Cont: Cancel culture IRL Part 2

[Stout]

Fabulous. I look forward to any non-ridiculous examples you can provide so that your point of view can be taken seriously for a change.

Don't be sad that you needed the post explained to you. Turn that from upside down and consider yourself just that much closer to understanding that the words "cancel culture" are the current description for something that's existed since the dawn of time and probably will exist forevermore.

 

[johnny karate]

At least other posters actually had a go at the values of academic freedom instead of pretending not to notice them as you do here.

I'm a little confused about whose academic freedom we're discussing.

If it's the adjunct professor who didn't have their contract renewed... well, I hate to break to to you, but I'm on record referring to it as censorious anti-intellectualism. Perhaps I didn't call it out as vehemently as you'd like, but I've certainly shown more concern about this one teacher losing their job than you have for all the teachers under threat of losing their jobs in Florida, which isn't "cancel culture" because reasons.

If we're talking about the university president whose job seems to be on the line, academic freedom to do what exactly? Continue to repress the academic freedom of others?

 

[wareyin]

Don't be sad that you needed the post explained to you. Turn that from upside down and consider yourself just that much closer to understanding that the words "cancel culture" ghosts are the current description for something that's existed since the dawn of time and probably will exist forevermore.

Whadya know, believers claim the thing they believe in has existed since the dawn of time and all unbelievers will join them in believing (despite absolutely **** all evidence that can convince someone who didn't already believe)

 

[Stout]

Whadya know, believers claim the thing they believe in has existed since the dawn of time and all unbelievers will join them in believing (despite absolutely **** all evidence that can convince someone who didn't already believe)

I know, it can be disconcerting to see all these examples of woke overreach which conjure up unpleasant images of wokesters parading in their chairman Mao jackets with their little red books held high. We're in luck though, unlike ghosts there's plenty of evidence cancel culture actually exists.

Speaking of cancel culture, and Jordan Peterson, their was an attempted (and failed) cancellation of his latest buy my book event in Ottawa last night. Freedom of expression 1, cancel culture 0

Link

But despite a number of attempts to convince organizers and the venue to cancel the show, the anticipated crowds protesting Peterson’s talk were nowhere to be seen.

 

[johnny karate]

Jordan Peterson hasn't been "cancelled".

This proves that "cancel culture" exists and is a problem.

Flawless logic.

 

[wareyin]

I know, it can be disconcerting to see all these examples of woke overreach which conjure up unpleasant images of wokesters parading in their chairman Mao jackets with their little red books held high. We're in luck though, unlike ghosts there's plenty of evidence cancel culture actually exists.

Sure, Stout, just like the ghost believers you take evidence which doesn't actually prove your claim and almost always has a better explanation which doesn't include your particular hobbyhorse, and you crow that you have "all these examples" while ignoring the pesky fact that your "examples" melt away when examined.

FFS, "cancel culture" as used by you guys doesn't require a cancellation, and doesn't require a "culture" or group demanding a cancellation. You've literally used marketing campaigns trolling people like you who believe in "cancel culture" as proof that cancel culture exists.

 

[d4m10n]

If we're talking about the university president whose job seems to be on the line, academic freedom to do what exactly?

To do her job, part of which is striking a balance between the stated goals listed at #2751, which include "academic freedom" and "free expression for everyone," while being "respectful of others" in the process. I'm not saying she got it right; seems to me she leaned hard on the latter desideratum at the expense of the former ones. This is an easy mistake to make, as we saw at #2754 where smartcooky commits the same error, assuming that any depiction of Mohammed is necessarily disrespectful of any and all Muslims.

...all the teachers under threat of losing their jobs in Florida, which isn't "cancel culture" because reasons.

Who is making this claim and what reasons did they give?

 

[Stout]

I'm not seeing a lot of support for this whole that in order of be considered cancel culture, the attempted cancellation needs to be successful. I've looked high and low all through the internet, and this seems to be the only place that anybody is trying to float that weirdo idea.

Now maybe some of you noticed the headline on the article I linked to above.

Jordan Peterson event in Ottawa that coalition tried to ban goes off without trouble

Coalition, culture, same same.

 

[wareyin]

I'm not seeing a lot of support for this whole that in order of be considered cancel culture, the attempted cancellation needs to be successful. I've looked high and low all through the internet, and this seems to be the only place that anybody is trying to float that weirdo idea.

Now maybe some of you noticed the headline on the article I linked to above.

Jordan Peterson event in Ottawa that coalition tried to ban goes off without trouble

Coalition, culture, same same.

Dude, you're using "examples" which don't even involve attempted cancellations. But, yeah, if a couple of employees think their boss overstepped her bounds and should be fired, to the true believers that's a mob attempting a cancellation.

 

[Stout]

Dude, you're using "examples" which don't even involve attempted cancellations. But, yeah, if a couple of employees think their boss overstepped her bounds and should be fired, to the true believers that's a mob attempting a cancellation.

Then you need to take that up with whoever brought up the issue ITT. Me? well I gave up saying "that's not cancel culture" in face of an overwhelming onslaught of stories about potato head, Seuss, book banning etc. This led to the off topic issue being raised at Bohemian Grove with the resulting executive decision to relax the definition of cancel culture so more people could have their say.

 

[johnny karate]

To do her job, part of which is striking a balance between the stated goals listed at #2751, which include "academic freedom" and "free expression for everyone," while being "respectful of others" in the process. I'm not saying she got it right; seems to me she leaned hard on the latter desideratum at the expense of the former ones. This is an easy mistake to make, as we saw at #2754 where smartcooky commits the same error, assuming that any depiction of Mohammed is necessarily disrespectful of any and all Muslims.

And yet she failed at her job. In a spectacular fashion that has garnered the university she works for a lot of negative press and might cost them their accreditation. Most people consider such failures to be worthy of dismissal.

This consequence-free utopia you imagine seems to only reward the incompetent and the malicious.

And I'm still not seeing what any of this has to do with "academic freedom".

Who is making this claim and what reasons did they give?

Here you go.

And the fact that the same people who comb through Reddit and Twitter looking for any random example they can contort into "cancel culture" completely disregarded this large-scale assault on academic freedom speaks volumes.

 

[wareyin]

Then you need to take that up with whoever brought up the issue ITT. Me? well I gave up saying "that's not cancel culture" in face of an overwhelming onslaught of stories about potato head, Seuss, book banning etc. This led to the off topic issue being raised at Bohemian Grove with the resulting executive decision to relax the definition of cancel culture so more people could have their say.

I am taking it up with you. Which part of "you" was confusing you? You specifically brought up A&W trolling people like yourself as an example of "cancel culture". There was no cancellation, no attempted cancellation, no mob, nothing, but you still thought it proved that your boogieman is real.

 

[Stout]

I am taking it up with you. Which part of "you" was confusing you? You specifically brought up A&W trolling people like yourself as an example of "cancel culture". There was no cancellation, no attempted cancellation, no mob, nothing, but you still thought it proved that your boogieman is real.

That was well after the executive decision and done as a favor to all the sad woke faces facing criticism for being too authoritarian. It was an opportunity to laugh at conservative Fox news who read a tweet from an official source and thought it was true...twice.

A&W has thanked me for repeatedly suggesting they put the great root bear in drag and their lawyers have kindly asked me to stop harassing them.

 

[smartcooky]

To do her job, part of which is striking a balance between the stated goals listed at #2751, which include "academic freedom" and "free expression for everyone," while being "respectful of others" in the process. I'm not saying she got it right; seems to me she leaned hard on the latter desideratum at the expense of the former ones. This is an easy mistake to make, as we saw at #2754 where smartcooky commits the same error, assuming that any depiction of Mohammed is necessarily disrespectful of any and all Muslims.

Regardless of your bovine faeces opinions on the subject, it is a fact that visual representation of Allah and prophets, such as Mohammad is 'haram' (forbidden/proscribed) in Islamic law and tradition. Perhaps you have never heard of Lars Vilks, or Jyllands-Posten, or Charlie Hebdo, or Samuel Paty.

The fact that many (even if not all) Muslims are offended by this should have been taken into account by Lopez-Prater because she most certains had to have known this to be the case. She should have had all the students sign disclaimers, temporarily dismissing from the class anyone who refused to sign. This is called CYA!

 

[d4m10n]

And yet she failed at her job. In a spectacular fashion that has garnered the university she works for a lot of negative press and might cost them their accreditation. Most people consider such failures to be worthy of dismissal.

The university was going to get negative press either way once people started calling for the cancellation of the adjunct professor for presenting "haram" material to her class. We have no way of knowing in advance which angry mob is going to cry out the loudest once their ox is gored, but we do know that some people (such as smartcooky) will blame the working level lecturers for failing to protect their students from ideas which may offend them.

Regardless of your bovine faeces opinions on the subject, it is a fact that visual representation of Allah and prophets, such as Mohammad is 'haram' (forbidden/proscribed) in Islamic law and tradition.

I bet they serve pork in the cafeteria as well.

 

[smartcooky]

The university was going to get negative press either way once people started calling for the cancellation of the adjunct professor for presenting "haram" material to her class. We have no way of knowing in advance which angry mob is going to cry out the loudest once their ox is gored, but we do know that some people (such as smartcooky) will blame the working level lecturers and academics who ought to know better for failing to protect their students from ideas which may offend them.

FTFY

I bet they serve pork in the cafeteria as well.

Relevance?

 

[d4m10n]

Relevance?

I've heard it, too, is haram.

Hopefully they have all the students sign disclaimers prior to being exposed to the various sights and smells.

That's called CYA!

 

[smartcooky]

I've heard it, too, is haram.

Hopefully they have all the students sign disclaimers prior to being exposed to the various sights and smells.

That's called CYA!

Or they simply avoid eating pork. Its that simple.

PS: I had hoped you might understand that haram is a "knowing" transgression... but you clearly didn't so let me educate you about that..

"...there is no sin on you concerning that in which you made a mistake, except in regard to what your hearts deliberately intend. And Allah is Ever Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” [al-Ahzab 33:5]


In other words, there is no sin on consumption of pork or a pork product unintentionally.

I wish you would take the time to actually learn about the stuff you try pontificate on so that you don't keep embarrassing yourself, and those of us who DO take the time to learn are not having to keep correcting you!

 

[johnny karate]

The university was going to get negative press either way once people started calling for the cancellation of the adjunct professor for presenting "haram" material to her class. We have no way of knowing in advance which angry mob is going to cry out the loudest once their ox is gored, but we do know that some people (such as smartcooky) will blame the working level lecturers for failing to protect their students from ideas which may offend them.

The consensus has been overwhelming in favor of the adjunct professor and critical of the university, thus the negative press. What rational basis do you have for claiming that had the professor not been penalized the press would be equally negative?

Also, you still haven't addressed the question of how specifically academic freedom is at stake if the university president loses their job.

 

[d4m10n]

In other words, there is no sin on consumption of pork or a pork product unintentionally.

Is there anything sinful about being exposed to a depiction of Mohammad unintentionally?

Also, is there some good reason to think secular universities ought to be in the business of preventing sin?