Cancel culture

[Mr Waldo]

22 minutes ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

If people believe someone is a transphobe (rightly or wrongly) why on earth is it a problem for them to boycott and encourage the boycotting of their works? Specifically, she's not going to starve or even lose a great deal of her income, she will continue to be given a platform to say whatever she wants, and perhaps a non-violent, non-offensive show of solidarity  with trans people will make her consider how progressive her views really are and engage with the topic in a different way. If not, surely it's no skin off her nose. While I agree with the last sentence, you seem to be arguing about Rowling (and other cultural figures) that they not only have the right to say what they want (agreed) but that they have the right to be liked and not financially impacted regardless of their opinions, which is a weird take. 

People are free to hold and express whatever opinion they want (excepting hate speech/incitement to violence, for which there's a very good "shouting fire in a theatre" argument). How others then choose to express their opinions in response is absolutely up to them, and also an example of free speech. I'm far more concerned about kids getting nicked for jokes they made online, or that dickhead who taught his dug to Hitler salute being prosecuted , than I am about a multi millionaire's right to not be offended by the reaction to her massively amplified views.

What I am trying to say  (probably quite badly) is I believe that people can say what they want, as long as it is not against the law.  But the perma-offended have a default setting to overstep the mark into a bullying culture that will stiffle debate. And, in my opinion, stifling debate is a large part of some recent political decisions this country has taken.  If you had piled on and hounded me for my first sentence I'd probably have just left it but, if we can debate, I can formulate my thoughts better and make my position clearer next time. You still might not agree, but that is fine.

Personally, I don't really care who the someone is, that guy getting jailed for a joke no worse than some of the stuff on this site and Scottish judge in the Hitler dog salute saying 'context doesn't matter' are, to me, potentially very scary reduction in people's freedoms, and there is not too much difference between, someone getting sacked for saying there are two genders, and a billionaire getting ostracised for the same thing. (Although her being able to accumulate so much wealth is a different argument.)

[Ross.]

1 hour ago, Mr Waldo said:

Hearts should be in the top league next season. 

They were relegated fair and square.

[Thistle_do_nicely]

to jump in; something I have seen which seems to be a relatively new tactic (it's probably been about for a while but seems to be a new favourite) to mollify the impact of the Holocaust isn't outright denying that it happened, but quibbling over the numbers involved and alleging that the holocaust has been exaggerated to either a moderate or severe extent.

The goal of it is still the same anti-semitic garbage as before (basically instead of the holocaust being completely made up to elicit sympathy for the Jews it's now just been exaggerated), but it's packaged in a wolf-in-sheeps-clothing argument that might not be as easy to identify as being outright dangerous.

Basically that even if you're doing all you can to stop bad faith actors peddling nonsense, they'll try their hardest to rebrand it. Intelligent design strikes me as that in a religious context, afaik it's not a "dinosaurs roamed the land side by side with humans" thing which is patently ridiculous, it's more predicated on looking at holes in human understanding in evolution and just scribbling "God did it" in them.

Edited July 20, 2020 by Thistle_do_nicely

[coprolite]

46 minutes ago, cb_diamond said:

The bold VT studied History at Strathclyde and idolised the walking, talking #metoo magnet that was Richard "Dick" Finlay. That wouldn't qualify anyone as a Historian. Empty vessels influencing empty vessels comes to mind.

No, he's very clever. He said "meta-narrative". 

[NotThePars]

9 minutes ago, Thistle_do_nicely said:

to jump in; something I have seen which seems to be a relatively new tactic (it's probably been about for a while but seems to be a new favourite) to mollify the impact of the Holocaust isn't outright denying that it happened, but quibbling over the numbers involved and alleging that the holocaust has been exaggerated to either a moderate or severe extent.

The goal of it is still the same anti-semitic garbage as before (basically instead of the holocaust being completely made up to elicit sympathy for the Jews it's now just been exaggerated), but it's packaged in a wolf-in-sheeps-clothing argument that might not be as easy to identify as being outright dangerous.

Basically that even if you're doing all you can to stop bad faith actors peddling nonsense, they'll try their hardest to rebrand it. Intelligent design strikes me as that in a religious context, afaik it's not a "dinosaurs roamed the land side by side with humans" thing which is patently ridiculous, it's more predicated on looking at holes in human understanding in evolution and just scribbling "God did it" in them.

It's also mutated into denying the collaboration that went on in the occupied countries, venerating Nazi collaborators as anti-communist resisters, or insisting the real victims were a specific nationality and not Jewish people.

[cb_diamond]

9 minutes ago, coprolite said:

No, he's very clever. He said "meta-narrative". 

To be fair he's a prime example of meta-narrative. In this case, repeating the same half dozen worn out phrases for the last decade and a half with predictably diminishing returns.

Edited July 20, 2020 by cb_diamond

[topcat(The most tip top)]

3 hours ago, 8MileBU said:

We already knew that the Venn diagram of 'toothless ticket' and 'qualified historian fantasist' would form a perfect circle. 

I'm pretty sure that Neil Oliver's degree was in Archaeology as opposed to History

 

[Melanius Mullarkey]

1 minute ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

I'm pretty sure that Neil Oliver's degree was in Archaeology as opposed to History

 

He is indeed qualified to dig up old shite rather than talk about old shite. 

[anotherchance]

What I am trying to say  (probably quite badly) is I believe that people can say what they want, as long as it is not against the law.  But the perma-offended have a default setting to overstep the mark into a bullying culture that will stiffle debate. And, in my opinion, stifling debate is a large part of some recent political decisions this country has taken.  If you had piled on and hounded me for my first sentence I'd probably have just left it but, if we can debate, I can formulate my thoughts better and make my position clearer next time. You still might not agree, but that is fine.
Personally, I don't really care who the someone is, that guy getting jailed for a joke no worse than some of the stuff on this site and Scottish judge in the Hitler dog salute saying 'context doesn't matter' are, to me, potentially very scary reduction in people's freedoms, and there is not too much difference between, someone getting sacked for saying there are two genders, and a billionaire getting ostracised for the same thing. (Although her being able to accumulate so much wealth is a different argument.)

All for things being called out when they are unquestionably blatantly racist and bigoted.

It’s worrying when it veers into more general and subjective terms like “offensive” and “unacceptable” when people pile on or try to get others into shit for things which fall into more of a grey area, which is when things like intent come into play, and people start looking at offensive jokes etc.

Who then becomes the moral arbiter?

[topcat(The most tip top)]

2 hours ago, Tynierose said:

The thicko didn't even manage an honours.

Although at least it was Glasgow as opposed to Strathclyde

[Emiliano ZaBankie]

That’s the rugby cancelled then.

[Dee Man]

3 hours ago, Broomhill Ultra said:

That’s the rugby cancelled then.

Good. 

[Theroadlesstravelled]

How can you be bullied on an anonymous website? 

[pandarilla]

Internet bullying. Let's call it for what it is. It goes on here every single day from the same obsessive individuals.

I don't feel like it's bullying, from my experience anyway.

But it's certainly frustrating, and makes you defensive. I prefer debates that take place in good faith, where folk aren't trying to find ways to trip you up in order to 'win the argument'. It's a constant stream of point scoring and snidey comebacks.

Discussions on sensitive topics can be difficult to navigate in real life, even with family or close friends, so it's not surprising it's even more difficult with strangers and no face to face consequences for your words.

[The_Kincardine]

1 hour ago, chocolateankles said:

Internet bullying. Let's call it for what it is. It goes on here every single day from the same obsessive individuals.

I'm struggling to think of many examples of bullying but maybe I'm less sensitive than some.

The same auld brain dead posters using the same brain dead tropes against those they disagree with?  Aye, that's very much a daily occurance.  Having a good pitchforking on a near weekly basis?  Again, pretty-much the forum's culture.

Bullying, though?  Nah.

[D.A.F.C]

I think that people like to fit in with whatever group they want to associate with and at times this will shut down a topic through being unnecessarily harsh or unfair while ignoring the topic simply to fit in.
Thats the majority of forum or online bullying thats anonymous. Small percentage is actually people going out of their way to be nasty to one individual on a regular basis.

Its completely counter productive and toxic and hard to moderate once it becomes accepted as the norm. When pointed out it gets played down as banter or just a joke or that the other person was too sensitive.
Who will stick their hand up and admit to being a dick? That takes character and strength and if you abuse strangers for kicks then you likely don't possess those qualities in the first place.

This isn't a go at this site, despite what some may think reading this.

[Marshmallo]

https://twitter.com/CornmealDumplin/status/1284912456121409536?s=19

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

2 hours ago, MixuFruit said:

Hahahaha the Guardian just sacked a load of folk and this is published

 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jul/21/what-have-we-learned-from-bari-weiss-we-need-plurality-in-journalism

They really are the biggest bunch of wet wipes going

"She hasn't been censored, but she has certainly been bullied." If this is the case, and she truly believes this, surely she should be suing for some form of constructive dismissal? Because when she antagonises and belittles her colleagues as some sort of hive mind that's fine, but when they don't support her in return it is bullying. This is obvious and sane to all people.

[Genuine Hibs Fan]

Just now, MixuFruit said:

It's quite meta really. Next week she'll write about how the Twitter mob tore her limb from limb for calling the racist Andrew Sullivan 'revered'. Once you're in that loop of write bad take, write about getting owned online the following week, you're set for life.

The Nick Cohen effect 

[tamthebam]

I noticed Dua Lipa will be cancelled in Serbia (and possibly North Macedonia) for retweeting a Greater Albania map.

Maybe she and Serbian turbo folk singer Ceca could have a fight to sort this.