• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cancel culture IRL

Status
Not open for further replies.
I work at a public university. We have, on occasion, invited speakers to come to speak at a symposium. However, when they gave us their expected travel costs, we decided it was too expensive for them to visit and did not let them come.

Were they deplatformed?

"I'm sorry, we are going to have to cancel because we can't afford to have you speak."

Not letting someone come to visit because it costs to much to host them is something that happens all the time. Usually we don't even bother extending an invitation, but there are times when we try.

When I was in college, I invited Mr. Wizard to speak at our school. It would have cost too much so we didn't go through with it. I guess I deplatformed Mr. Wizard.

:confused:

I really feel like you didn't actually read my post. Like maybe you hit the word "deplatformed" and just stopped right there...
Let's talk about deplatforming. Particularly, let's talk about people protesting a scheduled and legal speaking event with enough vehemence that police were concerned about violence, and the venue cancelled the engagement as a result of protest and threats against the location and the speaker.
 
Your definition requires a “cancelling” to occur in order to qualify as “cancel culture”.
Only if by canceling you mean what the definition says it means, that is, people withdrawing support from someone publicly.

You’ve already admitted that Kroger Andy wasn’t “cancelled”.
Plenty of people publicly called for boycotting his employer to retaliate against him. If that's not withdrawing support, I'm not sure what is.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it’s a real bummer when the stupid, bigoted things you broadcast to the world come back to bite you in the ass.

Well, she's Black, so we'll undoubtedly hear about how at least she's punching up, not punching down. And it's anti-Asian bias which we'll hear is "complicated."

My guess is she keeps the job.
 
:confused:

I really feel like you didn't actually read my post. Like maybe you hit the word "deplatformed" and just stopped right there...

And, so, in order to prevent that, the university has to pay more for security.

I read your post. Unlike you, however, I understand the problem.

It is all about $$$
 
Only if by canceling you mean what the definition says it means, that is, people withdrawing support from someone publicly.

Plenty of people publicly called for boycotting his employer to retaliate against him. If that's not withdrawing support, I'm not sure what is.

First you start a thread called “Cancel culture IRL” about Kroger Andy.

Then you say he wasn’t “cancelled”.

And now you’re walking that back.

This is why it’s so hard to take any of this seriously.

Over 50 pages of discussion about what a problem “cancel culture” is, and you still can’t decide if the very first example you provided qualifies.
 
Last edited:
Well, she's Black, so we'll undoubtedly hear about how at least she's punching up, not punching down. And it's anti-Asian bias which we'll hear is "complicated."

My guess is she keeps the job.

Yeah, I don’t known what your point is with most of that, but maybe she keeps her job. Or maybe she doesn’t.

In life, there are consequences for your actions, and that can be a hard lesson for some people.
 
Well, she's Black, so we'll undoubtedly hear about how at least she's punching up, not punching down. And it's anti-Asian bias which we'll hear is "complicated."

My guess is she keeps the job.

She's woke, but she's not woke enough. It's an interesting story in that she's already apologized for the comments ( don't forget the homophobic ones ) and Teen Vogue obviously accepted her apology. But nope, the even more woke staff has to throw a fit and get her cancelled.

This is pretty much what happened with the yoga studio upthread. Woke, but not woke enough. Made one slip up and KAPOW ! Takedown !

She'll probably apologize again, this time with extra grovelling for forgiveness and Teen Vogue will be publishing an article about how she's checked herself into some sort of woke reeducation camp.
 
Over 50 pages of discussion about what a problem “cancel culture” is, and you still can’t decide if the very first example you provided qualifies.

Pretty much everybody has a grip on what cancel culture is with a few exceptions playing silly games by pretending not to "get it".
 
Pretty much everybody has a grip on what cancel culture is with a few exceptions playing silly games by pretending not to "get it".

I’m working from the definition that d4m10n provided for “cancel culture” to determine if an incident that d4m10n claimed is “cancel culture” - and inspired this entire thread - qualifies.

d4m10n can’t seem to decide.

If this is all so cut and dried, I have to wonder why this is proving to be difficult.
 
I’m working from the definition that d4m10n provided for “cancel culture” to determine if an incident that d4m10n claimed is “cancel culture” - and inspired this entire thread - qualifies.

What definition of "canceled" are you working from, though? I assume that you referred exclusively to competed cancellations (to include significant sanctions) at #1949.

d4m10n can’t seem to decide.
I cannot decide on whether it makes sense to say someone was "cancelled" (past tense) when they personally suffered nothing more than unwanted infamy. I have been entirely clear and consistent, however, on whether the initial event was an instance of "cancel culture."

You are free to believe that it's only "cancel culture" when someone actually suffers sanctions, but I don't think you've made a convincing case for this view.
 
Last edited:
I've been cancelled by my doorway. I ordered a pallet of "cat in the hat" books to trigger the libs and it won't fit through the entry of my apartment.
 
She's woke, but she's not woke enough. It's an interesting story in that she's already apologized for the comments ( don't forget the homophobic ones ) and Teen Vogue obviously accepted her apology. But nope, the even more woke staff has to throw a fit and get her cancelled.

This is pretty much what happened with the yoga studio upthread. Woke, but not woke enough. Made one slip up and KAPOW ! Takedown !

She'll probably apologize again, this time with extra grovelling for forgiveness and Teen Vogue will be publishing an article about how she's checked herself into some sort of woke reeducation camp.
I think you are underestimating the young womans' intelligence.
If the pressure continues, she will explain that she could not help herself due to her involuntary internalizing the structural racism of the patriarchy. She is also the victim here- and stands united with her fellow oppressed peoples.
 
It should be interesting to see what happens here:



Pretty standard issues here; the tweets were from when she was in college (she's 27 now), she has previously expressed regret for them. Here are the ones that were published:

The Teen Vogue staff also mention in their letter that she made homophobic comments as well.

I don't really understand why this is a problem. Teen Vogue ostensibly advocates a strong anti-bigotry stance, or at least the writers do. Is it unreasonable that there would be high expectations of management in this regard?
 
Last edited:
Pretty much everybody has a grip on what cancel culture is with a few exceptions playing silly games by pretending not to "get it".
It is reasonable, when a term is used, to expect the term to be defined. especially when the term is used in a way that suggests further action should be required.

Although the proposed definitions of "cancel Culture" seem to hit somewhat close to the mark, they seem a little hazy and incomplete. When one is using a hazy, incomplete term one should expect to have that use challenged.

OTOH, in some instances, I think we are all aware of what the term is referring to. Like "pornography" or "racism" there are cases wherein whether something is or is not depending upon ones' outlook- but others where the majority of us "know it when we see it".
 
I’m working from the definition that d4m10n provided for “cancel culture” to determine if an incident that d4m10n claimed is “cancel culture” - and inspired this entire thread - qualifies.

d4m10n can’t seem to decide.

If this is all so cut and dried, I have to wonder why this is proving to be difficult.

There really isn't a hard definition. How could there be? It's an evolving mostly Twitter thing. People use it in the spirit they take it to mean, so it's going to be ambiguous by nature.

I take it as a kind of wildcat name-and-shame. Andy got slammed internationally for doing nothing more than doing his job as instructed. Yet he gets personally blasted for Krogers policy. While that may not be True Scotsman Cancel Culture, it's the same spirit of attaching some poor schmuck's mug and name to someone else's bad decision.
 
Last edited:
There really isn't a hard definition. How could there be? It's an evolving mostly Twitter thing. People use it in the spirit they take it to mean, so it's going to be ambiguous by nature.

I take it as a kind of wildcat name-and-shame. Andy got slammed internationally for doing nothing more than doing his job as instructed. Yet he gets personally blasted for Krogers policy. While that may not be True Scotsman Cancel Culture, it's the same spirit of attaching some poor schmuck's mug and name to someone else's bad decision.

There may have been a brief time when "cancel culture" may have had a more firm definition that described a novel, mostly online phenomena, but that time has passed. Conservative culture warriors have conflated it beyond all recognizable meaning. The true meaning now is more ambiguous, largely due to the incoherence of the right wing, but can basically be summed up as "any exercise of judgement that conservatives disagree with".

Insisting on some original coinage is pointless semantics. We've reached the stage where a children's book publisher can't exercise basic editorial control over their own IP without conservative freaks crying that libs want to desecrate the corpse of every beloved American author they can get their hands on.
 
The Teen Vogue staff also mention in their letter that she made homophobic comments as well.

I don't really understand why this is a problem. Teen Vogue ostensibly advocates a strong anti-bigotry stance, or at least the writers do. Is it unreasonable that there would be high expectations of management in this regard?
A phobia is a mental disorder. Why would they persecute the young woman for a mental disorder?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom