Ask Your Question today
My thoughts on cancel culture is that people have nothing better to do than to critique "offensive" occurrences from the past. It's pathetic and childish to be quite honest.
What are your thoughts on cancel culture?
| I'm against it | 33 | |
| I don't care | 12 | |
| I'm with it | 4 | |
| I'm in between | 12 |
i found the hypocrisy palpable when all the same people who demanded in unconditionally believin all women suddenly were screamin about what a crazy bitch the accuser was who said our now hair sniffin creep in chief was a creep cause they wanted so desperately to git rida the last pussy grabbin creep
Is it the same people? Or are they different people who happen to be on the same side of the political spectrum? I don’t know many “believe all women” people who dismissed Biden’s accusers and most of the “crazy bitch” people I know are the same ones who were suspiciously quiet about what Trump said and did to women. And for the hypocrites that too exist, it’s pretty easy to find all the people on their side calling them out for it.
And it’s curious that you were so specific about which side is hypocritical. A penny for your thoughts on the people who dismissed what Trump said and did but were all too happy to parade Biden’s accusers around for political gain (just like they did with Bill Clinton’s accusers in 2016) because they were so desperate to keep their creep in office?
help! help! im bein operessed!
cries the partisian poster
dont drag me down to your angry lil cable news 'debate' level
My honest thoughts?
There are legitimate cases, but there are also complainers dredging shit from a million years ago and complaining about it out of context? It's petty and bitchy, doesn't stop them from crying like a bunch of toddlers
But those people vote with their dollars.
If enough people stop buying a product and then the market responds; well, that's inevitable. That's what capitalism IS.
Then a bunch of conservatives, who claim to understand economics and love capitalism and be rational come along, whinging, crying, whining like babies. Saying the market is wrong even though it is supposed to be a slave of popular opinion. That hurts their feefees because they disagree.
As always with American politics, both sides are full of fucking shit.
I would argue that what you described in'ts cancel culture at all, I'd argue that's just boycotting. Cancel culture is when you're trying to cancel something because it doesn't fit your sensibilities regardless of if you weren't even a consumer of that something. For example, it's cancel culture for people who would never buy an author's book and then go on to pressure a website to then take that book down, or for a group of rabid assholes to throw threats at a venue in order to cancel an event because a speaker they don't like is speaking there.
Usually the purpose of cancel culture isn't to alter something you consume to a way you'd prefer but is a means to punish someone, it has nothing to do with capitalism.
Well, if people are retarded enough to listen to Karen on facebook about boycotting eminem because of his song against domestic abuse, then that's their prerogative. Idiots have money too. And a simpletons money is just as good as a rocket scientist's. That's what capitalism means.
So sick of people acting like "cancel culture" hasn't existed since Hitler burned books and tipper gore tried to get the beastie boys removed from existence.
To you it's "THE LIBERALS," which makes you part of the problem.
It's not "Karen" on Facebook that is influencing people to do this, it isn't "Karens" going on about "phobia" this and "Ism" that to get some progressive juggernaut whirlwind to barrage companies they otherwise didn't know existed nor cared about into complying with their "progressive" sensibilities and I'm sure you know that, infact the whole label of "Karen" demonstrates the lack of legitimacy society gives such people you're blaming for cancel culture here.
Cancel culture has always been a thing and we've always blamed it on particular sides of politics that are doing it. Yesterday it was the Right with their Satanic panic type shit and today it's Lefties with their buzzwords. That's just how it is. To sit there and suggest that the Right have any cultural power right now to be able to enforce their own version of cancel culture on people is honestly astounding and to pair that with "makes you part of the problem" to escape this position is lazy at best. I like our conversations but there's no way in hell do I believe you think the right have enough cultural power or energy right now to have as much cancel power as the left does, making the Left (or atleast a very specific category of the Left) the ones responsible for Cancel Culture existing as it is today. Do you actually believe that?
That's the thing. You're conflating it with political power, with parties. It doesn't come from the top down, it comes from the bottom up. It's a mob mentality. So no one political side has power.
You should be wary of confusing this with censorship. It isn't. That involves the destruction of information. When that happens, you can not access it. It doesn't exist.
Ian Watkins, of the Lost Prophets. He was canceled.
Guess what for?
Fucking a baby. Not a kid, not a 15 year old, a baby.
And it's not an accusation; he was convicted.
I just looked it up & you can still buy his albums at tower records, on Google play, pretty much anywhere. The media still exists.
The public has decided they don't want to purchase it. They have voted with their dollar. They have spoken. That band will see no future record deals.
And the platforms on which this information was spread? Those are all equal access. This is all word of mouth. So conservitaves have just as much access to the proverbial mob. That's just the truth.
At the end of the day, this is not the government arresting people. No one is being silenced. This is large groups of people assembling and refusing to spend their money a certain way and the market responding to that.
Agree with their cause or not. That's all it is. I think they're whiners for the most part, so I can go buy an eminen CD if I feel like it.
Holy fucking shit. I had no idea about any of that and I just read up on it.
Apparently they have phone audio of him saying, "If you belong to me, so does your baby."
Sweet, sweet gentleman saying he wants to be the father to an abandoned single mother's child? Nope. Just a baby fucker.
Apparently he also said he had plans to teach babies to do drugs. Sounds almost like some shit that pastafather fucker would say.
Like what the actual fuck. Not that this is okay either, but I at least sort of get it when fans date stars and end up putting up with some level of crap because they're so in awe, but this is next level.
Like, what is the internal conversation here?
"I mean I guess it's kind of weird he wants to fuck my baby, but on the other hand he has great hair and totes wrote that song that used to be my jam."
How does the celebrity not wear off? I don't give a fuck who anyone is or what they've pulled off; at the point that they say they want to fuck babies, this is now the first thing that comes to mind when thinking of them. They're that baby fucker now.
I have to take a step back now and totally reimagine his whole career. Like did he think to himself, "What's the best way to fuck babies? Oh, I know. Get famous. Then crazy bishes will just let me fuck their babies. Glad I sorted that."
Apparently one of the investigators described him as the most organized and dangerous offender he'd ever seen to which dude later agreed with. It's like I don't want to be right but I'm right. This was the plan. I feel bad for the rest of the band.
The problem comes in when the very platforms these mobs form and are effective on do not allow the similar types of mobs to form from the right as they cancel those on the right for not being in-line with Leftist ideology or remove trending tags depending on what mob is forming. So the only "bottom up" mob allowed to form are leftist ones and as a result the top now parrots the same things down and it gives the appearance that these people are the only marketplace when they're not, and as we've seen these top people will go out of their way to prevent The Right from even creating their own spaces as demonstrated by the Parler fiasco. For Christ sake, they banned Donald Trump while he sat as President.
I am wary of the difference and maybe I'm wrong on my stance but cancellation can be a form of censorship. If you produce pressure to ensure certain information cannot spread due to outside forces and as a result nobody will distribute a product in fear of being targeted themselves then that is a form of censorship in my eyes, it's not saying "You're not allowed to" it's saying "If you do we will make you regret it" which sure are two different things but with the same outcome.
I think you're confusing boycotting with Cancel culture or maybe it's that we just have different views on what Cancel Culture is. Someone not giving money for something is not the same as someone going out of their way to punish someone for not stepping in line with their ideology by making it impossible to get their product out there.
Conservatives do not have just as much access to creating a mob on these platforms, as explained on my first point.
Maybe don't have "phobia this" and "ism that".
These assertions are reminiscent of the polemical expostulations insinuating that fact-checkers are inherently biased against the right as evidenced by the right's presently being all but routinely credentially apprehended.
The contention thereof disregards the reality wherein the left can and will be checked commensurably, as evidenced by all leftist scuttlebutt regarding Trump à la the rumorous and suspiciously convenient allegation that his mother purportedly stated we would be fucked should he ultimately pursue a career in politics.
Let's call a spade a spade; the right is merely spewing more BS at present, still intoxicated by the allure of "fake news" and the potential to substitute one's preferred reality.
Similarly, the right is simply committing these offenses more frequently. The left has plenty of problems, but I hope I'm not giving you too much credit in refusing to believe that you aren't aware that the right suffers more xenophobic shit stains tarnishing the overall ideology and compromising even the more innocuous views of the intelligent right. There's no inequality in prosecution; there's inequality in offense.
I'll be honest with you, dude. I can't be bothered with you. I'll give you this one reply but I'm having this convo with C.D and you know I already don't consider you good-faith.
Ok, and maybe in the past they just shouldn't of worshipped Satan?
I'll point out the glaringly obvious. I didn't mention Fact-Checks but you seem to be making it the core, if not sole representation of my position here, I don't care to find out if this is intentional or not. I will point out that yes even the Fact-Checkers are bias and a clear example of that would be them allowing articles to portray Trump as inciting a riot without fact-checking with the "missing context" tag to wave away those false assertions. That aside, we already have footage of the types of people and culture within places like Facebook from groups such as Project Veritas. To deny that these people aren't typically anti-conservative is just ridiculous at this point, especially when these platforms themselves tend to have guidelines that are typically anti-conservative.
I'm going to be honest with you, this is partially why I can't be bothered with you. This is performative. We both know that you don't typically type like the third point here because we've previously had conversations. I don't know who you're trying to impress but can you just spare me from the process? But no, fact-checking a small and mediocre insult does not prove an unbiased process when paired with an example like the Capitol Hill pre-speech.
The rest is just essentially a "nuh-huh" rhetoric. That's fine.
Minor historical quibble:
Hitler wasn't the first person in power to try to ban books. In the mid-16th century, Pope Paul IV established the Tridentine Index of banned books. The last edition of the Index was published in 1948, but it wasn't until 1966 that the Church finally accepted that the whole thing was pointless and formally abolished the Index.
Thats what it means? So are people trying to shut down politicians participating in "Cancel culture?"
Sure there is a line to draw for anything, but im sock and tired of old tv getting canceled just because it doesnt feature every race color and sexuality all in one sitting.
How I feel about cancel culture depends on what is being cancelled, and why. Cancel culture is not unlike a bunch of junior high kids having a popularity contest, and banning whoever they don't like from the great big, proverbial lunch table.
People who arent against cancel culture dont think it will eventually affect people like them. But it will just wait.
The divine organism known as the internet... it giveth and it taketh away
It’s a good thing they don’t know about what goes on in internet sewers like IIN, their brains would spin as they realised that we all need to be cancelled and de-platformed for different reasons.
Let's be honest IIN is just a backwater internet site. Not the sewers, I would say reddit is the sewers as its large enough to act as one. 4chan borders the dark net and the normal internet depth wise.
You’re right I was being mean, “swamp” is usually my word of choice for IIN.
I remember back in 2013 or so when Tumblr and 4chan had a “war” involving 4chan users making fake Tumblr accounts to promote the made-up “clover gender”. Maybe if “cancelling” had been invented back then they would have tried to cancel 4chan? That would have been a mess to witness.
Reminds me of a witch hunt, or searching for ghosts. So many people seem too eager to join the mob rooting out perceived injustices unconcerned that innocent people get harmed in the process.
I voted in between.
Some cases are understandable, others are just stupid and the situation becomes a bandwagon.
But overall the whole thing is just fucking stupid. They'll cancel a person/thing (not even KNOWING ALL THE FACTS or even bothering to do their own independent research) for like a week make a big deal about it, then by next week the situation doesnt even matter any more and life carries on. Like TF.?
The internet is one hell of a place and it's sad that some people's livelihood rely on it!
It’s a contrived grievance that right wing reactionaries resort to when they have no policy of any substance to counter what is being proposed.
Cancel culture is when someone tries to put someone else out of work because they said something that they don't like or they find a classic piece of media offensive for a completely inane reason and demand for it to be banned. It's shutting down anything you don't like or want to hear. What does that have to do with policy proposals?
Nothing, that’s the point. When you don’t have actual policies, you pretend to be offended because somebody said they don’t think a random comedian is funny or they’re not going to buy some obscure book you never heard of until now and you cry about that for days or weeks while the people around you are actually doing their jobs and running the country or covering the people running the country.
"you pretend to be offended because somebody said they don’t think a random comedian is funny or they’re not going to buy some obscure book you never heard of until now" That is such a blatant strawman. That isn't what's happening at all. It isn't about "not thinking a random comedian is funny," it's about saying that a comedian (or anyone else for that matter) should have their reputation ruined and be put out of work because someone got upset about something they said 5 years ago that wasn't even in context. It's not about "people saying they're not going to buy some obscure book you never heard of," it's about people saying that no one should be able to buy that book (or other piece of media) just because they find it or someone attached to it offensive. It has nothing to do with whether or not one side or the other has policies. It's about being sick of moral busybodies trying to dictate what people should and shouldn't be allowed to see. We're not "pretending to be offended". We're disgusted that people suddenly think it's okay to form mobs to silence voices that they don't like.
If you were actually “disgusted” by people forming “mobs to silence voices that they don’t like” then you’d be complaining about professional athletes having their careers ended because they have a different opinion than the former president, or all the LGBTQ friendly books that are banned every year. You don’t care about voices being silenced, you just don’t want to see people face consequences for racism, sexism, and bigotry.
"then you’d be complaining about professional athletes having their careers ended because they have a different opinion than the former president," I don't care about sports in general, so I'm not entirely sure who you're referring to. "or all the LGBTQ friendly books that are banned every year" Such as? "You don’t care about voices being silenced, you just don’t want to see people face consequences for racism, sexism, and bigotry." Now that's just ad hominem.