Jump to content

Has Cancel Culture Gone too Far?


Guest

Recommended Posts

Fraggle Underdark
7 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

My opinion is based on how soft people have become, to where they often cancel comedians, characters due to having feelings hurt vs it actually being harmful.

Which, to be clear, you're not asking society to do less of.

 

7 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Criticism is fine. Personal attacks during a debate, are not.

So me pointing out that you sidestep criticism, when you're frequently sidestepping criticism, is somehow not criticism but a personal attack?

 

10 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

My opinion is based on how soft people have become, to where they often cancel comedians, characters due to having feelings hurt vs it actually being harmful.

To step away from meta details of this thread, and talk about broader society, this reminds me of something worth mentioning.

 

There are some valid concerns about cancel culture overstepping, which I share with many others. There are some people who are legitimately arguing against cancelling for the true sake of free speech. But there are a lot of people (let's assume it's no one here) who rail against cancel culture simply because they're offended. Someone points out that society would be better off without something and that it has negative effects. But some people didn't notice this on their own. And some of them don't understand the argument once it's made to them. What then?

 

Some people will respond with "huh, okay I guess there are some downsides to that kind of activity" or maybe just "well whatever, no skin off my back" or "okay they have a point but maybe pull back just a little".

 

But to have something pointed out to you that you didn't notice yourself? Kind of hurts one's pride. To have people telling you what to do? Kind of hurts one's pride. To have people say that you're doing something that hurts others? But then you'd be a bad guy! (Not really but that's the thought.) You don't feel like a bad guy! How dare they hurt your feelings by suggesting that some behavior of yours is suboptimal! If you gave them any credit you'd have to admit they noticed something about the effects of your behavior that you didn't! Only bad people like Nazis or 1960s racists are so negligent, and you're not like them! How dare they suggest you are?!

 

And then they turn their feelings of being offended towards complaining about how "no one can take criticism these days".

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fragglesinthedark said:

So me pointing out

That's perfectly fine. I am eluding to more personal attacks in the thread. I don't name drop, so you will have to find them.

 

1 hour ago, fragglesinthedark said:

There are some people who are legitimately arguing against cancelling for the true sake of free speech.

Comedians being canceled to name one. 

 

What makes this dangerous, is that comedy is truly a reflection of how much such freedoms one society has. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fraggle Underdark
1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

That's perfectly fine. I am eluding to more personal attacks in the thread. I don't name drop, so you will have to find them.

"Name dropping" refers to casually mentioning famous people you've interacted with and does not apply here.

 

Plus you've already claimed that I've personally insulted you. There's nothing polite about declining to point out which statements you felt were personal insults, on the contrary it shields your claim from examination and asks people to simply take your word for it that I've insulted you. (And the intended implication: that not only were you offended but that I spoke inappropriately. This is call out culture without even supplying evidence of the thing you're calling me out for.)

 

1 hour ago, Perspektiv said:

Comedians being canceled to name one. 

 

What makes this dangerous, is that comedy is truly a reflection of how much such freedoms one society has. 

Thank you for providing yet another example of a thing that I just agreed exists in the sentence of mine you quoted. Once again you quoted some random sentence of the thing you want to talk about while trying to skip past the meat of my post about how many people complaining about "people being offended" are just people being offended.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Alaska Native Manitou

Complaints about cancel culture remind me of an old civil-rights truism:  "When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 2SpiritCherokeePrincess said:

"When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."

Cancel culture isn't about equality. It should be. The me too movement as an example, moved the needle for those who had to suffer sexual harassment in silence. 

 

Many are using it as a tool to get views. Using manufactured outrage, to bring down giants due to being offended. Outraged, really. However, the outrage rarely matches the perceived slight. 

 

As mentioned. Lululemons stating Lycra can only stretch so much, is not shaming anyone. That's a fact. 

 

Stretched beyond a point, it loses out on being opaque, becoming virtually see through. It also increases its risk of tearing having exceeded the elasticity it was designed to have. 

 

People offended at a reality they are trying to control beyond censorship, is not conducive to seeking equality. 

 

Trying to bring down a comedian who made a funny point, and factual no less because one is offended, is not seeking equality. 

 

It's ironically conducive to eroding freedoms. Not reinforcing them. 

 

Comparing civil movements where marginalized groups of people were seeking a right to exist like anyone else to this, is a bit of a stretch. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mackenzie Holiday
4 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Fair enough. 

Does this apply to @fragglesinthedark's entire post?

 

I'm asking because earlier you said:

 

14 hours ago, Perspektiv said:
17 hours ago, fragglesinthedark said:

sidestepping criticism.

Criticism is fine. Personal attacks during a debate, are not. 

Implying that the only criticisms you've been sidestepping were ones you consider personal attacks. I'm wondering if you consider the rest of @fragglesinthedark's last post to be a personal attack and therefore not worth addressing, or if you were addressing the entirety of their post but just quoted the first couple words.

 

I'm also asking because you've avoided addressing a number of my points as well, which makes me worry that I may have come across as making personal attacks when that was far from my intentions. I'm hoping if I get a better sense of what you consider a personal attack, I can have an easier time ensuring my posts better reflect the respectful tone I intend for them to have. If you would prefer having that conversation over PMs rather than here, I would understand - that is, if that's feedback you feel like offering at all. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fraggle Underdark
6 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Many are using it as a tool to get views. [...] Outraged, really. However, the outrage rarely matches the perceived slight.

Good description of many complaining about cancel culture.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mackenzie Christmas Day said:

entire post?

To the name dropping explanation. I could see why they felt that way about the word, so even though I clarified, my fair enough pointed to that understanding.

 

1 hour ago, Mackenzie Christmas Day said:

Implying that the only criticisms

Only the ones that bypassed the point, and made personal insults. I am targeting nobody specifically.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, fragglesinthedark said:

Good description of many complaining about cancel culture.

So far, all comedians I have seen challenge cancel culture, have been spot on about it. 

 

George Carlin has had some try to silence him as his comedy was brutally honest, and his point was spot on.

 

Bill Burr. Jerry Seinfeld. Patrice O'Neal. Etc.

 

Many greats, who are having this movement of people who clearly do not know a thing about comedy, telling them how to do their jobs.

 

"Be funny" should be the only criteria.

 

Its like telling a structural engineer one wants a dome roof, no pillars and it to be the diameter of two football pitches.

 

Debating them based on how one feels about things vs understanding the concept of physics and load bearing make a huge difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fraggle Underdark
1 minute ago, Perspektiv said:

"Be funny" should be the only criteria.

I'm surprised you're not opposed to the n word.

 

1 minute ago, Perspektiv said:

Its like telling a structural engineer one wants a dome roof, no pillars and it to be the diameter of two football pitches.

Complaining about how an aspect of society has harmful impacts (like complaining about cancel culture for 19 pages) is like asking someone to build a giant dome? 🤔

 

4 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

diameter of two football pitches.

The first American football game was played between Rutgers and Princeton on Nov 6, 1869.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mackenzie Holiday
14 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

To the name dropping explanation. I could see why they felt that way about the word, so even though I clarified, my fair enough pointed to that understanding.

 

Only the ones that bypassed the point, and made personal insults. I am targeting nobody specifically.

So, did the rest of their post bypass the point or make a personal insult? You did at the very least heavily imply that @fragglesinthedark personally insulted you, so I hardly think they were bypassing your point, I also saw no personal insults in that post. They’re not the only one pointing out that valid criticisms are being sidestepped, and when we ask for an explanation, our comments are only ignored further or you deflect from them, citing that there are some personal attacks but not offering any examples, or that we’re bypassing the point but you’re not explaining to us how we’ve bypassed your points, while at the same time you yourself haven’t been acknowledging us when we point out how you’ve bypassed many of our points.

 

It’s unfortunate that while you’re talking about the way cancel culture shuts down conversations, you’re unwilling to engage in an honest conversation with people here.

 

And I don’t mean for any of that to be a personal criticism of you, it’s a criticism of the rhetorical strategy you’ve been using and how that’s unnecessarily impeding meaningful discourse on this topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Many greats, who are having this movement of people who clearly do not know a thing about comedy, telling them how to do their jobs.

 

"Be funny" should be the only criteria.

1. Comedy is inherently subjective. If your job is to make people laugh and they tell you that you’re unfunny, is that a problem with the audience, or the comic?

 

2. Obviously there are additional criteria, which is why you didn’t see comics doing a lot of hilarious jokes about the NYC skyline on 9/12/2001.

 

37 minutes ago, Perspektiv said:

Its like telling a structural engineer one wants a dome roof, no pillars and it to be the diameter of two football pitches.

The implication here seems to be that it is literally impossible to be funny without using slurs or making jokes about minorities. This would be a surprising stance to take.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mackenzie Christmas Day said:

You did at the very least heavily imply

I didn't attach a name to it, plus it matters little. It could continue and it honestly wouldn't affect me or my thread. I just pointed it out, and as a result will be the last time I address it.

 

People are entitled to do as they wish on an online forum as long as it fits within the TOS. 

 

Even if it didn't. I did just fine in hostile forums where you were trolled heavily for posting, and if you withstood that barrage, were left alone. 

 

If I don't like them, there are other forums. 

 

Same concept behind cancel culture I feel should be respected  when the entity being canceled didn't break a law, nor commit a hate crime regardless of its legality.

 

Michael Richard's as mentioned, leap frogged that line, so rightfully got canceled.

 

Moral compasses are so subjective, so using them to decide who gets canceled to me is wrong. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, fragglesinthedark said:

I'm surprised you're not opposed to the n word

Why should I be? Its just a word. Its dangerous when the intent behind it is.

 

There is a history behind the word, but the context matters more.

 

I remember walking behind a couple of white girls at a mall, and they uttered something one of their boyfriends had said: "He called him a stupid n***er".

 

Thats when they felt my presence behind them, and turned around and went bright red, mortified. 

 

I just smiled, as I had heard the conversation, letting them know I heard the context and its cool. Plus they were gorgeous, so I would have even let it slide in a racist context.

 

I remember in the Philippines, people kept calling me Kobe Bryant, as they felt I looked like his twin. I then got the: "Sup n***a!", or "Hey, Kobe Bryant!" everywhere I went o_O

 

Honestly. If I got offended at the word, it would mean I clearly can't see that the context they stated it in, was fully innocent. Rappers call each other it all the time, so whats the big deal? 

 

Its like a child asking me why my skin is so dark. I will gladly smile and make a joke out of it, but letting them know we are all the same on the inside.

 

Context is so important here, though. 

 

Main reason I defend comedians. Their context wasn't to hurt anyone for most. They are trying to make you laugh. As long as that is the context governing their material, I can accept it and switch the channel if its too much.

 

Its like me as a kid wearing my moms high heels and walking around in her dress and clip on earrings, doing impressions of her scolding my sister. 

 

I even had her walk down pat, when she chased us angrily.

 

Guaranteed to the wrong person, this is offensive. Anyone with common sense, knows I am not insulting her. I am trying to make her laugh. The context and intent is good. She was laughing, so I know I did my job.

 

I think we agree cancel culture can be good, but in the ways I have highlighted, does not help anyone.

 

I am not against cancel culture (as that would be be negating the good it has done). Who am I to cancel a movement?

 

It would be like me canceling religion. 

 

Don't like it, change the channel. That goes for me and my opinion on it and why it will always be just that, and not an actual push to actually cancel it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Alaska Native Manitou
  • 1 month later...
Alaska Native Manitou
4 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Yeah, due to anti semetic statements. What's the issue? 

 🤨

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Perspektiv said:

Someone please lock this thread. I think it has long lost its purpose.

@Iam9man?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 2SpiritCherokeePrincess said:

 🤨

Meaning he was rightfully canceled. What is the issue with his cancelation. Not the statement o_O

 

Anyways, this thread like I said has long lost its purpose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has been locked at the request of the OP. If anyone would like to discuss the topic further, feel free to start a new thread.

 

Iam9man

PPS Moderator

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...