All I can say is that what you describe hasn’t been my experience in hearing people talk about it, or about people being canceled. I also don’t understand why, even if what you say were the case, a chilling effect where zero tolerance policies are adopted or people are fired in apprehension of a possible future PR…
blue-haired_lawyer
blue-haired_lawyer
That first paragraph of yours is why it seems to me like form is the overriding factor for you. My sense is that cancel culture is a critique of a mindset, not just one of the ways in which it might be expressed. That’s one reason why referring to it as a culture has caught on, because it implicitly, definitionally…
You know that argument that added driver aids actually make drivers less attentive? Well? *gestures around*
*points index finger to temple* Don’t need to stock up if you already have the fall bug going full blast.
Why is form the overriding factor for you? If the goal is to police speech does it matter if it involves twitter rancor or a heckler in an auditorium? Does it matter if it’s a result of a protest or its apprehension? There’s no need to limit cancel culture to its tactics or one of many shapes it may take when the…
Imagine if some male streamers showed some solidarity by actually doing it.
Hey, the letters are small, maybe he has fat fingers? Or a greasy phone screen from all the junk food? Is it even possible to have fat fingers and tiny hands?
I made a coherent point, it’s just one you disagree with, and that’s fine, but don’t play dumb about who “they” are or what “it” is or some other bullshit eleven to thirteen responses into a comment thread.
Huh, ah well, I’m sorry you couldn’t follow.
Of course it’s predicated on a particular view of free expression. They are saying that they find something offensive, and because they are outraged it should go away.
So people who would deplatform or censor aren’t making any fundamental statement on how they view free expression?
Hey, I missed your reply last night because I was out and only noticed it now in the notifications. I’d say that both sides (which is kind of silly to say, because we aren’t talking monoliths here, more a continuum) predicate their criticism on contradictory views on free expression, so validity is a strange way of…
Did they find the pee tape? It’d fit with this absurdity.
They do have the power to do it directly, they just haven’t done it since MacCracken was tried on the Senate floor and imprisoned for 10 days in 1934.
Now I’m the one not following, are we talking criticism or heckling, and are you trying to equate some pretty well reasoned arguments on free expression with what Daniel Tosh did like a decade ago?
I gotta tell you, I’m not seeing the disconnect. There’s no tiptoeing. You have a right to take offense and express it in a way that seeks to censor or silence, and they have a right to label that expression outrage culture or cancel culture or whatever else and criticize or dismiss it. Remember, this all started…
If this was just discussion among some, voicing and arguing over issues and criticism, it would be one thing, but it would be disingenuous or naive to not recognize that critique easily devolves into proscriptive outrage fueled by social media and journalists looking to generate further outrage and traffic, all…
You shouldn’t silence your outrage, but then also don’t act surprised, or petulant, or self-righteously complain about what you perceive a public figure thinks they’re entitled to when they use their platform to criticize your outrage and get a sizable audience to agree with them. If you want to treat your outrage as…
Isn’t there a difference between disliking something and actively trying to stop it? In the Chappelle and Seinfeld context isn’t that what cancel culture is, really? Going from I don’t like this thing therefore I’m not going to participate in it or consume it, to I don’t like this thing therefore it shouldn’t exist…