Society/Culture Has cancel culture gone too far?

[CM86]

Like a false flag? Sure, that doesn't help. There are also some political commentators who call anything cancel culture and it loses its intended meaning.

That sounds like a problem.
Political commentators who call anything cancel culture, would more than likely have a negative impact on the actual victims.

Do we find ways to reduce the possible damage by the political commentators? Or just allow the possible lose of meaning?

 

[Lethality]

Do we find ways to reduce the possible damage by the political commentators? Or just allow the possible lose of meaning?

I normally think they should teach kids how to decode news media, particularly on the socials. Maybe they should watch Media Watch or something.

On a personal level I block news services on my social media because of the dishonesty and the rage baiting.

 

[CM86]

I normally think they should teach kids how to decode news media, particularly on the socials. Maybe they should watch Media Watch or something.

Yep sure, that's one of the ways to reduce the possible damage.

Who's going to teach the kids how to decode news media?
Does everyone have the same access to "Media Watch or something"?
Why would someone be compelled to fix or protect from an issue that they may not know exists?

On a personal level I block news services on my social media because of the dishonesty and the rage baiting.

That's great. It's very healthy.
All I did with the article you posted, was address possible dishonesty and maybe even rage baiting.



So do you go looking for the things you share with us?

Woke or joke? It's anyone's guess, unless they've verified the identity of these people.

Pressure on food giant to change ‘outdated’ name of iconic Aussie ice cream

‘My sexual identity is owned by me, not a brand ... isn’t it time for this double entendre to end?’

7news.com.au

View attachment 1102930

 

[Lethality]

Yep sure, that's one of the ways to reduce the possible damage.

Who's going to teach the kids how to decode news media?
Does everyone have the same access to "Media Watch or something"?
Why would someone be compelled to fix or protect from an issue that they may not know exists?

You'd learn it at school. It would be good for decoding advertising as well. Something like mindfulness even, would help.

That's great. It's very healthy.
All I did with the article you posted, was address possible dishonesty and maybe even rage baiting.

So do you go looking for the things you share with us?

No, it just finds its way through various means. The Bluey one would have been a screenshot someone shared with me. This was a story I looked up after I saw it being discussed on social media.

I also turned off the Discover tab on my browser. There are lots of such algorithms out there that encourage one to mindlessly click and become emotionally engaged. Currently there's an easy enough opt out option but they still get enough people.

 

[CM86]

You'd learn it at school. It would be good for decoding advertising as well. Something like mindfulness even, would help.

No, I mean... Who's teaching it? People who don't understand it themselves?
It's clearly a huge problem right now to ascertain the truth of something. And it's even harder to know if you've actually reached the truth, or if you're letting yourself be a little fooled, because it supports your world view.

I don't think anyone in the world is capable being completely immune to it.

So how do we set up the machinery... to create the tools to give people, so that they're able to combat it?

We're meant to learn a lot at school... It seems more and more people learn like a negative self-thinking habit.

No, it just finds its way through various means. The Bluey one would have been a screenshot someone shared with me. This was a story I looked up after I saw it being discussed on social media.

I also turned off the Discover tab on my browser. There are lots of such algorithms out there that encourage one to mindlessly click and become emotionally engaged. Currently there's an easy enough opt out option but they still get enough people.

It's really hard. Even being completely aware of it, you can suddenly realise that you've been caught again.
Like, am I doing it, in a way, with BigFooty? New content keeps coming up. Things I want to engage with.
How do I know when it's just enjoyable, or if I've been caught?
There's that little red dot, new content.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Chief do you understand cancel culture yet?

Professor removed from university post after showing 1965 Othello

Bright Sheng, who teaches composition at the School of Music, Theatre & Dance in Ann Arbor, Michigan, showed the 1965 film Othello starring Laurence Olivier has been removed from teaching.

www.google.com

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Should Netflix pull the Dave Chappelle special?

He offended some people and we can't have that. That's "dangerous"!

 

[kickazz]

Should Netflix pull the Dave Chappelle special?

He offended some people and we can't have that. That's "dangerous"!

No.

But perhaps create a "safe space' mode on Netflix that excludes it?

Or better still, we could use the same thing we've used for years, basic warnings.

Instead of MA or R : Nudity, Violence, Sex Scenes

we could have:

MA or R: transphobia, racism


It makes sense because that is how society's taboos have moved.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Should Netflix pull the Dave Chappelle special?

He offended some people and we can't have that. That's "dangerous"!

I guess this means people shouldn't speak to each other any more, just in case! It's dangerous!



Does this mean they want Chapelle to do comedy on 'him' and by extension his own 'minority group'? Yeah I'm sure that'd go well



Yeah and maybe you shouldn't take things seriously Lanier, grow a brain ffs.



How this professor can be taken seriously is beyond me. This is purely opinionated hyperbole trying to theorize a conspiracy and nothing else. I don't remember being part of the 'we' Lanier - don't paint me as part of the problem in your mind.


I don't think Dave is in trouble, purely coz he's not some privileged old white guy. But hey he's still 'dangerous' - yeah only by fkheads who actually listen to his words and do harm because of it.

 

[Carringbush2010]

No.

But perhaps create a "safe space' mode on Netflix that excludes it?

Or better still, we could use the same thing we've used for years, basic warnings.

Instead of MA or R : Nudity, Violence, Sex Scenes

we could have:

MA or R: transphobia, racism


It makes sense because that is how society's taboos have moved.

Oh no no no!, that would mean we can't cancel people and things we don't like. Nah fk everyone else, just cancel - much easier.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

No.

But perhaps create a "safe space' mode on Netflix that excludes it?

Or better still, we could use the same thing we've used for years, basic warnings.

Instead of MA or R : Nudity, Violence, Sex Scenes

we could have:

MA or R: transphobia, racism


It makes sense because that is how society's taboos have moved.

I have no problem with a classification system. Isn't that what currently exists?

But Chappelle's detractors want more than that. They argue Netflix simply shouldn't broadcast the special. It's "dangerous".

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Did anyone here actually watch the latest Dave Chapelle special on Netflix ? He never denied he was a trans and or homophobe but acknowledged it and admitted he had to better with it in that regard.

This is what is problem with the WOKE and cancel culture movement, often taking statements and or scenes out of context and use it to distort the facts and truth as part of their ongoing propaganda.

One of my best friend's is a Trans Man and I hate transphobia and Homophobia as much as anyone, but I think some people need to actually stop being overly offended and or dramatic in order to make a name of themselves a name in the media.

 

[kickazz]

I have no problem with a classification system. Isn't that what currently exists?

But Chappelle's detractors want more than that. They argue Netflix simply shouldn't broadcast the special. It's "dangerous".

It does, but I don't think they've caught up with the times. Facebook is a classic example - won't show breastfeeding (which some time ago was a taboo) but let people spread all sorts of violent or hateful stuff.

A better example might be this - if you look at the "Parent's Guide" on IMDB for "Kindergarten Cop" you will find "taboo" things suck as :

Profanity: Someone says (f word) - many people don't care about this now. The f_g word and n word are much worse.

But these parts:

• A man asks young kids to tell him what their fathers do. Two young girls stand up and say that their mom calls their dad a real sex machine. A young boy then stands up and says that his dad looks at vaginas all day. The same boy states twice in the movie that boys have a penis and girls have a vagina. Played for laughs.
• Joseph looks up the dresses of little girls and a teacher.

At the time, these are listed as 'taboos' because they cover topics of a sexual nature. Now, the whole "boys have a penis and girls have a vagina" has a whole new way of causing offence that is not captured in our current classification system. And on the second point above - the context is that a mother is (paraphrasing) "worried that her son plays with dolls", to which Arnie says (paraphrasing) "it's ok, he uses them to look up girls' dresses".

That would largely be considered offensive today, but there is no classification category for it. A parent might be happy for their child to hear "*" and "s**t" or even "campaigner", but not so happy to have the aforementioned non-traditional gender behaviour pathologised.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

It does, but I don't think they've caught up with the times. Facebook is a classic example - won't show breastfeeding (which some time ago was a taboo) but let people spread all sorts of violent or hateful stuff.

Facebook's problem is often that there is too much content for them to assess everything accurately.

A better example might be this - if you look at the "Parent's Guide" on IMDB for "Kindergarten Cop" you will find "taboo" things suck as :

Profanity: Someone says (f word) - many people don't care about this now. The f_g word and n word are much worse.

But these parts:

• A man asks young kids to tell him what their fathers do. Two young girls stand up and say that their mom calls their dad a real sex machine. A young boy then stands up and says that his dad looks at vaginas all day. The same boy states twice in the movie that boys have a penis and girls have a vagina. Played for laughs.
• Joseph looks up the dresses of little girls and a teacher.

At the time, these are listed as 'taboos' because they cover topics of a sexual nature. Now, the whole "boys have a penis and girls have a vagina" has a whole new way of causing offence that is not captured in our current classification system. And on the second point above - the context is that a mother is (paraphrasing) "worried that her son plays with dolls", to which Arnie says (paraphrasing) "it's ok, he uses them to look up girls' dresses".

That would largely be considered offensive today, but there is no classification category for it. A parent might be happy for their child to hear "fu**" and "sh*t" or even "campaigner", but not so happy to have the aforementioned non-traditional gender behaviour pathologised.

So the classification system should be updated. I assume it hasn't been frozen in time for 30 years.

 

[kickazz]

Facebook's problem is often that there is too much content for them to assess everything accurately.

Yeah true.

So the classification system should be updated. I assume it hasn't been frozen in time for 30 years.

Exactly. The proponents of 'cancel culture', as I see it, are more focussed on not letting us see it at all. This idea isn't new, things have been censored completely in the past if they are "bad enough", but I think there is a lot more that some people want to put in the "do not show" basket now these days.

 

[Hoops]

‘He’s no neo-Nazi’: How a cancelled lecture lit a free-speech firestorm

Professor Dorian Abbot’s specialty is life on other planets. But it was his views on academic merit that triggered protests and even resignations across the US.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Lethality]

No, I mean... Who's teaching it? People who don't understand it themselves?
It's clearly a huge problem right now to ascertain the truth of something. And it's even harder to know if you've actually reached the truth, or if you're letting yourself be a little fooled, because it supports your world view.

I guess you'd just teach critical thinking.

Personally I like to test my beliefs by watching people with differing points of view have a sensible debate with each other with no tricks or gotchas. That's the only way I learned about what CRT was.

It's really hard. Even being completely aware of it, you can suddenly realise that you've been caught again.
Like, am I doing it, in a way, with BigFooty? New content keeps coming up. Things I want to engage with.
How do I know when it's just enjoyable, or if I've been caught?
There's that little red dot, new content.

BigFooty and other forums are definitely a habit, but harmless enough in my experience. You might just need to turn off new content notifications. Fortunately it's easy to design your phone or computer so that it's not constantly tapping you on the shoulder unless it's for important reminders. For example I get notifications for work, or virus checks, or updates. I don't get notifications for Facebook.

 

[Lethality]

I think people are kidding themselves when they say it's just comedy. Clearly someone like Ricky Gervais when he's attacking Apple has a point of view that he's getting across, and maybe Chapelle did as well. John Stewart and co. have or had comedy news shows where they conflate news and comedy, and fall back on the excuse that nobody takes them seriously when their distortions are challenged, almost like Tucker Carlson does in court.

The same people who say it's just a comedy act also call comedians poignant, and that they're the modern day philosophers.

So which is it? You can't have it both ways.

 

[Chief]

I suppose it’s whether you present it as truth or a perspective.

Carlson doesn’t do comedy - intentionally anyway. He presents as a journalist.

 

[CM86]

‘He’s no neo-Nazi’: How a cancelled lecture lit a free-speech firestorm

Professor Dorian Abbot’s specialty is life on other planets. But it was his views on academic merit that triggered protests and even resignations across the US.

www.theage.com.au

It's genuinely upsetting to me, that someone as basic as me could call out their profit-line months before they admit it.
And even worse,
It's so good, that intelligent people accept it. And promote it.

 

[CM86]

I guess you'd just teach critical thinking.

I've engaged with you in good faith for long enough.


I've questioned how and WHO could teach this utopia, and you've had NO response.
You now throw out "critical thinking".
Genuinely... if you think that's not legacy-part of any Western Education... * you for your ignorance, while blasting off questions that you've never looked up.

This made me overly emotional.
And I'm sorry for that.
But I'm so exhausted with the casual "Virtue signalers" who want to make a quick point on the backs of hard workers.

 

[Lethality]

I've engaged with you in good faith for long enough.


I've questioned how and WHO could teach this utopia, and you've had NO response.
You now throw out "critical thinking".
Genuinely... if you think that's not legacy-part of any Western Education... fu** you for your ignorance, while blasting off questions that you've never looked up.

This made me overly emotional.
And I'm sorry for that.
But I'm so exhausted with the casual "Virtue signalers" who want to make a quick point on the backs of hard workers.

I have no idea what you're talking about

 

[CM86]

I have no idea what you're talking about

* me... But I'm going to actually think you're engaging in good faith.



What do you meant, when you say "just teach critical thinking."

 

[Lethality]

What do you meant, when you say "just teach critical thinking."

You could teach it in schools as a way to deconstruct news and advertising.

 

[CM86]

Personally I like to test my beliefs by watching people with differing points of view

That's admirable. If you'd actually do it.

You seem to look for things that affirm or reaffirm your point of view.
If you can't defend it, you just ghost.


...


And then make the same statement later. With no change.