[user104658]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Yeah, just because it's virtually impossible to financially ruin Rowling's career considering she's a bloody billionaire, doesn't take away from the attempt to completely ruin the reputations of people who offer opinions that go against the extreme activists. What about the people who aren't as financially stable as she is?

Possibly the most disturbing thing for me is that actual established academics and sociologists with decades of experience are shouted down, threatened, or have mass emails sent to their faculty in attempts to get them fired... And not even always for posting in agreement - it can be for simply acknowledging that there's a discussion worth having. And pointing out that not many people actually get fired is pretty meaningless: the threat and the anxiety that comes with it is enough, and the mob KNOWS that. I'm also not accepting claims that "this doesn't happen" - I've seen it happen multiple times, and I've talked to dozens of academics who admit that they censor their views because they're worried about the backlash from certain groups. Again, those groups know that. They use that. It's a mess.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Possibly the most disturbing thing for me is that actual established academics and sociologists with decades of experience are shouted down, threatened, or have mass emails sent to their faculty in attempts to get them fired... And not even always for posting in agreement - it can be for simply acknowledging that there's a discussion worth having. And pointing out that not many people actually get fired is pretty meaningless: the threat and the anxiety that comes with it is enough, and the mob KNOWS that. I'm also not accepting claims that "this doesn't happen" - I've seen it happen multiple times, and I've talked to dozens of academics who admit that they censor their views because they're worried about the backlash from certain groups. Again, those groups know that. They use that. It's a mess.

I didn't actually think of that. Just the affect of the threat of it is enough. Stifling the free speech their all shouting about.

[Liam-]

So what’s the answer then, what do we do as a society when someone says something so obviously racist or generally bigoted, do we ignore it and let them go on their way? I’m never going to feel sorry for people like Katie Hopkins, Laurence Fox or David Starkey, people have the right to be offended by things they find offensive, people have the right to protest, people have the right to boycott things if they need the need to, someone causing offence to hundreds or thousands of people and facing the consequences of doing so, should be seen as what it is, rightful, where do we draw the line, should people live and let live if someone continues to claim the Holocaust was a hoax? Should we give people a pat on the back if they say slavery was a choice? Yes people are allowed their opinions, free speech is just that, free speech, it’s not free from consequences, the people who claim their being targeted by ‘cancel culture’ don’t like their opinions or their behaviour questioned, just because a lot of people voice their disapproval or the offence things have caused them, doesn’t make it ‘mob rule’ all that serves to do is disconnect people from their actions and give them an easy out, do people go crazy? Absolutely, are some people offended by everything? Yes, but that should not be used as a tool by people to abstain from responsibility, like it’s turning into

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Liam-

So what’s the answer then, what do we do as a society when someone says something so obviously racist or generally bigoted, do we ignore it and let them go on their way? I’m never going to feel sorry for people like Katie Hopkins, Laurence Fox or David Starkey, people have the right to be offended by things they find offensive, people have the right to protest, people have the right to boycott things if they need the need to, someone causing offence to hundreds or thousands of people and facing the consequences of doing so, should be seen as what it is, rightful, where do we draw the line, should people live and let live if someone continues to claim the Holocaust was a hoax? Should we give people a pat on the back if they say slavery was a choice? Yes people are allowed their opinions, free speech is just that, free speech, it’s not free from consequences, the people who claim their being targeted by ‘cancel culture’ don’t like their opinions or their behaviour questioned, just because a lot of people voice their disapproval or the offence things have caused them, doesn’t make it ‘mob rule’ all that serves to do is disconnect people from their actions and give them an easy out, do people go crazy? Absolutely, are some people offended by everything? Yes, but that should not be used as a tool by people to abstain from responsibility, like it’s turning into

But having a different opinion, or engaging in a discussion that isn't just chanting the party line is not the same as the hate speech of Katie Hopkins. She's a rent-a-gob, this "culture" goes beyond people like that. Using the extreme examples of actual hate speech isn't addressing the problem of no discussion/nuance being allowed IMO.

I don't think anyone disagrees with hate speech being met with the disgust that it is.

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

But having a different opinion, or engaging in a discussion that isn't just chanting the party line is not the same as the hate speech of Katie Hopkins. She's a rent-a-gob, this "culture" goes beyond people like that. Using the extreme examples of actual hate speech isn't addressing the problem of no discussion/nuance being allowed IMO.

I don't think anyone disagrees with hate speech being met with the disgust that it is.

Discussion and nuance are there, people are willing to have those discussions, but people who claim to be victims of this ‘culture’ don’t really want that, they want to have their opinion and not be challenged, so they put a spotlight on the most extreme cases of rebuttal and anger, which are admittedly a lot of the times, borderline psychotic, they can’t stand people thinking they’re wrong, that goes for people on both sides of the spectrum, it’s the typical trick of people who want to be in an echo chamber, they tell people that something not common in a pandemic so they can play on it.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Discussion and nuance are there, people are willing to have those discussions, but people who claim to be victims of this ‘culture’ don’t really want that, they want to have their opinion and not be challenged, so they put a spotlight on the most extreme cases of rebuttal and anger, which are admittedly a lot of the times, borderline psychotic, they can’t stand people thinking they’re wrong, that goes for people on both sides of the spectrum, it’s the typical trick of people who want to be in an echo chamber, they tell people that something not common in a pandemic so they can play on it.

To suggest that the people most embroiled in this culture are "willing to have those discussions" is flat out false - there are a large number of people who are not only unwilling to have the discussion, but are in fact so angry that anyone else wants there to be a discussion that they aggressively campaign to ensure that everyone is too scared to openly have those conversations.

I wouldn't even ATTEMPT to discuss the nuances of something like trans rights on Twitter under my own name. There's a reason I highly value the anonymity of smaller forums.

I've seen people attacked to breaking point for even suggesting that nuances exist or that there's a discussion to be had.

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

To suggest that the people most embroiled in this culture are "willing to have those discussions" is flat out false - there are a large number of people who are not only unwilling to have the discussion, but are in fact so angry that anyone else wants there to be a discussion that they aggressively campaign to ensure that everyone is too scared to openly have those conversations.

I wouldn't even ATTEMPT to discuss the nuances of something like trans rights on Twitter under my own name. There's a reason I highly value the anonymity of smaller forums.

I've seen people attacked to breaking point for even suggesting that nuances exist or that there's a discussion to be had.

That’s not what I said was it? I said there are people who are willing to have discussions, but the people who are desperate to be seen as victims don’t converse with them, instead they play on the narrative that the only thing they’re getting is abuse, they choose to highlight the extremes rather than defend their points

[James]

Some people from a couple of film podcasts I listen to had a (fairly balanced) discussion about this subject. I thought it was interesting and would share it here (about an hour long).

Youtube video

These are the cases that were mentioned of non-celebrities who got 'cancelled':

PR executive who go fired after a tweet - https://www.google.com/search?q=Just...hrome&ie=UTF-8

and

'Husband-and-wife Yale professors resign in the wake of Halloween costume scandal' https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...t-yale/484418/ & https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ume-email.html

This is about the book 'So You've Been Publicly Shamed' by Jon Ronson.

So You've Been Publicly Shamed is a 2015 book by British journalist Jon Ronson about online shaming and its historical antecedents. The book explores the re-emergence of public shaming as an Internet phenomenon, particularly on Twitter.....

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/So_You...ublicly_Shamed

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by James

Some people from a couple of film podcasts I listen to had a (fairly balanced) discussion about this subject. I thought it was interesting and would share it here (about an hour long).

Youtube video

These are the cases that were mentioned of non-celebrities who got 'cancelled':

PR executive who go fired after a tweet - https://www.google.com/search?q=Just...hrome&ie=UTF-8

and

'Husband-and-wife Yale professors resign in the wake of Halloween costume scandal' https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...t-yale/484418/ & https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ume-email.html

This is about the book 'So You've Been Publicly Shamed' by Jon Ronson.



From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/So_You...ublicly_Shamed

I'm just over half way through that video, I'll finish it on my way home from work. It's good, a few thoughts so far :

- I don't want to get into the rights or wrongs of JK Rowlings tweets but I have to agree with one of the guys when he points out about her(and not just her, it could apply to a lot of other people too) which has been a big problem of mine with "cancel culture" (or whatever you want to call it) He said that, this is one topic that she has a different opinion on to some people, particularly very "liberal" or left wing people however probably 80% of her other views are probably toeing the party line so to speak but you have a different opinion on one thing from the "approved opinions list" and suddenly you're far right and a villain. This whole left or right thing and nothing in between just seems bad to me for individuality and for good reasoned discussions in general. Can we agree on a lot of things but not on others and still get on with each other anymore?

- Then one of the other speakers who doesn't think cancel culture is a thing mentioned the extreme reactions on Twitter, he said that's not normal people "canceling" someone, that's just Trolls and while I kind of agree with him to a point, it seems to me that these trolls are almost taking over twitter and becoming acceptable and people don't really challenge them much and I feel like people actually think they're justified in some way? And if you say "hey, I don't agree with this person's opinion on this particular subject but she doesn't deserve death threats or rape threats etc etc" you're also cast out for not joining the pile on or saying that someone on your side has gone too far. So yeah you can say "oh yeah but that bad ones are trolls" but if people are allowing this big number of trolls to abuse and target people and even agree with them, isn't that still cancel culture?

- So far the biggest thing I've agreed with is Twitter is a hell hole and people should stop posting there

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I'm just over half way through that video, I'll finish it on my way home from work. It's good, a few thoughts so far :

- I don't want to get into the rights or wrongs of JK Rowlings tweets but I have to agree with one of the guys when he points out about her(and not just her, it could apply to a lot of other people too) which has been a big problem of mine with "cancel culture" (or whatever you want to call it) He said that, this is one topic that she has a different opinion on to some people, particularly very "liberal" or left wing people however probably 80% of her other views are probably toeing the party line so to speak but you have a different opinion on one thing from the "approved opinions list" and suddenly you're far right and a villain. T[B]his whole left or right thing and nothing in between just seems bad to me for individuality and for good reasoned discussions in general. Can we agree on a lot of things but not on others and still get on with each other anymore?[/B]

- Then one of the other speakers who doesn't think cancel culture is a thing mentioned the extreme reactions on Twitter, he said that's not normal people "canceling" someone, that's just Trolls and while I kind of agree with him to a point, it seems to me that these trolls are almost taking over twitter and becoming acceptable and people don't really challenge them much and I feel like people actually think they're justified in some way? And if you say "hey, I don't agree with this person's opinion on this particular subject but she doesn't deserve death threats or rape threats etc etc" you're also cast out for not joining the pile on or saying that someone on your side has gone too far. So yeah you can say "oh yeah but that bad ones are trolls" but if people are allowing this big number of trolls to abuse and target people and even agree with them, isn't that still cancel culture?

- So far the biggest thing I've agreed with is Twitter is a hell hole and people should stop posting there

if you say you are a centerist you are immediately shot down as if that stance has no value at all, and you must commit to left or right or be gone

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Cherie

if you say you are a centerist you are immediately shot down as if that stance has no value at all, and you must commit to left or right or be gone

I wouldn't call myself "centrist", I'm not anything really

The only things "political" I actually care about are the environment and animals. Other things come and go, some of my opinions line up with the left and the right, but not enough to call myself either.

I'm just above your puny human politics

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

I wouldn't call myself "centrist", I'm not anything really

The only things "political" I actually care about are the environment and animals. Other things come and go, some of my opinions line up with the left and the right, but not enough to call myself either.

I'm just above your puny human politics

Yeah and you have a point there, putting labels on people isn't that helpful either, it takes the individuality out of life. No one really agrees with everyone in their "box" on everything - whether they say they do or not. That would be mental

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

if you say you are a centerist you are immediately shot down as if that stance has no value at all, and you must commit to left or right or be gone

Well this is the thing, I'm certainly left leaning in general but you disagree with one of the left ideas and suddenly people are speaking to you like you're on the right side, like if you don't agree with one thing you therefore must not agree with any left ideas or opinions? That's a sheep culture more than anything else imo. People have differing opinions because of life experiences, culture, gender etc etc All these different perspectives should be valuable to discussions if everyone would try to listen

[Niamh.]

I'm might have a listen to that on my way to work, thanks James

[Liam-]

People make out like tribal politics is exclusive to the left when it definitely isn’t.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Liam-

People make out like tribal politics is exclusive to the left when it definitely isn’t.

I'm certainly not if you're referring to me, why would I? I'm certainly not anywhere close to being right, the only reason I'm mentioning the left here is because it applies more to this topic

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I'm certainly not if you're referring to me, why would I? I'm certainly not anywhere close to being right, the only reason I'm mentioning the left here is because it applies more to this topic

No I mean in general, whenever these sorts of things are mentioned the blame the majority of time is placed on the ‘left’ somehow the right, who are just as tribal seem to get away with it at all points

[Oliver_W]

No-one said the right is innocent of such things?

[Ammi]

...the video you posted, James, is interesting...all of them make good points...I’m very undecided about cancel culture just because it feels like another unnecessarily and unhelpful label when it does feel similar to trolling...one of the things that is interesting is the discussion they had about the college professor..(..and her husband..)..and how there were screams for her to be fired from her job because of the Halloween costume email she had sent..when she’d previously been a much beloved professor..?...how one opinion had changed everything and determined her whole future etc...?...when she had been praised so highly before...it would most certainly feel like a mob mentality...anyways..(trying to make a long story, short.....)...their whole opinion and ‘debate‘ about that was on a very small bit of information...and they said that/two of them did...’this is all I know..’...and then looking at your link, which yeah is the DM, so I wouldn’t say a great source either...but however accurate, it still gives a ‘different story’ to the one that they were given...It provided something entirely different ...it could be that another source would give something different again, I don’t know...people portray and relay with ‘slants’ and I think that’s true as well...According to the DM article, the professor wasn’t ‘just advocating free speech and saying a ‘dress code’ would undermine that’...she was intimating (...according to the article and allegedly etc...)...that there should be ‘room for students to offend in their dress code..’.../...as in blackface if they wanted to blackface etc...

...it also says in the DM article ...

‘The email was one of several incidents on campus that prompted hundreds of students and faculty members to march in protest on November 9 over what they saw as racial insensitivity at the school.’

...and one of those incidents being an apparent allegation that a female student had been turned away from a fraternity party because she wasn’t white...so this could have been a whole series of events which led up to a highly charged situation and the result being the loss of jobs for the two professors...?...but I think that it would be quite unclear and uncertain whether ‘cancel culture’ could be applied at all with all of the factors we still don’t know but presumably the college board did know and made that decision...

...It is very interesting to look at how things are reported/relayed/portrayed etc and the ‘debate’ they provoke because of that...

[Tom4784]

The problem with centrism is that a lot of right wing people pretend they're centre when they're obviously not and it weakens the stance because it just makes it look like a stance for right wingers who don't want to admit they are right wing.

There are few true centrists and a lot of people in denial.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

The problem with centrism is that a lot of right wing people pretend they're centre when they're obviously not and it weakens the stance because it just makes it look like a stance for right wingers who don't want to admit they are right wing.

There are few true centrists and a lot of people in denial.

I really strongly disagree with this statement, in fact I'd say the vast majority of people are centre-to slight leaning in one of the other directions. Most people don't have very strong opinions on political or social topics that don't affect them and just want to get on with their own lives

[Tom4784]

Also I saw someone mention that JK Rowling has basically been cast as the villain when her other views are liberal and to that I say that the prime difference in behaviour between left and right is that the left hold other left leaning people accountable. The right has a culture of defending anything right leaning regardless. Just look at when you mention Right Wing terrorism is the vicinity of a right wing person and their first instinct is to bleat on about the left rather than denounce right wing terrorism because they see 'right wing' and automatically feel defensive.

It doesn't matter to the left if you present yourself as a liberal if you have views that are rooted in bigotry, you will be held accountable for those views. Standards like that apply to everyone, not just the 'other side' unlike the right that allows right wingers to get away with whatever as long as they are right leaning.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Also I saw someone mention that JK Rowling has basically been cast as the villain when her other views are liberal and to that I say that the prime difference in behaviour between left and right is that the left hold other left leaning people accountable. The right has a culture of defending anything right leaning regardless. Just look at when you mention Right Wing terrorism is the vicinity of a right wing person and their first instinct is to bleat on about the left rather than denounce right wing terrorism because they see 'right wing' and automatically feel defensive.

It doesn't matter to the left if you present yourself as a liberal if you have views that are rooted in bigotry, you will be held accountable for those views. Standards like that apply to everyone, not just the 'other side' unlike the right that allows right wingers to get away with whatever as long as they are right leaning.

And that to me is exactly why I think putting people in boxes like that is bad. Why should JK Rowling be accountable to anyone for her own views?

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

And that to me is exactly why I think putting people in boxes like that is bad. Why should JK Rowling be accountable to anyone for her own views?

All opinions come with a consequence because free speech works both ways. JK can say what she wants and people are free to react to her views how they see fit (with obvious exceptions). If people choose to turn their backs on someone because they find their views reprehensible then that's their choice.

The problem with people who typically complain about 'cancel culture' is that they want to be able to say what they want without people responding to them negatively. They want to have their cake and eat it too.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

All opinions come with a consequence because free speech works both ways. JK can say what she wants and people are free to react to her views how they see fit (with obvious exceptions). If people choose to turn their backs on someone because they find their views reprehensible then that's their choice.

Oh I'm not saying they don't come with consequences, that wasn't the point I was trying to make in my last post. What I meant was the phrasing "The left hold their own accountable" sounds to me like the left are some sort of organisation that only allow people to hold the views they approve of otherwise you're out on your ear and who is deciding which views are the "correct" ones. Why can't people sometimes share similar views and sometimes not?

The problem with people who typically complain about 'cancel culture' is that they want to be able to say what they want without people responding to them negatively. They want to have their cake and eat it too.

No not at all, certainly not from my point of view. I don't think my opinions in general are very out there or offensive, so certainly from a personal level, I find that to be untrue