ISF Logo   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 27th June 2020, 03:07 AM   #81
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,500
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I'm talking about the development of a social norm here, not some external authority.

Right now, the social norm being created and put in place is that if a person says something that "society" deems to be "bad", then "society" is right to persecute that person, and people associated with them, as well as anyone who opposes their persecution. The norm that is bubbling up is that "society" can, by force, deny livelihood to anyone that "society" decides isn't good enough. "Society" can issue death threats to individuals, their families, and their employers in order to evict the transgressor from that society.

That is absolutely something I think needs to be discussed. Because right now, leaving it up to each individual to try to decide whether or not they should say anything is kowtowing to a mob. And there's absolutely no reason to think that this mob will stop where you or I think they should stop. There's no guarantee that this mob will not decide that something you and I hold dear is now verbotten.

That social norm has been with us since at least the beginning of recorded history.

It is really only since the late 20th century that we’ve started to try and change it. For instance in the U.K. it is now illegal to sack a homosexual for being a homosexual. I use that as an example as it (well within my lifetime) is something that is well documented I.e. we know used to happen in the U.K. , it would be revealed by the decried social norm you argue against that someone was homosexual (or just suspected) and they would lose their job, even their home and be ostracised by family and their community.

So the question you need to consider is what “groups” you want to be protected because of a common attribute. As eluded by others in the thread, do you think being racist should now be added to the “protected by law groups”?
__________________
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 27th June 2020, 03:10 AM   #82
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,500
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
When the public response is from a relatively small group of people, who are safely anonymous, and who are publicizing something with the agenda of creating outrage... and when the public response involves death threats and coercion.. I rather think "mob" is the appropriate term.

You are aware death threats are illegal, so is harassment...?
__________________
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 27th June 2020, 03:32 AM   #83
Lplus
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 196
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I agree with you not seeing anything new. This is basic human behaviour that has always occurred. The use of social media and our now greater ease of communication does mean it can happen faster than ever.

I remember reading stories here on the forum years ago about the consequences for teachers being “outed” to their communities and losing their jobs, and outed not for being homosexual but for being an atheist.

I do wonder if it seems to be different to some people because of who tends to be on the receiving end these days? But even then my suspicions are that is more to do with which stories are deemed “newsworthy” than a real shift.
There may well be a change in who is on the receiving end, but there also seems to be a move towards the censuring of thought rather than action. Possibly partly because it is a lot easier to express personal thoughts to the world through modern media.
Lplus 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 June 2020, 03:53 AM   #84
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,500
Originally Posted by Lplus View Post
There may well be a change in who is on the receiving end, but there also seems to be a move towards the censuring of thought rather than action. Possibly partly because it is a lot easier to express personal thoughts to the world through modern media.
I think Tragicmonkey has made this point in the thread but as soon as you put your thoughts out there you are taking action. If you have a need to record your thoughts probably best to do so in a good old paper diary, otherwise you really do have to accept that your thoughts may end up everywhere!

I think this all ties up with the expectations of privacy we used to have, that we could act in our small social bubble and things didn't go further. But that privacy was really an illusion it was simply that it took effort and work to "breach" that privacy. People would have to visit libraries to find old copies of newspapers to find that letter you wrote complaining about the school employing an atheist, would have to go to the townhall and personally check the electoral roll to find where you lived and so on. All that illusory privacy has been shredded, and society is trying to adjust to that reality.
__________________
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 27th June 2020, 04:39 AM   #85
Lplus
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 196
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I think Tragicmonkey has made this point in the thread but as soon as you put your thoughts out there you are taking action. If you have a need to record your thoughts probably best to do so in a good old paper diary, otherwise you really do have to accept that your thoughts may end up everywhere!
You certainly do if your thoughts don't chime exactly with whichever brand of extremist thought is stirring the mob at the time.
Quote:
I think this all ties up with the expectations of privacy we used to have, that we could act in our small social bubble and things didn't go further. But that privacy was really an illusion it was simply that it took effort and work to "breach" that privacy. People would have to visit libraries to find old copies of newspapers to find that letter you wrote complaining about the school employing an atheist, would have to go to the townhall and personally check the electoral roll to find where you lived and so on. All that illusory privacy has been shredded, and society is trying to adjust to that reality.
The only privacy available for expression now is in the ballot booth.

Last edited by Lplus; 27th June 2020 at 04:42 AM. Reason: minor change in emphasis
Lplus 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 June 2020, 05:13 AM   #86
Mader Levap
Muse
 
Mader Levap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 872
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Isn't it supposed to be freedom of belief for all beliefs, not just freedom of beliefs I approve of?
There is no point in supporting beliefs that won't reciprocate. You may want to check "Tolerance Paradox".

If you genuinely think "let's murder everyone that is different" should get same support as "live and let live", then you really need to have your head checked.
__________________
Sanity is overrated. / Voting for Trump is morally equivalent to voting for Nazis in early 30's.
Mader Levap 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 June 2020, 07:00 AM   #87
d4m10n
Philosopher
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 5,275
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
None of these individuals besides Hirsi Ali have been "cancelled" for their opinions, in the sort of way being discussed here.
Fair point.

I suppose cancellation for speech acts and for sexual (mis)conduct are signifcantly different, inasmuch as there is a much better general case to be made for tolerating speech we find abhorrent.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
__________________
"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 27th June 2020, 07:10 AM   #88
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 16,412
Originally Posted by Mader Levap View Post
There is no point in supporting beliefs that won't reciprocate. You may want to check "Tolerance Paradox".

If you genuinely think "let's murder everyone that is different" should get same support as "live and let live", then you really need to have your head checked.
Incitement to murder (or other harm) is in a different category to simply stating a belief though I admit that the line can get blurry fast.

For example, is "I believe that all white men should be chemically castrated" a simple belief or is it something more sinister?
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 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 June 2020, 08:02 AM   #89
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 56,115
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I find it scary that not only is "keep your mouth shut for fear of reprisals" the norm but that you think that it should be the norm. That anything you say or have ever said could at any time be used as a weapon against you.

This sort of mentality creates a climate of fear where everybody distrusts their neighbour. That has been the hall mark of totalitarian societies throughout history. A free society is dead as a concept.
Hyperbole, much? All societies have always had the norm that you don't speak thoughtlessly. It's how humans get along. Do you say absolutely anything you want in front of your mother? Your boss? Your friends? Strangers? I realize that people make a deity of Freedom of Speech but it's taking it too far when they imagine that any degree of sensible discretion and considering one's audience is somehow the rise of Stalin. OMG I suggest not telling your employer's important client that she's fat and has body odor! HITLER IS BACK! DOOOOOOOOM!
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 June 2020, 08:04 AM   #90
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 56,115
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
So the question you need to consider is what “groups” you want to be protected because of a common attribute. As eluded by others in the thread, do you think being racist should now be added to the “protected by law groups”?
We must tolerate the intolerant, is the gist of what we're being told. Being gay and being a Nazi are both equally valid, fine people on both sides!
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 June 2020, 08:39 AM   #91
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 4,477
Not only are the effects of being 'outed' or 'doxxed' much worse since the advent of social media, but there is also an increase in the types of transgressions one can make against the mob.

And it is a mob, almost perfectly aligned upon what constitutes the correct set of beliefs and behaviors, with all of the concerns that Tocqueville wrote about. Basically, it's the CNN worldview. If you go against that, you're bound to find yourself in trouble.

It is interesting to see the window shrinking, and the phenomenon of the mob increasingly beginning to 'turn on their own' in certain instances.

There are lot of areas where discussion is completely and violently closed off in the public sphere. If you're on the Late Night Show and the conversation turns towards the George Floyd incident, say, or transgenderism, for example, you better tread lightly and just say what you're supposed to say.
__________________
I don't like that man. I must get to know him better. --Abraham Lincoln
sir drinks-a-lot 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 June 2020, 08:45 AM   #92
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 4,387
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
We must tolerate the intolerant, is the gist of what we're being told. Being gay and being a Nazi are both equally valid, fine people on both sides!
Essentially.
If the Nazi is not taking action to harm you- you have no justification for taking action against the Nazi.

You are both, of course, free to espouse your world views in a free society.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 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 June 2020, 08:49 AM   #93
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 17,693
I see a lot of problems with it. Let's take it for granted that there is only one acceptable opinion on George Floyd's death. On how many other issues is there only one acceptable opinion? Answer: Nearly none. On how many other issues do some people feel there is only one acceptable opinion? Answer: On almost all of them. And the scary part is actually when society as a whole changes its opinion.

Take the current blackface kerfuffle, for example. The current opinion of society is that blackface is always and everywhere racist and it has always been that way. And yet if you look on Wikipedia, the list of white performers who have appeared in blackface is like a Who's Who of current and former entertainers, including two current late-night hosts (Kimmel and Fallon), Billy Crystal, Ted Danson, Neil Diamond, Dan Aykroyd... the list actually had to be broken into segments. Some of them are comedians who are obviously always pushing the boundaries of good taste, but Neil Diamond?

Note that the comedians above are all liberals, unlikely to do anything that would be perceived as making them appear to be racist. So what happened? The Overton window shifted on them. There was always a segment of society that found blackface racist regardless of context, but that segment has grown dramatically in the last decade or so. A decade or more ago, blackface was widely socially acceptable if done by a liberal comedian. It registered well on the surprise meter, without quite going too far on the outrage scale.

Welcome to 2020. Kimmel and Fallon are under fire. Tina Fey (another noted liberal) had to pull four episodes of 30 Rock from streaming services. And just wait until wearing "trans-face" becomes an issue, because I don't think there's a famous comedian in history who hasn't worn women's clothing to get a laugh.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster 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 June 2020, 09:00 AM   #94
Lplus
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 196
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
I see a lot of problems with it. Let's take it for granted that there is only one acceptable opinion on George Floyd's death. On how many other issues is there only one acceptable opinion? Answer: Nearly none. On how many other issues do some people feel there is only one acceptable opinion? Answer: On almost all of them. And the scary part is actually when society as a whole changes its opinion.

Take the current blackface kerfuffle, for example. The current opinion of society is that blackface is always and everywhere racist and it has always been that way. And yet if you look on Wikipedia, the list of white performers who have appeared in blackface is like a Who's Who of current and former entertainers, including two current late-night hosts (Kimmel and Fallon), Billy Crystal, Ted Danson, Neil Diamond, Dan Aykroyd... the list actually had to be broken into segments. Some of them are comedians who are obviously always pushing the boundaries of good taste, but Neil Diamond?

Note that the comedians above are all liberals, unlikely to do anything that would be perceived as making them appear to be racist. So what happened? The Overton window shifted on them. There was always a segment of society that found blackface racist regardless of context, but that segment has grown dramatically in the last decade or so. A decade or more ago, blackface was widely socially acceptable if done by a liberal comedian. It registered well on the surprise meter, without quite going too far on the outrage scale.

Welcome to 2020. Kimmel and Fallon are under fire. Tina Fey (another noted liberal) had to pull four episodes of 30 Rock from streaming services. And just wait until wearing "trans-face" becomes an issue, because I don't think there's a famous comedian in history who hasn't worn women's clothing to get a laugh.
Is it society as whole, or just that part of it that rants on the internet?
Lplus 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 June 2020, 09:22 AM   #95
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 19,163
Originally Posted by DragonLady View Post

But at the end of the day, the left wing and the right wing belong to the same bird, and they must work together if civilization is gonna fly.

So, how do we figure out where to draw the lines? How far back into someone's past should we dig looking for evidence of holding the 'wrong' views? How much fallout is realistic for someone who holds an unpopular opinion today? How much reparation will that person be due if the culture shifts and those previously unpopular views become trendy again?
For those who have their information put out there, each individual gets to make that decision for themselves how to treat that individual.

It is a strange position (not necessarily wrong) that the solution is that a possible stranger should conclude that they should maintain a secret such that parties that know the person remain ignorant and don't act on knowledge.

I think many of us are on a quest for knowledge and truth.

Last edited by BobTheCoward; 27th June 2020 at 09:26 AM.
BobTheCoward 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 June 2020, 09:42 AM   #96
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 16,412
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Hyperbole, much? All societies have always had the norm that you don't speak thoughtlessly. It's how humans get along. Do you say absolutely anything you want in front of your mother? Your boss? Your friends? Strangers? I realize that people make a deity of Freedom of Speech but it's taking it too far when they imagine that any degree of sensible discretion and considering one's audience is somehow the rise of Stalin. OMG I suggest not telling your employer's important client that she's fat and has body odor! HITLER IS BACK! DOOOOOOOOM!
This is just head in the sand material.

Freedom of speech has never been absolute and if you insult an individual to their face then it has always had the potential to end badly.

But ostracism is no longer the stock remedy to those whose speech is "offensive" (for the day). It has risen to outing, doxxing, pressure to get individuals sacked and other punishments inflicted by keyboard warriors - all with your whole hearted approval.

It may not be quite the same as dobbing your neighbour to the secret police - yet, but the goal posts are on the march.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 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 June 2020, 09:58 AM   #97
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 4,477
Originally Posted by Lplus View Post
Is it society as whole, or just that part of it that rants on the internet?
The delta between the two is getting smaller and smaller. The Internet ranters are in lockstep with CNN (my example) and the overall accepted opinion on Late Night television and at the Academy Awards, etc. If you don't toe the line, you'll be bullied and pilloried. And yes, the Overton window is shrinking and strengthening. Scary times for the free exchange of ideas.
__________________
I don't like that man. I must get to know him better. --Abraham Lincoln
sir drinks-a-lot 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 June 2020, 10:00 AM   #98
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 19,163
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
The delta between the two is getting smaller and smaller. The Internet ranters are in lockstep with CNN (my example) and the overall accepted opinion on Late Night television and at the Academy Awards, etc. If you don't toe the line, you'll be bullied and pilloried. And yes, the Overton window is shrinking and strengthening. Scary times for the free exchange of ideas.
With the consequences being.... those who voluntarily associate with you learn something that leads them to conclude not to voluntarily associate with you.
BobTheCoward 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 June 2020, 10:11 AM   #99
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 56,115
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
This is just head in the sand material.

Freedom of speech has never been absolute and if you insult an individual to their face then it has always had the potential to end badly.

But ostracism is no longer the stock remedy to those whose speech is "offensive" (for the day). It has risen to outing, doxxing, pressure to get individuals sacked and other punishments inflicted by keyboard warriors - all with your whole hearted approval.

It may not be quite the same as dobbing your neighbour to the secret police - yet, but the goal posts are on the march.
Hysterical paranoia. I prescribe chill pills.

And you don't know what I "whole heartedly approve". Not everyone who disagrees with you on a thing is necessarily agreeing with everybody else who disagrees with you. Your thinking on this matter strikes me as cartoonishly simplistic.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 June 2020, 10:13 AM   #100
Pterodactyl
Graduate Poster
 
Pterodactyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,233
Eliminate all dissent by instilling fear of reprisal.

What could go wrong?
Pterodactyl 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 June 2020, 10:13 AM   #101
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 22,046
This thread began with an example of a seventeen year old girl expressing an opinion on a political subject, and her life being negatively affected in a significant manner (college admission rescinded, and significant negative and unwanted attention) as a result of that.


Show me any comparable case from the 1970s or 1980s. Anything. Things have changed with respect to free speech, and not for the better.

As it turns out, I woould know where to find cases that are at least comparable, but you wouldn't like the comparisons.
Meadmaker 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 June 2020, 10:16 AM   #102
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 25,461
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Some of them are comedians who are obviously always pushing the boundaries of good taste, but Neil Diamond?
Well he wore blackface and that's enough. But if we think that there should be more than that if we are going to lynch Neil Diamond then we can aggressively investigate him. Look to see if he allowed any racists to record or use his songs (cover versions or whatever), or any other connections like that. We are looking for occasions where Diamond is responsible for a racist who prospered because of Diamond. That is racist support or racist apologism.

But since we already know he did blackface it might be a waste of time to look for more. Don't clutch pearls and debate Neil Diamond. Just pull him down with ropes now and carry on.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

Last edited by William Parcher; 27th June 2020 at 10:29 AM.
William Parcher 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 June 2020, 10:36 AM   #103
Lplus
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 196
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
The delta between the two is getting smaller and smaller. The Internet ranters are in lockstep with CNN (my example) and the overall accepted opinion on Late Night television and at the Academy Awards, etc. If you don't toe the line, you'll be bullied and pilloried. And yes, the Overton window is shrinking and strengthening. Scary times for the free exchange of ideas.
Certainly those who rant on the internet have a lot more power to influence the middle ground now.
Lplus 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 June 2020, 10:53 AM   #104
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,125
Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper View Post
So... what do we do about this development, where not only Internet trolls, but also an increasing number of people across the political spectrum are starting to do things like this? And is this actually as big a problem as it seems, or just another case of a minority appearing much bigger than it is by being, well, very vocal?
What do you mean “starting to”? This is a very old phenomenon. Recall the Dixie Chicks. Recall blowback against the civil rights movement or the anti Vietnam War movement. Recall Jim Crow laws where speaking out could get you killed. Recall McCatheyism and Hollywood blacklisting. Hell, recall Puritanism.

This stuff is as American as it gets.
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch 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 June 2020, 11:05 AM   #105
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,295
I don't have anything substantive to add, but I just want to voice my support for TragicMonkey's contributions to this thread.
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer 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 June 2020, 11:30 AM   #106
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,500
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
The delta between the two is getting smaller and smaller. The Internet ranters are in lockstep with CNN (my example) and the overall accepted opinion on Late Night television and at the Academy Awards, etc. If you don't toe the line, you'll be bullied and pilloried. And yes, the Overton window is shrinking and strengthening. Scary times for the free exchange of ideas.

I think your idea of CNN and its reach is rather weird.
__________________
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 27th June 2020, 11:31 AM   #107
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,500
Originally Posted by Pterodactyl View Post
Eliminate all dissent by instilling fear of reprisal.

What could go wrong?

What has changed?
__________________
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 27th June 2020, 11:36 AM   #108
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 4,477
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I think your idea of CNN and its reach is rather weird.
I didn't mean to suggest that CNN was the secret headquarters for this kind of stuff, just that they are in complete alignment with the mob and the 'accepted' positions that we are all supposed to hold. Could have used another example.
__________________
I don't like that man. I must get to know him better. --Abraham Lincoln
sir drinks-a-lot 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 June 2020, 11:46 AM   #109
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 4,387
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
What has changed?
Exactly.
It has always been meet and just to attempt to do material harm to those whose worldview is antithetical to ones own.
If it is your turn to suffer the disapproval of the mob because your betters are in charge,(don't ask how they are your betters when they act exactly the same way you did once they have power), lay down and take it. Have we learned nothing from the lessons of Salem.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 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 June 2020, 11:48 AM   #110
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,500
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
This thread began with an example of a seventeen year old girl expressing an opinion on a political subject, and her life being negatively affected in a significant manner (college admission rescinded, and significant negative and unwanted attention) as a result of that.


Show me any comparable case from the 1970s or 1980s. Anything. Things have changed with respect to free speech, and not for the better.

As it turns out, I woould know where to find cases that are at least comparable, but you wouldn't like the comparisons.

Unfortunately the archive of the local paper where I grew up is not online and only available at their offices or the local library (privacy by inconvenience) so I can’t provide any links to the comparable cases from my childhood.

One I was looking for I had hoped would be accessible online as it made the national newspapers, in I think 1986 ,broke in the News of the World involved photos of my old headmaster that his son sent into the NOTW (backstory - divorce, teenage anger etc.). These photos were my ex-headmaster wearing some very mild S&M* leather outfits, no sexual acts or other people in the photos, he lost his job as a headmaster and had to move out of the town.

(If you want I can supply you more details so you can do further searches but not posting them in public PM me.)

*S&M because it was before the rebranding to BDSM!
__________________
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 27th June 2020, 11:51 AM   #111
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,500
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
I didn't mean to suggest that CNN was the secret headquarters for this kind of stuff, just that they are in complete alignment with the mob and the 'accepted' positions that we are all supposed to hold. Could have used another example.

No they aren’t, that’s just your bias lumping everyone you don’t like who do and say things you don’t like together.
__________________
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 27th June 2020, 11:51 AM   #112
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,500
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
What do you mean “starting to”? This is a very old phenomenon. Recall the Dixie Chicks. Recall blowback against the civil rights movement or the anti Vietnam War movement. Recall Jim Crow laws where speaking out could get you killed. Recall McCatheyism and Hollywood blacklisting. Hell, recall Puritanism.

This stuff is as American as it gets.

It’s as human as it gets!
__________________
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 27th June 2020, 11:54 AM   #113
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: It was Lothian's idea
Posts: 11,045
Haven't read the thread but imma roll with everyone is wrong except that one guy.
__________________

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 27th June 2020, 12:16 PM   #114
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 4,477
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
No they aren’t, that’s just your bias lumping everyone you don’t like who do and say things you don’t like together.
Nope. You're wrong.
__________________
I don't like that man. I must get to know him better. --Abraham Lincoln
sir drinks-a-lot 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 June 2020, 12:25 PM   #115
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 26,589
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
The delta between the two is getting smaller and smaller. The Internet ranters are in lockstep with CNN (my example) and the overall accepted opinion on Late Night television and at the Academy Awards, etc. If you don't toe the line, you'll be bullied and pilloried. And yes, the Overton window is shrinking and strengthening. Scary times for the free exchange of ideas.
Were the death threats against Ilhan Omar in lockstep with the CNN worldview? People of all sorts have been doing this stuff since forever. My sister got anonymous hate mail in the 1960's when her name got in the papers for civil rights marching. Maybe when you're on a high horse you forget to look down as well as sideways.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto 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 June 2020, 12:28 PM   #116
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 22,046
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Unfortunately the archive of the local paper where I grew up is not online and only available at their offices or the local library (privacy by inconvenience) so I can’t provide any links to the comparable cases from my childhood.

One I was looking for I had hoped would be accessible online as it made the national newspapers, in I think 1986 ,broke in the News of the World involved photos of my old headmaster that his son sent into the NOTW (backstory - divorce, teenage anger etc.). These photos were my ex-headmaster wearing some very mild S&M* leather outfits, no sexual acts or other people in the photos, he lost his job as a headmaster and had to move out of the town.

(If you want I can supply you more details so you can do further searches but not posting them in public PM me.)

*S&M because it was before the rebranding to BDSM!
So what you had back then was people being punished for sexual activity. That's bad. I'm glad that doesn't happen anymore.

But the cases aren't exactly comparable. There's some overlap, to be sure, but there's also a significant difference. In the case from the '80s, the negative consequences were a result of sexual activity, and the knowledge of that sexual activity becoming public. People felt that people who engaged in non-standard sexual activity, i.e. who deviated from the norm, were unfit to be around children. I'm glad that doesn't happen anymore, but that wasn't the sort of case I was looking for. I was looking for a case where the negative consequences were a result of a teenager expressing a political opinion.

So, if we found a case where a person experienced discrimination for being a homosexual or other sexual non-conformist, that wouldn't be very comparable. If we found someone who experienced discrimination after supporting gay rights, that would be comparable. But I remember the 70s. I don't think you'll find such a case.

If you did find such a case, I don't think very many people would be comfortable wit70sh the other comparisons between the cases, but I suppose that will have to wait until the cases are found..

ETA: I see that Bruto identified something somewhat similar from the '60s. The difference is quite significant. It was in the '60s that people started expressing outrage and demanding free speech as such cases occurred. It was during that era that there were an awful lot of lawsuits won by students who had been punished for expressing their political opinions in school. By the '70s, it had become accepted that free speech was free speech. It couldn't easily be shut down.

There's been some backsliding on that stance since.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 27th June 2020 at 12:48 PM.
Meadmaker 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 June 2020, 12:35 PM   #117
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 4,477
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Were the death threats against Ilhan Omar in lockstep with the CNN worldview?
??

Of course not. What did I say that suggested that?
__________________
I don't like that man. I must get to know him better. --Abraham Lincoln
sir drinks-a-lot 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 June 2020, 12:40 PM   #118
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 25,461
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Haven't read the thread but imma roll with everyone is wrong except that one guy.
Robert Johnson is the one who is right but he's in the other thread.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher 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 June 2020, 12:56 PM   #119
crescent
Illuminator
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,579
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Unfortunately the archive of the local paper where I grew up is not online and only available at their offices or the local library (privacy by inconvenience) so I can’t provide any links to the comparable cases from my childhood.

One I was looking for I had hoped would be accessible online as it made the national newspapers, in I think 1986 ,broke in the News of the World involved photos of my old headmaster that his son sent into the NOTW (backstory - divorce, teenage anger etc.). These photos were my ex-headmaster wearing some very mild S&M* leather outfits, no sexual acts or other people in the photos, he lost his job as a headmaster and had to move out of the town.

(If you want I can supply you more details so you can do further searches but not posting them in public PM me.)

*S&M because it was before the rebranding to BDSM!
Sexual orientation was a huge no-no back then. As recently as the 1990's Ellen Degeneres's show was cancelled after she came out of the closet. Rock Hudson, Liberace, George Michael, Freddy Mercury, a great many gay and bisexual people had to stay in the closet because they would get fired if they didn't. In this regard, free speech (the freedom to speak of one's own sexuality) has improved dramatically.

EAT: One could argue that discussion of one's own sexual orientation and public reaction to it is cultural, not political. That isn't the case, there is no great firewall between culture and politics. When famous people started coming out of the closet, from Ellen onwards, politics factored into that. When members of the armed services publicly came out, they did so to challange the political situation as evidences through Don't Ask Don't Tell and other policies. Sexual orientation was a hugely political topic, as much as some current conservatives would love to remember otherwise.

Last edited by crescent; 27th June 2020 at 01:08 PM.
crescent 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 June 2020, 01:37 PM   #120
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 12,822
I ******* love this ****. Precisely the people who would have been denying people access to everything from a good education to even making a decent living for simply existing are now whining and crying about how they can't call someone a fag or talk about how black people are inferior (for example) without suffering consequences!

Yeah, that's right: I'm saying there are people wringing their hands in this thread who had absolutely no problem with discriminating against people for simply existing. I love the flavor of your fear of suffering consequences for things you actually say and do, and it's hilarious that you're so scared of those consequences that you'll twist the law into a pretzel in order to try to get a little protection from your own racism, sexism, etc. It's awesome!
Babbylonian 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 05:26 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.