Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

“Cancel Culture” and “Woke”


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

You jumped into this thread to say that the 16 year old kid had it coming because he said [checks notes] that he's straight.  Does that sound reasonable to you?

I don’t think your interpretation of what I wrote is reasonable, no. 

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Fair enough...I still think that attitude is very prevalent in society.  To push back the other way to get a rise out of people.  Even from 16 year olds.

It absolutely is and it’s not good either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, djmich said:

It absolutely is and it’s not good either way.

Sure...I see it both with stuff similar to this (if that is indeed what he was doing)...and other things.  THink Cancel culture...going opposite of it to the extreme just to rebel against those woke liberals.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Could you explain what you meant, because that's definitely how it came across.

Sorry. 

I couldn’t find what the kid had said originally (my bad). I was skeptical of @djmich’s interpretation that he was just expressing his attraction towards women; I doubted that any trans or gay person would have a problem with that. I suspected that anybody who uses the term “superstraight” is expressing some sort of homophobic sentiment. Generally I have no problem when such statements (homophobic ones)  are criticized and even removed by Internet forums, and If that’s what folks are complaining about with “cancel culture”, then I personally see no issue with that. I DO have a big problem with trying to ruin the kids mother, and an even bigger problem with death threats, but I didn’t think it would be necessary to state that; any decent person would have a problem with that. I would never argue, in a billion zillion years that anyone deserved such treatment.


Later on in the discussion @supermike80 wrote that he couldn’t see any difference between one person proudly asserting his homosexuality and somebody else asserting his heterosexuality. This is, to me, the same sort of argument made by those who see no difference between “black pride” and “white pride”. It’s part of the whole white grievance thing which has swallowed up the Republican Party. And which the whole “cancel culture” stuff is so clearly a part of. IMO. 
 

Hope that clears it up? 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and you are supposed to boycott Amazon this week - no buying, no videos, and unplug your alexa.  

- A public service warning for the left.  #boycottamazon is trending.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, FairWarning said:

Oh, and you are supposed to boycott Amazon this week - no buying, no videos, and unplug your alexa.  

- A public service warning for the left.  #boycottamazon is trending.

F Alexa.

Though I did order a new scale this morning that is being delivered this afternoon. So freaking awesome.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, timschochet said:

Look with regards to me bringing up race: it’s not my fault that Republican Party, which used to be about preserving capitalism and freedom, is now about promoting white grievance. I can’t help the fact that you guys went from Ronald Reagan and the Wall Street Journal to Donald Trump and Gateway Pundit; it happened, and I can only comment about it. If you guys want to spend your time complaining about being the victim and seeing insidious patterns like “cancel culture” that don’t exist, I’m going to spend mine pointing out that it’s a losing political struggle because it’s based on fantasy. And I’m going to keep hoping that you guys return to providing a reasonable, respectable alternative  to the Democratic Party, as you once did in the days of old. 

:lol:  wtf?

 this has been a pretty bad day for you in here

 The good news is, tomorrow is a new day 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, timschochet said:

Sorry. 

I couldn’t find what the kid had said originally (my bad). I was skeptical of @djmich’s interpretation that he was just expressing his attraction towards women; I doubted that any trans or gay person would have a problem with that. I suspected that anybody who uses the term “superstraight” is expressing some sort of homophobic sentiment. Generally I have no problem when such statements (homophobic ones)  are criticized and even removed by Internet forums, and If that’s what folks are complaining about with “cancel culture”, then I personally see no issue with that. I DO have a big problem with trying to ruin the kids mother, and an even bigger problem with death threats, but I didn’t think it would be necessary to state that; any decent person would have a problem with that. I would never argue, in a billion zillion years that anyone deserved such treatment.


Later on in the discussion @supermike80 wrote that he couldn’t see any difference between one person proudly asserting his homosexuality and somebody else asserting his heterosexuality. This is, to me, the same sort of argument made by those who see no difference between “black pride” and “white pride”. It’s part of the whole white grievance thing which has swallowed up the Republican Party. And which the whole “cancel culture” stuff is so clearly a part of. IMO. 
 

Hope that clears it up? 

When someone posts a video of a guy calling a black person the N word and saying that people calling that out is cancel culture we're gonna let you ring the bell.  When someone posts a video of a guy saying vile #### about gay people and saying that's cancel culture we're gonna let you ring the bell.

Don't think we'll hear it though, because the only one that is arguing that's what cancel culture is, is you.

Also this is a 16yr old kid making tik toks like a million other kids...were you a perfect teenager?  How about showing some grace and understanding for people, even if they say something "controversial" before we destroy them.

Intolerance isn't good.  Wasn't good when muslims were the target, when jews were the target, wasn't good when religious folks wielded it against gays or loud music, wasn't good when people were targeted for thinking that communism had its merits....and its not good now.  This message brought to you by a white guy, so go ahead and knock a few points off the score.  

Edited by djmich
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sho nuff said:

Fair enough...I still think that attitude is very prevalent in society.  To push back the other way to get a rise out of people.  Even from 16 year olds.

Maybe he was being provocative.  But at 16 I give our children wide leeway in these type things.  

I also find nothing wrong with the expression of his sexual preferences, even if it displeases the political cause du jour.

Edited by Sand
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, djmich said:

When someone posts a video of a guy calling a black person the N word and saying that people calling that out is cancel culture we're gonna let you ring the bell.  When someone posts a video of a guy saying vile #### about gay people and saying that's cancel culture we're gonna let you ring the bell.

Don't think we'll hear it though, because the only one that is arguing that's what cancel culture is, is you.

Also this is a 16yr old kid making tik toks like a million other kids...were you a perfect teenager?  How about showing some grace and understanding for people, even if they say something "controversial" before we destroy them.

Intolerance isn't good.  Wasn't good when muslims were the target, when jews were the target, wasn't good when religious folks wielded it against gays or loud music, wasn't good when people were targeted for thinking that communism had its merits....and its not good now.  This message brought to you by a white guy, so go ahead and knock a few points off the score.  

I get you and I don’t disagree with ALMOST  anything you wrote. What I disagree with is your attempt to use this incident, and others, to present a pattern that doesn’t exist, 

And I also disagree with you about intolerance. I think society should be intolerant of racists, bigots, communists, Nazis, terrorists, fundamentalists, and New England Patriots fans. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, timschochet said:

Look with regards to me bringing up race: it’s not my fault that Republican Party, which used to be about preserving capitalism and freedom, is now about promoting white grievance. I can’t help the fact that you guys went from Ronald Reagan and the Wall Street Journal to Donald Trump and Gateway Pundit; it happened, and I can only comment about it. If you guys want to spend your time complaining about being the victim and seeing insidious patterns like “cancel culture” that don’t exist, I’m going to spend mine pointing out that it’s a losing political struggle because it’s based on fantasy. And I’m going to keep hoping that you guys return to providing a reasonable, respectable alternative  to the Democratic Party, as you once did in the days of old. 

I think a loaded statement like this needs to followed up with a recognition of the Democrat’s role in deteriorating race relations - namely their obsessive focus on identity politics.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, timschochet said:

Sorry. 

I couldn’t find what the kid had said originally (my bad). I was skeptical of @djmich’s interpretation that he was just expressing his attraction towards women; I doubted that any trans or gay person would have a problem with that. I suspected that anybody who uses the term “superstraight” is expressing some sort of homophobic sentiment. Generally I have no problem when such statements (homophobic ones)  are criticized and even removed by Internet forums, and If that’s what folks are complaining about with “cancel culture”, then I personally see no issue with that. I DO have a big problem with trying to ruin the kids mother, and an even bigger problem with death threats, but I didn’t think it would be necessary to state that; any decent person would have a problem with that. I would never argue, in a billion zillion years that anyone deserved such treatment.


Later on in the discussion @supermike80 wrote that he couldn’t see any difference between one person proudly asserting his homosexuality and somebody else asserting his heterosexuality. This is, to me, the same sort of argument made by those who see no difference between “black pride” and “white pride”. It’s part of the whole white grievance thing which has swallowed up the Republican Party. And which the whole “cancel culture” stuff is so clearly a part of. IMO. 
 

Hope that clears it up? 

The bolded is what I think of as cancel culture. Some people think that because things like racism, anti-semitism, transphobia, etc  are so harmful that it justifies going on the attack and ruining people. That these issues are so high stakes that if you get a whiff of it, it's no holds barred. It's real and it happens. 

I agree that a lot of the stuff that people complain about in here is just a reluctance to join in on the advancement of our culture (the Dr. Seuss thing for example). They're being left behind. The world is changing in ways that they don't like and so they're all freaked out about it. Instead of attacking them we've got to figure out a way to make them feel included in our project of making the world a better place for our great, great grandchildren. Easier said than done. 

Edited by Westerberg
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a thing being overlooked in the "super straight" video—b/c some have not watched or, or watched it w/o context—is that there is a current belief in (some of) the Trans and trans supporter community that if a "straight guy" would not date a "trans girl" he is considered "Transphobic" and needs to be canceled. B/c by their definition, she now is fully a female (by identity not just though surgery), and any straight guy is denying her existence as a woman by refusing to date her. 

So this dude just made silly video saying that if identifying a straight male isnt enough, he was going to "identify" as "super straight" and he set the rule that in this identity it is ok to only want to date biologically born genders. He basically took a page out of their "make up a gender identity" playbook and used it against the gender woke group and they didi not like it one bit—as we see. 

But I guess it begs the question, how far can we go with this ridiculousness? Taking gender out of it, we all have "preferences" that we have used to pick our partners....some physical (too fat, too skinny), others personality (too shy, too outgoing), etc. I think if we are ok with those, deciding to date a girl with or without a penis is a pretty logical choice that should be left up to the other partner. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Westerberg said:

I agree that a lot of the stuff that people complain about in here is just a reluctance to join in on the advancement of our culture (the Dr. Seuss thing for example). They're being left behind. The world is changing in ways that they don't like and so they're all freaked out about it. Instead of attacking them we've got to figure out a way to make them feel included in our project of making the world a better place for our great, great grandchildren. Easier said than done. 

Not necessarily. I'm not being left behind. Nobody as literate and as cognitively blessed as some of us are can ever be "left behind." Nobody is leaving me -- yes, me, personally -- behind. Society might not be "progressing," first of all, to a "forward" state in order to be able to leave free thinkers behind. It might be descending, upon rationality's grounds, into a maelstrom of wanton #######ing and rally 'round the Maypole for your favorite cultural revolutionary relic that does it no good, but it is not leaving a lot of us that dissent "behind."

Cultural "advancements" are often not as such. I'd submit that not being able to pick your own partner's genitals without a derisive label would be more totalitarian in nature than a march of freedom's progress. Why do all the dystopias focus on breeding at one point? Because sex is the most intimate thing we have. We are fully realized when we are able to choose our sexual partners, our sexual potential that results in birth and life. Why in Zamyatin's "We" are you compelled to have rotating partners and forced lovemaking sessions at certain times within your life cubicle? Why in a Brave New World are you assigned a partner by genetic merit for efficiency? Or in Orwell why do you have the prevention of isolated couples intermixed with an overweening Duty To The Party for all things sex? Because the state, or society writ large, interfering with your choices at that fundamental a level reveals how tethered one is to the monstrous state and how much power society has over your decisions in that realm.

But enough about sex. Left behind how else? By economics or status? The New Communist Man was billed as progress. Five-Year Economic Plans were billed as progress. The Nazi ubermensch was billed as progress. These now sit on the dustbin of history. There are tons of things billed as progress that aren't progress at all, nor is anyone left behind, rather, they've wound up in camps and gulags at the gunpoint and behest of simple majoritarian knuggle-dragging thinking.

Generally, nobody is getting "left behind." They're determining what to accept into their life and what not to accept. And I would caution that the masses will not only not like this new state where they are "left behind," but that their hearts and minds will rebel at the thought. Then things will get uglier. Uglier than January 6th. There will be weird coalitions shaping into formation whose surface we have yet to see scratched. Not a whole lot of people are going in for the "left behind" status, if that is really the effect of what is happening because of the brashest and the loudest and those with offices or positions of sinecure. Prepare for backlash if this is the case, but it won't be because you're moving forward and leaving everybody "behind," it will be because the new program is likely intrusive, obtrusive, and nowhere near what truth did.

Edited by rockaction
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/4/2021 at 7:23 PM, NorvilleBarnes said:
On 3/4/2021 at 6:10 PM, squistion said:

They tried to cancel French culture (or rather cuisine) by renaming French Fries and French Toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast respectively. 

I'm going to pretend you actually believe this :lmao:

Best to just surrender here. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/6/2021 at 12:42 PM, squistion said:

Charles Blow wrote a NYT opinion piece (which I can't link due to paywall) that argues classic cartoon characters, such as Pepe Le Pew and Speedy Gonzales, popularized negative stereotypes and 'normalized rape culture'

As a result Pepe Le Pew is trending on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/search?q="Pepe Le Pew"&src=trend_click&vertical=trends

Blow responded to some of the outrage expressed over the article:

Charles M. Blow @CharlesMBlow 4h

RW blogs are mad bc I said Pepe Le Pew added to rape culture. Let’s see.

1. He grabs/kisses a girl/stranger, repeatedly, w/o consent and against her will.

2. She struggles mightily to get away from him, but he won’t release her

3. He locks a door to prevent her from escaping.

https://twitter.com/CharlesMBlow/status/1368200161558663168 (cartoon clip at link)

This helped teach boys that “no” didn’t really mean no, that it was a part of “the game”, the starting line of a power struggle. It taught overcoming a woman’s strenuous, even physical objections, was normal, adorable, funny. They didn’t even give the woman the ability to SPEAK.

Charles blow is the same person that labeled gender rebeals as violent. Lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/7/2021 at 9:42 AM, bigbottom said:
On 3/7/2021 at 9:33 AM, timschochet said:

My first reaction was to suspect that your characterization of the guy as simply “being attracted to women” is false, amd that perhaps he deserves having his post removed. I didn’t make any comment about the death threats because it should be unnecessary for me to do so. 

His post wasn’t removed because of the content. He took it down himself because of the threats and attempts to ruin his mother’s business. 

Probably because he wouldn't wear the ribbon.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, rockaction said:

Not necessarily. I'm not being left behind. Nobody as literate and as cognitively blessed as some of us are can ever be "left behind." Nobody is leaving me -- yes, me, personally -- behind. Society might not be "progressing," first of all, to a "forward" state in order to be able to leave free thinkers behind. It might be descending, upon rationality's grounds, into a maelstrom of wanton #######ing and rally 'round the Maypole for your favorite cultural revolutionary relic that does it no good, but it is not leaving a lot of us that dissent "behind."

Cultural "advancements" are often not as such. I'd submit that not being able to pick your own partner's genitals without a derisive label would be more totalitarian in nature than a march of freedom's progress. Why do all the dystopias focus on breeding at one point? Because sex is the most intimate thing we have. We are fully realized when we are able to choose our sexual partners, our sexual potential that results in birth and life. Why in Zamyatin's "We" are you compelled to have rotating partners and forced lovemaking sessions at certain times within your life cubicle? Why in a Brave New World are you assigned a partner by genetic merit for efficiency? Or in Orwell why do you have the prevention of isolated couples intermixed with an overweening Duty To The Party for all things sex? Because the state, or society writ large, interfering with your choices at that fundamental a level reveals how tethered one is to the monstrous state and how much power society has over your decisions in that realm.

But enough about sex. Left behind how else? By economics or status? The New Communist Man was billed as progress. Five-Year Economic Plans were billed as progress. The Nazi ubermensch was billed as progress. These now sit on the dustbin of history. There are tons of things billed as progress that aren't progress at all, nor is anyone left behind, rather, they've wound up in camps and gulags at the gunpoint and behest of simple majoritarian knuggle-dragging thinking.

Generally, nobody is getting "left behind." They're determining what to accept into their life and what not to accept. And I would caution that the masses will not only not like this new state where they are "left behind," but that their hearts and minds will rebel at the thought. Then things will get uglier. Uglier than January 6th. There will be weird coalitions shaping into formation whose surface we have yet to see scratched. Not a whole lot of people are going in for the "left behind" status, if that is really the effect of what is happening because of the brashest and the loudest and those with offices or positions of sinecure. Prepare for backlash if this is the case, but it won't be because you're moving forward and leaving everybody "behind," it will be because the new program is likely intrusive, obtrusive, and nowhere near what truth did.

Did you read the next sentence? I don't want to leave anyone behind.

I don't see how you can argue that these folks haven't been left behind though. They're toiling away in meaningless low paying jobs. Those blue collar jobs that you could retire from, that you could provide for a family of three on, those aren't there anymore (at least in the number that they used to) and they're not coming back. The gap between these folks and the college educated is widening by the day. These folks have little economic power.

They don't see themselves reflected back in the media and entertainment they consume (and when they do, they don't like it). They think the news is lying to them. They have little cultural power.

And so we get Trump and January 6th. And we're going to see this kind of thing escalate if we don't find a way to include them in the "we". 

Sure, not everyone that rails against what people want to call "pc" or "cancel culture" falls into this group. That's clearly true. I think finding a way to make these folks feel including is incredibly important though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/7/2021 at 11:05 AM, sho nuff said:

Not defending any death threats or business cancelling...

But to respond to this...can the opposite also be asked?

Why would anyone make such a video if not trying to offend?

He probably thinks it’s as ridiculous as I do. 
 

Would anyone here date a trans?  Who would look down on anyone who would or wouldn’t date one?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vast majority of cancel efforts in the US have been conservatives, in particular evangelicals.  Ask a librarian. 

It's cartoons and children's books that are a bridge too far though. That seems off to me. 

This is what happens to a political party when they no longer have a platform.  

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, FairWarning said:

He probably thinks it’s as ridiculous as I do. 
 

Would anyone here date a trans?  Who would look down on anyone who would or wouldn’t date one?  

I woulnt date one but don't care about those that do

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, massraider said:

That's the goal. Get to the "I don't care what you doing in your personal life" stage.

It's not easy. 

It's actually quite easy, and I think most people are already there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, John123 said:
1 hour ago, massraider said:

That's the goal. Get to the "I don't care what you doing in your personal life" stage.

It's not easy. 

It's actually quite easy, and I think most people are already there. 

It is easy.  Except for some many ####### PEOPLE STILL WATCH THESE STUPID REALITY TV SHOWS!!!  Like who cares about the Kardashians or the lady with 3219658743 twinzies.  Until people stop watching that "entertainment", we will continue to have this click bait bull #### gender reveals and personal life crap.

Stawp clicking the bull#### people!!1!!11!!

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JAA said:

It is easy.  Except for some many ####### PEOPLE STILL WATCH THESE STUPID REALITY TV SHOWS!!!  Like who cares about the Kardashians or the lady with 3219658743 twinzies.  Until people stop watching that "entertainment", we will continue to have this click bait bull #### gender reveals and personal life crap.

Stawp clicking the bull#### people!!1!!11!!

There are two reasons to watch those shows:

To see people that have things you don't...so you can be pissed.

To see people that have ####ed up lives...so you can feel better about yours

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, massraider said:

Vast majority of cancel efforts in the US have been conservatives, in particular evangelicals.  Ask a librarian. 

It's cartoons and children's books that are a bridge too far though. That seems off to me. 

This is what happens to a political party when they no longer have a platform.  

 

Are you lumping the Crusades in with conservatives?

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can only speak for myself but I have been pretty clear several times on my position.

Both sides are guilty.  I'm not in this thread to fight for either side, will throw tomatoes at both.

I think conservatives have had the "cancel culture" lead up until recently.  Doesn't matter to me as much as its all no good.

This topic is not easy, as of course there are things we think are good to restrict particularly when it comes to impressionable young minds.  Personally, I think the Seuss dustup is overrated and don't have a problem simply changing the images if they are offensive (of course offensive is in the eye of the beholder, are fish that look like eskimos offensive...I think we could probably leave them in but again this is where things get carried away). 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, massraider said:

https://twitter.com/RottenInDenmark/status/1368684425504985094?s=19

Most banned books in 2019.  

I don't see many progressive targets there.  

It's really not even close.

I don't see any banned books on that list of banned books. Every single one is easily available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Side note: if you're truly against "banned books" then I'm with you.

There may be books not suitable for children and reasonably people can disagree because there are, yknow, fine people on both sides. But that's a different topic.

Side side not: If I ever collect a personal library again it will exclusively consist of banned books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

Side note: if you're truly against "banned books" then I'm with you.

There may be books not suitable for children and reasonably people can disagree because there are, yknow, fine people on both sides. But that's a different topic.

Side side not: If I ever collect a personal library again it will exclusively consist of banned books.

Same goes for music.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, NorvilleBarnes said:

I don't see any banned books on that list of banned books. Every single one is easily available.

And Dr. Seuss is an Amazon bestseller. 

And if someone can call a press conference or do an interview on Fox& Friends they aren't censored. 

So much ado about nothing, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, massraider said:

And Dr. Seuss is an Amazon bestseller. 

And if someone can call a press conference or do an interview on Fox& Friends they aren't censored. 

So much ado about nothing, no?

The six books in question are best sellers, or his books in general?

Link to comment
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...