Cont: Cancel culture IRL Part 2

[JoeMorgue]

Hey even the oppressed can be stupid ******** about things sometimes. Everybody can. It’s built in to humanity.

Yeah my point exactly. So we don't need a new term with scare cords flanking it.

NOTHING NEW IS HAPPENING. People don't like other people. They don't like them for good reasons, they don't like them for bad reasons.

There was not "Cancel Culture" when black people had to sit on the back of the bus and there's isn't one now. Just a society full of people deciding who to interact with.

The only thing that has changed is that conservatives, racists, bigots, and people on power now sometimes get the short end of the stick and if that's the problem (and it is because it's the only thing that's any different) I cannot, simply cannot stress how the people who are mad about it can die mad about it.

 

[EaglePuncher]

Hey even the oppressed can be stupid ******** about things sometimes. Everybody can. It’s built in to humanity.

Funny that they are seemingly always "stupid" when it comes to racism and discrimination. What does your "conservative" trainer have to say about that?

 

[Lithrael]

Oh, yeah, I’m way over in the ‘ ‘cancel culture’ is a scary buzzword used by people who want to make ‘people have opinions’ look new and frightening’ camp.

Funny that they are seemingly always "stupid" when it comes to racism and discrimination. What does your "conservative" trainer have to say about that?

Lol! Well your trainer needs some pointers, anyway.

Ok, look. I can picture some circumstances that would swing my needle back towards the professor as the one doing the major misstepping here. For example, one of his complaints is that none of his students approached him directly with any issues. If the school talks to them to ask why and they say because he didn’t create an atmosphere of approachability and so they were worried about reproach or futility, then the professor actually does need training around creating a better atmosphere. Or basically if it comes out from the students that the guy was dropping little ‘harmlessly racist uncle’ type **** all the time and the examples they’ve used in the complaints just sound a little drummed up because that’s what that stuff is like; it’s hard to complain about and make it sound as serious as it actually feels (and it is a genuine entire pain in the ass and nothing I’d want to put up with in a class).

I mean, what’s your impression of the actual specific stuff in the complaints about Kilborn?

 

[JoeMorgue]

Again nothing being said prevents us from going "The reason you stopped interacting with the person/business/etc is stupid" if we think so. We aren't obligated to agree with all "canceling" just because we think Cancel Culture is made up nonsense.

I get the foundation for a future "gotcha" be laid down, it's rather heavy handed and hard to miss, but if Monday Night Football gets cancelled because one of the announcers called it champagne and not sparking wine and I say "That's a stupid reason" I haven't really opened myself to eating any crow.

 

[Lithrael]

I’m totally on the same page with you on the larger ‘cancel culture’ thing, would be glad to take the Kilborn stuff to another thread if anyone wants to discuss it separately from this stuff. My intention was to discuss it on its own merits and not to defend it as an example of ‘cancel culture.’ Indeed I originally posted about it to point out he had not in fact been fired, after someone seemed to be talking as though he had. Then I read about it and got interested in the story. Apologies for not making my non-point clear.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I’m totally on the same page with you on the larger ‘cancel culture’ thing, would be glad to take the Kilborn stuff to another thread if anyone wants to discuss it separately from this stuff. My intention was to discuss it on its own merits and not to defend it as an example of ‘cancel culture.’ Indeed I originally posted about it to point out he had not in fact been fired, after someone seemed to be talking as though he had. Then I read about it and got interested in the story. Apologies for not making my non-point clear.

And I'm using your posts more as a general jumping off point (mainly because I have to since none of the actual people who (claim to) disagree with cancel culture can say a full coherent sentence about it) than a direct rebuttal and I need to be more clear on that, so that's on me.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I still would like to hear a response from the usuals about Carano recently reminding the public that she's a crackpot.

It seems obvious to me that Disney did itself a favor when they parted ways. She can say whatever she likes now and it won't embarrass the Mouse.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I still would like to hear a response from the usuals about Carano recently reminding the public that she's a crackpot.

It seems obvious to me that Disney did itself a favor when they parted ways. She can say whatever she likes now and it won't embarrass the Mouse.

Much like in every God discussion the people who believe in God refuse let any God that anyone actually believes in be discussed, demanding that the only God allowed be allowed is a vague God of constantly shifting definitions, none of the people who screech the longest and loudest about cancel culture will actually talk about ever actually happening.

Because like God it doesn't exist.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

no conspiridiot

It's more on the person who decided to spout weird conspiracy bs and the person who then decided to fire the conspiridiot.

This isn't even remotely related to any of the situations I (among others) have discussed. A post such has yours wastes everyone's time; therefore, it has negative marginal utility.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Outlandish?

Sounds an awful lot like "If a criminal is arrested, the victim owns a portion of that" See, it's easy actually: Don't do outlandish **** and no one will call for your firing.

Laws regarding criminal behavior were in place before the behavior took place; so were the penalties. In addition, mixing up two person's names, for example, is not outlandish. If you were trying to write a comment that was a failure in all respects, you succeeded.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

disconnect

Nah, it's not that complicated...some random guy with a victim complex spouted worthless bs and is now very sad that he has to face the consequences.

It would be difficult to imagine a post more disconnected from the realities of the situations I have mentioned than yours. No one can force you to read the links here, but it might be a start toward forming a coherent argument.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I still would like to hear a response from the usuals about Carano recently reminding the public that she's a crackpot.

It seems obvious to me that Disney did itself a favor when they parted ways. She can say whatever she likes now and it won't embarrass the Mouse.

I liked Carano’s character in Mando and was happy that they were planning on doing something more with her. But it was clear from her interactions with Disney and her coworkers that such an investment would be a waste of money. That she is making it doubly clear is no surprise.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Laws regarding criminal behavior were in place before the behavior took place; so were the penalties. In addition, mixing up two person's names, for example, is not outlandish. If you were trying to write a comment that was a failure in all respects, you succeeded.

Mixing up names can be a part of an abusive environment. I assume that is what the university is looking into.

I had an verbally abusive professor in college for exactly one day. For three semesters. It was his method for reducing the class size. He even made his German accent much thicker on the first day. If you knew him it was hilarious. If you didn’t it was frightening. I would not try to pull that crap off these days.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Ashley Shannon and BLSA

Black people couldn't even go to those school 50 years ago and the Right didn't call that "Cancel Culture" and have a big showy handwringing session where they pretended to worry about freedom of speech.

So, and I cannot stress this enough, I don't believe them when they lie about how worried about it they are now.

"Oh that's not the right question" is a very bad way of going "I'm wrong but I either don't want it to matter or don't want to admit it."

"Ashley Shannon, president of the campus BLSA chapter, who is not a student of Kilborn’s, said during her own speech last week, 'We do not feel safe. Students have come together to write demands for the law school, starting with the termination of his tenured professor, stating that tenure is not immunity for discriminatory practices.'"

One of the things that is wrong with your comparison to a company selling products is illustrated above: some of the people complaining were not even in his class. I did not say that you asked the wrong question. I implied that your argument was poorly thought through for several reasons, and I am happy to say so explicitly now.

Maybe you can have a go at explaining why what happened fifty years ago is relevant.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Unintended irony

At least you recognized the problem: He was offered to have some training, he refused, made himself look like a fool. Now they will or will not let him go. End of story.

Utter rubbish: "However, in November, under pressure from UIC’s Black Law Students Association and Jesse Jackson, UIC reneged on its agreement with Kilborn and is now requiring him to participate in months-long “training on classroom conversations that address racism” and compelling him to write reflection papers before he can return to the classroom. In a stunning display of unintended irony, the individualized training materials include the same redacted slur that Kilborn used in his test question (see page 5 for the redacted slur)." FIRE

 

[Chris_Halkides]

botched investigation

If the facts bear out in Kilborn's favor, he wins his lawsuit. The system works.

Filing a lawsuit is expensive and time-consuming; therefore, it is a failsafe measure. If the system had actually worked, the UIC administration would have told the students that firing Professor Kilborn was contrary to the law and second that the question in the context of his class was apppropriate. Instead: "The OAE botched its investigation of Kilborn. It repeatedly cited as “harassment” conduct that no reasonable person could regard as harassment. It enumerated charges without offering evidence. And it essentially found that he had violated the school’s discrimination policy by protesting his own earlier mistreatment." That is a strange way for a system to work.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

Jingle Bells

Weird that in a thread about the societal scourge of "cancel culture", one school that doesn't allow "Jingle Bells" is mentioned, but not any of the recent attempts by right wingers to ban books cropping up all over the place.

I'm still not sure what the overarching thesis of this thread is supposed to be - something about the oppression of free speech, I guess - but it makes it even more difficult to suss out when one school not singing "Jingle Bells" merits mention, but multiple school districts engaging in book banning doesn't.

If you are implying that by not mentioning book banning, the people who do bring up "Jingle Bells" are hypocritical, then you are using a tu quoque argument, not that the above is the only time this particular logical fallacy has been used here.

 

[Lithrael]

If we’ve both actually got silly hats on, the problem with tu quoque is if you’re trying to use it to distract from discussing how silly your hat in fact is. Which in debate is a no-no because you’re supposed to be debating the original point’s merits, not pointing out whether anybody is being hypocritical about their standards.

It’s a fallacy not because it can’t be correct but because it does not speak to the point in question.

But you’ve made ten thousand posts here, you know this already.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Regardless of what the internet has up and decided in the last few years when you're wrong you can't magically become right by finding "hypocrisy" in every person who's saying you're wrong.

When the pot calls the kettle black news flash... THE KETTLE IS STILL ******* BLACK.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

the students who were harmed.

After reading your subsequent post, it seems you have zero regard for what the students think or feel, and dismiss their concerns out of hand. You don’t seem to care in the slightest.

When you apply judgment and examination to only one side of the issue, the moral posturing rings false. Questions that arise from it can therefore be disregarded.

On the contrary, I pointed out that the UW-Madison students no longer can easily study a rock with (from what I understand is) geological significance. The U-Michigan students who lost out on learning from Bright Sheng were harmed in a more significant way, and so forth. You have known about these examples for months, and yet you said nothing.