Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

“Cancel Culture” and “Woke”


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Because he kind of sucked, created a crappy atmosphere, and really stopped caring about football.  

He makes more money at his new job.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.9k
  • 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.

Cancelling an awards show might be the best thing ever to emerge from the woke movement.  If they cancel the Oscars, I might become pro-woke.

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

16 hours ago, General Malaise said:

He has made a TON of money for Nike too.  

You think so?  How many more Nike products were sold solely because they used Kaepernick as a rep?  I'd be surprised if it was that much, but that is probably very difficult to quantify.  He fit in their brand and marketing scheme well, but they were already very well established and would have been fairly similar with or without him.  I think they just didn't want to get beaten to the punch by someone like Adidas or Puma.  I saw it more of a defensive move (protecting market share) rather than offensive (gaining market share).

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Jayrod said:

You think so?  How many more Nike products were sold solely because they used Kaepernick as a rep?  I'd be surprised if it was that much, but that is probably very difficult to quantify.  He fit in their brand and marketing scheme well, but they were already very well established and would have been fairly similar with or without him.  I think they just didn't want to get beaten to the punch by someone like Adidas or Puma.  I saw it more of a defensive move (protecting market share) rather than offensive (gaining market share).

I know so.  

Quote

 

Nike released an all-black jersey to commemorate the four years since former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick took a knee to peacefully protest against systemic racism and social injustice during the National Anthem.

The Icon Jersey 2.0, which retails for $150, went on sale Thursday morning and sold out in less than a minute, Nike confirmed to CNN.

This is not the first time that Nike's Kaepernick-themed apparel has quickly sold out. The Icon Jersey 1.0 was released last year and Kaepernick announced that the jersey sold out in approximately 10 hours. In 2018, Kaepernick said on social media that a Kaepernick Icon tee sold out in a few hours.

 

He fit in their brand and marketing scheme well, but they were already very well established and would have been fairly similar with or without him.

That is speculation on your part.  We don't KNOW for certain how their share price would perform absent Colin.  But here's the data.  When they renewed their endorsement deal with him in Sept. 2018 (two years after playing football) their market cap was roughly 127 Billion.  Today it's 213 Billion.  It's possible Nike would achieve that without Kaepernick's endorsement deal.  But it's a fact that his involvement didn't hurt the company, despite the  #Boycott Nike campaign.  The guy is an icon and his merch is hot.  It just is, man.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Jayrod said:

You think so?  How many more Nike products were sold solely because they used Kaepernick as a rep?  I'd be surprised if it was that much, but that is probably very difficult to quantify.  He fit in their brand and marketing scheme well, but they were already very well established and would have been fairly similar with or without him.  I think they just didn't want to get beaten to the punch by someone like Adidas or Puma.  I saw it more of a defensive move (protecting market share) rather than offensive (gaining market share).

31% increase as a matter of fact.

Nike was failing with the younger demographics and aligning themselves to such hot button social topics put them in the "cool" category with that demo 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/25/2021 at 12:17 PM, IvanKaramazov said:

This is why Tyreek Hill has a super bowl ring while Mr. Random Fifth-Rounder who roughs up his girlfriend probably ends up working at a car dealership someplace.

The difference between those two people is that ... Hill is a non-random fifth-rounder?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this correct?

The reason why so many extremely woke people turn out to have been bigoted in the past is because bigotry used to be the best way to bully and intimidate people, but now performative anti-bigotry is the best way to bully and intimidate people. An evolving toolset for sociopaths.

It seems somewhat plausible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, glvsav37 said:

31% increase as a matter of fact.

Nike was failing with the younger demographics and aligning themselves to such hot button social topics put them in the "cool" category with that demo 

Very true.  Nike was dealing with a loyal but aging demographic.  The  Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods age groups are between 44-60.    They needed a shot in the arm and Kappy came along at the right time. Kappy is no spring chicken but the timing was perfect.

Make no mistake Nike is "woke"  but in business marketing sense.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the first time, but Dr Seuss is back under fire as we get ready for "Read Across America Day"

Quote

 

“Realizing that many schools continue to celebrate ‘Read Across America Day’ in partial recognition of Dr. Seuss’ birthday, it is important for us to be cognizant of research that may challenge our practice in this regard,” Loudoun County Schools said in an announcement as reported by the Daily Wire. “As we become more culturally responsive and racially conscious, all building leaders should know that in recent years there has been research revealing radical undertones in the books written and the illustrations drawn by Dr. Seuss.”

After reading 50 of Dr. Seuss’ books, many of which were written in the 1950s, Learning for Justice found of the 2,240 identified human characters, there were only 45 of color and 43 of those “exhibited behaviors and appearances that align with harmful and stereotypical Orientalist tropes.”

Learning for Justice found Dr. Seuss’ books are plagued with “orientalism, anti-Blackness, and White supremacy.” Additionally, too many of the non-White characters are male. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, glvsav37 said:

Additionally, too many of the non-white characters were male

Oh, this deserves the rolling emoji right next to it. Too many male star-bellied sneetches! Too many!

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

Oh, this deserves the rolling emoji right next to it. Too many male star-bellied sneetches! Too many!

Hmm.  And how exactly do they know they are male?   They look in the sneetch's breetches?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

Hmm.  And how exactly do they know they are male?   They look in the sneetch's breetches?

They're definitely male, because #####es wear britches, not breetches, for sheezus.

Edited by rockaction
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

The difference between those two people is that ... Hill is a non-random fifth-rounder?

I don't get it. That was definitely my point -- super-stars get second and third and fourth chances, and backups don't.

Sorry if that didn't across right.

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

I don't get it. That was definitely my point -- super-stars get second and third and fourth chances, and backups don't.

Sorry if that didn't across right.

Could also include Adrian Peterson and Ray Rice in proving that point.

Rice only got cancelled after the video went public, if it stayed private he is still playing

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I don't get it. That was definitely my point -- super-stars get second and third and fourth chances, and backups don't.

Sorry if that didn't across right.

I figured you knew that Hill was a fifth-rounder, but it was phrased as if it might be contrasting superstars with fifth-rounders, in which case Tyreek Hill would be an unintentionally funny example since he's both.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

That's what I'm asking. Is it kind of like how so many anti-gay activists turn out to be gay themselves?

Well there's a rose, in a fisted glove
Where the eagle flies with the dove
And if you can't be with the one you love, honey, love the one you're with
Do do do do do do do do

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Cowboysfan8 said:

And then they came for Dr Seuss smh

The real quandry will be when the woke culture realizes that R.E.M. once mentioned Dr. Seuss in a song and internally battles with themselves over whether or not to cancel Michael Stipe. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FairWarning said:

So who is feeling the emotional scars of Dr Seuss?  Can they sue the 1st grade teacher and school?  

I'm so sick of this "book banning" woke BS. Dr. Seuss was just praised by the last 2 administrations, yet now it's racist?? Censorship, nazi tactics, thought police BS.

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

I'm so sick of this "book banning" woke BS. Dr. Seuss was just praised by the last 2 administrations, yet now it's racist?? Censorship, nazi tactics, thought police BS.

Hey according to many on this board, this stuff is only discussed on Hannity and isn't real.  Quit yer bellyaching.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, crackattack said:

I'm so sick of this "book banning" woke BS. Dr. Seuss was just praised by the last 2 administrations, yet now it's racist?? Censorship, nazi tactics, thought police BS.

Also not a fan of banning books.  Looking squarely at you, Texas. :hot:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it banning though? Seems some places were upset about this...but the company reviewed this stuff over a year, worked with educators and others, and came to this on their own vs. being forced to do so.

 

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

So who is feeling the emotional scars of Dr Seuss?  Can they sue the 1st grade teacher and school?  

The Lorax made me feel personally responsible for killing the planet.  Does that count?

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Is it banning though? Seems some places were upset about this...but the company reviewed this stuff over a year, worked with educators and others, and came to this on their own vs. being forced to do so.

 

Sometimes your semantics gets really annoying.  Wait, no, it's always annoying.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/27/2021 at 9:22 AM, Maurile Tremblay said:

Is this correct?

The reason why so many extremely woke people turn out to have been bigoted in the past is because bigotry used to be the best way to bully and intimidate people, but now performative anti-bigotry is the best way to bully and intimidate people. An evolving toolset for sociopaths.

It seems somewhat plausible.

It is undoubtedly a tool used by bullies.  It is used to both excuse riots on one side and then rationalize the criminalization of similar actions from the other side.  It is not just restricted to sociopaths.  

  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the 6 Dr Seuss books that are being removed, I’ve never heard of 5 of them. The only one I can barely remember is Mulberry Street and even that isn’t one of his classics. If they’re racist, if they offend people, they should be gone. We don’t watch Song of the South anymore either; that doesn’t mean Pinocchio is next. The classic Dr Seuss books aren’t going away. Neither are the classic Roald Dahl books, despite the fact that he was a notorious anti-Semite. Neither are the classic Disney movies. You guys are freaking out because you want to freak out. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, supermike80 said:

Sometimes your semantics gets really annoying.  Wait, no, it's always annoying.

The left is now utilizing corporatism to take away free speech rights which it failed to accomplish by governmental means.  It is a movement to create a liberal utopia of leftwing groupthink.  It is an apparent loophole around discrimination laws to censor and punish individuals by using government influence with the assistance of corporations.  

  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since people in this thread are apparently allergic to posting links to explain what they're talking about, here's one for easy reference for anybody who stumbles into this thread by accident.  

Quote

Two specific examples, according to the study, are found in the books "The Cat's Quizzer: Are YOU Smarter Than the Cat in the Hat?" and "If I Ran the Zoo."

"In ("The Cat's Quizzer"), the Japanese character is referred to as 'a Japanese,' has a bright yellow face, and is standing on what appears to be Mt. Fuji," the authors wrote.

This seems innocuous to me, if a little archaic.  I get the objections though.  

Quote

Regarding "If I Ran the Zoo," the study points out another example of Orientalism and White supremacy.

"The three (and only three) Asian characters who are not wearing conical hats are carrying a White male on their heads in 'If I Ran the Zoo.' The White male is not only on top of, and being carried by, these Asian characters, but he is also holding a gun, illustrating dominance. The text beneath the Asian characters describes them as 'helpers who all wear their eyes at a slant' from 'countries no one can spell,'" the study authors wrote.

If I were in charge of the Seuss library, I would [s]probably[/s] pull this one too.  (Edit: Actually, this one isn't a close decision). 

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

Since people in this thread are apparently allergic to posting links to explain what they're talking about, here's one for easy reference for anybody who stumbles into this thread by accident.  

This seems innocuous to me, if a little archaic.  I get the objections though.  

If I were in charge of the Seuss library, I would probably pull this one too.  

 

 

Right. We don’t watch cartoons with Speedy Gonzalez anymore either. The complaints about this are ridiculous. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Might as well just start burning books we find "offensive"! It's been done in the past. Don't ever want to offend anyone ever! Art and new literature and cultural activities will be dictated by the offended!! What could be better in a free society!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, crackattack said:

Might as well just start burning books we find "offensive"! It's been done in the past. Don't ever want to offend anyone ever! Art and new literature and cultural activities will be dictated by the offended!! What could be better in a free society!!

See this is the type of over the top, ridiculous rhetoric that caused me to believe this whole “movement” is disingenuous. 
Did the removal of Song of the South result in other Disney movies being banned? 
Did the removal of Speedy Gonzalez cartoons result in other Warner Brothers cartoon characters being banned? 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Shifting gears back to the Gina Carano stuff....Damn I love Bill Burr

https://www.indiewire.com/2021/03/bill-burr-gina-carano-mandalorian-firing-1234620604/
 

Quote

 

Bill Burr Addresses ‘Mandalorian’ Co-Star Gina Carano’s Firing: ‘She Was an Absolute Sweetheart’
Burr takes issue with "people just waiting, laying in the weeds" finding a reason to cancel someone.

“It’s a weird time….Unless she did some truly horrible #### or said overtly racist ####,” Burr said about Carano. “I don’t know. I think there is just too many channels. And then you gotta do sensational ####…I don’t know what the #### it is. I’m on that ####### show. Now, I gotta watch what the #### I say.”

“She was an absolute sweetheart. Super nice ####### person,” Burr later said of the actress. “And you know whatever and somehow someone will take this video and they’ll make me say something else and try to get rid of my bald action figure…It’s how it is out there. It’s ####### crazy times. People just waiting, laying in the weeds.”

....

Later in the podcast, Burr elaborated on his views of cancel culture by saying, “Now it’s becoming like, ‘Hey you made an ignorant comparison. (flushing sound) There goes your dream, right? I look at that and it’s like, ‘Who the #### stands up to that?’”

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Of the 6 Dr Seuss books that are being removed, I’ve never heard of 5 of them. The only one I can barely remember is Mulberry Street and even that isn’t one of his classics. If they’re racist, if they offend people, they should be gone. We don’t watch Song of the South anymore either; that doesn’t mean Pinocchio is next. The classic Dr Seuss books aren’t going away. Neither are the classic Roald Dahl books, despite the fact that he was a notorious anti-Semite. Neither are the classic Disney movies. You guys are freaking out because you want to freak out. 

I don't think the bold is correct. Art reflects the time in which it was made. Surely we are sophisticated enough to understand that.

Do you think Huck Finn should be removed or changed?

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

See this is the type of over the top, ridiculous rhetoric that caused me to believe this whole “movement” is disingenuous. 
Did the removal of Song of the South result in other Disney movies being banned? 
Did the removal of Speedy Gonzalez cartoons result in other Warner Brothers cartoon characters being banned? 
 

So cancel culture needs to have a big bang event where everything offensive to somebody somewhere is wiped out all at once...otherwise it doesn't exist and is ridiculous.  Is that what you are saying?

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

Of the 6 Dr Seuss books that are being removed, I’ve never heard of 5 of them. The only one I can barely remember is Mulberry Street and even that isn’t one of his classics. If they’re racist, if they offend people, they should be gone. We don’t watch Song of the South anymore either; that doesn’t mean Pinocchio is next. The classic Dr Seuss books aren’t going away. Neither are the classic Roald Dahl books, despite the fact that he was a notorious anti-Semite. Neither are the classic Disney movies. You guys are freaking out because you want to freak out. 

You said that if they’re racist, if they offend people, they should be gone....yet you seem to be incredibly self assured that the line has been drawn and it is not moving any further (doenst mean pinocchio is next, etc, etc).  Wanna bet there is more?

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.


×
×
  • Create New...