• 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.

Cont: Cancel culture IRL Part 2

Emily's Cat said:
I don't think it's "cancel culture" exactly, but I do think it's pretty idiotic virtue signaling that is cancel-culture-ish in effect.

Actually, I think it's worse than cancel culture. At least with Cancel Culture, it's generally enacting social punishments on a person for something that person actually did... even if the reasoning is wafer thin and stupid.

This isn't even that. This is punishing people for something that SOMEONE ELSE did, that the individuals being punished can't possibly impact in any way whatsoever. They're being punished for simply being the same nationality as Putin. FFS, they're punishing a DEAD GUY for the sin of being Russian! It's so dumb and pandering I run out of words for it.
Click to expand...

So you are obviously against the economic sanctions being imposed on Russia, correct?
 
Emily's Cat said:
Mostly because it's stupid and idiotic. It's absurd virtue signaling and anticipating that people will be up in arms because "OMG IT'S RUSSIAN THEREFORE EVIL". It's the kind of stupidity I would expect everyone here on ISF to note as being dumb and irrational and something we as humans should try to avoid. I'm a bit floored by the number of people who are arguing that this is a perfectly fine reaction and no big deal.
Click to expand...

I'm not aware that anyone is arguing that this is perfectly fine, but it certainly isn't a big deal.

I had not heard of that until now. That is also exceedingly dumb and stupid and I don't have enough words for the inanity of firing someone over reading a book that includes the word "butt"... because someone *might* complain, even though nobody *has* complained.

Kids think butts and farts are funny. Hell, adults think butts and farts are funny. Because butts and farts are funny. FFS, everyone has lost their goddamned minds.
Click to expand...

I hate to break it to you, but everyone's minds were lost a while ago. None of this is new. And most of it is the cost of living in a free society.

The only difference now is that historically powerless people have some of the power, and suddenly it's a big problem when they wield it in ways that the traditionally powerful don't like.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Nah. I tire of your constant need to cast principles as "right wing" and turn everything into partisan bickering.

When people get mad about stupid ******* things, and then punish people because they're mad about stupid ******* things, I have a problem with it. I don't care what their political preference is, I care that the world is being run by people who are both dumb AND authoritarian.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that the orchestras being discussed don't run the world... or anything outside of their orchestras.
 
johnny karate said:
The only difference now is that historically powerless people have some of the power, and suddenly it's a big problem when they wield it in ways that the traditionally powerful don't like.
Click to expand...

How many times do we have to ask this question before we get an answer?

What NEW is happening that hasn't happened since the very concept of a society first appeared?

"OMG people don't support things they don't like!" is not a problem simply because you're on the wrong end of it after thousands of years.

Again, and I have given up all hope for an answer, what is SUPPOSED to happen? I should just support things I find offensive, follow people who openly insult me on twitter, all so YOU don't feel any effects of anything?
 
Emily's Cat said:
How about the principle of the consequences should be reasonable with respect to the magnitude of the offense? Is that such a crazy principle to hold? Like, you know, not punishing a teacher for using a foreign word that sounds like an bad word in English... even though the teacher was pretty clear that it was a foreign word?
Click to expand...

Who decides?

Again, this is you. Well and several other people too. Posters who cannot seem to distinguish between something that liberal posters view as a principle, which also is something that some conservatives view as a principle... and a view that TURNS SOMEONE INTO a conservative.
Click to expand...

What's the principle you're defending?

Holy cow. I'm opposed to murder. Guess what? Most conservatives are also opposed to murder. By the logic expressed in this thread (and many others) that means that anyone who is opposed to murder is an evil stinking deplorable conservative!
Click to expand...

After the behavior exhibited by conservatives these last two years during the pandemic, I think it's a bit of a stretch to say they're opposed to murder...

FFS, this is so beyond any kind of basic reasoning that I despair for the future of our species.
Click to expand...

Luckily, we have the calm and collected rational minds of people absolutely losing their **** over what songs an orchestra decides to play to guide us all through these difficult times.
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
When people get mad about stupid ******* things, and then punish people because they're mad about stupid ******* things, I have a problem with it. I don't care what their political preference is, I care that the world is being run by people who are both dumb AND authoritarian.
Click to expand...

Pure virtue signaling, proves the point (like with cancel culture): It's only a bad thing when someone else does it.
 
One more for who's really being punished? Wouldn't musicians be compensated with such short notice? This seems like anticipation of lots of people not really feeling like enjoying Russian stuff for a (hopefully) little while.
 
Emily's Cat said:
This is cancel culture because... Tchaikovsky has been dead for over a hundred years, and has nothing at all to do with the current conflict other than the coincidence of his birthplace.

FFS, it's as stupid as cancelling algebra because of a conflict in the middle east. It's absurd virtue signaling. Next step: Cancelling Handel and Beethoven because of nazis...
Click to expand...

Correct.

I’m surprised that Picasso (or Hemingway, or Caravaggio, you name them) haven’t been cancelled because they were unpleasant people (yet quite unremarkable by the standards of their time).

I think boycotts of dead people are ridiculous. Tchaikovsky, like the others, was a genius, that’s all that matters to me, not his nationality.
 
lionking said:
Correct.

I’m surprised that Picasso (or Hemingway, or Caravaggio, you name them) haven’t been cancelled because they were unpleasant people (yet quite unremarkable by the standards of their time).

I think boycotts of dead people are ridiculous. Tchaikovsky, like the others, was a genius, that’s all that matters to me, not his nationality.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you or Emily's Cat could identify the boycott that you both seem to think is cancel culture and really is happening.
 
tyr_13 said:
Perhaps you or Emily's Cat could identify the boycott that you both seem to think is cancel culture and really is happening.
Click to expand...

I know you read this thread so you know exactly what I’m referring to. You don’t think it’s an example of cancellation. I do. Deal with it.
 
lionking said:
I know you read this thread so you know exactly what I’m referring to. You don’t think it’s an example of cancellation. I do. Deal with it.
Click to expand...

I am dealing with it by pointing out it doesn't count as either cancel culture or a boycott by anyone's definition or use until this 'example'.

These people deciding not to perform this piece at this time apparently on their own isn't anyone being canceled or boycotted. So you 'deal with it' or like most so concerned with 'cancel culture' keep coming up with absurd examples that don't actually work with what people are claiming the problem is.
 
lionking said:
Correct.

I’m surprised that Picasso (or Hemingway, or Caravaggio, you name them) haven’t been cancelled because they were unpleasant people (yet quite unremarkable by the standards of their time).

I think boycotts of dead people are ridiculous. Tchaikovsky, like the others, was a genius, that’s all that matters to me, not his nationality.
Click to expand...

Who is boycotting Tchaikovsky? :confused:
 
tyr_13 said:
I am dealing with it by pointing out it doesn't count as either cancel culture or a boycott by anyone's definition or use until this 'example'.

These people deciding not to perform this piece at this time apparently on their own isn't anyone being canceled or boycotted. So you 'deal with it' or like most so concerned with 'cancel culture' keep coming up with absurd examples that don't actually work with what people are claiming the problem is.
Click to expand...

And it would seem quite often have it arse about tit with the examples that are given.
 
tyr_13 said:
I am dealing with it by pointing out it doesn't count as either cancel culture or a boycott by anyone's definition or use until this 'example'.

These people deciding not to perform this piece at this time apparently on their own isn't anyone being canceled or boycotted. So you 'deal with it' or like most so concerned with 'cancel culture' keep coming up with absurd examples that don't actually work with what people are claiming the problem is.
Click to expand...

I do not agree. A concert was planned. Part of it was cancelled.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I don't think it's "cancel culture" exactly, but I do think it's pretty idiotic virtue signaling that is cancel-culture-ish in effect.

Actually, I think it's worse than cancel culture. At least with Cancel Culture, it's generally enacting social punishments on a person for something that person actually did... even if the reasoning is wafer thin and stupid.

This isn't even that. This is punishing people for something that SOMEONE ELSE did, that the individuals being punished can't possibly impact in any way whatsoever. They're being punished for simply being the same nationality as Putin. FFS, they're punishing a DEAD GUY for the sin of being Russian! It's so dumb and pandering I run out of words for it.
Click to expand...

Wow, at this point you're just rambling (and virtue signalling)
 
lionking said:
Stupid question already answered.

Would you support the cancelling of a Picasso exhibition?
Click to expand...

I would support a museum having the freedom to choose which artworks they exhibit and which they don’t.

I may not alway like their choices, but I’m sure that would be something I could get over almost immediately.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom