Matthew Best
Penultimate Amazing
Sorry I must have missed a memo. In what sense has Chris Pratt been cancelled, and what did he do when he used the fact that he was white, Conservative and Christian to be an ass?
Cont: Cancel culture IRL Part 2
- Thread starter ahhell
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cancel culture
Sorry I must have missed a memo. In what sense has Chris Pratt been cancelled, and what did he do when he used the fact that he was white, Conservative and Christian to be an ass?
TurkeysGhost
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 35,043
Of course, the problem is that "politically right wing" is increasingly no longer meaning religious and socially conservative, but belligerent jackass.
People like Gina Carano are pretty mainstream right wing, the problem is that "mainstream right wing" means a person who is deliberately combative and unpleasant. The norms of social conduct have remained somewhat constant, the problem is that politics have shifted so far right that an increasing number of people are outside those parameters.
Last edited:
Yeah that's what I've been saying for years across multiple topics.
"You're intolerant because you aren't tolerance of my intolerant toxic jackassery" is now the stated message, it's not in the subtext anymore.
You aren't on their side UNLESS you're a hateful proudly wrong bigot. And they are still trying to play the victim card.
It's why the Right has suddenly and out of nowhere starting whining about "Freedom of Speech" all the time despite not giving a **** about it ever until they wound up not being able to silence other people.
"You're intolerant because you aren't tolerance of my intolerant toxic jackassery" is now the stated message, it's not in the subtext anymore.
You aren't on their side UNLESS you're a hateful proudly wrong bigot. And they are still trying to play the victim card.
It's why the Right has suddenly and out of nowhere starting whining about "Freedom of Speech" all the time despite not giving a **** about it ever until they wound up not being able to silence other people.
Last edited:
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
Are you saying market forces and censorship are mutually exclusive phenomena, such that any given cancellation has to be just one or the other?
I linked to a real one which actually exists.
Taken off for what reasons though? I've a working theory.
To my knowledge, this page is the first mention of Pratt.
ETA (correction): Pratt came up in the previous iteration of the thread.
Last edited:
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2007
- Messages
- 18,498
It was explained in the very next post what most likely happened, and it's fairly simple and straightforward. Theories involving major corporations being brought to their knees by angry tweets remain stupid and unnecessary.
Last edited:
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
I remain skeptical of that explanation. More likely Cara Dune was scrapped for the obvious reason: probability of public pushback due to conflation of character and portrayer.
Last edited:
I am saying that what happened in this example is a result of "market forces".
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
Cancellation is typically about using market forces to punish someone for acting badly, e.g. getting Gelato Andy screwed over on Yelp or attempting to get Kroger Andy sacked from his job.
Last edited:
It was happening long before the current vogue for calling the usual market forces "cancelling".
And of course, in the example I was responding to you and Forbes haven't got a clue as to what was going to happen, you simply pile assumption onto assumption to try and create a narrative.
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2007
- Messages
- 18,498
Reality doesn’t care about your skepticism. What I described is how things actually work. Your acknowledgment of its veracity is not required.
And claiming to be skeptical of anything is quite rich coming from someone who keeps pushing the laughably implausible premise that major corporations tremble in fear before the might of people complaining on Twitter.
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2007
- Messages
- 18,498
d4m10n
Penultimate Amazing
I already provided an example; click the link.
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2007
- Messages
- 18,498
It took me to a long, meandering thread on some random blog. Hard pass. If you can’t present your argument clearly and succinctly, then it stands to reason that you don’t have a very good one.
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,564
Law Professor Jason Kilborn at UIC
"Just a few months after agreeing not to punish law professor Jason Kilborn for his use of pedagogically relevant references to redacted slurs on an exam, the University of Illinois Chicago is going back on its promise. UIC’s latest violation of Kilborn’s First Amendment rights comes weeks before he is set to return to the classroom in January.
This July, professor Kilborn reached a resolution with UIC with help from FIRE’s Faculty Legal Defense Fund and FLDF lawyer Wayne Giampietro. Kilborn agreed to alert the dean before responding to student complaints about racial issues and to having his classes audio recorded. Kilborn welcomed both of these stipulations in order to protect himself against spurious complaints, and had in any case decided to take those actions independently." FIRE
"He reached an agreement with the university that would have settled the matter, but the university reneged on that agreement and the chancellor of the university weighed in demanding that the punishment must continue until morale has improved." Reason
Some call the behavior of students such as these "performance art." I think that such students (see also my posts about the rock incident at UW-Madison) are not outraged but instead just want to throw their weight around. This is one more reason to support FIRE, not that one were needed.
"Just a few months after agreeing not to punish law professor Jason Kilborn for his use of pedagogically relevant references to redacted slurs on an exam, the University of Illinois Chicago is going back on its promise. UIC’s latest violation of Kilborn’s First Amendment rights comes weeks before he is set to return to the classroom in January.
This July, professor Kilborn reached a resolution with UIC with help from FIRE’s Faculty Legal Defense Fund and FLDF lawyer Wayne Giampietro. Kilborn agreed to alert the dean before responding to student complaints about racial issues and to having his classes audio recorded. Kilborn welcomed both of these stipulations in order to protect himself against spurious complaints, and had in any case decided to take those actions independently." FIRE
"He reached an agreement with the university that would have settled the matter, but the university reneged on that agreement and the chancellor of the university weighed in demanding that the punishment must continue until morale has improved." Reason
Some call the behavior of students such as these "performance art." I think that such students (see also my posts about the rock incident at UW-Madison) are not outraged but instead just want to throw their weight around. This is one more reason to support FIRE, not that one were needed.
autumn1971
Illuminator
I’m just glad Fatty Arbuckle didn’t live to see these dark times.
Wow! that is some serious big brother **** right there. He even gets his own personal minder, just like you get when you go on vacation to North Korea. I suppose he should consider himself lucky that he didn't get The Ludovico Technique.
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2016
- Messages
- 6,416
I'm guessing the "re-education program" is probably some standard diversity certification?
He's going to get full pay to do nothing but office work and jump through some Title IX style bureaucratic hoops?
I'll swap him if it's really that unbearable.
He's going to get full pay to do nothing but office work and jump through some Title IX style bureaucratic hoops?
I'll swap him if it's really that unbearable.
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Messages
- 12,564
More on the Kilborn/UIC case
“To whoever was in my class, who actually did read this exam of mine and actually had a negative reaction, I do feel bad about that. And I don’t want that to happen again,” he [Professor Kilborn] said. “But here’s the juxtaposition part. None of these people who have attacked me in that petition was in my class … I think they’re really battling about something other than me, but they chose to have me be the victim of their enormous attack.”
SNIP
“Facts are the lifeblood of legal analysis, so much so that trying to run a law school without specific fact patterns in hypothetical exercises is like trying to run a medical school without diagnostic tests,” FIRE wrote on that list about UIC. “Kilborn obliquely identified the slurs without using them; a student said she had ‘heart palpitations,’ more called for his punishment, and the school opened an investigation. UIC has functionally chilled the ability of its professors to teach the tough subjects.” Inside Higher Ed
Having now read the IHE news story, I am prepared to acknowledge that Professor Kilborn made one or two minor errors in judgment, but I also support FIRE's putting UIC on its list of ten worst campuses. UIC is a public institution, and (with some small exceptions) one has the same first amendment rights on a public campus as anywhere else.
Regarding the content of the re-education program, Brian Leiter reported: "Professor Kilborn will be subjected to an 8-week indoctrination course–20 hours of coursework, required “self-reflection” (self-criticism?) papers for each of 5 modules, plus weekly 90-minute sessions with a trainer followed by three more weeks of vaguely described supplemental meetings with this trainer. Since the trainer will provide “feedback regarding Professor Kilborn’s engagement and commitment to the goals of the program,” disagreement or skepticism about the content of the program is presumably not welcome."
Professor Leiter previously criticized UIC about this matter in no uncertain terms, and he quoted an article at the Chronicle of Higher Education: "Lawyers face such situations all the time. The question was entirely appropriate. One student, however, declared that, on seeing the sentence, she became “incredibly upset” and experienced “heart palpitations.” The Black Law Students Association demanded that Kilborn be stripped of his committee assignments, denounced him on social media, and filed a complaint with the university’s OAE (Office for Access and Equity)...."
An article at the Chronicle of Higher Education is worth consulting. "“my interim dean turned around and denied me a first-in-several-years across-the-board 2-percent ‘merit’ raise, despite my (by her own admission) extraordinary scholarship production and service. I got her to admit in writing that she had denied me this $3,000 raise SOLELY due to my purported violation of the discrimination policy on the basis of OAE’s findings. I had had quite enough by that point.” Now, he says, “I feel I have an obligation to carry forward this fight. I’m far less vulnerable (I hope) than many of my colleagues across campus, so I have to fight for them.”
EDT
CHE's Andrew Koppelman wrote, "It is embarrassing to have to say it, but the antiracism movement needs to regard truth as its friend. Episodes like this tend to discredit it and to reinforce the notion that complaints of racism are overblown." This entry at Simple Justice may also be consulted for a description of the program that UIC demands Professor Kilborn undertake. I would not swap positions with him for all the tea in....oh, never mind.
“To whoever was in my class, who actually did read this exam of mine and actually had a negative reaction, I do feel bad about that. And I don’t want that to happen again,” he [Professor Kilborn] said. “But here’s the juxtaposition part. None of these people who have attacked me in that petition was in my class … I think they’re really battling about something other than me, but they chose to have me be the victim of their enormous attack.”
SNIP
“Facts are the lifeblood of legal analysis, so much so that trying to run a law school without specific fact patterns in hypothetical exercises is like trying to run a medical school without diagnostic tests,” FIRE wrote on that list about UIC. “Kilborn obliquely identified the slurs without using them; a student said she had ‘heart palpitations,’ more called for his punishment, and the school opened an investigation. UIC has functionally chilled the ability of its professors to teach the tough subjects.” Inside Higher Ed
Having now read the IHE news story, I am prepared to acknowledge that Professor Kilborn made one or two minor errors in judgment, but I also support FIRE's putting UIC on its list of ten worst campuses. UIC is a public institution, and (with some small exceptions) one has the same first amendment rights on a public campus as anywhere else.
Regarding the content of the re-education program, Brian Leiter reported: "Professor Kilborn will be subjected to an 8-week indoctrination course–20 hours of coursework, required “self-reflection” (self-criticism?) papers for each of 5 modules, plus weekly 90-minute sessions with a trainer followed by three more weeks of vaguely described supplemental meetings with this trainer. Since the trainer will provide “feedback regarding Professor Kilborn’s engagement and commitment to the goals of the program,” disagreement or skepticism about the content of the program is presumably not welcome."
Professor Leiter previously criticized UIC about this matter in no uncertain terms, and he quoted an article at the Chronicle of Higher Education: "Lawyers face such situations all the time. The question was entirely appropriate. One student, however, declared that, on seeing the sentence, she became “incredibly upset” and experienced “heart palpitations.” The Black Law Students Association demanded that Kilborn be stripped of his committee assignments, denounced him on social media, and filed a complaint with the university’s OAE (Office for Access and Equity)...."
An article at the Chronicle of Higher Education is worth consulting. "“my interim dean turned around and denied me a first-in-several-years across-the-board 2-percent ‘merit’ raise, despite my (by her own admission) extraordinary scholarship production and service. I got her to admit in writing that she had denied me this $3,000 raise SOLELY due to my purported violation of the discrimination policy on the basis of OAE’s findings. I had had quite enough by that point.” Now, he says, “I feel I have an obligation to carry forward this fight. I’m far less vulnerable (I hope) than many of my colleagues across campus, so I have to fight for them.”
EDT
CHE's Andrew Koppelman wrote, "It is embarrassing to have to say it, but the antiracism movement needs to regard truth as its friend. Episodes like this tend to discredit it and to reinforce the notion that complaints of racism are overblown." This entry at Simple Justice may also be consulted for a description of the program that UIC demands Professor Kilborn undertake. I would not swap positions with him for all the tea in....oh, never mind.
Last edited:
You would be happy to have your name spread around the world and be denigrated by righteous crusaders? That’s a swap you would take?
Of the many cases cited in this thread, this one is probably the most outrageous.