__________________
Слава Україні! **** Putin!
angrysoba 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 27th January 2022, 11:27 AM   #1088
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 17,066
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I don't believe you've characterized any of my objections correctly at any point in this conversation. I never said off limits, I did say we should be hesitant about calling for someone's firing before we've heard all the facts.
You know what? Naw. If your argument was mainly 'cancel culture is acceptable apart from being too trigger happy' you wouldn't argue as you have. You believe that JAQing and avoiding people's points shields you from people accurately concluding what you're actually doing. If your argument was that limited, you wouldn't be as critical of the many justified cancellations you have been (you'll claim you were 'just asking questions' in each case, but that's because you think people have to follow your rule's lawyer narrow readings of everything).

But as no one else is reading these exchanges and I have zero interest in proving to you what you yourself have said means beyond what I already have, I decline to do the long work of going back through your quotes.

However, I will keep pointing out when you do this exact thing in the future. As before.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 27th January 2022, 11:33 AM   #1089
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,249
So our local minor league hockey team released a player, who was then banned from the League for year by the League itself, for making a racist gesture at another player and may dear God the angry mayonnaise noises coming from people with profile pictures of either a Trump flag/symbol or a picture of themselves wearing sunglasses while sitting in a pickup truck is unbelievable.

And I've been to Icemen games. There's like... 100 people in stands. The Maple Leafs they ain't when it comes to a fanbase. I guarantee you 99% of these people didn't know our city had a hockey team a week ago.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 27th January 2022 at 11:36 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 27th January 2022, 12:16 PM   #1090
SuburbanTurkey
Penultimate Amazing
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 15,065
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
So our local minor league hockey team released a player, who was then banned from the League for year by the League itself, for making a racist gesture at another player and may dear God the angry mayonnaise noises coming from people with profile pictures of either a Trump flag/symbol or a picture of themselves wearing sunglasses while sitting in a pickup truck is unbelievable.

And I've been to Icemen games. There's like... 100 people in stands. The Maple Leafs they ain't when it comes to a fanbase. I guarantee you 99% of these people didn't know our city had a hockey team a week ago.
Imagine being such a crap person that you get thrown out of a sport where fighting is generally considered an acceptable response to provocation. The lowest standards of conduct and still can't hack it.
__________________
Gobble gobble
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 27th January 2022, 12:59 PM   #1091
ZirconBlue
Sole Survivor of L-Town
 
ZirconBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lexington, KY, USA, Earth
Posts: 14,283
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
So our local minor league hockey team released a player, who was then banned from the League for year by the League itself, for making a racist gesture at another player and may dear God the angry mayonnaise noises coming from people with profile pictures of either a Trump flag/symbol or a picture of themselves wearing sunglasses while sitting in a pickup truck is unbelievable.

And I've been to Icemen games. There's like... 100 people in stands. The Maple Leafs they ain't when it comes to a fanbase. I guarantee you 99% of these people didn't know our city had a hockey team a week ago.
A racist gesture?
__________________
Religion and sex are powerplays.
Manipulate the people for the money they pay.
Selling skin, selling God
The numbers look the same on their credit cards.
ZirconBlue 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 27th January 2022, 01:02 PM   #1092
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 52,362
Originally Posted by ZirconBlue View Post
A racist gesture?
https://www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/...racial-gesture
__________________
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 online now   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 27th January 2022, 01:28 PM   #1093
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,249
Originally Posted by ZirconBlue View Post
A racist gesture?
Is this concept that confusing or shocking?
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
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 27th January 2022, 01:41 PM   #1094
ZirconBlue
Sole Survivor of L-Town
 
ZirconBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lexington, KY, USA, Earth
Posts: 14,283
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Is this concept that confusing or shocking?
I just couldn't imagine what that would refer to, other than maybe a Nazi salute.
__________________
Religion and sex are powerplays.
Manipulate the people for the money they pay.
Selling skin, selling God
The numbers look the same on their credit cards.
ZirconBlue 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 27th January 2022, 01:43 PM   #1095
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 52,362
Originally Posted by ZirconBlue View Post
I just couldn't imagine what that would refer to, other than maybe a Nazi salute.
Acting like a monkey at a black man was the exact thing described in the link I posted.
__________________
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 online now   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 27th January 2022, 02:00 PM   #1096
ZirconBlue
Sole Survivor of L-Town
 
ZirconBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lexington, KY, USA, Earth
Posts: 14,283
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Acting like a monkey at a black man was the exact thing described in the link I posted.
Thanks. I responded to JoeMorgue before reading your link. That someone would actually do that was somehow inconceivable to me.
__________________
Religion and sex are powerplays.
Manipulate the people for the money they pay.
Selling skin, selling God
The numbers look the same on their credit cards.
ZirconBlue 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 27th January 2022, 02:03 PM   #1097
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 52,362
Originally Posted by ZirconBlue View Post
Thanks. I responded to JoeMorgue before reading your link. That someone would actually do that was somehow inconceivable to me.
How about throwing bananas at black players?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/s...-field-n992911
__________________
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 online now   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 27th January 2022, 02:13 PM   #1098
ZirconBlue
Sole Survivor of L-Town
 
ZirconBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lexington, KY, USA, Earth
Posts: 14,283
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
How about throwing bananas at black players?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/s...-field-n992911
__________________
Religion and sex are powerplays.
Manipulate the people for the money they pay.
Selling skin, selling God
The numbers look the same on their credit cards.
ZirconBlue 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 27th January 2022, 02:18 PM   #1099
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,249
This is actually the second incident. Another player, this one in the AHL, received a 30 game ban (essentially the same as a ban for the season) and released from his team for... well literally exactly the same thing, making the "swinging monkey arm gesture" at an African American player.

https://thehockeynews.com/news/ahl-p...wards-opponent

Note. I've rumors that the two players are cousins, leading to the possibility that the second incident was basically a retaliation for the punishment put down on the first in typical "How dare you tell me not to be racist, I'll show you racist" way the right loves, but I can't confirm that so grain of salt and all that.

*For non-hockey folks the there are two minor league hockey leagues in the US, the American Hockey League and the now hopelessly misnamed East Coast Hockey League. The AHL is the higher of the two and is seen as the primary farm league for the NHL, with AHL players seen as being more directly being groomed for NHL careers.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
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 27th January 2022, 04:07 PM   #1100
lobosrul5
Master Poster
 
lobosrul5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,958
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
*For non-hockey folks the there are two minor league hockey leagues in the US, the American Hockey League and the now hopelessly misnamed East Coast Hockey League. The AHL is the higher of the two and is seen as the primary farm league for the NHL, with AHL players seen as being more directly being groomed for NHL careers.
There is another:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federa..._Hockey_League

I miss ze Albuquerque Scorpions of the WPHL/CHL but then they moved to a nice new arena in a town called Rio Rancho, that with traffic could be an hours drive from eastern ABQ. And then they promptly folded due to low attendance.
lobosrul5 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 27th January 2022, 04:16 PM   #1101
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 8,651
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
If your argument was mainly 'cancel culture is acceptable apart from being too trigger happy' you wouldn't argue as you have.
I've never yet made an argument about "cancel culture" as a whole. Instead, I've pointed out specific instances where individuals have seemed (to me) overly trigger happy, taking too much delight and haste in the ruination of others.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
You believe that JAQing and avoiding people's points shields you from people accurately concluding what you're actually doing.
I'd be playing into your attempt to address the arguer instead of the argument if I were to defend myself against this accusation.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
If your argument was that limited, you wouldn't be as critical of the many justified cancellations you have been...
You'd do better to address my actual arguments than to (once again) demonstrate the fallibility of mindreading.

We disagree about which cancellations were indeed justified, and this disagreement could well be interesting and productive. All you have to do is engage with what I've actually written instead of tilting at strawmen.
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

Last edited by d4m10n; 27th January 2022 at 04:19 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 27th January 2022, 04:24 PM   #1102
autumn1971
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,685
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I don't know about that, given that she found herself back at IAC around four years later.

https://twitter.com/complex/status/954872306488274945

That aside, what makes you think she ought to have been canceled fired in the first place?
She was **** at understanding her job and proved it in a public way that embarrassed both her and her employer.

Why do you believe an employer should not be allowed to fire an employee who demonstrates gross incompetence?
__________________
'A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; a base, proud, shallow, beggardly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a lily-livered, action-taking knave, a whoreson, glass-gazing, superservicable, finical rogue;... the son and heir of a mongral bitch: one whom I will beat into clamorous whining, if thou deniest the least syllable of thy addition."'
-The Bard
autumn1971 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 27th January 2022, 04:59 PM   #1103
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
 
Graham2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,567
This is an update on a case where a Professor used redacted racial/sexual slurs in an exam question as he had for years and got pinged because someone claimed to have heart palpitations on seeing the redacted racial slur.


He reached an agreement with the university about it, which amongst other things involved having his lessons recorded.


The university then went back on that and required he undergo months long 'struggle sessions'.



It turns out the course material for the 'struggle sessions' contains the same racial slur he got in trouble for using redacted exactly the same way he redacted it.


The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has done an article on this:


Quote:
CHICAGO, Jan. 27, 2022 — Law professor Jason Kilborn forges ahead in the battle to vindicate academic freedom rights at University of Illinois Chicago, which punished him for a test question that included two redacted slurs.

Today, Kilborn filed a First Amendment lawsuit against UIC. He is represented by Wayne Giampietro, an attorney in the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education’s Faculty Legal Defense Fund network.

“The only thing that will hold UIC accountable for its unconstitutional actions is a lawsuit,” said Kilborn. “FIRE’s Faculty Legal Defense Fund gave me the strong medicine of real legal action, and UIC has given me no choice but to use it.”

They've also got a copy of the 'training material' which is a fine example of 'Critical Theories' at work.


https://www.thefire.org/university-o...ing-materials/
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!"
'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail

Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...
Graham2001 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 27th January 2022, 05:13 PM   #1104
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 39,249
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I've never yet made an argument about "cancel culture" as a whole.
WE'VE NOTICED.
__________________
"If everyone in the room says water is wet and I say it's dry that makes me smart because at least I'm thinking for myself!" - The Proudly Wrong.
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 27th January 2022, 07:27 PM   #1105
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 8,651
Originally Posted by autumn1971 View Post
She was **** at understanding her job and proved it in a public way that embarrassed both her and her employer.
Making jokes about white privilege (on her own time) has nothing do to with her job.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
WE'VE NOTICED.
And?
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

Last edited by d4m10n; 27th January 2022 at 07:29 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 27th January 2022, 08:29 PM   #1106
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 14,937
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Again we agree! Sadly you again don't realize that you're on the wrong ass end of it yet again. You bragged about your refusal to even read the argument based on who was making it, then demanded that same person restate their argument in your demanded format and with a requirement that doesn't make any rational sense.
This is nonsense. It's also still more evidence that you do not know how to argue. Instead of saying "a requirement that doesn't make any rational sense," you need to demonstrate why it doesn't make any sense.

I also love this "demanded" bit: I wrote: "Cancel Culture predates the 'scary' terminology. Instead of eye-rolling dialogues, why don't you just defang the term by supplying your definition?"

"Why don't you" doesn't sound anything like "you must."

Quote:
Wait, no moving goalposts now. Was Joe's challenge just 'a definition'? That was the entirity of what he was arguing about? You quote one sentence of his argument that taken alone later that disproves that.
This is rich. And vague. Identify the sentence. Construct an argument.

Also, it takes some chutzpah to suggest I'm moving goalposts. A challenge was issued to generate a definition of "Cancel Culture." One was provided and you've been beclowning yourself defending an objection about the source. Speaking of which...

Quote:
That chance that the NYT fell for a right-wing scare mongering term in general is greater than non-zero and not in the trivial sense but in the 'they do in fact tend to do exactly that' sense. Opinion pieces have an even greater chance of that, making the odds in this specific case even greater. There is literally no logical fallacy in pointing that out.
Except this has nothing to do with the original challenge.

Quote:
Wow are you bad at this.

Yes, the evidence does indeed matter to accepting a term, negatively charged or not. You can't divorce the legitimacy of the use of the term from it's real utility. (And no, Joe's argument didn't just need 'a definition' to refute.)

Remember when it was called 'global warming'? Remember how a lot of deniers attacked that term because parts of the globe would cool? The deniers had a bunch of bad-faith criticisms of the phrase, and yet there were actual good reasons to switch from one term to the other so that's largely what's happened.

Are we going to have a conversation about the phenomenon of the 'welfare queen' and not point out that it's not really a thing as commonly used? 'Fake news'? 'Super criminals'?

For someone who claims to be oh so good at arguing and can tell who is hardcore stupid, illiterate, lightweights, you sure display absolutely zero skill at language implications. Chomsky should be proud.
It's amusing that you think you're making points here after you so thoroughly **** the bed. You're pretending to triple-down on a laughably bad argument whilst trying to change the subject. We can call Creationism "abrupt appearance theory," but rebranding does not alter the underlying claims in play. We can also say Creationism is "stupid" or a form of "scare-mongering," but those are not definitions, even if someone insistently stamps their little feet. And pathetically conceding, "we might agree they are not COMPREHENSIVE definitions" is just weak misdirection. As I said earlier, people can call "Cancel Culture" anything else they want -- including "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles." It makes no rational difference.

Quote:
What a mendacious and long winded way to say 'I saw a valid contention that might support an argument I don't like so I decided we had to skip it.'
This is yet another demonstration that you do not know how to read (or you're being completely dishonest). Also, do you see how I'm not merely asserting such a thing, but pointing at it? I can speak with some authority regarding my opinion of Joe's challenge.

Quote:
Joe is free to show how the given definitions don't align with the term's usage (oh no, semantics!) or how it is stupid, but there is no reason he would have to provide a definition for his argument to hold validity.
Joe is free to do many things, including nothing at all. My question was not unreasonable. He could have tried to make his point without a volunteer. As it happens, a definition was volunteered and he didn't make his point.

Quote:
You brag about not reading someone's argument based on the person making it,
Time is limited.

Quote:
make a nonsense challenge already provided in that poster's other posts,
"Cancel Culture predates the "scary" terminology. Instead of eye-rolling dialogues, why don't you just defang the term by supplying your definition?" So unreasonable.

Quote:
demand they reframe their argument to your liking, fling petty and base insults at everyone pointing out holes in arguments you like, all while pretending it is reasoning and evidence that supports your actions.
It sounds like you have personal issues you need to work out.
__________________
Cain: Don't be a homo.
Diablo: What's that supposed to mean?
Cain: It's a heteronormative remark meant to be taken at face-value.
Cain 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 28th January 2022, 02:24 AM   #1107
EaglePuncher
Critical Thinker
 
EaglePuncher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Posts: 371
Wow, someone is really angry about the fact that cancel culture is just a useless buzzword, created by brownshirts.
EaglePuncher is online now   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 28th January 2022, 09:17 AM   #1108
digger
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Posts: 207
How about the right's campaign to cancel Critical Race Theory?
digger 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 28th January 2022, 10:27 AM   #1109
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 8,651
Originally Posted by digger View Post
How about the right's campaign to cancel Critical Race Theory?
Does it fit the description given here?

https://www.dictionary.com/e/pop-cul...ancel-culture/
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.
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 28th January 2022, 04:53 PM   #1110
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 17,066
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I've never yet made an argument about "cancel culture" as a whole. Instead, I've pointed out specific instances where individuals have seemed (to me) overly trigger happy, taking too much delight and haste in the ruination of others.

I'd be playing into your attempt to address the arguer instead of the argument if I were to defend myself against this accusation.

You'd do better to address my actual arguments than to (once again) demonstrate the fallibility of mindreading.

We disagree about which cancellations were indeed justified, and this disagreement could well be interesting and productive. All you have to do is engage with what I've actually written instead of tilting at strawmen.
Pointing out that a thesis statement for your argument could be, 'Right wing criticisms of Cancel Culture are largely correct and Cancel Culture represents woke overreach' without being inconsistent with your points nor your tactics is not 'a personal attack'. This is doubly so when your tactics are only consistent with someone trying to make exactly that point but pretending they are not.

Being better at it than 16.5 doesn't make it not observable.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 28th January 2022, 05:01 PM   #1111
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 8,651
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Pointing out that a thesis statement for your argument could be, 'Right wing criticisms of Cancel Culture are largely correct and Cancel Culture represents woke overreach' without being inconsistent with your points nor your tactics is not 'a personal attack'.
You'll find no mention of right-wing criticisms in anything I've written. Once again, I implore you to address what I've said instead of your imagined idea of what my argument "could be."
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.
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 28th January 2022, 05:29 PM   #1112
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 17,066
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
This is nonsense. It's also still more evidence that you do not know how to argue. Instead of saying "a requirement that doesn't make any rational sense," you need to demonstrate why it doesn't make any sense.
Abjectly backwards. You haven't made a valid case why the 'request' was reasonable. If you don't understand why your writing makes it clear you were demanding that be done for you to consider the argument from the person whose posts you weren't reading, then you're an even worse communicator than a reader.

Quote:
I also love this "demanded" bit: I wrote: "Cancel Culture predates the 'scary' terminology. Instead of eye-rolling dialogues, why don't you just defang the term by supplying your definition?"

"Why don't you" doesn't sound anything like "you must."
'Why don't you make the argument the way I want you to', doesn't work very well when there isn't a rational reason to conform to your debate preferences. That you really think it would be the 'best' way doesn't mean it is.

Quote:
This is rich. And vague. Identify the sentence. Construct an argument.

Also, it takes some chutzpah to suggest I'm moving goalposts. A challenge was issued to generate a definition of "Cancel Culture." One was provided and you've been beclowning yourself defending an objection about the source. Speaking of which...

lmao, really? The fact that you think your failure identify which of the only two sentences of Joe that you quoted I'm referring to there makes it 'vague' and a fault of mine is hilarious. I'm the clown because you can't make this obvious deduction? Sure buddy. Well argued.

The challenge that you quoted was "Cancel Culture' stops being a thing (or at least stops being a thing that isn't obviously stupid) the second they actually clearly define. It only works as a scary code-word."

Since you're such a masterful debater, I've added a highlight so you can tell not only which sentence, but which part of the sentence proves your interpretation of the challenge being selective and self serving. That part is even a caveat! You love those right? Praise for Joe.


Quote:
Except this has nothing to do with the original challenge.
You can unsurprisingly be wrong about more than one thing at a time.


Quote:
It's amusing that you think you're making points here after you so thoroughly **** the bed. You're pretending to triple-down on a laughably bad argument whilst trying to change the subject. We can call Creationism "abrupt appearance theory," but rebranding does not alter the underlying claims in play. We can also say Creationism is "stupid" or a form of "scare-mongering," but those are not definitions, even if someone insistently stamps their little feet. And pathetically conceding, "we might agree they are not COMPREHENSIVE definitions" is just weak misdirection. As I said earlier, people can call "Cancel Culture" anything else they want -- including "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles." It makes no rational difference.
Your argument was a failure the moment you bragged about not reading the posts of the poster you demanded argue in the way you wanted and thus failed to comprehend their writings. Again you frame this as a failing in him, and not yourself. You'd be able to understand a more comprehensive definition from Joe's writings if you decided to read them. Or maybe not. Maybe you're too deep into some other motivations to give anything a fair reading.

As your refusal to see the points here is your failing. This isn't 'a rose by any other name' situation. It's about how one term is (has become) a right-wing narrative framing to monger fear that doesn't accurately describe the reality and another is a more neutral term that is far better at encompassing the phenomena under discussion. It is changing the underlying claims in this case.

I even used the 'global warming' example to show how changing what term is used can still be important even when the reasons to do so are much less important. If you don't understand how this at least impacts how things are communicated, then you're no one who has standing to be critical of the writings of others, nor their reading ability.

And to forestall your obvious next galaxy brained response, 'can' doesn't mean 'does' in every case obviously. Do you really think that taking about 'welfare queens' is the same as taking about 'social safety net spending'? No, you're just arguing as if it were for the purposes of being angry here.


Quote:
This is yet another demonstration that you do not know how to read (or you're being completely dishonest). Also, do you see how I'm not merely asserting such a thing, but pointing at it? I can speak with some authority regarding my opinion of Joe's challenge.
It's truly adorable that you don't understand that your 'paraphrasing' isn't accurate while it's spoken against by the very thing you quoted, but that your speculation isn't just another assertion. 'This is what would have happened' is an assertion. More to the point, you're still ignoring that this would have been a valid thing to contest.


Quote:
Joe is free to do many things, including nothing at all. My question was not unreasonable. He could have tried to make his point without a volunteer. As it happens, a definition was volunteered and he didn't make his point.
Which doesn't make your understanding of what he argued accurate. It certainly doesn't make your 'Well I would have done this to argue that' evidence that people 'don't know how to read or argue and are stupid'.



Quote:
Time is limited.



"Cancel Culture predates the "scary" terminology. Instead of eye-rolling dialogues, why don't you just defang the term by supplying your definition?" So unreasonable.
'Time is limited so if you don't rewrite what I've already refused to read or understand in the way I think best, you can't read nor argue. How is this unreasonable?'

Yeah, you're so good at this. Not sounding entitled in the least, no no!

Quote:
It sounds like you have personal issues you need to work out.
Your horrid arguments and massively dickish writing is not a personal problem I need to work on.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 28th January 2022, 05:32 PM   #1113
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 17,066
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
You'll find no mention of right-wing criticisms in anything I've written. Once again, I implore you to address what I've said instead of your imagined idea of what my argument "could be."
What a self-severing and invalid metric.

If your criticisms match the ones coming from the right wing, it consistent with their criticisms regardless of if you explicitly state you are agreeing with them.

'I didn't say I wanted her dead, I said I didn't want her to be alive anymore,' isn't a rational thing to say.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 28th January 2022, 05:36 PM   #1114
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 8,651
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
If your criticisms match the ones coming from the right wing, it consistent with their criticisms regardless of if you explicitly state you are agreeing with them.
Which of my specific criticisms (quotes preferable here) match which specific criticisms from the right? I don't follow right-wing media, so this should be interesting.
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

Last edited by d4m10n; 28th January 2022 at 05:38 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 28th January 2022, 06:15 PM   #1115
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 17,066
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Which of my specific criticisms (quotes preferable here) match which specific criticisms from the right? I don't follow right-wing media, so this should be interesting.
What was interesting was reading the first eight pages of this part of the thread and realizing just how inevitably you only are critical of cancellations coming from the left, only posted such, and how hard you work at avoiding what people are arguing. It truly reminded me what kind of bad faith you work in.

But my favorite from the first eight pages is when you straw man smartcooky saying they wouldn't want to hear from certain organizations as...

Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
At least you're upfront trying to censor ideas you don't like.
There are few more right-wing style arguments than claiming that 'not listening to Ann Coulter is censorship'.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 28th January 2022, 06:29 PM   #1116
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 8,651
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
What was interesting was reading the first eight pages of this part of the thread and realizing just how inevitably you only are critical of cancellations coming from the left...
I've criticized efforts at cancelling both Colin Kaepernick and Kathy Griffin, as already pointed out to you upthread.

Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
There are few more right-wing style arguments than claiming that 'not listening to Ann Coulter is censorship'.
How about not listening to Bill Ayers? Is it right wing to say he shouldn't be deplatformed?

Again, which of the specific criticisms I've written resemble arguments we've only seen from the right?
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.

Last edited by d4m10n; 28th January 2022 at 06:38 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 29th January 2022, 02:45 AM   #1117
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 14,937
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Abjectly backwards. You haven't made a valid case why the 'request' was reasonable.
Except that this has been addressed in mind-crushing detail, which I believe you called "long-winded" (and "mendacious" because the accusations are confessions).

Quote:
'Why don't you make the argument the way I want you to', doesn't work very well when there isn't a rational reason to conform to your debate preferences. That you really think it would be the 'best' way doesn't mean it is.
For a lot of your arguments, such as they are, the poor-reading comprehension is doing the heavy lifting. The ESP, the false inferences. I can't do anything more than quote the plain text of the original and juxtapose it against your ominous misreading.

Not that it needs to be pointed out again, but what I suspected would happen -- what with semantic wanking -- is exactly what did happen. And Joe never made good on his promise, instead face-planting.

But it is amusing that you would try to rehabilitate other people's terrible arguments with your even more terrible arguments.

Quote:
lmao, really? The fact that you think your failure identify which of the only two sentences of Joe that you quoted I'm referring to there makes it 'vague' and a fault of mine is hilarious. I'm the clown because you can't make this obvious deduction? Sure buddy. Well argued.

The challenge that you quoted was "Cancel Culture' stops being a thing (or at least stops being a thing that isn't obviously stupid) the second they actually clearly define. It only works as a scary code-word."

Since you're such a masterful debater, I've added a highlight so you can tell not only which sentence, but which part of the sentence proves your interpretation of the challenge being selective and self serving. That part is even a caveat! You love those right? Praise for Joe.
I see what you're saying now. It's yet another demonstration that you cannot read. This conversation thread comes from you quoting the following block of text:

Quote:
This is a non-sequitur. If you feel a demand is unreasonable, then you're obligated to generate a proper argument. We have a case in point: Joe asked for a definition of "Cancel Culture." One was supplied. Joe goes into radio silence.

ST's objection to the definition attacks the source, but this is a fallacy of irrelevance. Joe merely requested a definition -- one that could have come from Rocko's School of Typing for the Galactically Stupid. D4m10n presumably offered one on more amenable terms precisely to forestall irrelevant objections. It's also important to note that I did not merely say the objection was "irrelevant"; I explained my reasoning.

It's like if someone says, "John couldn't be the Midnight Strangler because he eats Cinnamon Toast Crunch for lunch." It's not an expression of "entitlement" or "privilege" to say the relevance of CTC as a lunch-time meal needs to be established. That's not "grinding the conversation" to a halt; it's moving it along. If the Cinnamon Toast Crunch argument is not developed, then IT is grinding things to a halt. This is utterly basic. It's astonishing that you fancy yourself some kind of counter-puncher when you are the lightest of light-weights.
There are two arguments here. One is that d4m10n supplied a definition, I welcomed Joe's demonstration, and ST replied to me attacking the sourcing. In that case you were reduced to arguing that ST's reply to me in fact had nothing to do with my comment about Joe's challenge, but was actually about d4m10n's crack regarding the NYT promulgating a right-wing myth. Now you're reduced to similar contortions by hanging your case on Joe's parenthetical remark because paraphrasing "stops being a thing" is not the "entirty [sic]" of what he said.

Never mind for a moment that Joe failed to do anything -- demonstrating Cancel culture stops to be a thing (OR a thing that is not obviously stupid). Small detail, that. If you sincerely believe you're making some kind of point here -- I mean -- I'm stunned. Flabbergasted. On some level, you must know you're a fraud, right? You cannot possibly be this clueless.

I'm also going to confess to being flattered at your attempts to cast me as a tyrant. In part, it speaks to your impotence at crafting impactful arguments. As I've said elsewhere, the formerly libertarian philosopher Robert Nozick once observed that arguments have a coercive quality. A compelling one will get someone to believe something they do not want to believe (a pre-"scary terminology" example of Cancel Culture).

Quote:
As your refusal to see the points here is your failing. This isn't 'a rose by any other name' situation. It's about how one term is (has become) a right-wing narrative framing to monger fear that doesn't accurately describe the reality and another is a more neutral term that is far better at encompassing the phenomena under discussion. It is changing the underlying claims in this case.
Creationism does not accurately describe reality, but reducing it to "scare-mongering" does not accurately describe the material claims made by creationists. That right-wingers cynically and opportunistically exploit modern ostracism (while hypocritically engaging in the same), says nothing to principled non-conservative opponents (either normatively, or how they assess the extent and shape of the problem). Rather than meaningfully engage the merits, you're desperately reduced to "discourses" in power, or, as I see above, lazy tarring ("What was interesting was reading the first eight pages of this part of the thread and realizing just how inevitably you only are critical of cancellations coming from the left...")

Republican strategists have said they're going to run on opposition to "wokeness" and "Cancel Culture," hoping to do what they've always done: exploit dumb cultural wedge issues so they can wreak havoc on international institutions, undermine any remnant of stateside democracy (to their aide re-election), further cripple the welfare state, facilitate environmental catastrophe, and cut taxes for the wealthy. Among other things, I'm sure.

It looks most of these other meanderings have already been addressed. Since you've added nothing of substance, I'm content with my previous remarks.
__________________
Cain: Don't be a homo.
Diablo: What's that supposed to mean?
Cain: It's a heteronormative remark meant to be taken at face-value.
Cain 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 29th January 2022, 07:16 AM   #1118
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 8,651
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
That right-wingers cynically and opportunistically exploit modern ostracism (while hypocritically engaging in the same), says nothing to principled non-conservative opponents (either normatively, or how they assess the extent and shape of the problem).
Precisely. We shouldn't need to continually revisit bygone attempted cancelations of Ellen Degeneres, Larry Flynt, Natalie Maines, Kathy Griffin, Colin Kaepernick, etc. if we already agree those efforts were motivated by seriously flawed or faith-based reasoning (e.g. Romans 1:26).

Conservatives pioneered mass cancelation of public figures on moralistic grounds, way back in the day. It was typically wrong when they did so, and even when they happened to be right it was often for the wrong reasons. This tells us almost nothing about whether it makes moral sense for progressives to adopt and update those same tactics for public figures (e.g. Gina Carano, Kathleen Stock) who say things which progressives find unacceptable by their own lights.

In my somewhat limited experience, groups dedicated to broadly Millian principles respecting speech (e.g. ACLU, FIRE) enjoy much more support from the left than from the right, so it's not particularly surprising to see right wingers trying to shut down speech they find offensive. It's more surprising—and from my perspective much more worrying—to see the left wing adopting the tactics of mass shaming followed by public pressure to disemploy or divest from individuals who transgress with their words.
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.
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 29th January 2022, 07:41 AM   #1119
digger
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Posts: 207
The American right is always projecting. They're so worried about cancel culture because they do everything they can to remove anything they don't like from the culture. They project that mindset onto their political opponents. They are certain that the left wants to censor them because they censor the left.

Rap music, video games, research on stem cells, interracial marriage, Maus, research on gun violence, Critical Race Theory, sex education, Big Bird. What does the right not try to cancel?

Last edited by digger; 29th January 2022 at 07:45 AM.
digger 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 29th January 2022, 07:45 AM   #1120
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 8,651
Originally Posted by digger View Post
They are certain that the left wants to censor them because they censor the left.
Is it wrong for them to try to censor their opponents, in your view?
__________________
Just reread theprestige's signature; still cannot recall anything about it.
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 06:59 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, 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.