Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

“Cancel Culture” and “Woke”


Recommended Posts

40 minutes ago, Sea Duck said:

Come on, you know it's clickbait and it's the kind of thing that Reason usually avoids because it's beneath their core philosophy. If any other poster besides squistion had pointed this out, you wouldn't have gone out of your way to make 4 posts about it.

 

No other poster but that one would bother with something so trivial.

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

1 hour ago, Sea Duck said:

Come on, you know it's clickbait and it's the kind of thing that Reason usually avoids because it's beneath their core philosophy. If any other poster besides squistion had pointed this out, you wouldn't have gone out of your way to make 4 posts about it.

Make that 5 posts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sea Duck said:

You're not helping your cause here.

😆

Probably not but I find it amusing being criticized for pointing out "something so trivial" after being attacked constantly over minutia like using SFO for San Francisco, Squeeze for The Squeeze, while, if anyone else had posted that they would be given a pass. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, squistion said:

SFO for San Francisco

I don't get this.  Maybe we're weird together.  I have traveled way too much and often refer to cities by their airport codes.  

I mean, what heathen doesn't know that MSY is New Orleans?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, rockaction said:

https://reason.com/2021/06/15/daniel-elder-cancel-culture-choral-composer-antifa-blm-gia/

More grist for the mill. This one is a doozy. Real guy, real innocuous statement about the Antifa/BLM riots/arson (a grouping that's right in the link, for all the fools who want to keep arguing only those of us in the PSF have made the correct connection), real cancellation.

Funny how that article never frames his actions in the way people got upset over.   In fact, they even minimize it by saying, "all he basically said was "arson is bad", guys".  

 

When what did was post "I'm done" in white lettering over the blackout box (a symbol to show solidarity with the BLM movement) and said "enjoy burning it all down...". 

 

I'm fine if you don't mess with him after that.  

 

Might be if someone posted a pride flag with the words "I'm straight" on it while saying, "enjoy the Aidz yall!".

 

The whole, "what, we just dressed as ghosts and burnt a lower case t to welcome the nice black family to the team" defense is pretty weak. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, cockroach said:

Might be if someone posted a pride flag with the words "I'm straight" on it while saying, "enjoy the Aidz yall!".

The whole, "what, we just dressed as ghosts and burnt a lower case t to welcome the nice black family to the team" defense is pretty weak. 

Yes, these are completely analogous. Good job.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rockaction said:

Yes, these are completely analogous. Good job.

No, they're not.  They're exaggerated for effect.  But the jist if the article you posted is that people are mad this guy waived goodbye.  When he flipped people the bird.    

 

Its a completely disingenuous portrayal of what went down.    Why?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cockroach said:

No, they're not.  They're exaggerated for effect.  But the jist if the article you posted is that people are mad this guy waived goodbye.  When he flipped people the bird.    

 

Its a completely disingenuous portrayal of what went down.    Why?  

What on earth are you talking about? The post he made is right there in the article, at least 3/8 of the way up. It's completely right there, within the context of the writer's point.

Huh? Forget this. I have a lot better things to do with my time than argue with people about made-up #### like "the article hurr durr..."

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

9 minutes ago, rockaction said:

What on earth are you talking about? The post he made is right there in the article, at least 3/8 of the way up. It's completely right there, within the context of the writer's point.

Huh? Forget this. I have a lot better things to do with my time than argue with people about made-up #### like "the article hurr durr..."

Yea, then they completely ignore the symbolic context and state the following:

 

"The post was unambiguous: Elder was criticizing the activists who had set the courthouse on fire. He did not malign their cause or their ethnicity (and in fact, the perpetrator was white). He did not attack the Black Lives Matter movement or criminal justice reform. He implied that the militants had good motives ("well-intentioned") but were oblivious ("blind") when it came to the self-defeating nature of their tactics."

 

They're playing dumb about that burning t.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cockroach said:

Yea, then they completely ignore the symbolic context and state the following:

"The post was unambiguous: Elder was criticizing the activists who had set the courthouse on fire. He did not malign their cause or their ethnicity (and in fact, the perpetrator was white). He did not attack the Black Lives Matter movement or criminal justice reform. He implied that the militants had good motives ("well-intentioned") but were oblivious ("blind") when it came to the self-defeating nature of their tactics."

They're playing dumb about that burning t. 

First you have an issue with the post. It's in the article. Then, you have an issue with context of the article. Then, it'll be something else. Sounds like anything contra BLM will get you cancelled in your book. Which is your right as a citizen to hold such idiotic beliefs.

But the dude's creative wellspring was cut off for simply exercising dissent from BLM and the fires he saw in his city. That's what this thread is all about, really. You having a problem with the context of one article doesn't mean ####.

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

9 minutes ago, rockaction said:

First you have an issue with the post. It's in the article. Then, you have an issue with context of the article. Then, it'll be something else. Sounds like anything contra BLM will get you cancelled in your book. Which is your right as a citizen to hold such idiotic beliefs.

But the dude's creative wellspring was cut off for simply exercising dissent from BLM and the fires he saw in his city. That's what this thread is all about, really. You having a problem with the context of one article doesn't mean ####.

The whole article is about how he got cancelled because he said arson is bad.   Again, that's not the REASON.com.    So to say that and then  never explicitly address the ACTUAL reason it went viral and people were pissed gives other readers like you and excuse to act knucle-headed even after it's spelled out for you.  

 

 

When he put "I'm done" over the blackout box with a white font he told every person of every color fighting for social justice, "I don't f##k with yal n####z no more".  

 

 

And now they don't f###s with him.  Boo fing hoo.  

 

duces

Edited by cockroach
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, cockroach said:

The whole article is about how he got cancelled because he said arson is bad.   Again, that's not the REASON.com.    So to say that and then gen never explicitly address the ACTUAL reason it went viral and people were pissed gives other readers like you and excuse to act knucle-headed even after it's spelled out for you.  

 

 

When he put "I'm done" over the blackout box with a white font he told every person of every color fighting for social justice, "I don't f##k with yal n####z no more".  

 

 

And now they don't f###s with him.  Boo fing hoo.  

 

duces

I'll just let all this speak for itself with no more responses. Way to sound completely unhinged. I can't even make out what you're trying to say.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, squistion said:

Someone at Reason, who posted the URL, decided on their own, not to use the actual article title in the link but instead added a Antifa/BLM connection. It is misleading when Antifa was not mentioned once in the entire article. 

 

What cave have you been living in?  BLM/Antifa are so synonymous now they might as well be siamese twins.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, tonydead said:

What cave have you been living in?  BLM/Antifa are so synonymous now they might as well be siamese twins.  

A cave full of left-wing media "fact-checkers."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tonydead said:

What cave have you been living in?  BLM/Antifa are so synonymous now they might as well be siamese twins.  

They are synonymous to you and your ilk you only because you keep repeating this falsehood without any evidence.

There is still not one shred of proof that BLM and Antifa (which is not even an actual organization) are allies and have worked or are working together. 

Edited by squistion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, squistion said:

They are synonymous to you and you ilk you only because you keep repeating this falsehood without any evidence.

There is still not one shred of proof that BLM and Antifa (which is not even an actual organization) are allies and have worked or are working together. 

It's not a falsehood.  There is plenty of evidence.  You and your ilk just deny it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ramblin Wreck said:

It's not a falsehood.  There is plenty of evidence.  You and your ilk just deny it

The funny thing is is we posted evidence numerous times. He just refuses to look at it because the truth hurts.

Kind of like in the lgbtq thread for he said gay people don't have any rights. Even after it was brought up that the Supreme Court actually ruled in a landmark case for them he still doesn't believe it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

The funny thing is is we posted evidence numerous times. He just refuses to look at it because the truth hurts.

Kind of like in the lgbtq thread for he said gay people don't have any rights. Even after it was brought up that the Supreme Court actually ruled in a landmark case for them he still doesn't believe it.

Oh just read the Kaepernick thread for a lifetime's worth of ignoring evidence.  It's a trend

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, squistion said:

They are synonymous to you and you ilk you only because you keep repeating this falsehood without any evidence.

There is still not one shred of proof that BLM and Antifa (which is not even an actual organization) are allies and have worked or are working together. 

You should get out more.  

Faux protest, vandalize, fire and steal stuff. Rince and repeat. -BLM/Antifa. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

The funny thing is is we posted evidence numerous times. He just refuses to look at it because the truth hurts.

Kind of like in the lgbtq thread for he said gay people don't have any rights. Even after it was brought up that the Supreme Court actually ruled in a landmark case for them he still doesn't believe it.

No you haven't. One guy, a BLM member, nothing to do with running even his local chapter says Antifa has infiltrated BLM. That is all that I have seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tonydead said:

You should get out more.  

Faux protest, vandalize, fire and steal stuff. Rince and repeat. -BLM/Antifa. 

Following the BLM peaceful daily protests, in the evening after the protesters went home. Some people who identified as Antifa engaged in violence, etc., but no proof that Antifa (the so called organization that doesn't exist) worked with the BLM people or coordinated anything with them. There is no there there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, squistion said:

Following the BLM peaceful daily protests, in the evening after the protesters went home. Some people who identified as Antifa engaged in violence, etc., but no proof that Antifa (the so called organization that doesn't exist) worked with the BLM people or coordinated anything with them. There is no there there.

Takes Google 2 seconds to prove you wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, parasaurolophus said:

They were there together destroying stuff, but there is no link they were there together.

lolololololololoo

No they weren't. Antifa does not exist as an actual organization, so it can't do anything together with BLM or any other group.

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tonydead said:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is-antifa/

Antifa is not a highly organized movement, nor is it merely an idea. Antifa is a loose affiliation of local activists scattered across the United States and a few other countries. 

(Please refrain from posting laughing emoji. TIA).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, squistion said:

There is still not one shred of proof that BLM and Antifa (which is not even an actual organization) are allies and have worked or are working together. 

If Antifa isn’t an actual organization then there’s no evidence it even exists.  😆😆😆

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

32 minutes ago, ekbeats said:

If Antifa isn’t an actual organization then there’s no evidence it even exists.  😆😆😆

I've loved this leap in logic since I heard it. I have no reason to debate it here, as the only one who ever posits it as such is The Wall, but it's exactly as you put it, yes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ekbeats said:

If Antifa isn’t an actual organization then there’s no evidence it even exists.  😆😆😆

True. Antifa as an actual national organization in this country doesn't exist and neither you nor anyone else can prove me wrong. Show me where the national headquarters are located, who is in charge (names of officers, etc.) and how many documented members they have nationwide.

 

Edited by squistion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, squistion said:

True. Antifa as an actual national organization in this country doesn't exist and neither you nor anyone else can prove me wrong. Show me where the national headquarters are located, who is in charge (names of officers, etc.) and how many documented members they have nationwide.

 

I think you’ve laid out the argument for the non existence of white supremacy and systemic racism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, squistion said:

True. Antifa as an actual national organization in this country doesn't exist and neither you nor anyone else can prove me wrong. Show me where the national headquarters are located, who is in charge (names of officers, etc.) and how many documented members they have nationwide.

 

Can you give us the location of the White Supremacist Headquarters?  Thanks in advance

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why the whole idea of asking for links can be pointless.  Someone can just refuse to read it, and say, "I haven't seen any proof," and not technically be lying.  It would be like if I said, "I haven't seen any proof that the MSM lies on purpose," someone posts a link showing specific examples, I ignore the link, and then weeks later when the subject comes up again, I say, "I still haven't seen any  proof that the MSM lies on purpose."  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, djmich said:

I think you’ve laid out the argument for the non existence of white supremacy and systemic racism.

What?

Has anyone argued that white supremacy and systemic racism are organizations themselves?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Ghost Rider said:

This is why the whole idea of asking for links can be pointless.  Someone can just refuse to read it, and say, "I haven't seen any proof," and not technically be lying.  It would be like if I said, "I haven't seen any proof that the MSM lies on purpose," someone posts a link showing specific examples, I ignore the link, and then weeks later when the subject comes up again, I say, "I still haven't seen any  proof that the MSM lies on purpose."  

It can be if someone is asking in such a manner or even making such a claim to avoid saying something.  Both would be in pretty bad faith.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sho nuff said:

What?

Has anyone argued that white supremacy and systemic racism are organizations themselves?

No, not in themselves but some are organized like The American Freedom Party that has a website and headquarters in Westminster CA (not too far from Tim). 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Freedom_Party

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Social Media and Cancel Culture

Part three (might want to go there directly as the rest is more personal backdrop/drama) is a blistering and accurate depiction of many peoples online persona/existence.

An excerpt:

There are many social-media-savvy people who are choking on sanctimony and lacking in compassion, who can fluidly pontificate on Twitter about kindness but are unable to actually show kindness. People whose social media lives are case studies in emotional aridity. People for whom friendship, and its expectations of loyalty and compassion and support, no longer matter. People who claim to love literature – the messy stories of our humanity – but are also monomaniacally obsessed with whatever is the prevailing ideological orthodoxy. People who demand that you denounce your friends for flimsy reasons in order to remain a member of the chosen puritan class.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

North Korean Defector Fears for US After Attending Columbia University:

https://news.yahoo.com/north-korean-defector-says-going-130747688.html

Money quote: "She described a culture of political correctness at the Ivy League institution that she said rivaled the thought-policing that happened in her native country."

To be fair, this is exactly what the left wants, IMO.  They've been moving further left every year as the far left contingent gets bigger and bigger with every election.  Ultimately NK-like will be the end result.

If you won't take the word of people who've actually lived under these types of regimes, who's word can you take?

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

1 hour ago, BladeRunner said:

North Korean Defector Fears for US After Attending Columbia University:

https://news.yahoo.com/north-korean-defector-says-going-130747688.html

Money quote: "She described a culture of political correctness at the Ivy League institution that she said rivaled the thought-policing that happened in her native country."

To be fair, this is exactly what the left wants, IMO.  They've been moving further left every year as the far left contingent gets bigger and bigger with every election.  Ultimately NK-like will be the end result.

If you won't take the word of people who've actually lived under these types of regimes, who's word can you take?

Seems relevant

2021 American College Student Freedom, Progress and Flourishing Survey

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BladeRunner said:

North Korean Defector Fears for US After Attending Columbia University:

https://news.yahoo.com/north-korean-defector-says-going-130747688.html

Money quote: "She described a culture of political correctness at the Ivy League institution that she said rivaled the thought-policing that happened in her native country."

To be fair, this is exactly what the left wants, IMO.  They've been moving further left every year as the far left contingent gets bigger and bigger with every election.  Ultimately NK-like will be the end result.

If you won't take the word of people who've actually lived under these types of regimes, who's word can you take?

No it isn't what the left wants, another one person account who is a NK defector, which means absolutely nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2021 at 10:33 AM, djmich said:

Filing this under woke…

China has nothing on us…86% Gifted

 Beverly Catlin, the division’s gifted coordinator, said 86% of students were identified as gifted this spring, following changes aimed at opening up the label to more students — a label that’s essentially meaningless in that it doesn’t provide anything different for students formally identified as such. 

In NYC they got rid of the Gifted and Talented program altogether.

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...