Cancel Culture

[dumbo]

If you commit heinous crimes, or if you target marginalized groups, or if you leak information of government illegality to the press, or if you stand for free broadband for your citizens, or if you post edgy jokes on twitter you may face a negative response from people, organisations, the media, politicians, governments and society as a whole. These are the consequences of your actions.

Sometimes the consequences will be fair sometimes horribly unjust, sometimes mild, sometimes fierce. Sometimes they will be organised by fascist politicians, sometimes social justice advocates, sometimes sadistic bullies with 20 minutes to kill, sometimes media moral panickers, sometimes meanies on twitter.

That the entire social phenomena of ostracism has been boiled down to one lazy expression and carelessly and almost exclusively wielded against some nebulous cabal of villainous lefty wokists, usually hiding on twitter and in our universities, might actually be saying more about those doing the boiling and wielding.

 

[NotThatSoph]

And why do you believe that?

I believe that because of a combination of two things. The first thing as the the earliest mention of her conversation with Pascal that I can find happened on the 12th of September and the first mention of her mocking trans people with her robot speech being on the 13th. The second thing is me using my learned experience to deduce that the 13th came after the 12th.

 

[Norman Brownbutter]

I believe that because of a combination of two things. The first thing as the the earliest mention of her conversation with Pascal that I can find happened on the 12th of September and the first mention of her mocking trans people with her robot speech being on the 13th. The second thing is me using my learned experience to deduce that the 13th came after the 12th.

What are you doing? I ask because the beep bop boop is on the twitter post above that she made saying she had the conversation. Its marked the 12th. On the twitter post again above were its not there anymore its the 13th. 12th, its there. 13th, its gone. 13 does indeed come after 12.

And thats before we even get into this


Unless of course "you know what she meant"?

 

[NotThatSoph]

What are you doing? I ask because the beep bop boop is on the twitter post above that she made saying she had the conversation. Its marked the 12th. On the twitter post again above were its not there anymore its the 13th. 12th, its there. 13th, its gone. 13 does indeed come after 12.

And thats before we even get into this


Unless of course "you know what she meant"?

No, you're right, I was looking for screep captures of her bio because that's where peope type that stuff, totally missing what was staring me in my face.

 

[Tarrou]

Of course boycotts have been around since before social media, but the thing that’s new about it as far as I can see is the bar for what merits one has been lowered, and secondly how in extreme cases people will weaponise it to suit an existing agenda.

I totally agree with taking your money elsewhere and voting with your feet when someone says or does something racist or homophobic etc. Someone mentioned Mel Gibson as an example of someone hit by it, but to me that’s not cancel culture - the guy is a known basket case who has said some awful, racist things. And even if he hadn’t, people have a right to vote with their feet and boycott anyone for any reason they see fit. It’s a free country. You shouldn’t even need a reason.

However where I think cancel culture can be quite toxic, is when someone has already decided they don’t like you, (e.g because they disagree with you politically say) and try to get you cancelled because of it. That’s where the mobs can get quite ugly, and they know it works because companies have caved in time and time again to appease them. I think companies should maintain some perspective and actually evaluate what the person has done, and not how many retweets a call for their firing has.

the main thing that's new about modern day cancel culture, in my view at least, is everyones fair game now (including the establishment)

in past the holders of power were doing all the cancelling and nobody cared, or at least nobody who cared had any voice

this is what I see is the most important aspect that social media has played, it's given everyone a voice

 

[Norman Brownbutter]

No, you're right, I was looking for screep captures of her bio because that's where peope type that stuff, totally missing what was staring me in my face.

ok. Honestly, you had me thinking I was going mad for a second

 

[AkaAkuma]

If we're touching on Gina Carano again, the aspect that troubled me the most was Disney calling her views abhorrent.

This was after the period she was no longer employed by them. They didnt renew as she was too outspoken, which I thinks fine.

But to then call out somebody who no longer is in your employment with abbhorence, and the power that has coming from Disney is wrong.

Thank her for her work and say you dont share her values.

 

[Gehrman]

If we're touching on Gina Carano again, the aspect that troubled me the most was Disney calling her views abhorrent.

This was after the period she was no longer employed by them. They didnt renew as she was too outspoken, which I thinks fine.

But to then call out somebody who no longer is in your employment with abbhorence, and the power that has coming from Disney is wrong.

Thank her for her work and say you dont share her values.

It's always good to get a moral lecture from Disney.

Personally I I had people haressing me on twitter. I wouldn't give them what they wanted.

 

[VorZakone]

How is 'why did twitter users start put pro nouns in" the main part of the story?

Notice the dates?

"Putting pronouns in your bio is just a decent thing to do".

What's the backstory here? Why were they asking Carano that? Surely it's none of their business whether Carano puts pronouns in their bio or not. Why do they care?

 

[KirkDuyt]

"I didn't know about it before but now I do", kind of a common theme for these rightwingers. Making bold statements on Twitter about stuff they know feck all about.

Bit like me talking about football.

 

[Gehrman]

"I didn't know about it before but now I do", kind of a common theme for these rightwingers. Making bold statements on Twitter about stuff they know feck all about.

Bit like me talking about football.

I in general always look to Hollywood celebrities for virtue, wisdom and guidance.

 

[decorativeed]

Thanks for proving my point. "its fairly obvious what she meant.". Apparently its not. Since everyone has gone out of their way to ignore what she meant. And yes, I am keen to point it out because its a shitty culture that we are allowing to happen. "We know what you really meant" has been used for a long time to screw people over. And now people can point a finger at you, and youre just guilty. Thats it. How do you prove youre not a racist? You cant, anything you say just digs the hole deeper. How do you say youre not sexist? You cant, you just dig the hole deeper. Say nothing, youre guilty. Defend yourself, youre guilty. She clarified what she meant. It didnt matter, now she was a liar as well. Because you can never defend yourself once youve been accused in todays world. And that should scare the living shit out of us all.

If people agreed with me, then we wouldnt be here. 6 months of being constantly attacked. 6 months of no one saying anything. Thats the context of her post about the nazis, nazi neighbours and jews. And this where my other pet hate comes in of people ignore context, and the nuance of an argument. "How is that different from hating someone for their political views?". Its a good question, how is it that we can be fine with people hating like that for no other reason than religion or politics? Death threats and rape threats on line are horrible. Yet it seems that because shes right wing, its ok. Its ok to attack people like that because they are sub human? Isnt that what the nazis did? They convinced people that jews were sub human so it was to treat them like that? Isnt that what they slave owners in America did to black people? Isnt that why still today they word most used to dehumanise black people is still so offensive? 6 months of daily abuse, and no one cared. But as soon as she brings up nazis and jews everyone cant be more interested.

Like I said, Im not a fan of hers or her politics. But the treatment she got was bullshit in my opinion. She didnt want to do the pro nouns thing and that was it. They were going to get her one way of another. And they got her.

Yeah, you're just repeating the same lines now without actually responding to the points I made in my post.

And with regard to the one new point you made about being unable to do anything but dig a deeper hole for yourself, that's not true at all. You apologise, you don't make silly comparisons between an organised, state level genocidal regime and some people writing nasty messages. Or do what I do and abandon social media. Or maybe do what many celebrities do and pay someone to handle it for you for the PR. Plenty of ways to prevent yourself from the inevitability of people on a platform disagreeing with stupid stuff you might write and the smaller number of extremists who make illegal threats to your person.

 

[decorativeed]

6 months of death threats and rape threats is a bit more than being rude. But are we really ready to start allowing this kind of abuse of people because of hyperbole?

You're willfully and repeatedly ignoring the fact that that kind of abuse is not allowed at all. It is actually illegal, as you well know. The people that made them can and should face the consequences. But that obviously doesn't fit your argument.

 

[duffer]

Had anyone been "cancelled" for something that wasn't shitty or dumb behaviour? I can't really think of anyone.

 

[JPRouve]

the main thing that's new about modern day cancel culture, in my view at least, is everyones fair game now (including the establishment)

in past the holders of power were doing all the cancelling and nobody cared, or at least nobody who cared had any voice

this is what I see is the most important aspect that social media has played, it's given everyone a voice

I share that idea but I have one small point that is the crux of my disagreement with the idea of cancel culture. In the past people used to either call radio stations, protests in the streets or write something for the comments sections of their local/national newspaper, your visibility was comparatively limited by default. The newspapers and radios comments were currated but it was still possible to see people share outrageous/mean things. Nowadays you have an easier access and wider platform the comment sections are global and not/barely currated.

Also there is something everyone in this thread knows but we tend to overlook it, a massive part of what we see on twitter is trolling. People who don't really care about the topic, aren't affiliated to any side but just want to throw a grenade in a comment section and watch everything burn.

Edit: And I forgot to mention letters sent directly to public figures or their entourages whether it is to threaten, berate or share your passion.

 

[Norman Brownbutter]

"Putting pronouns in your bio is just a decent thing to do".

What's the backstory here? Why were they asking Carano that? Surely it's none of their business whether Carano puts pronouns in their bio or not. Why do they care?

that was her point, they didn’t take too kindly to that.

 

[decorativeed]

"Putting pronouns in your bio is just a decent thing to do".

What's the backstory here? Why were they asking Carano that? Surely it's none of their business whether Carano puts pronouns in their bio or not. Why do they care?

Probably because they were hoping as a woman with a high profile in the media she'd be an ally rather than a bit of a knob. Not that I agree people should feel forced to do so, it should ultimately be their choice, but her replies only escalated the situation.

 

[Norman Brownbutter]

You're willfully and repeatedly ignoring the fact that that kind of abuse is not allowed at all. It is actually illegal, as you well know. The people that made them can and should face the consequences. But that obviously doesn't fit your argument.

Im not doing anything so the sort. When Laura Bailey got the same treatment because she voiced a character in the last of us, it was everywhere. People were outraged. Heads will roll etc. For Gina, it was deleted with out much of a stink. They made new accounts, rinse and repeat.

 

[decorativeed]

Im not doing anything so the sort. When Laura Bailey got the same treatment because she voiced a character in the last of us, it was everywhere. People were outraged. Heads will roll etc. For Gina, it was deleted with out much of a stink. They made new accounts, rinse and repeat.

I would say that is a fundamental problem with how social media companies deal with trolling rather than something exclusive to "cancel culture".

 

[Gehrman]

Had anyone been "cancelled" for something that wasn't shitty or dumb behaviour? I can't really think of anyone.

If we consider No-platforming people from universities, I'd mention Richard Dawkins. On top of that I would add Brett Weinstein's treatment at Evergreen college.

 

[Norman Brownbutter]

Probably because they were hoping as a woman with a high profile in the media she'd be an ally rather than a bit of a knob. Not that I agree people should feel forced to do so, it should ultimately be their choice, but her replies only escalated the situation.

what you mean to say there is that she said no, and didn’t take their shit for saying no. Why we are still pretending that just because someone has good intentions they can’t be toxic as feck about it? This is problem with all of this. The tribalism of us vs them. She’s a right winger, so she’s just automatically in the wrong. Her being a moron and not deserving of the abuse she got can both be true. And in fact are both true. But because of some line in the sand, so many people are going out of their way to excuse what happened. Might as well say “what did she think was going to happen going up to his room at that time of night?”. Blaming the victim of abuse is never a good look.

 

[Norman Brownbutter]

I would say that is a fundamental problem with how social media companies deal with trolling rather than something exclusive to "cancel culture".

True, but do we rape a death threats really fall under trolling? We don’t call what happened to lingered, martial, Rashford or many other black players trolling. It’s racism plain and simple. The fact it happens online doesn’t diminish it. But you’re right, social media companies don’t do nearly enough to deal with this stuff. No football player should be getting “I know where your kids go to school” because of a bad game. But that, and things like it keep happening every week.

 

[decorativeed]

what you mean to say there is that she said no, and didn’t take their shit for saying no. Why we are still pretending that just because someone has good intentions they can’t be toxic as feck about it? This is problem with all of this. The tribalism of us vs them. She’s a right winger, so she’s just automatically in the wrong. Her being a moron and not deserving of the abuse she got can both be true. And in fact are both true. But because of some line in the sand, so many people are going out of their way to excuse what happened. Might as well say “what did she think was going to happen going up to his room at that time of night?”. Blaming the victim of abuse is never a good look.

Well I don't know about "we", but I'm not. I'm perfectly aware that some people are capable of going over the top with their cause and their overzealous nature can have the opposite effect on people. Doing this on social media is worse because it is an inherently toxic environment.

Carano wasn't automatically in the wrong because she is a right winger, she was in the wrong because of the obviously wrong things she said (and kept saying). She could just as well have said nothing, maybe instead replying to the thousands of others who messaged her about completely apolitical things instead, I don't know, but it's clear all of this was of her own making.

 

[DavelinaJolie]

"Cancel culture" strikes me as a phrase much like "Virtue Signalling". Largely vapid and pretty much used exclusively against people with left leaning views to try and silence them. Virtue Signalling to silence the individual, cancel culture to silence the collective.

 

[sullydnl]

"Putting pronouns in your bio is just a decent thing to do".

What's the backstory here? Why were they asking Carano that? Surely it's none of their business whether Carano puts pronouns in their bio or not. Why do they care?

They generally want to encourage cis people to put their pronouns in their twitter bios because it helps to normalise the sharing of pronouns. Otherwise the only people who do it will be trans people, which leaves them singled out and immediately identifiable as a trans person.

In this case they hoped Carano would do it because 1) it's a positive gesture that costs her absolutely nothing, 2) it helps spread the idea among the huge, multi-generational fanbase who follow her and 3) it helps the plethora of trans people within that fanbase feel respected, included and welcome, as they so often aren't made to feel.

So in terms of "how is it their business?" and "why do they care?", the answer is "because they care about trans people and want to encourage people to do things that help make their very difficult lives slightly less difficult"

 

[KirkDuyt]

She compared being suspended from twitter because you have shit opinions to the holocaust. How is this still a debate

 

[Cloud7]

She compared being suspended from twitter because you have shit opinions to the holocaust. How is this still a debate

Right wing types have a fetish for feeling oppressed. Never seen anything like it.

 

[Gehrman]

She compared being suspended from twitter because you have shit opinions to the holocaust. How is this still a debate

Who are we talking about atm?

 

[KirkDuyt]

Who are we talking about atm?

Beep/bop/boop Carano

 

[Hammerfell]

"Cancel culture" strikes me as a phrase much like "Virtue Signalling". Largely vapid and pretty much used exclusively against people with left leaning views to try and silence them. Virtue Signalling to silence the individual, cancel culture to silence the collective.

Yep. Nailed it.

 

[Gehrman]

Beep/bop/boop Carano

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't recollect that she was suspended from Twitter and she said " ‘Hating someone for their political views’ is not that different to when the Nazis turned on Jewish people"

Which is obviously stupid holocaust relativism, but it something that quite a lot of people engage in these days. I'd agree though that she is a right wing twat.

 

[decorativeed]

Right wing types have a fetish for feeling oppressed. Never seen anything like it.

Yeah, when they say they are being silenced, what they actually mean is that they want everyone else to shut up so that their voices are the only ones heard and the only ones that matter.

 

[Hugh Jass]

Fame has always led to more scrutiny, the difference is that some share more than they should, in particular pictures and thougths that shouldn't be shared with millions of people.

Yea agreed. I think as well you have to possess the right mentality to deal with this scrutiny.

Some singer from Little Mix has been destroyed by fame. She quit the band recently.

Some can deal with it. Some cannot.

 

[shaky]

They generally want to encourage cis people to put their pronouns in their twitter bios because it helps to normalise the sharing of pronouns. Otherwise the only people who do it will be trans people, which leaves them singled out and immediately identifiable as a trans person.

In this case they hoped Carano would do it because 1) it's a positive gesture that costs her absolutely nothing, 2) it helps spread the idea among the huge, multi-generational fanbase who follow her and 3) it helps the plethora of trans people within that fanbase feel respected, included and welcome, as they so often aren't made to feel.

So in terms of "how is it their business?" and "why do they care?", the answer is "because they care about trans people and want to encourage people to do things that help make their very difficult lives slightly less difficult"

The vast majority of twitter users dont have pronouns in their bios. Singling out Carano in particular for not doing so sounds more like an attempt to pick a fight than anything else.

 

[Paxi]

Actually not an example of cancel culture.

Ron Atkinson an example. I mean if he wasn’t live, no one would have said anything to him.

 

[Paxi]

David Icke got cancelled for being batshit crazy and nothing else pretty much. I mean most of his stuff was pretty much harmless.

 

[sullydnl]

The vast majority of twitter users dont have pronouns in their bios. Singling out Carano in particular for not doing so sounds more like an attempt to pick a fight than anything else.

That's the point though. The vast majority don't and that's exactly what people want to change. So they look for high profile celebrities to start doing it, to help influence that change. Which is why a huge number of celebrities get those requests. Some agree and do it, others ignore them and don't.

Whereas Carano mocked those attempts with that beep/bop/boop bullshit. And while she claimed that wasn't her intention, she ignored all the people from the trans community who pointed out that was very obviously its effect, as she instead tried to portray it as an act of defiance against bullies. But while I have complete sympathy for anyone who is bullied or absued online, the appropriate way to respond to that isn't to do something that undermines a very basic attempt to make a marginalised group of people feel less marginalised. Especially when you've repeatedly had the importance of that attempt explained to you and especially when the overwhelming majority of those asking you to make that attempt were asking you to do so in a polite way.

 

[KirkDuyt]

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't recollect that she was suspended from Twitter and she said " ‘Hating someone for their political views’ is not that different to when the Nazis turned on Jewish people"

Which is obviously stupid holocaust relativism, but it something that quite a lot of people engage in these days. I'd agree though that she is a right wing twat.

Hating someone in her context means being "silenced" and "canceled" though doesnt it? So it basically means being suspended from Twitter.
That's all bypassing the fact that she and her group of alt righters arent hated for political beliefs, they're hated for being hateful racist bigoted cnuts.

I'm sick of racists saying wahhhh they're prosecuting me because I hate gays and brown people that' s so unfair. Because that is what it comes down to.

 

[Gehrman]

Hating someone in her context means being "silenced" and "canceled" though doesnt it? So it basically means being suspended from Twitter.

That's all bypassing the fact that she and her group of alt righters arent hated for political beliefs, they're hated for being hateful racist bigoted cnuts.

I'm sick of racists saying wahhhh they're prosecuting me because I hate gays and brown people that' s so unfair. Because that is what it comes down to.

But she wasn't suspended from Twitter though was she? Her cancellation here would be being fired from Disney which is fair enough although although I have no respect for Disney or any of the people on Twitter who wrote all that vile shit to her. I don't give people are free pass because they are not celebrities. People who write vile shit on Twitter are vile individuals.

 

[villain]

Thread is going as well as I thought it would be tbh, terribly.

There are some people on here who repeatedly have questionable opinions when it comes to these types of discussions, but can never admit it with their chest - they just continue to feign ignorance.