Advertisement
by Gormwood » Sun Jul 12, 2020 7:17 am
by Galloism » Sun Jul 12, 2020 7:23 am
Gormwood wrote:Apparently boycotting someone who offends your very being is cancel culture. "No, you can't return The Complete Harry Potter, you tranny freak."
by Picairn » Sun Jul 12, 2020 7:30 am
Gormwood wrote:Apparently boycotting someone who offends your very being is cancel culture. "No, you can't return The Complete Harry Potter, you tranny freak."
by Galloism » Sun Jul 12, 2020 7:34 am
Picairn wrote:Gormwood wrote:Apparently boycotting someone who offends your very being is cancel culture. "No, you can't return The Complete Harry Potter, you tranny freak."
"It is sophistry to try to redefine your opponent's arguments. It might feel good...
But so can jerking off in a subway." - Vivian James.
Edit: I think I just found another great quote for my signature!
by Arkhane » Sun Jul 12, 2020 7:34 am
by Diarcesia » Sun Jul 12, 2020 7:37 am
Vassenor wrote:Diarcesia wrote:That it didn't happen to him doesn't mean cancelling that caused people to be indefinitely unemployable doesn't exist.
The criticism is about the latter, because it leads to the question of "Are all bigots absolutely, unambiguously unredeemable?". That implies malicious intent on each and every one of them.
So we shouldn't criticise people who actively spread views known to be harmful (such as the ROGD myth in this case) because it might ruin their future?
by Picairn » Sun Jul 12, 2020 7:45 am
Galloism wrote:I am stealing this quote.
by Ifreann » Sun Jul 12, 2020 8:21 am
Diarcesia wrote:Vassenor wrote:
So we shouldn't criticise people who actively spread views known to be harmful (such as the ROGD myth in this case) because it might ruin their future?
We're talking about different things here. Telling them to stop spreading harmful views and doing more if they double down is good. Doing that plus telling them to kill themselves is not.
To give an analogy, would you deny an ex-convict employment simply because they were imprisoned? What if they're actually innocent and was falsely accused? Even if they actually did it, but they repented, is there really a way for them to make amends? Or is it once undesirable, always undesirable?
by Diarcesia » Sun Jul 12, 2020 8:24 am
Ifreann wrote:Diarcesia wrote:We're talking about different things here. Telling them to stop spreading harmful views and doing more if they double down is good. Doing that plus telling them to kill themselves is not.
To give an analogy, would you deny an ex-convict employment simply because they were imprisoned? What if they're actually innocent and was falsely accused? Even if they actually did it, but they repented, is there really a way for them to make amends? Or is it once undesirable, always undesirable?
How many of the signatories of this letter have spoken out against the discrimination in employment against the formerly imprisoned?
by Ifreann » Sun Jul 12, 2020 8:54 am
Diarcesia wrote:Ifreann wrote:How many of the signatories of this letter have spoken out against the discrimination in employment against the formerly imprisoned?
None, because I'm giving an analogy for the worst effects of cancellation. And I'm aware that while it exists, it's not representative of the entire thing.
by Diarcesia » Sun Jul 12, 2020 9:04 am
Ifreann wrote:Diarcesia wrote:None, because I'm giving an analogy for the worst effects of cancellation. And I'm aware that while it exists, it's not representative of the entire thing.
So their concern with the plight of those who struggle to find gainful employment starts and ends with racists, homophobes, and other bigots. Hmm.
by Proctopeo » Sun Jul 12, 2020 9:35 am
Ifreann wrote:Diarcesia wrote:None, because I'm giving an analogy for the worst effects of cancellation. And I'm aware that while it exists, it's not representative of the entire thing.
So their concern with the plight of those who struggle to find gainful employment starts and ends with racists, homophobes, and other bigots. Hmm.
by Galloism » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:04 am
Diarcesia wrote:Ifreann wrote:How many of the signatories of this letter have spoken out against the discrimination in employment against the formerly imprisoned?
None, because I'm giving an analogy for the worst effects of cancellation. And I'm aware that while it exists, it's not representative of the entire thing.
by Ifreann » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:05 am
by Galloism » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:08 am
Ifreann wrote:Diarcesia wrote:Is the criticism valid?
Is the concern for people left destitute because they can't get a job legitimate? Or is it just a cover for trying to protect bigots, who are themselves driving people out of the workforce by their bigotry and subjecting those people to the same destitution?
See, I do care about people who are destitute because they can't get a job, whether that is because they have a criminal record or because they are a member of a marginalised community or because they are just a raging shithead and no one wants to work with them. And thus I want to decouple people's access to housing and healthcare and all of that from whether or not they have a job. I do not want raging shitheads to keep their jobs, because they will make their workplace a worse place by being a raging shithead. I do want members of marginalised communities to keep their jobs, because they are not making their workplace worse by being Black, or trans, etc. You see how this works? People suffering when they lose their job isn't a good argument for protecting bigots, it's a good argument for making it so that people don't suffer when they lose their job.
by Stellar Colonies » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:15 am
Floofybit wrote:Your desired society should be one where you are submissive and controlled
Primitive Communism wrote:What bodily autonomy do men need?
Techocracy101010 wrote:If she goes on a rampage those saggy wonders are as deadly as nunchucks
Parmistan wrote:It's not ALWAYS acceptable when we do it, but it's MORE acceptable when we do it.
Theodorable wrote:Jihad will win.
Distruzio wrote:All marriage outside the Church is gay marriage.
Khardsland wrote:Terrorism in its original definition is a good thing.
I try to be objective, but I do have some biases.
North Californian.
Stellar Colonies is a loose galactic confederacy.
The Confederacy & the WA.
Add 1200 years.
by The Reformed American Republic » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:19 am
by Gormwood » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:22 am
by The Reformed American Republic » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:22 am
by Radfems Inc » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:23 am
Ifreann wrote:People suffering when they lose their job isn't a good argument for protecting bigots, it's a good argument for making it so that people don't suffer when they lose their job.
by Kowani » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:27 am
Radfems Inc wrote:Ifreann wrote:People suffering when they lose their job isn't a good argument for protecting bigots, it's a good argument for making it so that people don't suffer when they lose their job.
So wait a minute, we should hold racists accountable by... giving them a permanent paid vacation?
by Radfems Inc » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:28 am
Kowani wrote:Radfems Inc wrote:So wait a minute, we should hold racists accountable by... giving them a permanent paid vacation?
Yes. Welfare is heavily stigmatized in the US, and we don’t want them making workplaces inhospitable, and we don’t want some small business owner getting screwed out of customers because one of their employees hated Mexicans.
At the same time, however, racists have families, and unemployment tends to lead to very bad things, so we don’t want them to be reduced to complete and utter poverty.
by The Reformed American Republic » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:30 am
Rostavykhan wrote:Organized States wrote:Imagine being fundamentally opposed to the idea of being called out for saying racist or hateful shit and having consequences for those actions.
Freedom of Speech does not equal Freedom from Consequences.
Imagine being a Leftist or Liberal who attacks the work opportunities of others by weaponizing mobs and pressuring their bourgeois corporate employers to give them the boot, all because they have an unpopular opinion that you find slightly distasteful.
Just because it's not being supported by a guy named MacArthy doesn't make it any less witch-hunty and shady.
by Ifreann » Sun Jul 12, 2020 10:32 am
Radfems Inc wrote:Ifreann wrote:People suffering when they lose their job isn't a good argument for protecting bigots, it's a good argument for making it so that people don't suffer when they lose their job.
So wait a minute, we should hold racists accountable by... giving them a permanent paid vacation?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Atrito, Czechostan, Diplomatinis, Google [Bot], Ifreann, Merriwhether, Post War America, Simonia, Sublime Ottoman State 1800 RP
Advertisement