"Cancel Culture" Opinions?

[action]

21 minutes ago, Dazey said:

So this is causing quite a bit of controversy over here. TV news report about a racially motivated attack is drawing criticism and support from all quarters it seems.

 

everytime someone uses the N word these days, like that shoe advert, I shake my head in disbelief. Surely by this point, these people are just trolling and just provoking a reaction?

[DieselDaisy]

It is every time somebody uses the black word these days. 

[action]

1 hour ago, soon said:

You don't have any trans friends? I hope you can find more friends.

I'm just glad that you are monitoring the situation with Captain kirk and the trans people. Thats important stuff. 

as much as I reckon the rights of trans people, I don't think they're generally easy going people. they seem far too "pushy" and too loud to me. I prefer calm, tolerating, easy going people. you know, the accountant type of person. the reason I don't have trans people in my friend circle, is as simple as, I just don't like them.

I reserve the right to stock my friend circle with people I identify with and who I feel comfortable with. It would be a bad idea, both for me as to the other party, to force us together. I don't see the point in it really? Just let people chose who they want to be with.

[Towelie]

It's just a bunch of pussies really, isn't it?

[Ace Nova]

24 minutes ago, downzy said:

It's a group of people expressing an opinion.  No different than any other association or group of people who express a judgement.  Everyone else is free to disregard their message.

The only real difference is that this group is harnessing new communication platforms to broadcast that message. 

But again, it has yet to be demonstrated that this louder broadcast has any real effect on what gets truly "canceled." 

Do you have an example of "cancel culture" forcing its will on society?

My argument here is that I don't think it actually exists in the way that many here have argued.  

 

My issue is with the psychological/sociological/philosophical aspect of it and what it could (potentially) do to an innocent entity or an entity that does not deserve to be "hurt" or "destroyed".  And the word "cancel" deceptively alludes to something getting completely "canceled".  That is not always the case.  But the reality is, if an entity is targeted, they will be hurt financially, socially, mentally ...regardless of being "guilty" or "innocent".  

 They don't need to be entirely "cancelled" for "cancel culture" to do what it intends to do....which is hurt the entity, in whatever way possible.  So then you have folks saying it's harmless because rarely do entities actually get full-out "canceled".  How about all the people it hurt? I would think that you, out of all people, would agree that a person/entity deserves his day in court...not a trial by media, no?  (And I'm not talking about the people or entities that are likely guilty of being "monsters"; where there already is an overwhelming amount of evidence).

On the surface, "cancel culture" can appear harmless (or justified) but if you dig deep enough, it is rooted from the psychological concept of "mob mentality"

There are a myriad of abominations that have transpired (or were formed) throughout history; as a result of "mob mentality"...

- The Salem Witch Trials

- Hate Groups

- Cults

(To an extent, one could make the argument that the Holocaust was a result of "mob mentality")  And before anyone makes a statement, no, I do not believe "cancel culture" could lead to an event like the holocaust.  But the mentality is alarmingly similar, from a psychological standpoint.   Two completely opposite ideologies but born from same concept of "mob mentality".

Although "Cancel Culture" is intended to be "justified" it can easily result in something much worse.... because psychologically, it is no different than the concept of "mob mentality". 

Some modern day examples showing the hypocrisy of "cancel culture" because it is (likely) influenced/started by a select group of people, and spread on social media because of "mob mentality" ...

 

A data analyst and veteran of the Obama reelection campaign was fired by Civis Analytics for tweeting a link to a paper written by a well-regarded (and, worth noting, biracial) Princeton professor of African-American studies finding that riots are bad for black communities. No criticism, however respectful or intelligent, is to be permitted.

These men were not fired for using racial slurs or engaging in abuse. They were fired for giving voice to views that the mob wishes to see silenced.

Of course there is rampant hypocrisy. The editor of Bon Appétit had to go, but as recently as 2019 the Liberal prime minister of Canada and the Democratic governor of Virginia both survived blackface scandals resulting from some of those “youthful indiscretions” the politicians are always going on about. Fender will fire a luthier but maintains a relationship with Eric Clapton, who has been known to use racial slurs in vicious denunciation of British immigrants and as recently as 2007 talked up Enoch Powell, the politician whose “Rivers of Blood” speech was a cri de cœur for British racists. Clapton’s name can move a lot of guitars. On the “Animal Farm” of social-media scalp hunting, some animals are more equal than others.

The same progressives who once held themselves out as checks on corporate power now have decided to deputize the Fortune 500 to enforce political and social conformism, making political correctness a criterion for employment — not only in high-status jobs but also for fast-food workers and obscure middle managers. They believe that they have the cultural power, and that this way of doing things will advantage the Left. But culture changes: Today’s social-justice warriors are relying on the same strategy that once kept openly gay actors out of the movies and black musicians off the radio, an irony that is lost on our progressive friends.

The imbeciles on Twitter are unserious people, but unserious people can produce serious problems. There is a word for the situation in which there is no room for disagreement. The word is not “justice.” It is “totalitarianism.” That is what cancel culture is, and we have seen it in highly developed form in such places as East Germany under Honecker and China under Mao and the Cultural Revolution.

https://nypost.com/2020/06/13/social-justice-warriors-are-waging-a-cancel-cultural-revolution/

 

The online mob came for Harald Uhlig.

What terrible thing had he done? As I show in my new video, he tweeted that Black Lives Matter "torpedoed itself, with its full-fledged support of #defundthepolice." Instead of defunding, Uhlig suggested, "train them better."

Hundreds of people then signed a petition to demand that Uhlig, a University of Chicago professor and head of the Journal of Political Economy, resign. Even prominent economists like Janet Yellen and Paul Krugman joined the mob. Krugman called Uhlig "another privileged white man who evidently cannot control his urge to belittle the concerns of those less fortunate."

But that's just a lie. Uhlig wasn't belittling concerns of anyone less fortunate.

"There was nothing racist or discriminatory in how he said it," says Reason magazine senior editor Robby Soave, who covers the new "woke" protests. "But because he has some different views from the protesters, he must be a racist.

Uhlig was placed on leave by the journal he ran.

The new totalitarians demand that no one criticize their view of the world.

The online mob even attacks its fellow Democrats.

David Shor, an analyst at Democratic polling firm Civis Analytics, tweeted a study that concluded, "race riots reduced Democratic vote share."

That study was probably accurate. Obviously, rioting alienates voters.

But the mob attacked Shor. "Come get your boy," one tweeted.

His bosses did. Even though Shor issued a groveling apology, he was fired.

Soave points out, "There's a cruel streak in activism that says, 'If you disagree with me…you have no right to speak.'"

"Why are they winning?" I ask. "Their argument is ridiculous."

"People are afraid to challenge them," explains Soave. "It just takes one employee at one company, to say, 'Here's the law that protects my rights to feel safe and comfortable in this workplace. If you're not making me feel safe and comfortable, I'm going to get you in trouble.'"

So cowardly corporations cave.

A Boeing executive was even forced out for opposing women's service in the military—30 years ago.

A Los Angeles soccer team fired a player because his wife posted racist comments.

Michigan State pushed out a physicist when a twitter mob from its "Graduate Employees Union" labeled him a "scientific racist." What racist thing had the physicist done? He "rejects the idea that scientists should categorically exclude the possibility of average genetic differences among groups," is how a Wall Street Journal column explained it.

https://reason.com/2020/07/08/cancel-culture-is-out-of-control/

 

This is a decent article on the dangers of "mob mentality" on social media platforms....

 

We Want to Be Liked

When we share our thoughts on social media, we’re generally hoping for validation. A simple web search will reveal that people have begun discussing the possibility that many in our society are now addicted to likes. By extension, our desire to be accepted can impact our ability to be objective in the face of online bullying. In fact, it may contribute to our willingness to join the mob.  

This collection of naysayers may be completely well-intentioned, but could be making decisions and forming opinions based on irrational thought. Once this groupthink sets in, an “us versus them” attitude can dominate any discussion. When members of the group don’t want to dissent for fear of rejection, the mob mentality will prevail.

Even if people see social media bullying unfolding, they may not step in. The term bystander effect was coined following the  horrific 1964 murder of Kitty Genovese in New York City. Many people heard the young woman being stabbed to death, but no one called the police. Social psychologists Bibb Latané and John Darley theorized that the inaction on the part of the witnesses was due to the “perceived diffusion of responsibility” and social influence.

Facts Don’t Change Minds

When people have formed an opinion about something, it can be very hard for them to change their minds. Our own personal biases, feelings and even life circumstances can have a major impact on how we process information.

For example, we come in contact with sick people all the time and could be infected with something before symptoms appear. If you’re still feeling fine as you roll up your sleeve for a flu shot, but the virus is already spreading through your body, when you wake up sick the next morning, you might be convinced that the shot is what made you sick (and, before the comments start rolling, this is just an example — no one is advocating for the flu shot here). Because this was a personal experience, it might make it difficult to believe that your interpretation of the events could be wrong.

This is why fact-checking also doesn’t seem to work. Even if you present someone with overwhelming evidence, they may not be able to accept it. In those moments, they may look to their supporters, those who share the same beliefs, for validation.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeannecroteau/2019/02/01/our-society-is-broken-lets-fix-it/#101c9cd6704b

 

And my final example for the night (I'm tired, need go to bed) is the story of Richard Jewel....

Richard Allensworth Jewell (born Richard White;[1] December 17, 1962 – August 29, 2007) was an American security guard and police officer who was falsely suspected as the perpetrator of the Centennial Olympic Park bombing at the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta, Georgia.

The media circus surrounding the investigation, which was leaked to the press, has been widely cited as an example of law enforcement and media excesses.[2]

While working as a security guard at the Olympics Park, he discovered a backpack containing three pipe bombs on the park grounds.[1] Jewell alerted police and helped evacuate the area before the bomb exploded, saving many people from injury or death. Initially hailed by the media as a hero, Jewell was soon considered a suspect by the FBI and local law enforcement.

Though never charged, he underwent a "trial by media", which took a toll on his personal and professional life. Jewell was cleared as a suspect after 88 days of public scrutiny.[3] Eric Rudolph eventually confessed and pleaded guilty to that bombing and other attacks.[4][5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Jewell

I remember it clear as day...just about every media outlet in the country played "judge, jury and executioner".  Had that event happened in the era of social media, it would have been that much worse.  Think about it, "A former cop, turned security officer, plants a bomb at the Olympics so that he could get recognized as a hero".  The Cancel Culture crowd would look like this....

 

 

 

So maybe it doesn't appear to exist.  But it's there and has always been there.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[DieselDaisy]

46 minutes ago, action said:

as much as I reckon the rights of trans people, I don't think they're generally easy going people. they seem far too "pushy" and too loud to me. I prefer calm, tolerating, easy going people. you know, the accountant type of person. the reason I don't have trans people in my friend circle, is as simple as, I just don't like them.

This is a problem of course when you find yourself lubed-up and on all fours in a seedy Thai hotel.

[action]

10 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

This is a problem of course when you find yourself lubed-up and on all fours in a seedy Thai hotel.

i once had a co worker, he was wealthy and single, who went to thailand on vacation each year. alone. Such a nice country, he said.

to this day I wonder how many boy-bums he drilled

 

[Swampfox]

6 hours ago, downzy said:

For a little perspective, Chris Brown - the guy who beat the shit out of Rhianna - grossed over $30 million during his 2019 NA Tour.

If a guy like that isn't "canceled," is there really a cancel culture?  

I get what you're saying but it isn't like cancel culture doesn't still hurt some in the wallet.  Dukes of Hazzard can be purchased on DVD but they've lost money not being aired on regular television.  I know Disney has the money but I'm sure it isn't cheap altering one of their rides to the Frog Princess.  It does however have the opposite effect in some cases.   I actually bought "Baby it's cold outside" just to see what all the fuss was about.  I think the broader result of cancel culture is what we never see or hear.  People are afraid of being targeted so we all have to be so careful to not offend.  Think about the next CEO that gets invited to the White House like Goya.  They're going to say fuck that we don't want boycotts hurting our business.  Look at the AFD remastered release.  OIAM is on Lies but they were afraid to put it out now.  They still would have made millions in ticket sales but were afraid to include it because of what might have happened if they did.  They can say whatever they want about why it was left off but it's really because of fear of drawing the cancel culture mob their way.

[soon]

6 hours ago, action said:

as much as I reckon the rights of trans people, I don't think they're generally easy going people. they seem far too "pushy" and too loud to me. I prefer calm, tolerating, easy going people. you know, the accountant type of person. the reason I don't have trans people in my friend circle, is as simple as, I just don't like them.

I reserve the right to stock my friend circle with people I identify with and who I feel comfortable with. It would be a bad idea, both for me as to the other party, to force us together. I don't see the point in it really? Just let people chose who they want to be with.

Except that you don’t know what you’re talking about and are clearly basing your assumptions on whatever hysterical media puts all your other flawed thoughts in your head.

5 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

This is a problem of course when you find yourself lubed-up and on all fours in a seedy Thai hotel.

Why a deeply confused person you are.

[downzy]

6 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

The point is, you defended the Ghostbusters remake.

I defended the effort to make a franchise with a cast that is largely made up of females.  I never defended the movie itself. 

Again, not sure what that has to do with this topic.  

[soon]

11 hours ago, downzy said:

I think we need to be careful about what exactly we're talking about when we throw around terms like "cancel culture."

What exactly do people think is cancel culture?  How effective do people think it is? 

I think you make a good point about defining it. And your point has been proven by the various uses in this thread.

I think elements of Purity-testing, De-platforming, Boycotting and Pile-on-culture are all in play. De-platforming and boycotting have their place in the world to be sure. We have those tools there to use when we needs them. To me, Cancel Culture is when the overzealous use of those elements becomes routine. It becomes routine and is also used as the touchstones for an online communities base of affinity, aka its what people do to bond and socialize.

I have less than no idea about pop stars and businesses. I dont know if its effective there. It is certainly at play in the world of social movements that I spoke to. 

Broadly speaking Im not sure that its efficacy measures if it exists or not though, tbh? In fact, I think cancel culture just doesn't care to look back and make sure people stay canceled, its always just ripping the next thing down. Doesnt really care about any of the issues.

And even failed attempts at Cancelling can harm third parties, when its a circular firing squad situation. The very first time I learned of Cancel Culture was way back when Trump was running for POTUS. Do you remember when he went on Jimmy Fallon and Fallon ruffled Trumps hair to see if its real and some online wanted to cancel Fallon for "Normalizing Trump?" They failed, but they also attacked others in progressive movements for not supporting their bid for cancellation. Caused a lot of damage and splintering in those movements. 

11 hours ago, downzy said:

For me the concept of cancel culture is over-simplified.  It's such a meaningless concept and employed usually by those who wish to avoid responsibility for their actions.  

Its certainly used this way a lot.

[DieselDaisy]

45 minutes ago, soon said:

Why a deeply confused person you are.

Is that really the best interrogative you could have picked?

[downzy]

1 hour ago, Swampfox said:

I get what you're saying but it isn't like cancel culture doesn't still hurt some in the wallet.  Dukes of Hazzard can be purchased on DVD but they've lost money not being aired on regular television.

Maybe some things shouldn't be celebrated or be aired without opposition? 

Dukes of Hazzard made the battle flag of the army of northern Virginia (commonly referred to as the Confederate Flag) as its principle brand and logo.  The car was called General Lee.  It was a less than subtle promotion (or celebration if you will) of the pro-slavery Antebellum.  It was the 2015 racial mass shooting in Charleston that prompted TV Land and other networks to pull the show from re-run syndication.

Now you might disagree, but Warner Brothers (who owns the property) and others feel differently.  And you have the ability to watch the show on Amazon Prime and/or buy episodes from iTunes if you so choose.  You can still make your own racist merch if you so desire.  

So again, what is being canceled here?  Your inability to watch a show that has not aged well on a third-rate re-run cable network?  Oh the humanity.  What a loss to society.

On the flip side, the "loss" of having less distribution comes at the gain of not celebrating a show that peddled in racist imagery. 

2 hours ago, Swampfox said:

I know Disney has the money but I'm sure it isn't cheap altering one of their rides to the Frog Princess.

To be honest I never knew that Splash Mountain was based on the overtly racist cartoon Songs of the South.

But now knowing that, I'm glad they're making the change.  I can't believe Disney thought they would base a ride on a film they have continually chose not to distribute since the 1980s.  

2 hours ago, Swampfox said:

People are afraid of being targeted so we all have to be so careful to not offend.  Think about the next CEO that gets invited to the White House like Goya.  They're going to say fuck that we don't want boycotts hurting our business.

I would hope CEOs give thought to visit the White House regardless of the blacklash and decide not to go because of who currently resides there. 

If they choose to go, then they should accept whatever fallout that comes.  

It goes both ways.  Nike chose to embrace the BLM movement and promote someone like Colin Kaepernick with conservatives burning their Nike gear and promising not to buy Nike products.

But there are CEOs who still visit the White House and it really doesn't affect the success of their respective companies.  Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg visited the White House last November and the last time I checked people still use Facebook and Instagram.

2 hours ago, Swampfox said:

Look at the AFD remastered release.  OIAM is on Lies but they were afraid to put it out now.  They still would have made millions in ticket sales but were afraid to include it because of what might have happened if they did.  They can say whatever they want about why it was left off but it's really because of fear of drawing the cancel culture mob their way.

Axl addressed this over twenty years ago when he did a phone interview with Kurt Lodder.  He's on record being against including OIAM because he feels the song is too often mis-interpreted and he doesn't think it's worth the fight to keep it on.  This was long-before any semblance of a cancel-culture as it is understood today.  

But look, the song is still part of GNR's history.  It faced backlash at its release and anyone who calls themselves a fan who has heard Lies is aware of it.  The song's existence doesn't seem to affect the band's recent success.  

[soon]

9 hours ago, lame ass security said:

I just popped in and read this while watching an episode of TJ Hooker.😄 Kinda weird.

Haha, too cool! Id never seen this before. Enjoying a clip now. What a cool cop he is 

[action]

1 hour ago, soon said:

Except that you don’t know what you’re talking about and are clearly basing your assumptions on whatever hysterical media puts all your other flawed thoughts in your head.

 

you are totally right. I don't know what I'm talking about, and fully accept that I never will.

the character and psychology of trans people is very complex. You'd need a full psychological analysis of these people to even begin to understand them. If such understanding can ever be achieved. Even trans people themselves struggle with who they are, so how should I even pretend to know?

So we have come to the very reason why I don't like them as friends: their personalities are far too complex for my basic mind.

I will repeat, before being canceled: I fully accept the rights of trans people.

[soon]

5 minutes ago, action said:

the character and psychology of trans people is very complex.

That is true of everyone. Not just Trans people.

Shit, you and I have even our own language for humour - we understand one another to that extent. And its my opinion that we'd both require teams of physiologists, studying us around the clock for months on end to understand what the fuck is going on  

[action]

3 minutes ago, soon said:

That is true of everyone. Not just Trans people.

 

everyone is different.

I prefer easy people. I don't need bullshit and drama in my life. I'm tired. All I want is my peace and quiet. 

[Gracii Guns]

Don't know. Everyone seems to be happy to brush John Lennon's domestic abuse under the rug. Elvis basically groomed Priscilla, then was an awful husband and father. Is it impossible to be posthumously cancelled? 

[action]

12 minutes ago, Gracii Guns said:

 Is it impossible to be posthumously cancelled? 

all those statues getting canceled tho

[soon]

8 minutes ago, Gracii Guns said:

Don't know. Everyone seems to be happy to brush John Lennon's domestic abuse under the rug. Elvis basically groomed Priscilla, then was an awful husband and father. Is it impossible to be posthumously cancelled? 

Yeah, you make a good point. Ive thought about this a little bit and wonder if its got to do with the digital nature of cancel culture? I dont think that Lennon and Elvis figure in the online landscape? Especially not with cancel culture having so many younger people involved. I dont think any cancellers are reading books and then bringing facts to the online discussion - I think most of the info used in cancel culture is produced within the the digital reality. I dunno, thats as far as Ive got with it at least.

[Gracii Guns]

There isn't going to be a satisfactory resolution to this. We're discovering our heroes are human. 

Perhaps we should be more weary of putting people on pedestals in the first place? 

It's a shame that we often remember the best-intentioned of people for their mistakes. We all go through hard times in life and mess up. One thing I don't think I've disclosed on this forum before, is that my mum had a long-running affair, which wasn't revealed until after her death. I loved her to bits, and she was a wonderful mother, who sacrificed so much for her family. She had high moral standards and did lots of volunteering as well as working and raising us. 

All it took was meeting a new man and going through a rough patch with my dad.

The affair made my teenage years miserable, and I've been working on forgiving her for the past ten years. I'm trying to remember the good she did and not the hurt she caused. Because if there's anyone who witnessed her love, it was me. 

My mum's memory shouldn't be tarnished by her affair. It was a very stupid, selfish mistake. The best I can do right now is parent my daughter as well as she parented myself. I can't have her picture up in my house. I don't talk about her. She wasn't acknowledged at my wedding. 

Let's recognise the humanity in everyone, even if they're not showing it. We can regonise good actions, by flawed, complicated, hurting people. 

[action]

we have forgotten the ability to forgive. All we ever want, is revenge and judging.

totally the opposite of what christianity preaches.

no wonder, christianity is such a target by hateful people

[EvanG]

5 minutes ago, action said:

we have forgotten the ability to forgive. All we ever want, is revenge and judging.

totally the opposite of what christianity preaches.

no wonder, christianity is such a target by hateful people

I forgive you.

[action]

1 minute ago, EvanG said:

I forgive you.

you can kiss my ring now

[soon]

11 minutes ago, action said:

we have forgotten the ability to forgive. All we ever want, is revenge and judging.

I really hope that people will watch White Right: Meeting the Enemy 

The documentarian Deeyah Khan doesnt necessarily state any forgiveness to the hate leaders she spends time with. But the grace and kindness she extends to them completely disarmed some violent people. I dont wanna give spoilers because everyone should check it out! Powerful stuff. 

I think it represents why its important to consider all the tools at our disposal in undoing injustice. The host chose the very opposite of cancelling them. People can be the judge of if it was successful. It won and Emmy and its on YouTube!