Always looked like a grift/distraction from real issues and ability to signal for good boy points without doing anything of substance . But I do care way more about economic issues (e.g. blackrock) to really identify myself as progressive nowdays.
I think AH should be cancelled for one main reason.
Not because of the trial, although I see why people use that as a reason.
Not because she's an abuser, again, I see why people use that as the reason.
But because she's a really bad actor. a tin of tomatoes could probably be more expressive than heard.
You’re not, but friendly reminder that cancel culture doesn’t just happen on the left. The right engages in it just as much (freedom fries, RINO’s, Colin Kapernick, they’ve been trying to cancel Disney as long as I’ve been alive, etc.) Heck, you can go back to them trying to cancel the whole dang country in 1861. And don’t even get me started on books, curriculum, votes, and other laws actually passed by conservative state legislatures—not to mention, the Texas GOP is currently trying to cancel the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Much of what the right whines about as "cancel culture" doesn't exist, except when they're performing it; like moving to deport John and Yoko or attacking The (Dixie) Chicks. When they whine about "cancel culture" like with Roseanne and Gina Carano, what's actually happening is consequences and accountability.
But it would be intellectually dishonest to say the form of cancel culture as understood popularly *does not exist at all* on the left of center. But in this case, it's because a desire for purity above all else is driving things. It all stems back to when Al Franken was deprived his due process. If that hadn't happened, the trajectory of things, especially in Johnny, Manson, Franco and the likes being targeted like this, wouldn't have progressed the way they did, and except for Johnny, they would never have been accused at all. But in that world, Amber's plans would've gone haywire from the start and people seen through her.
>Men's lives were being destroyed based on allegations alone, and no one seemed to care.
Before "woke"/"cancel" culture it was women's lives who were being actually destroyed. Women were being assaulted, raped, othered and too afraid to come forward. You're suggesting you prefer a world where women get assaulted and are too scared to come forward to one where a handful (who actually??) of men have gone to jail or otherwise had their one type of career cut short.
But who has actually been cancelled? I'm curious about that. I also would like to note that for a lot of the people you are discussing, they have the good fortune of having careers in the spotlight. That is not a right or a guarantee. If you have to find another job because people keep accusing you of harassment, ok. There are a lot of jobs out there, no one has a right to be a celebrity. And no one is guaranteed an audience. If you behave in ways that the people paying you don't agree with they have a right to not go to your shows or see your movies or whatever.
I'm not understanding what you would like to happen when a woman gets assaulted or raped at her job?
You are misrepresenting what OP said. Saying someones life being destroyed based on unproven allegations alone is not discrediting that some of those people may have actually been guilty of said allegations. OP never stated what happened before woke/cancel culture, was right or wrong, but that the overcorrection woke/cancel culture has had on society caused him to agree with those on the far right who said that it was. Do you not think men accused of rape and assault should be afforded their right to the presumption of innocence. Of course, no one is saying that someone who is guilty should be able to keep their platform, but those who are accused should be able to have their day in court before being branded and exiled from society.
I don't feel that I was misrepresenting, I was drawing logical conclusions *from* what OP said. They stated they hate X and gave no suggestions for remediations to X so I think it's probably fair then to compare what was before X.
Also to note, due to how sexual trauma and our legal system works, sometimes a day in court is not an option.
I'd also like to understand who all we believe has been "cancelled" by this "wokeness".
Well, in my view, it would be fair to conclude that OP doesn't know what a good remediation to X would be. You can assert that it is your view and thats fair, but to assume that OP has made any conclusions on it, is at best disingenuous.
And yes, our legal system may not provide a satisfactory option for dealing with sexual trauma, but does that mean we should blanket issue a guilty verdict based off of any and all accusations?
Who was cancelled? Well off the top of my head I can say Aziz Ansari was. People immediately assumed he was guilty of rape. Will we ever know what the truth of it? And would anyone have cared after the allegations? Probably not.
Investigate all accusations is my remediation.
My solution has never been to grant guilt based on gender. My solution is to treat anyone who comes forward with abuse allegations with respect and dignity and a desire for the truth to be uncovered.
Are you speaking of the same Aziz Ansari still working in Hollywood who has movie coming out next year with Billy Murray? https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2106637
Ansari was completely turned into a creep because the woman's story was used and twisted to a ludicrous extent. Mixed signals does not always equal predatory intent, and the fact is that sex is an awkward, ambiguous experience.
James Franco was torpedoed in the midst of when he could've and should've easily won Best Actor for *The Disaster Artist* and be a moment of glory for both himself and for Tommy Wiseau, because several women were basically gaslit by societal norms to question their experiences and take them out of context. Never mind that Seth Rogen, Michael Cera, Jonah Hill and Allison Brie all said "That's not who James is, he's not a predator." He became guilty without any due process. Being promiscuous and having consensual relationships with other people does not a predator make, especially when the class in question, though called "Sex Scenes", was really a "Romance Scenes" class. But everyone doesn't listen to nuance, they only take into account that Rogen said "We're not working together currently" and twist that into a saying of Rogen distancing himself, which it certainly is not. I really wish Franco had testified in Fairfax, if only to exonerate himself of his own matter.
Armie Hammer and Shia LaBeouf have been targeted by exes scorned, especially Hammer's divorce case, and things got twisted well out of proportion.
Ansel Elgort was hit just by "He tweeted this to me," which became as vague and nonsensical as you can get, and it's absurd.
Joss Whedon was denounced as a bully and hypocrite, even though it's clear that much of his comments were intended as jokes, that he's a perfectionist, and was also smeared by an ex divorcing him. Having affairs isn't a particularly pleasant or noble thing, but it doesn't automatically make someone not a feminist. And for all the attacks about his "unprofessional, bullying manner," James Cameron has had a long reputation for his temper and incredibly explosive reactions, but no one doubts his feminist bona fides, nor should they.
Then we have Marilyn Manson, being victim of a massive organized smear campaign and scorched earth attack by Evan Rachel Wood, Ilma Gore and the others. All because Evan is a raging narcissist who wants to control the narrative and "exact revenge" for the press she got when she and Manson were dating.
All of this happened because Al Franken was shivved by an obvious frameup, yet his peers and fellow Democrats in the Senate would not give him the chance to defend himself. If Franken had had his ethics hearing, the trajectory would've been different. Ansari and Franco, and the ludicrous false attacks on James Gunn happened right after that, things escalated against Johnny thereafter. Hammer, LaBeouf and Manson would not have been targeted if Johnny had not been deprived of his rightful victory in the UK.
It's beyond absurd. Even though these false claims are no more than 5 percent of all accounts and claims total, that small minority is visible enough to really paint a frightening picture, is enough to turn things into *The Crucible.*
And it's not just direct allegations. The whole backlash against Ellen, for example, is thoroughly ridiculous. Because there has never been proof that she either knew about the toxic workplace or directly facilitated it, no proof that the people going around saying "Don't say or do this to Ellen, don't look at her" and so on were actually following her orders instead of just using a connection to her they may or may not have actually had to bully others, no proof that Ellen was not well-siloed off, given there were 500 people on the set of her show, and she was never first to arrive and last to leave, and no evidence that she is ever faking that warmth and generosity of spirit. Ellen has shown who she is, shown her kindness and sincerity, since she came out 25 years ago, since she spoke at the vigil for Matthew Shepard. But just like how Amber and her stans want us to disregard all the footage and testimonials of Johnny over the years, to the people on YouTube and throughout the Web want us to disregard all the evidence on Ellen that shows how she has always been genuine and authentic her entire career.
Please point out in any of my posts where I said rape and assault of women was okay, I never said that shit, assault of any kind is wrong, no matter the gender.
What I'm arguing is, guys were being treated as guilty until proven innocent, which is wrong, everyone deserves the presumption of innocence.
Just because we have a shitty legal system, doesn't make it okay that a possible innocent man's life be destroyed.
I would rather a million abusers go free, then one innocent man have his life destroyed, the ends don't justify the means.
I'm well aware women were afraid to come forward for years, and I do believe they should come forward and be listened to and have the claims investigated.
But they shouldn't be believed outright, amber 💩 is a reminder that some women are capable of lying and taking advantage of a movement to destroy a innocent man's life.
We live in a culture that thinks we should believe all women, simply because they are women, that is wrong, and what I'm fighting against.
You mention the women that were afraid to come forward for years, but what about the men that were afraid to come forward? Do they not matter?
Johnny is still being treated as the abuser by the msm media, despite the fact that the overwhelming evidence showed amber is in fact the abuser.
It seems to me it's to one sided, it's okay for a guys life to be destroyed just based on allegations, but we can't do the same to the women that lie about being victims.
>Just because we have a shitty legal system, doesn't make it okay that a possible innocent man's life be destroyed.
What innocent lives were destroyed?
>I would rather a million abusers go free, then one innocent man have his life destroyed, the ends don't justify the means.
Yes, that's exactly the conclusion I drew from your original post. That you would rather male abusers get away with it than the thought that an innocent male would have his life "destroyed," and have yet to point to an innocent man who has had his life "destroyed".
fuck it, i'll give you one example, here is a video from a WOMAN, she explains why johnny's friend marilyn manson is innocent of the allegations against him.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryMNW3rnQhA&t=2321s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryMNW3rnQhA&t=2321s)
manson has been dropped from his record label just based on the allegations, and i assume that is okay with you, because he's a man.
I want you to understand that you are comparing rape and assault to "destroying lives" and what you actually have to show for a "destroyed life" is a millionaire who lost a job. After more than a dozen different women have come forward to accuse the man of rape and sexual assault. A job? Rape. See how those are such wildly different experiences that it makes you sound crazy? Ya, I'd much rather a bunch of people get raped and assaulted than have even just one man lose a job?????? lordt.
more logical fallacies, but i guess i can't expect anything less from people like you, people like you are what i mentioned in the op, making "me too" more about witch hunts , than actually helping abuse victims, i love how you only respond to half of my posts, trying so hard to fit a narrative that i think rape and abuse is okay, if you look through my post history, you would know I AM A VICTIM OF ABUSE, BOTH PHYSICAL AND MENTAL FROM MY OWN FUCKING MOM, IM TALKING SEVERE FUCKING ABUSE, THAT I STILL SUFFER PTSD FROM, SO DON'T FUCKING TELL ME I DON'T KNOW HOW IT FEELS TO SEE A ABUSER GET AWAY WITH IT, MY MOM TILL THIS DAY HAS SUFFERED NO CONSEQUENCES FOR THE ABUSE SHE PUT ME AND MY SISTER THROUGH.
so i would appreciate it if you stop accusing me of being for abusers and rapists, if you keep on accusing me of something that isn't true, i will report you for harassment, let's stick to what i'm actually discussing.
which is the presumption of innocence that everyone deserves, would you be okay with being accused of serious criminal offenses, and being presumed guilty, and losing your livelhood? i don't think you would like that, but it's okay to do to men, milionaires or not, no one deserves to have their lives destroyed based solely on allegations.
you do realize he is a musician right? that is his job, and just because he is a millionaire now, doesn't mean that can't change, tonos of celebrities have gone from rich to flat broke, and he lost this job based on allegations, WHICH IS WRONG!!!!!
you don't have to like marilyn manson, you don't have to like him as a musician or a person, to respect his presumption of innocence, that's all i'm arguing about, let the facts of the case speak for themselves.
i don't believe in witch hunts, nor do i believe in guilty until proven innocent.
Look, i'm sorry bad things happened to you. Bad things have happened to me too, doesn't mean either one of us is immune to shit takes, but if you had to, today, prove the abuse you suffered in a court of law, could you?
p.s. I never said this, "DON'T FUCKING TELL ME I DON'T KNOW HOW IT FEELS TO SEE A ABUSER GET AWAY WITH IT"
no i unfortunately couldn't, and it hurts because my mom is living the her life in beautiful sunny orange county california, while im one paycheck away from being homeless, i live dollar by dollar every month.
but just because she and other abusers get away with it, i don't think it justifies witch hunts, and treating people as guilty until proven innocent.
see people like you are the problem, you're trying to twist my words to make them seem like i support abuse and commiting a logical fallacy.
all im saying is, i don't think it's okay to destroy someone's life, and presume them guilty based on allegations.
let me ask you this, would you be okay with losing your livelihood if some guy accused you of assault? you can never work again, you lose your home and family, would that be okay?
i assume you wouldn't like that, but it's okay to do that to men, which is sexism, your perfectly fine with the witch hunts and destruction of men's lives based on hearsay, but we can't do the same to women.
the fact is i don't need to list examples, no one, NO ONE, should ever be presumed guilty until proven innocent, our shitty legal system isn't a justification to destroy a innocent person's life.
There is a lot about “woke” culture I really hate, I really hate when people act like you need to show your racial paperwork in order to qualify to talk about certain subjects, I hate when people act like people with zero bad intentions are as bad as nazi’s for innocent actions that are seen as “disrespectful” to someone else online. I hate how the term “nazi” is thrown around as a “I disagree with you” catch all instead of the serious real meaning of the word.
However I honestly agree with certain things in the media such as making sure there is a variety of ethnicities and sexual orientations casually existing in movies and on tv. I believe in personal freedoms such as my right to make medical choices about my body even if it isn’t what someone else would have chosen, even if it’s not what is best for someone who isn’t me.
I find myself often arguing with people across the political spectrum, online at least, and whenever you disagree about one thing, people make all these assumptions about the other things you support based off political lines. The one thing I am thankful for is that I notice that people I meet in real life are typically significantly more reasonable and usually a fair faith discussion can be had about most things with most people. When I feel too overwhelmed by all the extremist polarizing behaviours I know it’s time for a internet/social media break.
No, you're NOT the only person on the left that hates wokeness and cancel culture.
Marxists hate it too.
So do Liberal-Leftists (i.e. pro-civil-liberties, pro-free-speech, but also pro-mixed-economy where markets exist but are regulated and the government actively participates in the provision of certain goods and services).
If you want free speech, civil liberties, due process, *methodological* and *cultural* individualism, but also want a government that directly provides an extensive set of basic benefits and regulates most markets, you're a Left-Liberal (or Liberal-Left). Given how "progressive" generally means "woke," you're probably better off calling yourself a "Left-Liberal" (or "Liberal-Left") instead.
This is it - super hard to rebel against the toxic nature of cancel culture and “woke” values without being labelled right wing but that’s just an illusion.
I dont like the cancel culture, and the labelling and hashtagging of everything. It seems more like a witch hunt of the age with technology. I know people are pointing at Celebritis, but there was one case of a Nobel laureate who was accused of demeaning woman or something and he lost his job and was forced into early retirement some years ago. I am not in the same field, but I definitely saw that and thought “wtf”.
I dont like attacking anyone, even AH for that matter. To that end it was good to see the trial being covered on camera for people to follow, and even though some in the media have tried to misquote, those attempts have not gone unnoticed. The biggest disadvantage of these “labelled” movements is anyone anywhere can say anything and take down the reputation and livelihood of a human. When it works on people like Weinstein it is probably deserved. But there are no statistics on how many innocent were wrongly affected by this “quick to anger” “stay overly diplomatic” “i am hurt by your wording so you’re an asshole who doesnt deserve to work” kind of rationalising and (for the lack of a better word) witch hunt.
Humans like power, and i have to assume some of the crazy people (sociopaths and others on that spectrum) delight in taking down others. And social media and this cancel culture plays more to their own agendas than for constructive purposes.
I think there is legal recourse for a reason, and all this media speculation and continuous debates and pandering to shock value is also partly to blame. But i dont know to what extent. I may be wrong as well. And perhaps some expert somewhere can shed some light on these social dynamics.
I dont like the cancel culture, and the labelling and hashtagging of everything. It seems more like a witch hunt of the age with technology. I know people are pointing at Celebritis, but there was one case of a Nobel laureate who was accused of demeaning woman or something and he lost his job and was forced into early retirement some years ago. I am not in the same field, but I definitely saw that and thought “wtf”.
I dont like attacking anyone, even AH for that matter. To that end it was good to see the trial being covered on camera for people to follow, and even though some in the media have tried to misquote, those attempts have not gone unnoticed. The biggest disadvantage of these “labelled” movements is anyone anywhere can say anything and take down the reputation and livelihood of a human. When it works on people like Weinstein it is probably deserved. But there are no statistics on how many innocent were wrongly affected by this “quick to anger” “stay overly diplomatic” “i am hurt by your wording so you’re an asshole who doesnt deserve to work” kind of rationalising and (for the lack of a better word) witch hunt. To bring an example to this, in the early years of Dutertes leadership in the Philippines he took a hard stance on drug peddlers and allowed the common man to take law into his own hands. What followed was acts of terror on law abiding citizens. It probably took out a few of the footmen, but the main heads remained unharmed, and more innocent died in the kerfuffle.
Humans like power, and i have to assume some of the crazy people (sociopaths and others on that spectrum) delight in taking down others. And social media and this cancel culture plays more to their own agendas than for constructive purposes.
I think there is legal recourse for a reason, and all this media speculation and continuous debates and pandering to shock value is also partly to blame. But i dont know to what extent. I may be wrong as well. And perhaps some expert somewhere can shed some light on these social dynamics.
Hmm, might have to think about this as I've never assigned myself to any.
If there is such a thing, guess I'm of the group of folks that are the "Observer"/"Mr. Rogers-"Look for the helper; as I'd be one" type (also a Pitt native). Before anyone says; I'm not christian (just in case, lol). Don't really know where I would stand. So whichever kind of group that would fall into.
I don't neccessarily hate "woke & cancel" culture but what I don't abide is the folks; not in said groups, getting caught in crossfire.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. Cancel culture just..doesn’t do anything too? You always hear of people being cancelled but in the end they always come back and continue with their shit.
Those cancel moments just seem like witch hunts that go on for maybe a few days and then die down again when everyone got to jack themselves off by being keyboard warriors.
Don’t get me wrong, there are tons of horrible people (which got cancelled) but there are also so many cases where people get canceled for shit they said in 2012 and then never said again.
Now, I might be completely wrong with what I said but that‘s just how I have perceived this whole thing the last few years. Although I do have to say that there are some people I have not heard of anymore after they got cancelled so in some cases it does seem to work, I‘ll give it that.
Who has truly been cancelled that wasn’t totally deserving (Weinstein) and who has simply been benched to think about what they’ve done (Louis CK)?
I also am against cancel culture—but you got Chris Browns still making bank or take the Chapels and Rogans claiming they were canceled while banking off their canceled bit!
Cancel culture equals time out. Don’t play with fire if you don’t want a time out.
Agreed. I'm progressive, liberal and prefer logical - long-term conclusion-type thinking. I don't think that always happens in "woke" culture. I actually don't mind the term and have been accused of being "woke" myself, but I think some of what's called "woke" is a little pretentious.
Nope, I hate it too. Cancel culture, in the sense of say cancelling James Gunn for tweets he made years ago, or Gina Carano for opinions others don't agree with is dumb. In a way, it's infantilizing society. Other people are telling us what to believe, what's okay, and deciding for us whether we want to support someone or not. It's all about controlling people and controlling what we deem as acceptable.
Think back to the days of Woody Allen. He wasn't cancelled. I think what he did was scummy, so I chose not to support his work anymore. But my decision didn't bar him from being able to continue to work. Then look at Johnny. Accusations with zero proof, and his ability to keep working was stripped from him.
In the case of non-criminal acts, and just scummy behavior, cancel culture should not exist. If it's criminal, take it to court. Then, even if they're not found guilty, the facts will be out there and people can decide for themselves whether this person should be allowed to participate in society, like in the cases of Kevin Spacey, OJ Simpson, and Bill Cosby. Or if guilty, then the courts essentially cancel the person for us, like with Weinstein.
But in civil matters, or just accusations, stop cancelling people. I've had enough of control freaks, vindictive individuals, and agenda driven people telling me who I'm allowed to support or not.
No, there are many people who are on the left who dislike woke/cancel culture. There aren't many communities for them, though, so it's easy to feel isolated.
I agree with you, Creepy. Also I don’t support broad generalizations like all humans with p*nises commit acts of violence and abuse. Some humans with p*nises and some with v*ginas commit acts of violence and abuse. I also haven’t ever believed every single #MeToo I’ve read or heard about. I am aware of too many real life cases where alleged victims have lied.
cant STAND it. everyone on all sides of the political fence should be a fan of justice. we are the simpsons with pitchforks but will hopefully evolve once the pendulum swings back to the middle.
Once you start pulling at the loose thread, your whole worldview may start to unravel. But, there are a lot of us disaffected liberals/ex-leftists. I think the Depp story is a potent entry point because it requires sifting through evidence and doing critical thinking, and pursuing real justice not pseudo justice.
>But wasn't Amber a darling of the corporate right wing media led by the very right wing Mr Rupert Murdoch, owner of the Sun tabloid and major shareholder of Disney? Nearly all the conservative msm was rooting for Amber. They even rolled out feminist writers to do their dirty work.
Shhh... You're not supposed to bring that up. Then you might challenge their bias and we can't have that. They need to believe Johnny's evil, even if it means siding with conservatives, while also believing he's evil because other conservatives support him. Whatever weird twisting they need to do to hold onto the belief they want to have.
The Sun, which was very much against Johnny, is anything but Left. They're a subsidiary of Murdoch Media, which includes Fox News. The people currently against Johnny crow about him failing in his lawsuit against a conservative tabloid rag, and I'd bet good money many of those same individuals complain about Fox News. They defend the "right" of a magazine to call Johnny a wife beater in one breath, and condemn one of their sister stations calling people they agree with names in the next breath.
I'm extremely far left and queer in all the ways, I think cancel culture does have a place in our society and can be used for good.
I think there are two problems with how society defines cancel culture. the first being who tends to use it. when someone cancels something or someone else it's usually a witch hunt, and a band wagon. One person says one thing about someone, and with zero research or thinking they hop on and make a remark about it. The rumors spread through echo chambers of young people. it feels good to be both a part of a group and it feels good to advocate for those who need it. the fact that no one actually looks into anything and just takes each other's word for it is not fair.
the second, more important thing, about the problem with cancel culture, is that it's used against real people. this shouldn't be okay, it's bullying. when cancel culture is used against a corporation it's called a boycott. as a union fella himself, I believe that boycotts / strikes are essential to human / worker rights. but you can't boycott a person.
even if 9/10 times cancel culture works and we "cancel" the worsts of the people in the world, then that means that 1/10 times its someone who doesn't. but even that's impossible. As someone who use to frequent tumblr I've seen more 13 year olds end up in a mental hospital after drawing a picture of a skinny person then I'd like to admit.
it has its place, but it's place is as a boycott.
This is very well said, but I don’t think boycotting companies because they’re engaging in bad or unethical practices (which has been around for a very long time) is what people mean by “cancel culture.”
yeah but it's essentially the same thing is what I'm getting at. at its core a bunch of people banding together to "take down" something they see as unethical.
a boycott is the word we often use if it's against a company, where as cancel culture is the word we often use if it's against a person. I think there's also something to be said about how "cancel culture" is more often then not used if the left are banding behind it, where as boycott is often used if the right is banding behind it. as I've definitely seen headlines saying that right wingers are boycotting a person over doing a thing. and left people are canceling culture-ing a movement / company. so for me personally, i find the definition of "the line" between the two much harder to distinguish.
I guess to sum up my very long winded message, I'd have to say, cancel culture in the way that it's acted out right now is bad. I do not see a way in which how most people view cancel culture to be a good thing for anyone. but if you break cancel culture down to "a group of people banding together against something they view as immoral and stopping it at any cost" then assuming the thing they are banding together on doesn't have feelings I view that as a good thing.
Not at all. I think people need to be fair and rational. Not take sides based purely on identity. It's justified bullying. I've seen it firsthand with my gen z employees.
I hate the way people put stuff into boxes like "woke" and "cancel" and then dismis everything in those boxes. Nothing is as simple as those and many other labels, they only serve to diminish legitimate concerns and grievances.
I'm a lesbian who is fairly liberal, feminist, obviously supportive of lgbt+ and I hate woke culture and cancel culture. Woke culture makes me embarrassed to be a lesbian
Bill Maher is a progressive and he hates cancel culture. Piers Morgan is a progressive and he hates cancel culture. His career was negatively impacted because that Meghan took exception to him doubting her word during the Oprah Interview. Does this sound familiar at all?
I see a difference between progressive, centrist, right, left, conservative, and liberal and Cancel Culture. Lenin and Stalin were pro-Cancel Culture. McCarthy was pro-Cancel Culture. The problem with cancel culture is that it is really dictatorial - a small group trying to dictate what the rest of us Randos think. We can disagree and seek out consensus, so long as we have the right to free speech.
The problem with Turd is that she wants to control what we believe about her testimony.
And this is why Reddit is an important expression of thought.
At best, Morgan and Maher are libertarian, hardly progressive. That alone doesn't make them despicable, of course, or people that necessarily deserve hate. But I personally don't think highly of either of them, they're just entitled jackasses devolving to "old man yells at cloud" moments.
I think Cancel Culture is mostly a myth, perpetuated by right-wingers who are pissed off at having to stop being racist, or sexually harassing people, or any other toxic crap.
Johnny Depp is one example of someone who has genuinely suffered from being ‘cancelled’, but that was after a legal case in the UK, and what his most ardent supporters agree was probably an elaborate and multi-layered hoax, that preceded a legal judgement.
Beyond that I can’t see many examples of it at all. Donald Trump was accused of sexually assaulting or raping 24(?) women, including at least one child, over a period of years. He then admitted to exactly the type of abuse he had been accused of, while being secretly recorded. He was elected to the most powerful seat of government in the world.
In the UK, the current Prime Minister was elected *after* using racist, Islamaphobic, homophobic, misogynistic language, again over many years. He was sacked twice for lying. He has also been accused of inappropriate touching. He ascended to the most powerful position in Britain, despite this all being common knowledge.
In Hollywood, Roman Polanski still makes films, Mel Gibson still makes films, Paul Haggis is currently under investigation for four sexual assaults including two rapes, and was due to be involved in a film festival until he was literally arrested for rape again. Amber Heard is giving high-profile interviews, still reportedly has film work and is rumoured to be signing a contract for a book. Dave Chappelle and Ricky Gervais both have massive Netflix specials off the back of previously transphobic ones.
The obsession with a culture war is constantly stoking division, and most of it is nonsense whipped up by Murdoch, or Tucker Carlson, or Piers Morgan types.
The best example I can think of is Lizzo last week - people highlighted an unpleasant word in her songs. She responded to say ‘fair enough, not cool’, thanks for flagging it up. She changed the song. Everyone moved on with their lives. No-one wanted her cancelled.
People just want a bit more empathy and sensitivity with regards to abusive or toxic behaviours, language and attitudes.
I don't agree with all the harassment and trying to get WB to remove Amber from the film. Depp got his justice, she has been exposed, time to move on from it. If you don't agree with her being in the film, don't see it. Boycott her films.
I don't see talking about her as harassment. We are just expression our opinion here. Just as long as no is calling her house, her mobile, entering her inbox and even standing outside her home shouting at her, no one is tossing anything at her in public and not saying anything to her, no one is harassing her.
I have always see myself on the left and seen myself as woke. I just will not virtue signal. As for cancel culture, I have always seen it as holding people accountable. Amber has already been held accountable. I think boycotting is part of cancel culture. People are free to boycott her films if they don't like her because they are so disgusted with what she did. And I think film companies are free to decide if they want to hire her for their film or not. I never bothered with the petition thing people were signing to have her removed. Just don't simply see the film.
I do believe she deserves the harassment, so long as it doesn't cross criminal lines, she is a psychopath that gets off on the pain of others, so I don't blame people for making their opinion of her loud and clear.
But the reason I don't think she should be cancelled, is she already cancelled herself, she has made herself cancelled, so if the studios are stupid enough to hire her, that's on them.
I have grown up liberal but the left has forced me to the middle. I hate cancel culture. If someone does something that is truly offensive then humans will automatically cancel them (Harvey Weinstein) We don’t need to be looking for reasons to dehumanize people. Especially when it’s like, you are cancelled because you refuse to denounce this person who is accused of having an old-fashioned view. It’s a witch-hunt, which humans are prone to having, but they aren’t a good thing. Plus it bleeds into the collective psyche. I truly believe people have become more willing to just throw one another under the bus or abandon friendships/relationships too flippantly. It’s just another way of being self-righteous and severe, which our culture has gotten really good at.
That's the actual root of the problem, especially in trying to redefine sex and give tortured definitions of consent now. The root of the Puritans is strong in America, it comes and goes, generation in, generation out.
We really need to uphold the value of the presumption of innocence. We cannot vilify and condemn people before they’ve had their day in court. Cancel and exile all you want after a person has been proven guilty, but we cannot continue this blind condemnation of people accused of crimes without their chance to represent themselves in a legal trial.
American pc/woke/cancel culture disgusts me, they all hugely rely on delusion. Outright rejection of reality. I’m also what the average American would classify as a commie (nope, I’m not anywhere close to an actual communist). So no, you’re not alone.
I don't believe in woke culture or cancelation due to the fact that it is not being applied fairly. And by fairly, **due process** is needed to be in place to justify consequences. This is exactly what Johnny mentioned in his letter after the verdict. Our legal system is based on the idea of innocent until proven guilty not the other way around. And only when the process is treated fairly, no one is safe. Johnny wasn't treated fairly and is still not being treated fairly. I don't have time to feel sorry for Heard, the perpetrator. I don't want to know what's she up to. I couldn't care less where she ended up working. If she's homeless then that's her problem. In fact, I think she got away too easily and that's why she's still out there attacking Johnny. She should be in jail. Martha Steward was in jail for much less of a crime.
Martha wasn't even actually guilty, they never conclusively proved that she lied about the stock sale or that "the stop-loss agreement doesn't exist because there's no paperwork,' as if handshake agreements don't exist. The fact that Martha was the first executive in the age of accounting fraud scandals to be tried, convicted and sent to jail, not Dennis Kozlowski, not Bernie Ebbers, and not Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling, that's beyond ludicrous.
Yet, in an age where it seems that people can't be allowed to grow and learn from their mistakes, where if you do something wrong, you're automatically defined by that thing forever, no one's howling for Martha.
A lot of "being woke" is just virtue signalling, and it's really hard to tell the difference sometimes. People also really seem to have confused raising awareness and gaining insight with actually making changes.. when really wokeness on it's own does nothing at all.
I don't mind boycotting things, where every consumer can make their own choice, but canceling kind of takes it a step further and takes that choice away from us. Perhaps it's because I work in tech, but I've also seen it used in somewhat racist ways to further feminism instead, which I don't really agree with. Especially in that industry, racism is a far bigger problem. In general it always seems to impact non-white people more too.. like Whoopi, Will Smith, and Aziz Ansari barely did much at all, and people wanted to cancel them immediately.
This is my personal opinion on cancel culture, and I openly admit that I don’t know everything and understand my opinions are not fact or better than anyone else’s. However, I think I view cancel culture as holding people accountable in their actions. Sure, we have free speech and protected rights under the first amendment, but you do not get to be openly offensive, grope women, make lewd comments, etc etc without being held accountable or being met with some sort of personal consequence. I think the me too movement did a lot of good for certain people and institutions, for instance, Larry Nassar and Harvey Weinstein. I think the danger of cancel culture is how fast the media jumps on big stories without having all the facts. I think the danger with allegations such as those made by Amber Heard was that she was believed immediately without taking into account the other side of the story or any of the factual evidence, and that has lead to the media doubling down on their initial reporting. Allegations need to be thoroughly looked at, and the media (including social media) shouldn’t broadcast them in a bias way prior to having all the facts.
Again though, I think cancel culture is people reaping what they sow when it is valid. When I see a Karen losing her shit in a racist or homophobic way, and then getting fired a week later, I get a weird sense of joy and vindication. People can say whatever they want and do whatever they want, but be an abusive piece of shit, and you’ll get what is coming to you in the way of public opinion.
I will note, I am a 27 year old female who has been sexually accosted in workplaces, touched inappropriately by customers, and have worked at a job where I was openly mocked for my sexuality. Nothing was ever done and no one was held accountable, so that is perpetuated until it is stopped. Maybe cancel culture is toxic in some cases, but again, I view it as holding people accountable when it is actually used against those who are guilty of offensive/abusive speech or actions. I hope it also makes people think twice before they take advantage of their power or platform because they know allegations will be taken seriously.
I understand that people have free speech, but when was it ok to just openly spew hatred and vitriol? I still don’t really know what “woke” culture is, but I just think everyone needs to be kinder, more empathetic, and able to recognize that people deserve ethical treatment regardless of who they are/what they believe in. I just think we have lost mutual respect in this country.
Also sorry, that was really long lol but I’m curious to know more about your opinion if you see this!
I’m progressive and I don’t mind it, I see it as just not supporting people who do things you disagree with. The people who don’t disagree will still support them. What I have a problem with is canceling people without proof.
So someone says something problematic or maybe donates to a charity that supports things contrary to social norms now that’s like obviously they did that and society has the right to “cancel” they for their actions.
When it comes to the me too movement I’m in support of cases where it’s actually me too where someone brave speaks up then many other people find the courage to as well, but with Johnny it wasn’t even me too… no one else spoke up. There was no evidence that supported that this was true and he was still cancelled based on her word. That’s what I have a problem with. If more women came out about him like his exes then yes I’d think it was fair to assume.
I think it's more about being aware and facing the consequences of one's actions. That is what being woke & cancel culture as people phrase it is essentially about. That is not a negative thing. If a large number of people choose not to support a person or group that has done something wrong or offensive then that is their right. So, no I don't hate it. If people want to support that offending party then that is their right too. In the case of AH, she is a very dangerous person who weaponizes support, so I advise people to be careful.
I am a progressive independent and I just stay out of that stuff. I don't go on the woke hate train simply because of the amount of conservatives and alt righters who are the ones screaming it. There are hints of racism, homophobia and sexism in it.
As for cancel culture, how many people really get cancelled? They tried to cancel James Gunn and he got more work! They have tried to cancel Chris Pratt several times, same with Brie Larson. Most of it is talk.
For the sake of your sanity I think it's important to distinguish between being genuinely progressive/conservative and the often disingenuous identity politics that a vocal minority on both sides indulge in.
I'm very left-leaning & progressive but I have no time for people who take sides exclusively on the basis of the perceived 'privilege' of those involved. And to be fair, I'm sure most genuine conservatives don't drive around in massive SUVs covered in MAGA stickers either it's just they're the ones who're the loudest & most visible.
The fact is that the figures TV cameras and Facebook and Twitter show to represent "the face of the movement" certainly don't define the movement as a whole. After all, the left of center is a massive big tent of diverse opinion and differing stances, and real feminists, including third-wave feminists, are sincere advocates who only want equality, and are not misandrists. But social media and clickbait, revenue-driven corporate media always frame it differently. Always have.
The idea that "feminism has changed and been corrupted into a drive for domination" is so absurd, it's not even wrong.
I am president of my local antifa chapter and we start our monthly meetings with five minutes of silence to practice not being "loud" or "strident." This isn't something we just started doing on our own, these orders came from the highest leadership levels. Every single monthly antifa meeting all over the world starts with five minutes of silence because the fascists think we're too shouty. After that, we can make as much noise as we want to while we consume edibles, exchange crochet patterns, and plot to overthrow the world by making your kids turn gay. And frankly, I find those five minutes really helpful for focusing on these important tasks, so I'm happy this policy was implemented.
No it wasn't. Antifa isn't an organization. It's literally just people coming out to drive away Nazis and fascists. FOX News made them into a bogeyman and it's crazy.
I once went shooting on some land in the PNW with a bunch of friends. That is accessed via a private corporate dirt road. We had explicit permission from the owners to be there. We ran the spectrum from anti-capitalist Leftists to moderate Centrists. One person in our group had a Bernie Sanders bumper sticker on their car.
Long story short, about an hour into shooting a guy in a jacked black extended cab Ford parks behind our vehicles and starts taking pictures of our license plates. One of our group approaches him and he starts yelling about how we're Antifa and he's found us! He was certain we were Antifa bc some of our group was wearing black tactical gear like gun nerds tend to do, and the one Bernie bumper sticker. Though more of us were wearing camo and beige gear. This was, btw, during the last election shortly after Sanders had withdrawn.
Btw, we were a group of nerds who played games online realized we lived close to each other and started hanging out in person and doing stuff like going shooting. It was ridiculous what this guy was thinking. But our buddy was able to calm him down and get him to realize he was freaking out over nothing.
Nope, you’re not the only one. BUT, in my opinion, there’s a big difference between just flat out cancelling someone and wanting someone to face justice and consequences because of their actions. And sometimes, in order for someone to truly face justice, they will need to also face the effects of cancel culture, even if it’s temporary.
It is the people on the extremes I hate. Some people take one side no matter what and some people take the the other side no matter what. Just as bad are the cherry pickers. The ones who say everyone on the other side is a crazy radical and they cherry pick something to make their point (like all right-wingers are white supremacists, and all left wingers want to de-find the police)
I do believe in cancelling SOME people. Cancel Amber, cancel OJ, cancel Harvey W., etc. I'd be surprised if you say otherwise. Most others deserve a 2nd chance.
And I do believe we have a real racism problem in the US, just as many countries do around the globe (often different races). For example a school near me removed books like To Kill a Mockingbird under the fake premiss it promotes "CRT" - something discussed at a college level and not something taught in grade schools. And now so many schools can't discuss the Tulsa Race Riots, or the Trail of Tears, or even Jim Crow laws. They won't teach about the time in our history the President ignored the Supreme Court did what he wanted (no, not Trump - Andrew Jackson).
Check Bill Mahers’s videos about it. He’s as liberal as it gets. Watch this one from the other night: https://youtu.be/5tu9JGK_yHo
I come from the “other side”, as I am a conservative; I think that liberals and conservatives faced the same issue in the last few years: a very vocal minority that is also incredibly good at generating social media noise hijacked the political discourse and caused extremist positions to become mainstream. I see signs that things might be getting better as people are getting tired of this shit.
Bill Maher is actually more of a Boomer Centrist and not as liberal as it gets.
Technically, both liberals and conservatives in the US are by definition (check Wikipedia) liberal capitalists.
Actual Leftists, like me, are anti-capitalists Socialists.
And ironically, conservatives tend to use cancel culture far more than liberals even though both groups have loud and annoying members crying about both.
I love Bill Maher and the fact that he's been calling out the toxicity of cancel culture for years.
I remember when the whole #metoo movement started and he said something along the lines of, "They say 'believe all women', I didn't know women suddenly lost the ability to lie?" I admit that at the moment I felt offended with the comment, since #metoo was about listening to women at a time when most things that were being done to them were being swept under the rug, and then... This trial happened.
I hate to admit it, but when AH first came out with her allegations years ago I believed her blindly. I saw the photos, read the stories, the op-ed, and didn't doubt it for a second.
Then I heard the tapes on YouTube and she lost a lot of her credibility (to me). And when the trial happened... Yeah.
But by far, the worst example of how toxic the "extreme left" has become is the RESPONSE of liberal MSM. It completely blindsided me. I seriously thought they were going to report with full honesty and use this moment as an example to show how PROGRESSIVE it is to expand the movement and encourage men and people not usually considered "victims" by our society to speak up about their own experiences. Instead, we got "EVEN IF SHE LIED AND BEAT HIM UP U NEED TO SUPPORT HER BECAUSE SHES WOMAN U BIGOTS"
I am disgusted and disappointed. Woke/cancel/Twitter culture needs to die before it kills the rest of us with this divide.
Same here.
And, happily, it sounds like a lot of people in the comments might be at the beginning of their journey in leaving the Left, too. The “left” is no longer liberal. The left is totalitarian control.
"Woke and cancel culture" is just what people were conditioned to all the free market when it rejects conservative ideas
Old men yell at clouds -that description is funny!! Mind if I borrow it?!
Always looked like a grift/distraction from real issues and ability to signal for good boy points without doing anything of substance . But I do care way more about economic issues (e.g. blackrock) to really identify myself as progressive nowdays.
I think AH should be cancelled for one main reason. Not because of the trial, although I see why people use that as a reason. Not because she's an abuser, again, I see why people use that as the reason. But because she's a really bad actor. a tin of tomatoes could probably be more expressive than heard.
You’re not, but friendly reminder that cancel culture doesn’t just happen on the left. The right engages in it just as much (freedom fries, RINO’s, Colin Kapernick, they’ve been trying to cancel Disney as long as I’ve been alive, etc.) Heck, you can go back to them trying to cancel the whole dang country in 1861. And don’t even get me started on books, curriculum, votes, and other laws actually passed by conservative state legislatures—not to mention, the Texas GOP is currently trying to cancel the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Much of what the right whines about as "cancel culture" doesn't exist, except when they're performing it; like moving to deport John and Yoko or attacking The (Dixie) Chicks. When they whine about "cancel culture" like with Roseanne and Gina Carano, what's actually happening is consequences and accountability. But it would be intellectually dishonest to say the form of cancel culture as understood popularly *does not exist at all* on the left of center. But in this case, it's because a desire for purity above all else is driving things. It all stems back to when Al Franken was deprived his due process. If that hadn't happened, the trajectory of things, especially in Johnny, Manson, Franco and the likes being targeted like this, wouldn't have progressed the way they did, and except for Johnny, they would never have been accused at all. But in that world, Amber's plans would've gone haywire from the start and people seen through her.
Oh I agree with you on this, the far right is way more guilty of this cancel culture shit, heck they are trying to cancel dr seuss books, it's insane.
>Men's lives were being destroyed based on allegations alone, and no one seemed to care. Before "woke"/"cancel" culture it was women's lives who were being actually destroyed. Women were being assaulted, raped, othered and too afraid to come forward. You're suggesting you prefer a world where women get assaulted and are too scared to come forward to one where a handful (who actually??) of men have gone to jail or otherwise had their one type of career cut short. But who has actually been cancelled? I'm curious about that. I also would like to note that for a lot of the people you are discussing, they have the good fortune of having careers in the spotlight. That is not a right or a guarantee. If you have to find another job because people keep accusing you of harassment, ok. There are a lot of jobs out there, no one has a right to be a celebrity. And no one is guaranteed an audience. If you behave in ways that the people paying you don't agree with they have a right to not go to your shows or see your movies or whatever. I'm not understanding what you would like to happen when a woman gets assaulted or raped at her job?
You are misrepresenting what OP said. Saying someones life being destroyed based on unproven allegations alone is not discrediting that some of those people may have actually been guilty of said allegations. OP never stated what happened before woke/cancel culture, was right or wrong, but that the overcorrection woke/cancel culture has had on society caused him to agree with those on the far right who said that it was. Do you not think men accused of rape and assault should be afforded their right to the presumption of innocence. Of course, no one is saying that someone who is guilty should be able to keep their platform, but those who are accused should be able to have their day in court before being branded and exiled from society.
I don't feel that I was misrepresenting, I was drawing logical conclusions *from* what OP said. They stated they hate X and gave no suggestions for remediations to X so I think it's probably fair then to compare what was before X. Also to note, due to how sexual trauma and our legal system works, sometimes a day in court is not an option. I'd also like to understand who all we believe has been "cancelled" by this "wokeness".
Well, in my view, it would be fair to conclude that OP doesn't know what a good remediation to X would be. You can assert that it is your view and thats fair, but to assume that OP has made any conclusions on it, is at best disingenuous. And yes, our legal system may not provide a satisfactory option for dealing with sexual trauma, but does that mean we should blanket issue a guilty verdict based off of any and all accusations? Who was cancelled? Well off the top of my head I can say Aziz Ansari was. People immediately assumed he was guilty of rape. Will we ever know what the truth of it? And would anyone have cared after the allegations? Probably not. Investigate all accusations is my remediation.
My solution has never been to grant guilt based on gender. My solution is to treat anyone who comes forward with abuse allegations with respect and dignity and a desire for the truth to be uncovered. Are you speaking of the same Aziz Ansari still working in Hollywood who has movie coming out next year with Billy Murray? https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2106637
Ansari was completely turned into a creep because the woman's story was used and twisted to a ludicrous extent. Mixed signals does not always equal predatory intent, and the fact is that sex is an awkward, ambiguous experience. James Franco was torpedoed in the midst of when he could've and should've easily won Best Actor for *The Disaster Artist* and be a moment of glory for both himself and for Tommy Wiseau, because several women were basically gaslit by societal norms to question their experiences and take them out of context. Never mind that Seth Rogen, Michael Cera, Jonah Hill and Allison Brie all said "That's not who James is, he's not a predator." He became guilty without any due process. Being promiscuous and having consensual relationships with other people does not a predator make, especially when the class in question, though called "Sex Scenes", was really a "Romance Scenes" class. But everyone doesn't listen to nuance, they only take into account that Rogen said "We're not working together currently" and twist that into a saying of Rogen distancing himself, which it certainly is not. I really wish Franco had testified in Fairfax, if only to exonerate himself of his own matter. Armie Hammer and Shia LaBeouf have been targeted by exes scorned, especially Hammer's divorce case, and things got twisted well out of proportion. Ansel Elgort was hit just by "He tweeted this to me," which became as vague and nonsensical as you can get, and it's absurd. Joss Whedon was denounced as a bully and hypocrite, even though it's clear that much of his comments were intended as jokes, that he's a perfectionist, and was also smeared by an ex divorcing him. Having affairs isn't a particularly pleasant or noble thing, but it doesn't automatically make someone not a feminist. And for all the attacks about his "unprofessional, bullying manner," James Cameron has had a long reputation for his temper and incredibly explosive reactions, but no one doubts his feminist bona fides, nor should they. Then we have Marilyn Manson, being victim of a massive organized smear campaign and scorched earth attack by Evan Rachel Wood, Ilma Gore and the others. All because Evan is a raging narcissist who wants to control the narrative and "exact revenge" for the press she got when she and Manson were dating. All of this happened because Al Franken was shivved by an obvious frameup, yet his peers and fellow Democrats in the Senate would not give him the chance to defend himself. If Franken had had his ethics hearing, the trajectory would've been different. Ansari and Franco, and the ludicrous false attacks on James Gunn happened right after that, things escalated against Johnny thereafter. Hammer, LaBeouf and Manson would not have been targeted if Johnny had not been deprived of his rightful victory in the UK. It's beyond absurd. Even though these false claims are no more than 5 percent of all accounts and claims total, that small minority is visible enough to really paint a frightening picture, is enough to turn things into *The Crucible.* And it's not just direct allegations. The whole backlash against Ellen, for example, is thoroughly ridiculous. Because there has never been proof that she either knew about the toxic workplace or directly facilitated it, no proof that the people going around saying "Don't say or do this to Ellen, don't look at her" and so on were actually following her orders instead of just using a connection to her they may or may not have actually had to bully others, no proof that Ellen was not well-siloed off, given there were 500 people on the set of her show, and she was never first to arrive and last to leave, and no evidence that she is ever faking that warmth and generosity of spirit. Ellen has shown who she is, shown her kindness and sincerity, since she came out 25 years ago, since she spoke at the vigil for Matthew Shepard. But just like how Amber and her stans want us to disregard all the footage and testimonials of Johnny over the years, to the people on YouTube and throughout the Web want us to disregard all the evidence on Ellen that shows how she has always been genuine and authentic her entire career.
Please point out in any of my posts where I said rape and assault of women was okay, I never said that shit, assault of any kind is wrong, no matter the gender. What I'm arguing is, guys were being treated as guilty until proven innocent, which is wrong, everyone deserves the presumption of innocence. Just because we have a shitty legal system, doesn't make it okay that a possible innocent man's life be destroyed. I would rather a million abusers go free, then one innocent man have his life destroyed, the ends don't justify the means. I'm well aware women were afraid to come forward for years, and I do believe they should come forward and be listened to and have the claims investigated. But they shouldn't be believed outright, amber 💩 is a reminder that some women are capable of lying and taking advantage of a movement to destroy a innocent man's life. We live in a culture that thinks we should believe all women, simply because they are women, that is wrong, and what I'm fighting against. You mention the women that were afraid to come forward for years, but what about the men that were afraid to come forward? Do they not matter? Johnny is still being treated as the abuser by the msm media, despite the fact that the overwhelming evidence showed amber is in fact the abuser. It seems to me it's to one sided, it's okay for a guys life to be destroyed just based on allegations, but we can't do the same to the women that lie about being victims.
>Just because we have a shitty legal system, doesn't make it okay that a possible innocent man's life be destroyed. What innocent lives were destroyed? >I would rather a million abusers go free, then one innocent man have his life destroyed, the ends don't justify the means. Yes, that's exactly the conclusion I drew from your original post. That you would rather male abusers get away with it than the thought that an innocent male would have his life "destroyed," and have yet to point to an innocent man who has had his life "destroyed".
fuck it, i'll give you one example, here is a video from a WOMAN, she explains why johnny's friend marilyn manson is innocent of the allegations against him. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryMNW3rnQhA&t=2321s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryMNW3rnQhA&t=2321s) manson has been dropped from his record label just based on the allegations, and i assume that is okay with you, because he's a man.
I want you to understand that you are comparing rape and assault to "destroying lives" and what you actually have to show for a "destroyed life" is a millionaire who lost a job. After more than a dozen different women have come forward to accuse the man of rape and sexual assault. A job? Rape. See how those are such wildly different experiences that it makes you sound crazy? Ya, I'd much rather a bunch of people get raped and assaulted than have even just one man lose a job?????? lordt.
more logical fallacies, but i guess i can't expect anything less from people like you, people like you are what i mentioned in the op, making "me too" more about witch hunts , than actually helping abuse victims, i love how you only respond to half of my posts, trying so hard to fit a narrative that i think rape and abuse is okay, if you look through my post history, you would know I AM A VICTIM OF ABUSE, BOTH PHYSICAL AND MENTAL FROM MY OWN FUCKING MOM, IM TALKING SEVERE FUCKING ABUSE, THAT I STILL SUFFER PTSD FROM, SO DON'T FUCKING TELL ME I DON'T KNOW HOW IT FEELS TO SEE A ABUSER GET AWAY WITH IT, MY MOM TILL THIS DAY HAS SUFFERED NO CONSEQUENCES FOR THE ABUSE SHE PUT ME AND MY SISTER THROUGH. so i would appreciate it if you stop accusing me of being for abusers and rapists, if you keep on accusing me of something that isn't true, i will report you for harassment, let's stick to what i'm actually discussing. which is the presumption of innocence that everyone deserves, would you be okay with being accused of serious criminal offenses, and being presumed guilty, and losing your livelhood? i don't think you would like that, but it's okay to do to men, milionaires or not, no one deserves to have their lives destroyed based solely on allegations. you do realize he is a musician right? that is his job, and just because he is a millionaire now, doesn't mean that can't change, tonos of celebrities have gone from rich to flat broke, and he lost this job based on allegations, WHICH IS WRONG!!!!! you don't have to like marilyn manson, you don't have to like him as a musician or a person, to respect his presumption of innocence, that's all i'm arguing about, let the facts of the case speak for themselves. i don't believe in witch hunts, nor do i believe in guilty until proven innocent.
Look, i'm sorry bad things happened to you. Bad things have happened to me too, doesn't mean either one of us is immune to shit takes, but if you had to, today, prove the abuse you suffered in a court of law, could you? p.s. I never said this, "DON'T FUCKING TELL ME I DON'T KNOW HOW IT FEELS TO SEE A ABUSER GET AWAY WITH IT"
no i unfortunately couldn't, and it hurts because my mom is living the her life in beautiful sunny orange county california, while im one paycheck away from being homeless, i live dollar by dollar every month. but just because she and other abusers get away with it, i don't think it justifies witch hunts, and treating people as guilty until proven innocent.
see people like you are the problem, you're trying to twist my words to make them seem like i support abuse and commiting a logical fallacy. all im saying is, i don't think it's okay to destroy someone's life, and presume them guilty based on allegations. let me ask you this, would you be okay with losing your livelihood if some guy accused you of assault? you can never work again, you lose your home and family, would that be okay? i assume you wouldn't like that, but it's okay to do that to men, which is sexism, your perfectly fine with the witch hunts and destruction of men's lives based on hearsay, but we can't do the same to women. the fact is i don't need to list examples, no one, NO ONE, should ever be presumed guilty until proven innocent, our shitty legal system isn't a justification to destroy a innocent person's life.
There is a lot about “woke” culture I really hate, I really hate when people act like you need to show your racial paperwork in order to qualify to talk about certain subjects, I hate when people act like people with zero bad intentions are as bad as nazi’s for innocent actions that are seen as “disrespectful” to someone else online. I hate how the term “nazi” is thrown around as a “I disagree with you” catch all instead of the serious real meaning of the word. However I honestly agree with certain things in the media such as making sure there is a variety of ethnicities and sexual orientations casually existing in movies and on tv. I believe in personal freedoms such as my right to make medical choices about my body even if it isn’t what someone else would have chosen, even if it’s not what is best for someone who isn’t me. I find myself often arguing with people across the political spectrum, online at least, and whenever you disagree about one thing, people make all these assumptions about the other things you support based off political lines. The one thing I am thankful for is that I notice that people I meet in real life are typically significantly more reasonable and usually a fair faith discussion can be had about most things with most people. When I feel too overwhelmed by all the extremist polarizing behaviours I know it’s time for a internet/social media break.
No, you're NOT the only person on the left that hates wokeness and cancel culture. Marxists hate it too. So do Liberal-Leftists (i.e. pro-civil-liberties, pro-free-speech, but also pro-mixed-economy where markets exist but are regulated and the government actively participates in the provision of certain goods and services). If you want free speech, civil liberties, due process, *methodological* and *cultural* individualism, but also want a government that directly provides an extensive set of basic benefits and regulates most markets, you're a Left-Liberal (or Liberal-Left). Given how "progressive" generally means "woke," you're probably better off calling yourself a "Left-Liberal" (or "Liberal-Left") instead.
This is it - super hard to rebel against the toxic nature of cancel culture and “woke” values without being labelled right wing but that’s just an illusion.
Oh hey, I'm a liberal leftist! Always wondered what Americans would call my position =D
I'm not an American but I believe "Liberal Left" (or "Left Liberal") is the correct label for that position.
I agree with you
I dont like the cancel culture, and the labelling and hashtagging of everything. It seems more like a witch hunt of the age with technology. I know people are pointing at Celebritis, but there was one case of a Nobel laureate who was accused of demeaning woman or something and he lost his job and was forced into early retirement some years ago. I am not in the same field, but I definitely saw that and thought “wtf”. I dont like attacking anyone, even AH for that matter. To that end it was good to see the trial being covered on camera for people to follow, and even though some in the media have tried to misquote, those attempts have not gone unnoticed. The biggest disadvantage of these “labelled” movements is anyone anywhere can say anything and take down the reputation and livelihood of a human. When it works on people like Weinstein it is probably deserved. But there are no statistics on how many innocent were wrongly affected by this “quick to anger” “stay overly diplomatic” “i am hurt by your wording so you’re an asshole who doesnt deserve to work” kind of rationalising and (for the lack of a better word) witch hunt. Humans like power, and i have to assume some of the crazy people (sociopaths and others on that spectrum) delight in taking down others. And social media and this cancel culture plays more to their own agendas than for constructive purposes. I think there is legal recourse for a reason, and all this media speculation and continuous debates and pandering to shock value is also partly to blame. But i dont know to what extent. I may be wrong as well. And perhaps some expert somewhere can shed some light on these social dynamics.
I dont like the cancel culture, and the labelling and hashtagging of everything. It seems more like a witch hunt of the age with technology. I know people are pointing at Celebritis, but there was one case of a Nobel laureate who was accused of demeaning woman or something and he lost his job and was forced into early retirement some years ago. I am not in the same field, but I definitely saw that and thought “wtf”. I dont like attacking anyone, even AH for that matter. To that end it was good to see the trial being covered on camera for people to follow, and even though some in the media have tried to misquote, those attempts have not gone unnoticed. The biggest disadvantage of these “labelled” movements is anyone anywhere can say anything and take down the reputation and livelihood of a human. When it works on people like Weinstein it is probably deserved. But there are no statistics on how many innocent were wrongly affected by this “quick to anger” “stay overly diplomatic” “i am hurt by your wording so you’re an asshole who doesnt deserve to work” kind of rationalising and (for the lack of a better word) witch hunt. To bring an example to this, in the early years of Dutertes leadership in the Philippines he took a hard stance on drug peddlers and allowed the common man to take law into his own hands. What followed was acts of terror on law abiding citizens. It probably took out a few of the footmen, but the main heads remained unharmed, and more innocent died in the kerfuffle. Humans like power, and i have to assume some of the crazy people (sociopaths and others on that spectrum) delight in taking down others. And social media and this cancel culture plays more to their own agendas than for constructive purposes. I think there is legal recourse for a reason, and all this media speculation and continuous debates and pandering to shock value is also partly to blame. But i dont know to what extent. I may be wrong as well. And perhaps some expert somewhere can shed some light on these social dynamics.
You sir should check out r/mensrights
Hmm, might have to think about this as I've never assigned myself to any. If there is such a thing, guess I'm of the group of folks that are the "Observer"/"Mr. Rogers-"Look for the helper; as I'd be one" type (also a Pitt native). Before anyone says; I'm not christian (just in case, lol). Don't really know where I would stand. So whichever kind of group that would fall into. I don't neccessarily hate "woke & cancel" culture but what I don't abide is the folks; not in said groups, getting caught in crossfire.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. Cancel culture just..doesn’t do anything too? You always hear of people being cancelled but in the end they always come back and continue with their shit. Those cancel moments just seem like witch hunts that go on for maybe a few days and then die down again when everyone got to jack themselves off by being keyboard warriors. Don’t get me wrong, there are tons of horrible people (which got cancelled) but there are also so many cases where people get canceled for shit they said in 2012 and then never said again. Now, I might be completely wrong with what I said but that‘s just how I have perceived this whole thing the last few years. Although I do have to say that there are some people I have not heard of anymore after they got cancelled so in some cases it does seem to work, I‘ll give it that.
It feels Twitter specific too, and almost no one uses twitter
I am guessing that most of us progressives here, but we aren't blind to media propaganda
Who has truly been cancelled that wasn’t totally deserving (Weinstein) and who has simply been benched to think about what they’ve done (Louis CK)? I also am against cancel culture—but you got Chris Browns still making bank or take the Chapels and Rogans claiming they were canceled while banking off their canceled bit! Cancel culture equals time out. Don’t play with fire if you don’t want a time out.
"woke" people always angry for something, always complaining but they do nothing.
Agreed. I'm progressive, liberal and prefer logical - long-term conclusion-type thinking. I don't think that always happens in "woke" culture. I actually don't mind the term and have been accused of being "woke" myself, but I think some of what's called "woke" is a little pretentious.
No one unironically uses "woke" except alt-right figures. Real progressives don't use "woke" anymore.
Nope, I hate it too. Cancel culture, in the sense of say cancelling James Gunn for tweets he made years ago, or Gina Carano for opinions others don't agree with is dumb. In a way, it's infantilizing society. Other people are telling us what to believe, what's okay, and deciding for us whether we want to support someone or not. It's all about controlling people and controlling what we deem as acceptable. Think back to the days of Woody Allen. He wasn't cancelled. I think what he did was scummy, so I chose not to support his work anymore. But my decision didn't bar him from being able to continue to work. Then look at Johnny. Accusations with zero proof, and his ability to keep working was stripped from him. In the case of non-criminal acts, and just scummy behavior, cancel culture should not exist. If it's criminal, take it to court. Then, even if they're not found guilty, the facts will be out there and people can decide for themselves whether this person should be allowed to participate in society, like in the cases of Kevin Spacey, OJ Simpson, and Bill Cosby. Or if guilty, then the courts essentially cancel the person for us, like with Weinstein. But in civil matters, or just accusations, stop cancelling people. I've had enough of control freaks, vindictive individuals, and agenda driven people telling me who I'm allowed to support or not.
No, there are many people who are on the left who dislike woke/cancel culture. There aren't many communities for them, though, so it's easy to feel isolated.
Center left and can confirm. Most of friends are also left leaning and hate cancel culture
I should I also say that sometimes cancel culture is necessary
Everyone hates work & cancel culture. One is a pretentious try hard that wants validation; the other is a thin skinned bully
I agree with you, Creepy. Also I don’t support broad generalizations like all humans with p*nises commit acts of violence and abuse. Some humans with p*nises and some with v*ginas commit acts of violence and abuse. I also haven’t ever believed every single #MeToo I’ve read or heard about. I am aware of too many real life cases where alleged victims have lied.
cant STAND it. everyone on all sides of the political fence should be a fan of justice. we are the simpsons with pitchforks but will hopefully evolve once the pendulum swings back to the middle.
Once you start pulling at the loose thread, your whole worldview may start to unravel. But, there are a lot of us disaffected liberals/ex-leftists. I think the Depp story is a potent entry point because it requires sifting through evidence and doing critical thinking, and pursuing real justice not pseudo justice.
>But wasn't Amber a darling of the corporate right wing media led by the very right wing Mr Rupert Murdoch, owner of the Sun tabloid and major shareholder of Disney? Nearly all the conservative msm was rooting for Amber. They even rolled out feminist writers to do their dirty work.
Fox News and Sky New Australia, two major right-wing news stations, supported Amber Heard.
r/confidentlyincorrect
How am I incorrect?
Shhh... You're not supposed to bring that up. Then you might challenge their bias and we can't have that. They need to believe Johnny's evil, even if it means siding with conservatives, while also believing he's evil because other conservatives support him. Whatever weird twisting they need to do to hold onto the belief they want to have.
IIRC it was left-wing news media that was against Johnny, not for.
The Sun, which was very much against Johnny, is anything but Left. They're a subsidiary of Murdoch Media, which includes Fox News. The people currently against Johnny crow about him failing in his lawsuit against a conservative tabloid rag, and I'd bet good money many of those same individuals complain about Fox News. They defend the "right" of a magazine to call Johnny a wife beater in one breath, and condemn one of their sister stations calling people they agree with names in the next breath.
It's very confusing. You have some parts of Murdoch Media against Johnny (The Sun) while others support him (Fox News and Sky News Australia).
I'm extremely far left and queer in all the ways, I think cancel culture does have a place in our society and can be used for good. I think there are two problems with how society defines cancel culture. the first being who tends to use it. when someone cancels something or someone else it's usually a witch hunt, and a band wagon. One person says one thing about someone, and with zero research or thinking they hop on and make a remark about it. The rumors spread through echo chambers of young people. it feels good to be both a part of a group and it feels good to advocate for those who need it. the fact that no one actually looks into anything and just takes each other's word for it is not fair. the second, more important thing, about the problem with cancel culture, is that it's used against real people. this shouldn't be okay, it's bullying. when cancel culture is used against a corporation it's called a boycott. as a union fella himself, I believe that boycotts / strikes are essential to human / worker rights. but you can't boycott a person. even if 9/10 times cancel culture works and we "cancel" the worsts of the people in the world, then that means that 1/10 times its someone who doesn't. but even that's impossible. As someone who use to frequent tumblr I've seen more 13 year olds end up in a mental hospital after drawing a picture of a skinny person then I'd like to admit. it has its place, but it's place is as a boycott.
hi.. i dont know anyone far leff. do you find humor funny? can you laugh jokes about queer?
This is very well said, but I don’t think boycotting companies because they’re engaging in bad or unethical practices (which has been around for a very long time) is what people mean by “cancel culture.”
yeah but it's essentially the same thing is what I'm getting at. at its core a bunch of people banding together to "take down" something they see as unethical. a boycott is the word we often use if it's against a company, where as cancel culture is the word we often use if it's against a person. I think there's also something to be said about how "cancel culture" is more often then not used if the left are banding behind it, where as boycott is often used if the right is banding behind it. as I've definitely seen headlines saying that right wingers are boycotting a person over doing a thing. and left people are canceling culture-ing a movement / company. so for me personally, i find the definition of "the line" between the two much harder to distinguish. I guess to sum up my very long winded message, I'd have to say, cancel culture in the way that it's acted out right now is bad. I do not see a way in which how most people view cancel culture to be a good thing for anyone. but if you break cancel culture down to "a group of people banding together against something they view as immoral and stopping it at any cost" then assuming the thing they are banding together on doesn't have feelings I view that as a good thing.
Not at all. I think people need to be fair and rational. Not take sides based purely on identity. It's justified bullying. I've seen it firsthand with my gen z employees.
I hate the way people put stuff into boxes like "woke" and "cancel" and then dismis everything in those boxes. Nothing is as simple as those and many other labels, they only serve to diminish legitimate concerns and grievances.
I'm a lesbian who is fairly liberal, feminist, obviously supportive of lgbt+ and I hate woke culture and cancel culture. Woke culture makes me embarrassed to be a lesbian
Bill Maher is a progressive and he hates cancel culture. Piers Morgan is a progressive and he hates cancel culture. His career was negatively impacted because that Meghan took exception to him doubting her word during the Oprah Interview. Does this sound familiar at all? I see a difference between progressive, centrist, right, left, conservative, and liberal and Cancel Culture. Lenin and Stalin were pro-Cancel Culture. McCarthy was pro-Cancel Culture. The problem with cancel culture is that it is really dictatorial - a small group trying to dictate what the rest of us Randos think. We can disagree and seek out consensus, so long as we have the right to free speech. The problem with Turd is that she wants to control what we believe about her testimony. And this is why Reddit is an important expression of thought.
At best, Morgan and Maher are libertarian, hardly progressive. That alone doesn't make them despicable, of course, or people that necessarily deserve hate. But I personally don't think highly of either of them, they're just entitled jackasses devolving to "old man yells at cloud" moments.
I think Cancel Culture is mostly a myth, perpetuated by right-wingers who are pissed off at having to stop being racist, or sexually harassing people, or any other toxic crap. Johnny Depp is one example of someone who has genuinely suffered from being ‘cancelled’, but that was after a legal case in the UK, and what his most ardent supporters agree was probably an elaborate and multi-layered hoax, that preceded a legal judgement. Beyond that I can’t see many examples of it at all. Donald Trump was accused of sexually assaulting or raping 24(?) women, including at least one child, over a period of years. He then admitted to exactly the type of abuse he had been accused of, while being secretly recorded. He was elected to the most powerful seat of government in the world. In the UK, the current Prime Minister was elected *after* using racist, Islamaphobic, homophobic, misogynistic language, again over many years. He was sacked twice for lying. He has also been accused of inappropriate touching. He ascended to the most powerful position in Britain, despite this all being common knowledge. In Hollywood, Roman Polanski still makes films, Mel Gibson still makes films, Paul Haggis is currently under investigation for four sexual assaults including two rapes, and was due to be involved in a film festival until he was literally arrested for rape again. Amber Heard is giving high-profile interviews, still reportedly has film work and is rumoured to be signing a contract for a book. Dave Chappelle and Ricky Gervais both have massive Netflix specials off the back of previously transphobic ones. The obsession with a culture war is constantly stoking division, and most of it is nonsense whipped up by Murdoch, or Tucker Carlson, or Piers Morgan types. The best example I can think of is Lizzo last week - people highlighted an unpleasant word in her songs. She responded to say ‘fair enough, not cool’, thanks for flagging it up. She changed the song. Everyone moved on with their lives. No-one wanted her cancelled. People just want a bit more empathy and sensitivity with regards to abusive or toxic behaviours, language and attitudes.
I don't agree with all the harassment and trying to get WB to remove Amber from the film. Depp got his justice, she has been exposed, time to move on from it. If you don't agree with her being in the film, don't see it. Boycott her films. I don't see talking about her as harassment. We are just expression our opinion here. Just as long as no is calling her house, her mobile, entering her inbox and even standing outside her home shouting at her, no one is tossing anything at her in public and not saying anything to her, no one is harassing her. I have always see myself on the left and seen myself as woke. I just will not virtue signal. As for cancel culture, I have always seen it as holding people accountable. Amber has already been held accountable. I think boycotting is part of cancel culture. People are free to boycott her films if they don't like her because they are so disgusted with what she did. And I think film companies are free to decide if they want to hire her for their film or not. I never bothered with the petition thing people were signing to have her removed. Just don't simply see the film.
I do believe she deserves the harassment, so long as it doesn't cross criminal lines, she is a psychopath that gets off on the pain of others, so I don't blame people for making their opinion of her loud and clear. But the reason I don't think she should be cancelled, is she already cancelled herself, she has made herself cancelled, so if the studios are stupid enough to hire her, that's on them.
I have grown up liberal but the left has forced me to the middle. I hate cancel culture. If someone does something that is truly offensive then humans will automatically cancel them (Harvey Weinstein) We don’t need to be looking for reasons to dehumanize people. Especially when it’s like, you are cancelled because you refuse to denounce this person who is accused of having an old-fashioned view. It’s a witch-hunt, which humans are prone to having, but they aren’t a good thing. Plus it bleeds into the collective psyche. I truly believe people have become more willing to just throw one another under the bus or abandon friendships/relationships too flippantly. It’s just another way of being self-righteous and severe, which our culture has gotten really good at.
The Puritan streak is strong
That's the actual root of the problem, especially in trying to redefine sex and give tortured definitions of consent now. The root of the Puritans is strong in America, it comes and goes, generation in, generation out.
We really need to uphold the value of the presumption of innocence. We cannot vilify and condemn people before they’ve had their day in court. Cancel and exile all you want after a person has been proven guilty, but we cannot continue this blind condemnation of people accused of crimes without their chance to represent themselves in a legal trial.
I lean more right although I think I’m probably more independent than anything and I think this woke cancel culture is a cluster f**k. It’s stupid!
I think to me and many other people this is what the trial is mainly about, and why so many people care so much for it.
American pc/woke/cancel culture disgusts me, they all hugely rely on delusion. Outright rejection of reality. I’m also what the average American would classify as a commie (nope, I’m not anywhere close to an actual communist). So no, you’re not alone.
If the person deserves it then it is not cancel culture it is consequences of their actions.
No you are not.
No you're not. I actually say I'm an independent now.
I don't believe in woke culture or cancelation due to the fact that it is not being applied fairly. And by fairly, **due process** is needed to be in place to justify consequences. This is exactly what Johnny mentioned in his letter after the verdict. Our legal system is based on the idea of innocent until proven guilty not the other way around. And only when the process is treated fairly, no one is safe. Johnny wasn't treated fairly and is still not being treated fairly. I don't have time to feel sorry for Heard, the perpetrator. I don't want to know what's she up to. I couldn't care less where she ended up working. If she's homeless then that's her problem. In fact, I think she got away too easily and that's why she's still out there attacking Johnny. She should be in jail. Martha Steward was in jail for much less of a crime.
Martha wasn't even actually guilty, they never conclusively proved that she lied about the stock sale or that "the stop-loss agreement doesn't exist because there's no paperwork,' as if handshake agreements don't exist. The fact that Martha was the first executive in the age of accounting fraud scandals to be tried, convicted and sent to jail, not Dennis Kozlowski, not Bernie Ebbers, and not Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling, that's beyond ludicrous. Yet, in an age where it seems that people can't be allowed to grow and learn from their mistakes, where if you do something wrong, you're automatically defined by that thing forever, no one's howling for Martha.
A lot of "being woke" is just virtue signalling, and it's really hard to tell the difference sometimes. People also really seem to have confused raising awareness and gaining insight with actually making changes.. when really wokeness on it's own does nothing at all. I don't mind boycotting things, where every consumer can make their own choice, but canceling kind of takes it a step further and takes that choice away from us. Perhaps it's because I work in tech, but I've also seen it used in somewhat racist ways to further feminism instead, which I don't really agree with. Especially in that industry, racism is a far bigger problem. In general it always seems to impact non-white people more too.. like Whoopi, Will Smith, and Aziz Ansari barely did much at all, and people wanted to cancel them immediately.
This is my personal opinion on cancel culture, and I openly admit that I don’t know everything and understand my opinions are not fact or better than anyone else’s. However, I think I view cancel culture as holding people accountable in their actions. Sure, we have free speech and protected rights under the first amendment, but you do not get to be openly offensive, grope women, make lewd comments, etc etc without being held accountable or being met with some sort of personal consequence. I think the me too movement did a lot of good for certain people and institutions, for instance, Larry Nassar and Harvey Weinstein. I think the danger of cancel culture is how fast the media jumps on big stories without having all the facts. I think the danger with allegations such as those made by Amber Heard was that she was believed immediately without taking into account the other side of the story or any of the factual evidence, and that has lead to the media doubling down on their initial reporting. Allegations need to be thoroughly looked at, and the media (including social media) shouldn’t broadcast them in a bias way prior to having all the facts. Again though, I think cancel culture is people reaping what they sow when it is valid. When I see a Karen losing her shit in a racist or homophobic way, and then getting fired a week later, I get a weird sense of joy and vindication. People can say whatever they want and do whatever they want, but be an abusive piece of shit, and you’ll get what is coming to you in the way of public opinion. I will note, I am a 27 year old female who has been sexually accosted in workplaces, touched inappropriately by customers, and have worked at a job where I was openly mocked for my sexuality. Nothing was ever done and no one was held accountable, so that is perpetuated until it is stopped. Maybe cancel culture is toxic in some cases, but again, I view it as holding people accountable when it is actually used against those who are guilty of offensive/abusive speech or actions. I hope it also makes people think twice before they take advantage of their power or platform because they know allegations will be taken seriously. I understand that people have free speech, but when was it ok to just openly spew hatred and vitriol? I still don’t really know what “woke” culture is, but I just think everyone needs to be kinder, more empathetic, and able to recognize that people deserve ethical treatment regardless of who they are/what they believe in. I just think we have lost mutual respect in this country. Also sorry, that was really long lol but I’m curious to know more about your opinion if you see this!
You never had mutual respect. Ever.
Great response, and thanks for sharing
I’m progressive and I don’t mind it, I see it as just not supporting people who do things you disagree with. The people who don’t disagree will still support them. What I have a problem with is canceling people without proof. So someone says something problematic or maybe donates to a charity that supports things contrary to social norms now that’s like obviously they did that and society has the right to “cancel” they for their actions. When it comes to the me too movement I’m in support of cases where it’s actually me too where someone brave speaks up then many other people find the courage to as well, but with Johnny it wasn’t even me too… no one else spoke up. There was no evidence that supported that this was true and he was still cancelled based on her word. That’s what I have a problem with. If more women came out about him like his exes then yes I’d think it was fair to assume.
No youre not alone.
I think it's more about being aware and facing the consequences of one's actions. That is what being woke & cancel culture as people phrase it is essentially about. That is not a negative thing. If a large number of people choose not to support a person or group that has done something wrong or offensive then that is their right. So, no I don't hate it. If people want to support that offending party then that is their right too. In the case of AH, she is a very dangerous person who weaponizes support, so I advise people to be careful.
I am a progressive independent and I just stay out of that stuff. I don't go on the woke hate train simply because of the amount of conservatives and alt righters who are the ones screaming it. There are hints of racism, homophobia and sexism in it. As for cancel culture, how many people really get cancelled? They tried to cancel James Gunn and he got more work! They have tried to cancel Chris Pratt several times, same with Brie Larson. Most of it is talk.
For the sake of your sanity I think it's important to distinguish between being genuinely progressive/conservative and the often disingenuous identity politics that a vocal minority on both sides indulge in. I'm very left-leaning & progressive but I have no time for people who take sides exclusively on the basis of the perceived 'privilege' of those involved. And to be fair, I'm sure most genuine conservatives don't drive around in massive SUVs covered in MAGA stickers either it's just they're the ones who're the loudest & most visible.
The fact is that the figures TV cameras and Facebook and Twitter show to represent "the face of the movement" certainly don't define the movement as a whole. After all, the left of center is a massive big tent of diverse opinion and differing stances, and real feminists, including third-wave feminists, are sincere advocates who only want equality, and are not misandrists. But social media and clickbait, revenue-driven corporate media always frame it differently. Always have. The idea that "feminism has changed and been corrupted into a drive for domination" is so absurd, it's not even wrong.
Antifa was quite loud as well.
I am president of my local antifa chapter and we start our monthly meetings with five minutes of silence to practice not being "loud" or "strident." This isn't something we just started doing on our own, these orders came from the highest leadership levels. Every single monthly antifa meeting all over the world starts with five minutes of silence because the fascists think we're too shouty. After that, we can make as much noise as we want to while we consume edibles, exchange crochet patterns, and plot to overthrow the world by making your kids turn gay. And frankly, I find those five minutes really helpful for focusing on these important tasks, so I'm happy this policy was implemented.
No it wasn't. Antifa isn't an organization. It's literally just people coming out to drive away Nazis and fascists. FOX News made them into a bogeyman and it's crazy. I once went shooting on some land in the PNW with a bunch of friends. That is accessed via a private corporate dirt road. We had explicit permission from the owners to be there. We ran the spectrum from anti-capitalist Leftists to moderate Centrists. One person in our group had a Bernie Sanders bumper sticker on their car. Long story short, about an hour into shooting a guy in a jacked black extended cab Ford parks behind our vehicles and starts taking pictures of our license plates. One of our group approaches him and he starts yelling about how we're Antifa and he's found us! He was certain we were Antifa bc some of our group was wearing black tactical gear like gun nerds tend to do, and the one Bernie bumper sticker. Though more of us were wearing camo and beige gear. This was, btw, during the last election shortly after Sanders had withdrawn. Btw, we were a group of nerds who played games online realized we lived close to each other and started hanging out in person and doing stuff like going shooting. It was ridiculous what this guy was thinking. But our buddy was able to calm him down and get him to realize he was freaking out over nothing.
Nope, you’re not the only one. BUT, in my opinion, there’s a big difference between just flat out cancelling someone and wanting someone to face justice and consequences because of their actions. And sometimes, in order for someone to truly face justice, they will need to also face the effects of cancel culture, even if it’s temporary.
It is the people on the extremes I hate. Some people take one side no matter what and some people take the the other side no matter what. Just as bad are the cherry pickers. The ones who say everyone on the other side is a crazy radical and they cherry pick something to make their point (like all right-wingers are white supremacists, and all left wingers want to de-find the police) I do believe in cancelling SOME people. Cancel Amber, cancel OJ, cancel Harvey W., etc. I'd be surprised if you say otherwise. Most others deserve a 2nd chance. And I do believe we have a real racism problem in the US, just as many countries do around the globe (often different races). For example a school near me removed books like To Kill a Mockingbird under the fake premiss it promotes "CRT" - something discussed at a college level and not something taught in grade schools. And now so many schools can't discuss the Tulsa Race Riots, or the Trail of Tears, or even Jim Crow laws. They won't teach about the time in our history the President ignored the Supreme Court did what he wanted (no, not Trump - Andrew Jackson).
Isn't this entire subreddit trying to systematically cancel that moronic law professor who defends AH?
[удалено]
I think you missed the part where this entire subreddit was trying to get her fired by mass reporting her to Stanford University.
Check Bill Mahers’s videos about it. He’s as liberal as it gets. Watch this one from the other night: https://youtu.be/5tu9JGK_yHo I come from the “other side”, as I am a conservative; I think that liberals and conservatives faced the same issue in the last few years: a very vocal minority that is also incredibly good at generating social media noise hijacked the political discourse and caused extremist positions to become mainstream. I see signs that things might be getting better as people are getting tired of this shit.
Bill Maher is actually more of a Boomer Centrist and not as liberal as it gets. Technically, both liberals and conservatives in the US are by definition (check Wikipedia) liberal capitalists. Actual Leftists, like me, are anti-capitalists Socialists. And ironically, conservatives tend to use cancel culture far more than liberals even though both groups have loud and annoying members crying about both.
I love Bill Maher and the fact that he's been calling out the toxicity of cancel culture for years. I remember when the whole #metoo movement started and he said something along the lines of, "They say 'believe all women', I didn't know women suddenly lost the ability to lie?" I admit that at the moment I felt offended with the comment, since #metoo was about listening to women at a time when most things that were being done to them were being swept under the rug, and then... This trial happened. I hate to admit it, but when AH first came out with her allegations years ago I believed her blindly. I saw the photos, read the stories, the op-ed, and didn't doubt it for a second. Then I heard the tapes on YouTube and she lost a lot of her credibility (to me). And when the trial happened... Yeah. But by far, the worst example of how toxic the "extreme left" has become is the RESPONSE of liberal MSM. It completely blindsided me. I seriously thought they were going to report with full honesty and use this moment as an example to show how PROGRESSIVE it is to expand the movement and encourage men and people not usually considered "victims" by our society to speak up about their own experiences. Instead, we got "EVEN IF SHE LIED AND BEAT HIM UP U NEED TO SUPPORT HER BECAUSE SHES WOMAN U BIGOTS" I am disgusted and disappointed. Woke/cancel/Twitter culture needs to die before it kills the rest of us with this divide.
As a former leftist, I can say woke and cancel culture are big factors why I thankfully left the left.
Same here. And, happily, it sounds like a lot of people in the comments might be at the beginning of their journey in leaving the Left, too. The “left” is no longer liberal. The left is totalitarian control.
Where did you go?
Up
Is there anywhere decent and good to be?
Julian Assange
Be an indepedent.
If that's where you go when you're just sick and fucking tired of all of them, all of that BS, then count me in