Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

“Cancel Culture” and “Woke”


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, massraider said:

Both sides attempt boycotts.  One has been more successful.  I don't feel like that's disingenuous.  

It's disingenuous because you're ignoring the fact that the left holds 99% of the power in entertainment, news and media.  It's not even debatable.

What you're saying is akin to blaming the girls in a track race where the winner is a transsexuals' biological boy, telling them that "he's just more succesfull".  When the entire game is rigged against you, that's not being "more successful".  That's winning because you control everything.  Unless you count "successful" as rigging the playing field in your favor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

That was way too long a post.  Gordon Gekko is looking at that and wondering why I couldn't tighten it up a little.

I make sure to tell Tim that he's wrong about something at least weekly.  It's my good deed of the day.

Right-wingers do something dumb: "Look at those right-wingers.  What a bunch of dummies." Progressives do something dumb: "Look at those right-wingers complaining about that thing we did.  What a

2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Anti-semitism is a different form of bigotry than racism but it’s still bigotry and like racism it has a terrible history. But not here though. We’ve only had minor incidents of anti-semitism in American history: some discrimination at times, a few bad incidents, one terrible lynching. Nothing like Europe. On the other hand our treatment of blacks and natives has been worse than any country on the globe save some of Central America. 

So I just want to make sure I understand.  Nazi's can only be referenced with regard to bigotry or if specifically something is being discussed with regard to where America committed sins in the past.  Because nothing could happen in the future if it didn't happen in the past.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

You’re not the victim you think you are. Sorry but you’re not. 

Interesting.  So the guy whose side has rigged the game is telling everyone else that they are not a victim.   

You're just not living in reality, Tim. Or you refuse to pull aside the curtain.  In either case, it's absurd.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, djmich said:

So I just want to make sure I understand.  Nazi's can only be referenced with regard to bigotry or if specifically something is being discussed with regard to where America committed sins in the past.  Because nothing could happen in the future if it didn't happen in the past.

You can mention Nazis anytime you want. And I can offer my opinion of what is and what is not offensive anytime I want. It’s a free country. 
If the government ever insisted on Gina Carano being fired for her comments, I would defend her 100%. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

You can mention Nazis anytime you want. And I can offer my opinion of what is and what is not offensive anytime I want. It’s a free country. 
If the government ever insisted on Gina Carano being fired for her comments, I would defend her 100%. 

They are not applying the rules evenly.  See Pedro Pascal for further details.

Edited by BladeRunner
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BladeRunner said:

Interesting.  So the guy whose side has rigged the game is telling everyone else that they are not a victim.   

You're just not living in reality, Tim. Or you refuse to pull aside the curtain.  In either case, it's absurd.

I’m almost afraid to ask but what does “my side has rigged the game” mean exactly? 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

I’m almost afraid to ask but what does “my side has rigged the game” mean exactly? 

Listen.  You can play obtuse all day long if you want, but you know exactly what we mean.  If you can't even agree that the rules aren't being applied evenly then you won't believe anything that doesn't fit your DNC narrative.

I can only lead you to the water, I can't make you drink it.  You'd rather have the Kool-Aid.  And why not?  As long as its favoring you then who gives two beans, amiright?

Edited by BladeRunner
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BladeRunner said:

They are not applying the rules evenly.  See Pedro Pascal for further details.

They’re not the government. They can apply the rules however they want. 
As for Pedro, I’m still pissed that he mocked the Mountain. He had that won. Stupid! 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Listen.  You can play obtuse all day long if you want, but you know exactly what we mean.  If you can't even agree that the rules aren't being applied evenly then you won't believe anything that doesn't fit your DNC narrative.

I can only lead you to the water, I can't make you drink it.  You'd rather have the Kool-Aid.  And why not?  As long as its favoring you then who gives two beans, amiright?

I have no idea what “my side has rigged the game” means. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Of the ones you mentioned the only one I found personally offensive was AOC. If she was working for Disney I would have been glad if she was fired over it. 
I’ve never liked AOC and I could never ever vote for her. But in recent days she has redeemed herself in my eyes through what she has done for the people of Texas. I now think she’s a pretty good person though still wrong about so many things. 

Dude, really you just changed your mind on AOC?

You thought Biden comparing Trump to Joseph Goebbels was OK?

You thought Pelosi comparing federal agents to Stormtroppers was OK?

Neither of those is in the context of bigotry or racism, how do you reconcile that against what appeared to be your litmus test.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a double standard between Pascal and Carano? Sure. Why? Probably because Pascal made his foolish, offensive analogy in defense of innocent mistreated children, and Carano made her foolish, offensive analogy in defense of victimless adults accused of bigotry. That makes me more sympathetic to Pascal myself. He was still being foolish and offensive though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Is there a double standard between Pascal and Carano? Sure. Why? Probably because Pascal made his foolish, offensive analogy in defense of innocent mistreated children, and Carano made her foolish, offensive analogy in defense of victimless adults accused of bigotry. That makes me more sympathetic to Pascal myself. He was still being foolish and offensive though. 

Always an excuse as to why it's cute when your side does it.  I'd like to reply with something a little more harsher, but I don't want to run afoul of the rules.

Let's just say you're just all over the place with your reasoning.  None of it appears to be based in fact, but in feelings and narratives.

Edited by BladeRunner
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, djmich said:

Dude, really you just changed your mind on AOC?

You thought Biden comparing Trump to Joseph Goebbels was OK?

You thought Pelosi comparing federal agents to Stormtroppers was OK?

Neither of those is in the context of bigotry or racism, how do you reconcile that against what appeared to be your litmus test.

4 good questions: 

1. Yes. When people do good things I tend to reevaluate them. Also when they do bad things. 
2. Yes I did. At first I thought it was over the top. But after consideration, I now regard Donald Trump’s “Big Lie” about the election to be the single biggest, most dangerous and worst lie in American history, even surpassing the Lost Cause. So now I think the specific comparison to Goebbels is apt. I would strongly object if Trump was compared to any other Nazi, but this particular one fits IMO. 
3. Over the top but not particularly offensive. 
4. I think I just did. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

Always an excuse as to why it's cute when your side does it.  I'd like to reply with something a little more harsher, but I don't want to run afoul of the rules.

You're just all over the place with reasoning not based in fact, but in feelings and narratives.

The liberal justice system is totally based on:

1.. Gender/Race/Politics of offender.

2.. Gender/Race/Politics of victim.

Oddly i am not even sure liberals would deny it.  But our idea of a blind justice system where all people are viewed equally has been thrown in the dumpster by the left.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

I disagree. We are on a slippery slope. If things aren't opposed, they tend to escalate and get worse. You yourself have gone from not knowing what cancel culture is, to supporting it in an astonishingly short time. There's nothing offensive about the Auschwitz Memorial pointing this out. There's nothing wrong with Carano saying essentially the same thing.

If you want to argue that "political ideology" is equivalent to religious faith, that's your prerogative. Personally, I think that such comparisons devalue religion, but if you need to do so to make your point, so be it.

Nonetheless, Jewish persecution runs far deeper than simply ideology. The Jews in Germany weren't just persecuted for what they believed; they were persecuted for who they were -- in terms of both ethnic identity and national origin. And the persecution took place long before any government utilized the tools of "legal exclusion".

And that's where your Auschwitz comparison fails big time.

Gina Carano can avoid "persecution" by being silent. That option was not available to Jews in Nazi Germany.

And I'm basically on the same "side" as you when it comes to the Carano situation. I don't think the Gina Caranos of the world should be compelled to hide their ideological views, nor do I agree with firing someone in her position simply because they made a poor analogy on social media.

But your Jews-Conservatives metaphor is way, way off, to the point of blurring the line of where tasteful ends.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sea Duck said:

If you want to argue that "political ideology" is equivalent to religious faith, that's your prerogative. Personally, I think that such comparisons devalue religion, but if you need to do so to make your point, so be it.

I'm not and I don't.

Legit confused where you're getting this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, timschochet said:

4 good questions: 

1. Yes. When people do good things I tend to reevaluate them. Also when they do bad things. 
2. Yes I did. At first I thought it was over the top. But after consideration, I now regard Donald Trump’s “Big Lie” about the election to be the single biggest, most dangerous and worst lie in American history, even surpassing the Lost Cause. So now I think the specific comparison to Goebbels is apt. I would strongly object if Trump was compared to any other Nazi, but this particular one fits IMO. 
3. Over the top but not particularly offensive. 
4. I think I just did. 

I can’t wrap my ahead around all that, but thanks for answering.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nitpicking over the Jews-Nazis analogy and whether the people were doing the discriminating and rounding up and sending to concentration camps sounds like an exertion of time and effort unnecessary to the issue at hand. At some point, the volk was responsible for it. It wasn't a foreign movement, that's for sure. I'm not sure how we got on this tangent, but it seems like when the people became responsible is so far down the list of things Disney was concerned about the analogy as to render the niggling details of people/government responsibility moot. And the point is surely debatable, at least.

And tim changing his mind about AOC and Texas is probably the biggest dumb-### whopper of a fishing line I've ever seen on this board? Really?

That's a ####### joke.

Edited by rockaction
  • Laughing 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

The liberal justice system is totally based on:

1.. Gender/Race/Politics of offender.

2.. Gender/Race/Politics of victim.

Oddly i am not even sure liberals would deny it.  But our idea of a blind justice system where all people are viewed equally has been thrown in the dumpster by the left.

Our justice system is primarily based on wealth of the offender.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, rockaction said:

And tim changing his mind about AOC and Texas is probably the biggest dumb-### whopper of a fishing line I've ever seen on this board? Really?

I don't know - I kind of thought it explained some things.

When politicians engage in the most transparent opportunistic political theater, I often wonder "who's buying this?"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

I don't know - I kind of thought it explained some things.

When politicians engage in the most transparent opportunistic political theater, I often wonder "who's buying this?"

tim's a Streisand for it. Always has been.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2021 at 2:58 PM, IvanKaramazov said:

That said, I've been thinking recently about some of our various intellectual allegiances have changed recently.  If a person was active in the FFA fifteen years ago, we spent a massive amount of time debating religion.  In those debates, people like me occupied one "side," while prominent voices on the other "side" included people like Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens who claimed to be free thinkers who just wanted to be free from what they viewed as superstition.  I can't help but notice that an awful lot of folks (not all of course) who once identified with the new atheist movement have transitioned to one degree or another into the anti-woke camp, which is honestly pretty refreshing since they actually meant it when they said they didn't like irrationality and cultiness.   

My views on religion haven't changed and theirs haven't either, but we've both reacted similarly and predictably to this new, illiberal quasi-religious awakening.    

That’s where I sit   :goodposting:

Link to post
Share on other sites

A friendlier take on @timschochet's position is that he didn't like AOC's "concentration camps" comment (me neither), he thought at the time that she should have been "fired" over it (I disagree but whatever), and now that she's redeemed herself a bit he's happy that she got a second chance.

I think it's useful to reflect on the fact that most people who get fired/cancelled/whatever are suffering out-of-proportion punishment over a single episode that involves them behaving at their worst.  That's all we ever see, and it's yanked out of context of everything else they've done or will ever do.  If you can understand why AOC isn't demonic because she made one stupid analogy, then I don't see why it's so hard to extend that same grace to other people who say or do something stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

A friendlier take on @timschochet's position is that he didn't like AOC's "concentration camps" comment (me neither), he thought at the time that she should have been "fired" over it (I disagree but whatever), and now that she's redeemed herself a bit he's happy that she got a second chance.

I think it's useful to reflect on the fact that most people who get fired/cancelled/whatever are suffering out-of-proportion punishment over a single episode that involves them behaving at their worst.  That's all we ever see, and it's yanked out of context of everything else they've done or will ever do.  If you can understand why AOC isn't demonic because she made one stupid analogy, then I don't see why it's so hard to extend that same grace to other people who say or do something stupid.

It seems he can and has...to Pelosi, Biden, anyone on his side.  Hell, even Cuomo is getting triple benefit of the doubt. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, timschochet said:

I have no idea what “my side has rigged the game” means. 

Stop being obtuse tim.  Everyone knows that women, minorities, and their political supporters/party have always enjoyed outsized influence in America, and that white males have never gotten a fair shake. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rockaction said:

 

And tim changing his mind about AOC and Texas is probably the biggest dumb-### whopper of a fishing line I've ever seen on this board? Really?

That's a ####### joke.

Perhaps I need to clarify this further: 

What I changed my mind about is whether or not AOC is a good person. I normally don’t judge this based on politics. AOC had said some things in the past that made me think she really wasn’t a good person. Now I think she probably is. I think whats she’s done for Texas is noteworthy and terrific. 
I haven’t changed my mind about her politics. She’s not somebody I could ever support. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, tommyGunZ said:

Stop being obtuse tim.  Everyone knows that women, minorities, and their political supporters/party have always enjoyed outsized influence in America, and that white males have never gotten a fair shake. 

You’re joking but it seems like @BladeRunnermight actually believe this- unless I’m misunderstanding him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, tommyGunZ said:

Stop being obtuse tim.  Everyone knows that women, minorities, and their political supporters/party have always enjoyed outsized influence in America, and that white males have never gotten a fair shake. 

You should sit this one out again. You're taking something that was never said or implied and arguing against that. Stop twisting people's words to fit your narrative. 

Maybe you should find another form to go troll in.  Let's keep these forums clean of your nonsense.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BladeRunner said:

You should sit this one out again. You're taking something that was never said or implied and arguing against that. Stop twisting people's words to fit your narrative. 

Maybe you should find another form to go troll in.  Let's keep these forums clean of your nonsense.

Except that, given the chance to explain yourself, you refused, and I thought that what he wrote was a fair interpretation. 
If it’s not, then I invite you to explain. I’ll be grateful for the correction. 

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, timschochet said:

Except that, given the chance to explain yourself, you refused, and I thought that what he wrote was a fair interpretation. 
If it’s not, then I invite you to explain. I’ll be grateful for the correction. 

He's full of it and it's nowhere near a fair representation at all.  As usual, twist someone's words and then accuse them of those instead.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, timschochet said:

What exactly you meant when you wrote that my side has it rigged? 

The "rigged game" is the news, entertainment and media and the companies that make it up.  It's 99% driven by liberal agendas.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Perhaps I need to clarify this further: 

What I changed my mind about is whether or not AOC is a good person. I normally don’t judge this based on politics. AOC had said some things in the past that made me think she really wasn’t a good person. Now I think she probably is. I think whats she’s done for Texas is noteworthy and terrific. 
I haven’t changed my mind about her politics. She’s not somebody I could ever support. 

I was just venting. I have no real issue with whether you like AOC, or if you even like her as a politician. That's up to you. You're still simpatico in my book. Perhaps my tone didn't really come through. I'm exasperated and laughing more than anything.

I personally don't find her to be the worst thing in politics. I think she's short-sighted and not incredibly bright nor a deep thinker, though she tries. Until she gets real power, I won't really sweat her, unless she exerts influence on a national scale. Once she wields real power, then all bets are off.

Edited by rockaction
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rockaction said:

I was just venting. I have no real issue with whether you like AOC, or if you even like her as a politician. That's up to you. You're still simpatico in my book. Perhaps my tone didn't really come through. I'm exasperated and laughing more than anything.

I personally don't find her to be the worst thing in politics. I think she's short-sighted and not incredibly bright nor a deep thinker, though she tries. Until she gets real power, I won't really sweat her, unless she exerts influence on a national scale. Once she wields real power, then all bets are off.

I would rather have my rep fight for my district like she does.  I do think its a matter of time before she gets the power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

The "rigged game" is the news, entertainment and media and the companies that make it up.  It's 99% driven by liberal agendas.

There’s a huge Twitter troll advantage as well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, FairWarning said:

I would rather have my rep fight for my district like she does.  I do think its a matter of time before she gets the power.

Wasn’t she part of the fight that scared Amazon away from NY?

I really know nothing about her local work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, djmich said:

Wasn’t she part of the fight that scared Amazon away from NY?

I really know nothing about her local work.

Yes, she was. Probably a bad move, though this board debates it endlessly in her thread with fatguy taking the pro-AOC side of things and jon_mx taking the con.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, rockaction said:

I was just venting. I have no real issue with whether you like AOC, or if you even like her as a politician. That's up to you. You're still simpatico in my book. Perhaps my tone didn't really come through. I'm exasperated and laughing more than anything.

I personally don't find her to be the worst thing in politics. I think she's short-sighted and not incredibly bright nor a deep thinker, though she tries. Until she gets real power, I won't really sweat her, unless she exerts influence on a national scale. Once she wields real power, then all bets are off.

my thoughts exactly on AOC.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

The "rigged game" is the news, entertainment and media and the companies that make it up.  It's 99% driven by liberal agendas.

Proof:  All you have to do is go back to page 9 and see how people gobbled up the narrative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...