Thats being very disingenuous to what is happening. It not posting a review, its a continued assault on someones character. McDonalds served me cold chips once, so I now get to start a hashtag saying closedown mcdonalds and spread it to other people so we can all brigade against mcdonalds? I get to go on twitter about post horrible things to mcdonalds every day? I get to abuse mcdonalds so bad that they snap and then use that snap against them?
Cancel Culture
- Thread starter Buchan
- Start date
Thats being very disingenuous to what is happening. It not posting a review, its a continued assault on someones character. McDonalds served me cold chips once, so I now get to start a hashtag saying closedown mcdonalds and spread it to other people so we can all brigade against mcdonalds? I get to go on twitter about post horrible things to mcdonalds every day? I get to abuse mcdonalds so bad that they snap and then use that snap against them?
Right... So they are not the same thing.
you have free speech and your personal judgement and you can use it in any way you see fit, including starting a hashtag about cold fries.
Why would I rally against anyone? I can just not watch. I dont go onto the internet, make myself a twitter account and post pictures of various water mammals that he happens to look like in an attempt brigade people to hate him.
Yes, I watch last week tonight. I like John Oliver. I dont have to agree with everything he says or does to like his and the entertainment he brings.
Then why are we pretending that people arent doing that?
So like, what’s wrong with not wanting to watch a film if an actor in it is a known moron?
You don't make yourself a Twitter account, but you do make yourself a Redcafe account. So we have established, at least, that posting negative stuff about people you don't like isn't cancelling in and of itself, because you're not a canceller.
you have lost me. do you think people are start hastags about cold fries? is this what this entire thread shoudl be about? and is it the same thing as not seeing mel gibson movies?
Never said it was. But are we really going to pretend that people dont go on twitter to brigade?
Grim read, no doubt he would've hit her if these weren't phone conversations.
" I deserve to be blown", I had to reread that one. What a piece of shit.
Is this isnt a real conversation, youre just try to get a rise out of me. Fair enough. Have a nice day. Happy fishing.
you brought up mel gibson, and then out of nowhere you, nobody else, brought up mcdonalds
If you're making up stories, then I assume McDonalds could sue you. If you're saying "mcdonalds burguers are shit, no one should eat there, who's with me?" I don't see a problem.
Are hashtags calling for boycotts on china or saudi arabia for their human rights abuses cancel culture? Nah it's people saying things and trying to convince others, it's the basis of free speech.
What does it mean to brigade?
Lets say you dont like what Im saying in this thread. So you go to other parts of this form and tell everyone Im being an asshole so that they will all come to this thread and abuse me.
But "cancel culture" doesnt exist...
So a company should be forced to pay an employee they don't want working for them?
Ok...
I'm not sure why this is relevant. Does it mean that saying bad stuff about Mel Gibson or John Oliver isn't cancel culture, but if you try to get other people to join in then it is?
Put the goal posts back where they were.
Look up at my previous post about Gina Carano. Since I cant seem to explain it every well, Ill let the twitter examples do it for me.
What does this mean? I'm not following.
The topic is whether of not cancel culture exists. Not whether or not a company has to continue someones employment.
Ok. Is it the tagging or the numbers that make it cancel culture, or something else?
I assume you're suggesting Disney firing Carano was cancel culture, or did I misunderstand you?
It was a result of it. In much the same way that Colin Kaepernick was cancelled for taking a knee during the national anthem. Here was a man trying to start a conversation about police killing black people in America in a civil way. He was cancelled for that. And he was cancelled hard. The story wasnt about black people and the systemic racism they face in America anymore, it was about a football player disrespecting the United States. And that he should be fired for it.
Not liking someone is fine. Moaning about them on line is fine. Calling them names, sending them death threats, rape threats and whatever else, and then rallying hundreds if not thousands, if not hundreds of thousands to do the same is cancel culture. Disney didnt give a shit about what Gina was posting until after 5/6 months of abuse that she got and finally snapped at with her nazi picture. We dont stand for black players being called racist bullshit on twitter when they have a bad game, why are standing for a woman getting death threats and rape threats because she doesnt put up her pronouns on twitter? You can think shes a moron. You can think shes whatever you want. But does she deserve that? And when she calls it out by liking the actions of those people to how Germans treated their Jewish neighbours, does she really deserve to be blamed for the whole mess and fired?
Cancel culture isn't a thing and people arguing otherwise need to understand that the term cancel culture is pure marketing from one side of the political spectrum, who is trying to make you believe that there is a new cultural phenomon going on where the liberals are cancelling people they disagree with.
Now if people want to talk about the existence of the concepts of consequence and blackballing then yes, both of these things exists and have existed for as long as humanity exists. And Kaepernick was blackballed, that's literally what happened to him and we don't need to make up a new term.
Now if people want to talk about the existence of the concepts of consequence and blackballing then yes, both of these things exists and have existed for as long as humanity exists. And Kaepernick was blackballed, that's literally what happened to him and we don't need to make up a new term.
I think it’d be more helpful if ‘cancel culture’ was simply renamed ‘consequence culture’ to explain actually what is going on.
i think within that mcdonalds madness, there was an actual point about consumption and culture replacing politics, and about how liberalism, with its focus on the individual, is more horrified by a mass boycott than a quiet firing by a boss. but i'm too lazy to make those points.
It would be a much better term, but 99% of the people that go on about cancel culture wouldn't like that because it would mean having to acknowledge that they did something wrong rather than admit responsibility, which is why they invented the term to begin with.
It all depends on the context and whether it was said with any malicious intent and who takes offense.
He did...
And get offline, quit whinin', this is just a rhyme, bitch
Last edited:
The thing is politics are and have always been fueled by culture and social norms. You can't separate them and it would be a poor point to say that culture has replaced politics, now we may have to think about the power of consumerism and how things have turned, for decades capitalists ideologists brainwashed the mass into thinking that it needed to consum, now the mass understand that they hold some of the cards and can use it against whoever they want when money is part of the equation because they are the ones consuming or not...
Since when has brigade been a verb?
Exactly they all have skeletons in their closets.
I think a few distinctions need to be made, between a private business making a decision regarding an employee and twitter mobs.
I assume both Kaepernick and Carano were aware their actions would have consequences, as they did. If they weren't, then they are just naive or were ill-advised. I don't think either case is cancel culture, it's two businesses making a decision they thought (rightly or wrongly so) was good for their business. Are they the same? I don't think so and with time everyone clearly sees the difference. Kaepernick, years later is being applauded for what he did and most people recognize it was a bad and unfair move on the part of the NFL. I don't think in 5 or 6 years anyone will be looking at Carano as some sort of leader for free speech or something like that. She said offensive stuff and paid the price. Kaepernick stood up for something most consider fair and paid for it, unfairly in my opinion. Others will think differently.
Neither the NFL nor Disney give two shits about police violence or free speech, they act according to what they perceive to be the public opinion amongst those who pay for their products. So their actions will be determined by, ultimately, the community. And in time, unfair things will self-correct. Kaepernick is now widely applauded with even the NFL admitting their mistake. Will Carano be back and forgiven? It will mostly depend on her, although early signs show she preferred the rabbit hole. If she returns, it will be because the community has widely forgiven her.
What the hell am I trying to say? These actions are determined by the community and what the community accepts as fair or unfair at any given time. If you say stuff or do stuff most people in the community regard as negative, you will pay a price, not because you're being canceled but because you have a weak product in the marketplace of ideas. This has happened since forever, it's nothing new. It's not a conspiracy, it's not an ideology trying to destroy you, it's a result of societal evolution and some people failing to adapt. Society doesn't all move at the same pace, so sometimes you will have cases like Kaepernick and it's unfortunate but inevitable. As society moves in a certain direction, these people will be vindicated and celebrated or will fall into obscurity.
Regarding twitter mobs, we have two different thing.
Hashtags wanting to boycott someone and pressuring a person or an entity are perfectly fine. One million people going to the amazon twitter spamming them with "providing better working conditions or I'll never buy from you again is fine", a million people spamming Manchin's twitter telling him to vote for whatever in the senate or they'll kick him out of office is fine, a million people spamming Downey Jr's twitter with "if you keep defending Mel Gibson I'll never watch one your films again" is fine. It's not cancel culture, it's the community applying pressure on people and organizations so that something they believe needs to change actually changes.
Now a million people twitting "I know where you live" or "I'll do this and that to you", that's obviously unacceptable. Is it cancel culture? No, because ultimately that person will have their voice heard on other platforms depending on if those platforms will take something from those people (wether it's profit or credibility). People who are dicks online and threat people are always in the minority, sometimes it'll seem they are the majority because they are very vocal but organizations will not make decisions based on this minority, they can see where the majority of the community is going and they will follow (sometimes the silent majority and the dickhead minority want the same thing but companies will decide based ont he majority always). So if what you're saying if valuable to the community, it doesn't matter how many threats you get online, someone will give you a platform for what you're saying or doing if there is a space in the community for that. It's not a coincidence that people who cry about being cancelled invariably find different gigs at different places, so they're not really cancelled, are they?
Anyway I've written too much, sorry about that.
As to be more accurate, consequence of not compiling to our defined way of thinking, culture, not quite as catchy...
Cancel culture as a term has now been politically weaponized so any use of it comes preloaded.
However there is a culture, I care not for the naming rights or semantics, of malicious online harassment and bullying that is rife across the net and social media, and you would be disengenuous to proclaim that only those with problematic ideas suffer from it or perpetuate it.
However there is a culture, I care not for the naming rights or semantics, of malicious online harassment and bullying that is rife across the net and social media, and you would be disengenuous to proclaim that only those with problematic ideas suffer from it or perpetuate it.
But "cancel culture" doesnt exist...
That's not cancel culture, what the feck are you talking about
That's a bunch of individuals being rude on the internet.
More or less agree with this.
That's not cancel culture, what the feck are you talking about
That's a bunch of individuals being rude on the internet.
If she wasn't too big a name to be cancelled she might though. But usually deranged twitter mobs don't pile up on ordinary people in the first place or perhaps i'm mistaken.
Surely cancel culture refers specifically to people being hauled over the coals via social media? Which has to be a new phenomenon, as social media didn’t exist 15 years ago. Hence the need for a new term.