Cont: Cancel culture IRL Part 2

A news story from Canada on how school boards are looking into how to get rid of books claimed to be "...harmful to staff and students."


The Waterloo Region District School Board is undertaking a multi-year review of its library collections to identify and remove any texts deemed “harmful to staff and students.”


Graham Shantz, coordinating superintendent in human resources and equity services outlined the ongoing work during Monday’s board meeting as part of an overview of the board’s 2021-2022 strategic and operational plan.
Click to expand...


https://www.cambridgetoday.ca/local...-from-regions-public-school-libraries-4551859


At the end of the article it mentions that Margaret Atwoods 'The Handmaids Tale' is one of these books.


This has now led to calls for oversight of the process.


Cindy Watson wants to know more about the public school board's plan to remove certain books from its library collections and is exploring the idea of bringing forward a motion asking for details and public oversight of the process.


At Monday's Waterloo Region District School Board meeting, Graham Shantz, coordinating superintendent in human resources and equity services, explained that some texts in school library collections "are not appropriate at this point” given the progress the board has made in creating an equitable, inclusive and safe learning environment for staff and students.
Click to expand...


https://www.cambridgetoday.ca/local...c-boards-plan-to-remove-harmful-books-4702502
 
tyr_13 said:
That would be true if males were trans women and females trans men at the same rate, which doesn't appear to be the case.
Click to expand...

Historically, yes, which is why there are currently more trans women than trans men. One of the articles I linked above indicated that transition rates have equalized in the last 20 years (I think, I don't recall the exact time frame). Unless those rates change again, we should expect there to be more trans men in absolute numbers because there is a slightly higher proportion of females in the US population.
 
Upchurch said:
Historically, yes, which is why there are currently more trans women than trans men. One of the articles I linked above indicated that transition rates have equalized in the last 20 years (I think, I don't recall the exact time frame). Unless those rates change again, we should expect there to be more trans men in absolute numbers because there is a slightly higher proportion of females in the US population.
Click to expand...

Oh thanks for the reference, I'll have to go back and look. If so it would lend evidence to my suspicion that the differences were do to other pressures (and because it helps confirm my biases, it must be true :p ).

Assuming that rates will stay the same as in any given timeframe is a quick way to extrapolate incorrectly. It reminds me of a 'concern' that happens when suppression of any given trait is reduced. 'People are jumping onto a trend, and the increasing numbers of people who have claim to have it proves it!' It was the 'trans trender' claim, that current numbers increasing beyond the numbers from the recent past prove that people are just choosing to be that way. The same as the claim 'autism didn't exist in my day' and blaming vaccines for 'increasing autism'. The same as the increase in people identifying as homosexual, then bisexual. The same as the increases of people identifying as left handed.

In every case the increase was right after suppression of these traits was reduced. Interestingly some recent research showed that some increased at the same rates before leveling off as each other (left handedness and homosexual iirc).

It is not at all surprising that people with these traits being cancelled less because of them is always framed with the same bad arguments including the claim that others are being 'cancelled' for not being allowed to cancel others for the reasons they used to.

EDIT: 'As more people realize my behavior was wrong and harmful, they put up with it less. Poor persecuted me! They won't let me be wrong and hurt people in peace!'
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
Historically, yes, which is why there are currently more trans women than trans men. One of the articles I linked above indicated that transition rates have equalized in the last 20 years (I think, I don't recall the exact time frame). Unless those rates change again, we should expect there to be more trans men in absolute numbers because there is a slightly higher proportion of females in the US population.
Click to expand...
I wonder what would account for those shifting rates.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
phiwum said:
I wonder what would account for those shifting rates.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Data is hard to find online. My uninformed rando internet guy guess is that the social acceptability of Tom boys historically has acted as a “good enough” half-measure for folks in the FTM trans closet, where MTF had no such option. There is no similar “Jane girl” option that would not have gotten someone beaten up or killed.
 
d4m10n said:
You need to distinguish here between two types of support.

1) Supporting the legalization of a message (e.g. Nazis holding a rally in Marquette Park in Chicago)

2) Supporting the message itself

One can say "Nazis ought not rally in Marquette Park," without affirming that they ought to be legally sanctioned for doing so.

Similarly, one can say that it was wrong to pursue #StockOut (since Dr. Stock did nothing wrong) while affirming the legal right of students to protest in that manner.
Click to expand...

I’m glad you acknowledge that protest and criticism count as free speech.

Now you need to explain what makes these expressions of free speech problematic in the specific situations you referenced.
 
Cain said:
The trans topic in particular is not just a matter of losing employment, but having a basic conversation. I see people, and know people, who say they're happy to talk politics with friends about all issues except this one, which harkens back to the idea that freedom of speech is related to freedom of thought.
Click to expand...

Hey just try having a basic conversation about the blacks or jews and what they deserve and you will find it rather difficult. I mean look at Mel Gibson how he was canceled for a few statements about the jews.

You really think Chapelle could have done that same bit about asians or jews?

How about something truly wrong and outrageous, Eddie Murphy apologizing for hit joke about gay people in the 80's.

https://www.essence.com/celebrity/eddie-murphy-homophobic-content-ignorant/

Gay stereotypes are just funny like black stereotypes, but you do a good old fashion minstrel show to prove that and suddenly you get canceled for no reason.
 
Last edited:
SuburbanTurkey said:
Your two examples of "cancel culture" are people, both who had tenure protecting their academic freedom, who voluntarily resigned because they did not like that their public comments invited public criticism.
Click to expand...

"Voluntarily" is technically true. But when retaining their position requires them to hire security guards to protect them from people who are threatening them with harm, and the university seems unable to ensure the basic safety of their professors with tenure... one has to wonder what exactly "voluntarily" means these days.

The university didn't cancel Stock, but the slavering rabid mob sure as hell did.
 
Upchurch said:
The death threats are the only illegal and fully inappropriate part of that response.

“Cancel culture” is an inevitable and immediate consequence of living in a society that has both free speech and capitalism. It is literally one aspect (exclusively the stick, rather than the carrot) of the “invisible hand of the market.” The only things new about it is applying the term “cancel culture” and then framing it as a scapegoat for the economic consequences of one’s free speech instead of addressing the content of the criticism.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I disagree. This is way, way beyond "invisible hand of the market" and all the way into denying a person the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It's denying a person the ability to live their lives without threat of harm and harassment.
 
Upchurch said:
Historically, yes, which is why there are currently more trans women than trans men. One of the articles I linked above indicated that transition rates have equalized in the last 20 years (I think, I don't recall the exact time frame). Unless those rates change again, we should expect there to be more trans men in absolute numbers because there is a slightly higher proportion of females in the US population.
Click to expand...

Are you aware that over the past few years, the rate of young females self-identifying as transgender, with no historical expressions of dysphoria or even gender nonconformity, has skyrocketed?

The number of young males identifying as transgender, has risen, but by a much lower margin. The number of middle-aged males identifying as transgender has risen by a material amount.

Why on earth would you expect a behavioral pattern that has historically been overwhelmingly male to equalize in the first place?
 
Emily's Cat said:
Are you aware that over the past few years, the rate of young females self-identifying as transgender, with no historical expressions of dysphoria or even gender nonconformity, has skyrocketed?

The number of young males identifying as transgender, has risen, but by a much lower margin. The number of middle-aged males identifying as transgender has risen by a material amount.

Why on earth would you expect a behavioral pattern that has historically been overwhelmingly male to equalize in the first place?
Click to expand...
Uh, because of that study I linked to and those reasons I've stated?

What's your source?

ETA: wait, aren't you saying that they are approaching the same rate?
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
Yeah, I disagree. This is way, way beyond "invisible hand of the market" and all the way into denying a person the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It's denying a person the ability to live their lives without threat of harm and harassment.
Click to expand...

Well, it wouldn't be the first time you misunderstood something based on bad assumptions and just made claims without support.
 
Apparently there is a new biography of Anthony Comstock, the behaviours he exhibited in his quest to avoid being triggered into acts of 'self abuse' make an eerie parallel to much of what is now termed 'Cancel Culture.


Robert Corn-Revere’s new book, “The Mind of the Censor and the Eye of the Beholder: The First Amendment and the Censor’s Dilemma,” follows the evolution of America’s free speech culture from the nineteenth century to the present. He starts that journey with the story of a man named Anthony Comstock.

To students of the First Amendment, Comstock (1844-1915) is a familiar villain, because a surprising amount of America’s free speech movement can be traced back to the uniquely addled psyche of the crusading postal inspector. Comstock is a character so improbable that he would be considered poorly written if fictional, because the absurdity of his life would frustrate the suspension of disbelief.

Comstock was a moral crusader motivated by personal shame. He kept diaries confessing to what most biographers agree was chronic masturbation and crusaded against anything he thought might inspire that self-discovery in others. In the name of that crusade, he would order “obscene” materials and objects, then have the sellers arrested. “Mind of the Censor” recounts the story of how Comstock once pursued a man for over a year, in a chase involving seven cities in three countries, because the offender sold Comstock a single condom. Ever the charmer, he bragged about hounding several of his targets to suicide.
Click to expand...


(Emphasis mine)



https://www.thefire.org/the-mind-of...e-infamous-and-often-absurd-anthony-comstock/
 
d4m10n said:
How about death threats, campus-wide calls for removal, and your own union throwing you under the bus instead of defending academic freedom?

Not if the speech is true, or even arguably true. Philosophers are expected to explore such things from all available angles.

ETA: Where are you sourcing the bit about tenure from? I've made a good faith effort to find her tenure status, to no avail.
Click to expand...

Death threats? Meh

Cancel culture ninnies should try being a politician, especially a progressive or a liberal. They receive hundreds of death threats every week. Politicians such as AOC spend the first part of every morning reviewing photos of the people who have made death threats against her.

Upchurch said:
The death threats are the only illegal and fully inappropriate part of that response.

“Cancel culture” is an inevitable and immediate consequence of living in a society that has both free speech and capitalism. It is literally one aspect (exclusively the stick, rather than the carrot) of the “invisible hand of the market.” The only things new about it is applying the term “cancel culture” and then framing it as a scapegoat for the economic consequences of one’s free speech instead of addressing the content of the criticism.
Click to expand...

Yup! Nailed it perfectly... 100% agree!
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Is this an aspect of our culture which you would like to see changed?
Click to expand...

Yes, but not in the way you have deliberately misrepresented it.

I would like to see consequences... REAL consequences for people who make death threats! People who threaten a person's life should not be afforded the protection of free speech laws.
 
Last edited:
Graham2001 said:
Apparently there is a new biography of Anthony Comstock, the behaviours he exhibited in his quest to avoid being triggered into acts of 'self abuse' make an eerie parallel to much of what is now termed 'Cancel Culture.





(Emphasis mine)



https://www.thefire.org/the-mind-of...e-infamous-and-often-absurd-anthony-comstock/
Click to expand...

Hard to see how that's relevant. Comstock wielded state power, where most of the complaints around "cancel culture" seem mostly to be rooted in indignation that the unwashed masses might hold strong negative opinions of people who are their betters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom