What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

The “Woke” thread (1 Viewer)

Bucsfan5493 said:
it’s always seemed to me people hated cancel culture because it was costing people their jobs, and livelihood, not because people were sending mean tweets. To me, that part of cancel culture is way overblown.
Click to expand...
How can you say it is overblown? You know the follow up to Justine Sacco because somebody sought her out. How many of the other people do you know the follow up? How many do you actually know the story of their life before to know if they deserved it and after to see the totality of what happened? 

We live in a weird place where people are totally cool with somebody getting fired for what they said but people get really mad if you dont want to hire somebody that committed armed robbery or got a dui and some states actually have enacted laws against that. 

That is messed up. 

 
Bucsfan5493 said:
It depends on the situation IMO. I think some comments and actions are bad enough to warrant an immediate firing. There’s also some instances where I feel like no punishment is needed as long as the person genuinely seems to be sorry and working on educating themselves on the topic.

I think that’s one part of cancel culture and I definitely agree it’s an area that needs to be addressed. But again, that is an issue that goes way beyond just cancel culture. You hear about and see athletes get death threats all the time on social media. Online harassment in general just needs to be addressed more IMO.
Click to expand...
Like what type of comments?   Does it matter what the person's position/job is?    Did Sacco deserve to get....... sacked?  (sorry) 

I am just guessing here.  I agree "some" probably should, but I would guess I that I personally would disagree with 80% or so of the firings.  Mostly I feel that is a knee jerk reaction and a way for a company, university, whatever to have an actual conversation about it and give comments context.  

 
Bucsfan5493 said:
It depends on the situation IMO. I think some comments and actions are bad enough to warrant an immediate firing. There’s also some instances where I feel like no punishment is needed as long as the person genuinely seems to be sorry and working on educating themselves on the topic.

I think that’s one part of cancel culture and I definitely agree it’s an area that needs to be addressed. But again, that is an issue that goes way beyond just cancel culture. You hear about and see athletes get death threats all the time on social media. Online harassment in general just needs to be addressed more IMO.
Click to expand...
I was going to post this today and you did it for me. 
I appreciated the video. Online harassment and bullying is a huge problem in our society but it’s not specific to “cancel culture”, which is a separate, IMO, mostly manufactured issue. 

 
timschochet said:
I was going to post this today and you did it for me. 
I appreciated the video. Online harassment and bullying is a huge problem in our society but it’s not specific to “cancel culture”, which is a separate, IMO, mostly manufactured issue. 
Click to expand...
Many times they are joined at the hip - harrassment + calls for their jobs 

 
KarmaPolice said:
Many times they are joined at the hip - harrassment + calls for their jobs 
Click to expand...
I would correct you by saying “many times the harassment is political.” And when that happens, on a situational basis, it ought to be condemned. 
But “cancel culture” has a larger meaning than that. It attempts to link these incidents to each other in order to make the argument that conservatism in general is being unfairly persecuted in our society. It’s essentially an extension of the phenomenon that was begun around 30 years ago by the late Rush Limbaugh and which has been, IMO, so poisonous for our society: trying to turn conservative white men into victims. This single phenomenon has, I believe, been more damaging to our political culture than nearly  any other factor (second only to the conservative rejection of the mainstream media, also initiated by Rush Limbaugh.) “Cancel Culture” is, IMO, merely the latest chapter in this movement. 

 
timschochet said:
I would correct you by saying “many times the harassment is political.” And when that happens, on a situational basis, it ought to be condemned. 
But “cancel culture” has a larger meaning than that. It attempts to link these incidents to each other in order to make the argument that conservatism in general is being unfairly persecuted in our society. It’s essentially an extension of the phenomenon that was begun around 30 years ago by the late Rush Limbaugh and which has been, IMO, so poisonous for our society: trying to turn conservative white men into victims. This single phenomenon has, I believe, been more damaging to our political culture than nearly  any other factor (second only to the conservative rejection of the mainstream media, also initiated by Rush Limbaugh.) “Cancel Culture” is, IMO, merely the latest chapter in this movement. 
Click to expand...
I'm sure you know but you see everything though a hyper political lens and it shows up in your thinking.  You've been "fighting" so long/frequently that in many ways I think you have become what you say you despise...someone who lets their thoughts be driven by ideological anger.

I was going to ask if you could give three examples of Cancel Culture that you think is not OK.  But I'm realizing its not about the actual subject its your frustration that it might be in some way help protect your enemy from undue harm, conservative white men.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
djmich said:
I'm sure you know but you see everything though a hyper political lens and it shows up in your thinking.  You've been "fighting" so long/frequently that in many ways I think you have become what you say you despise...someone who lets their thoughts be driven by ideological anger.

I was going to ask if you could give three examples of Cancel Culture that you think is not OK.  But I'm realizing its not about the actual subject its your frustration that it might be in some way help protect your enemy from undue harm, conservative white men.
Click to expand...
Conservative white men are not my enemy. I used to be one myself, and may yet be one in the future. The poisons I mentioned in the previous post (assumed victimhood, rejection of the MSM) hurt conservative white men much more than they hurt anybody else; they are self-inflicted wounds. 

 
parasaurolophus said:
How can you say it is overblown? You know the follow up to Justine Sacco because somebody sought her out. How many of the other people do you know the follow up? How many do you actually know the story of their life before to know if they deserved it and after to see the totality of what happened? 

We live in a weird place where people are totally cool with somebody getting fired for what they said but people get really mad if you dont want to hire somebody that committed armed robbery or got a dui and some states actually have enacted laws against that. 

That is messed up. 
Click to expand...
I’m saying it’s overblown because I think people act like victims of cancel culture will never get a job again and it’s impossible to recover from when the majority of cases seem to be the opposite. Justine is just one of many examples of this.

Now I’m not saying it never happens, but it doesn’t appear to be anywhere near as often as the cancel culture critics claim it to be.

In terms of that second part, you seem to be talking about different situations. Hiring and firing someone are completely different. Do you really think if you or I committed an armed robbery or got a DUI, you wouldn’t be fired from your current job just like Justine was? I certainly would be. I think those laws are in place to ensure those people can actually get a second chance and job when they hopefully turn their lives around.

 
timschochet said:
Conservative white men are not my enemy. I used to be one myself, and may yet be one in the future. The poisons I mentioned in the previous post (assumed victimhood, rejection of the MSM) hurt conservative white men much more than they hurt anybody else; they are self-inflicted wounds. 
Click to expand...
Assumed victimhood?  Sounds a lot like what I would hear someone on the “right” say about certain groups as a way to avoid constructive conversation.  
 

Gotta run, will catch the convo later.

 
Bucsfan5493 said:
I’m saying it’s overblown because I think people act like victims of cancel culture will never get a job again and it’s impossible to recover from when the majority of cases seem to be the opposite. Justine is just one of many examples of this.
Click to expand...
Can you name one more example of a justine sacco type situation? I dont mean an actor or actress, i mean somebody like sacco. 

 
KarmaPolice said:
Like what type of comments?   Does it matter what the person's position/job is?    Did Sacco deserve to get....... sacked?  (sorry) 

I am just guessing here.  I agree "some" probably should, but I would guess I that I personally would disagree with 80% or so of the firings.  Mostly I feel that is a knee jerk reaction and a way for a company, university, whatever to have an actual conversation about it and give comments context.  
Click to expand...
I don’t think there should be any tolerance for racism, homophobic or physically threatening comments. Usually I’d say role shouldn’t have much of a factor but in Justine’s case I believe it should considering she was high up in a comms/PR role. I think at the very least we can admit Justine made some irresponsible comments. If you can’t even be responsible on your own social accounts, it seems crazy to me that someone would want that person representing their company’s voice.

 
Bucsfan5493 said:
In terms of that second part, you seem to be talking about different situations. Hiring and firing someone are completely different. Do you really think if you or I committed an armed robbery or got a DUI, you wouldn’t be fired from your current job just like Justine was? I certainly would be. I think those laws are in place to ensure those people can actually get a second chance and job when they hopefully turn their lives around.
Click to expand...
The laws say nothing about turning their life around and in my state they also apply to firing.

You can fire somebody for saying something on social media but not for getting a DUI. There are some exceptions to that, for example if they are employed as a driver or that the place of employment is something to do with liquor, but by and large you cant. 

Also it is a weak point to say firing somebody for doing X is much different than not hiring them for doing X, which is obviously why in WI at least there is no difference in the law. 

 
parasaurolophus said:
Can you name one more example of a justine sacco type situation? I dont mean an actor or actress, i mean somebody like sacco. 
Click to expand...
From the quick google search I did I couldn’t find one but not even sure what to really search there. Can you name me an example of someone who was actually never able to recover from a professional standpoint because they got cancelled?

 
parasaurolophus said:
The laws say nothing about turning their life around and in my state they also apply to firing.

You can fire somebody for saying something on social media but not for getting a DUI. There are some exceptions to that, for example if they are employed as a driver or that the place of employment is something to do with liquor, but by and large you cant. 

Also it is a weak point to say firing somebody for doing X is much different than not hiring them for doing X, which is obviously why in WI at least there is no difference in the law. 
Click to expand...
That’s an insanely dumb law then and I’m sure that’s why only a handful of states have it. You should most certainly be allowed to fire someone for a DUI or bad recent behavior.

I disagree, I think a DUI from 10 years ago looks much different than a DUI from this past weekend. You could be a completely different person at that point and one mistake in your past should not prevent you from getting another job. Meanwhile, if you get a DUI now while you’re at your current job, it shows you have a bad sense of judgement and character which should give an employer the right to fire you.

 
Bucsfan5493 said:
I don’t think there should be any tolerance for racism, homophobic or physically threatening comments. Usually I’d say role shouldn’t have much of a factor but in Justine’s case I believe it should considering she was high up in a comms/PR role. I think at the very least we can admit Justine made some irresponsible comments. If you can’t even be responsible on your own social accounts, it seems crazy to me that someone would want that person representing their company’s voice.
Click to expand...
That's why I asked before what the purpose of the cancel culture was.   Is it to actually help people turn around their thinking and change their patterns, or is it just about a game of "gotcha" and punishment.   I guess I never got the point of why people losing their jobs is helping anything in the long run, besides the companies saving face.  

I could understand a little suspension while they get help or something on those lines, but the insta-firing is kind of dumb, IMO.  

It's also silly that with the last part of the bolded Sacco gets fired but the people in the Twitter mob that were calling for her to get raped and hurt probably went to work just fine the next day, most likely with a feeling of a job well done on the internet the night before.  

 
Bucsfan5493 said:
From the quick google search I did I couldn’t find one but not even sure what to really search there. Can you name me an example of someone who was actually never able to recover from a professional standpoint because they got cancelled?
Click to expand...
How can you say it is overblown then? 

Even Sacco was out of work for how long? Wasnt she single and able to move back to appleton with her parents or something? I dont know her story that great. But imagine losing your job when you have two kids and a mortgage and beingbout of work for a year? That's not small. So "never" is a unicorn. 

 
KarmaPolice said:
That's why I asked before what the purpose of the cancel culture was.   Is it to actually help people turn around their thinking and change their patterns, or is it just about a game of "gotcha" and punishment.   I guess I never got the point of why people losing their jobs is helping anything in the long run, besides the companies saving face.  

I could understand a little suspension while they get help or something on those lines, but the insta-firing is kind of dumb, IMO.  

It's also silly that with the last part of the bolded Sacco gets fired but the people in the Twitter mob that were calling for her to get raped and hurt probably went to work just fine the next day, most likely with a feeling of a job well done on the internet the night before.  
Click to expand...
I think the point of cancel culture is to hold ‘bad people’ accountable for doing/saying bad things. I completely agree with you though, I think it’s definitely turned into more of a ‘gotcha’ then actually trying to make a difference and educate the person on their ignorance so they can potentially learn from it.

And completely agree with the last part as well. I’ve made it very clear I don’t have tolerance for online harassment either and the lack of accountability there currently is around that is insane.

 
parasaurolophus said:
How can you say it is overblown then? 

Even Sacco was out of work for how long? Wasnt she single and able to move back to appleton with her parents or something? I dont know her story that great. But imagine losing your job when you have two kids and a mortgage and beingbout of work for a year? That's not small. So "never" is a unicorn. 
Click to expand...
I haven’t seen many people have their lives permanently ruined and I think a lot of people think that’s the result of most cancel culture incidents. That’s why I think it’s overblown.
 

Maybe I’m off here and am a bit biased because it seems like celebrities or brands usually get the most attention around cancel culture.  Happy to be proven wrong here though, can you show me an example of someone who still hasn’t been able to rebound a couple years following their incident? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bucsfan5493 said:
I think the point of cancel culture is to hold ‘bad people’ accountable for doing/saying bad things. I completely agree with you though, I think it’s definitely turned into more of a ‘gotcha’ then actually trying to make a difference and educate the person on their ignorance so they can potentially learn from it.

And completely agree with the last part as well. I’ve made it very clear I don’t have tolerance for online harassment either and the lack of accountability there currently is around that is insane.
Click to expand...
Who gets to decide who is bad and needs to be held accountable?

 
John123 said:
Who gets to decide who is bad and needs to be held accountable?
Click to expand...
Their employer gets to decide if they don't want them representing a company.  

So when a guy gets caught assaulting teen girls for putting up BLM signs, or someone gets filmed screaming horrible racist slurs at strangers, their employers get to decide that they don't want that kind of energy in their company. 

There will be instances when the punishment doesn't fit the crime, and that's a bummer. 

It's also been a bummer that for decades people didn't have video access at their fingertips, and people could walk around, behaving horribly in public, with no repercussions. 

People dealing with old tweets is such a small fraction of cancel culture. 

Mostly, it had been people saying indefensible things in public, usually to strangers, and facing consequences for their actions. 

I usually eat these stories up like candy. Looooove them 💘

 
I think so much of this conversation is focused on the wrong cases that everybody pretty much agrees with or micro outcomes to justify that can canceling is ok.  Its easier to trade "extreme" case barbs back and forth.

People who make a living trading in political outrage are not relevant, I don't see anybody defending them.

There are indefensible statements.  Personally, I think its a societal negative to hunt these people down and try to destroy them...but I don't think the statements or the people are really worth defending for me.

There are many, many things said or done today that become part of the social media / cultural frenzy that just shouldn't be treated with the extreme responses that they are.  Thats it, no more complicated than that.  The line is moving way left and decided largely by people that are on what most of america would consider the extreme left.  Its illiberal.  30yrs ago it felt like it was the right that was trying to do this, often tied to religion.  It does way more harm to good causes than good for them (as is often the case...unintended consequences).  It drives us further apart.

The fact that somebody "survived" a canceling in this scenario makes it no less bad than a wrongful beating when somebody survives that.  Not sure why people are using "survival" to justify or diminish the wrong action to begin with.

 
rockaction said:
Better to leave all those incidentals to the thirsty and majoritarian mob. Sounds better that way.
Click to expand...
Do I have the statement wrong? 

It just occurred to me, haven't thought it through, but it seems generally correct. 

And, ah, that seems a little funny. 

 
Bucsfan5493 said:
Maybe I’m off here and am a bit biased because it seems like celebrities or brands usually get the most attention around cancel culture.  Happy to be proven wrong here though, can you show me an example of someone who still hasn’t been able to rebound a couple years following their incident? 
Click to expand...
Roseanne Barr and Paula Deen, to name two. Michael Richards (Kramer on Seinfeld) probably falls into this bucket as well.

I don't know about Barr ... but from what I can Google quickly about their current careers, it might be said that Deen and Richards rebounded somewhat. But their profiles are far lower than from before their respective incidents.

 
Bucsfan5493 said:
This I completely agree with. There needs to be much more accountability and punishment when it comes to online harassment. People cross the line far too often and the fact that they can continue to get away with it without facing any consequences is absurd.
Click to expand...
Like the Hollywood types who were demanding info on twitter about the kid wearing the MAGA hat at the White House -   Kathy Griffin and  Alysia Milano.  Barely a peep from them when they were wrong.  

Actually what they did was no different than what Trump did.  If the right was bothered by them, they should have been equally bothered by Trump.  All three incited their followers.

 
Doug B said:
Roseanne Barr and Paula Deen, to name two. Michael Richards (Kramer on Seinfeld) probably falls into this bucket as well.

I don't know about Barr ... but from what I can Google quickly about their current careers, it might be said that Deen and Richards rebounded somewhat. But their profiles are far lower than from before their respective incidents.
Click to expand...
Kathy Griffin. 

Her cancellation was fine with me then, and fine with me now.

 
Doug B said:
Roseanne Barr and Paula Deen, to name two. Michael Richards (Kramer on Seinfeld) probably falls into this bucket as well.

I don't know about Barr ... but from what I can Google quickly about their current careers, it might be said that Deen and Richards rebounded somewhat. But their profiles are far lower than from before their respective incidents.
Click to expand...
Barr and Richards deserve everything that comes there way based off the comments I’ve seen from them. I don’t see that as a negative of cancel culture, racists should not have the same opportunities as others until they’ve shown they’ve changed their ways.

From what I’ve read, Deen seems to be a legitimate case where I think things might have been blown out of proportion. At least it seems like she got back on TV in 2018 though so she’s recovered somewhat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bucsfan5493 said:
Barr and Richards deserve everything that comes there way based off the comments I’ve seen from them. I don’t see that as a negative of cancel culture, racists should not have the same opportunities as others until they’ve shown they’ve changed their ways.

From what I’ve read, Deen seems to be a legitimate case where I think things might have been blown out of proportion. At least it seems like she got back on TV in 2018 though so she’s recovered somewhat.
Click to expand...
Deen was pretty upfront about her past, I'll always give her credit for that. She had a little, "Yeah, I used that word back in the day, you know where I come from?" kind of vibe, which was very honest. 

 
massraider said:
Deen was pretty upfront about her past, I'll always give her credit for that. She had a little, "Yeah, I used that word back in the day, you know where I come from?" kind of vibe, which was very honest. 
Click to expand...
Exactly the vibe that I got from reading up on her past. She seemed genuine with saying that and it makes sense given she grew up in the south.

 
General Malaise said:
What did Kathy Griffin actually get cancelled from?  Did she have a TV show or something?  
Click to expand...
Stand up. She was more successful than most, comedy specials, and toured, playing big venues. Did a lot of hosting of various live events you and I would never watch. 

She earned. She was making Chris Rock money, if not better. 

 
General Malaise said:
What did Kathy Griffin actually get cancelled from?  Did she have a TV show or something?  
Click to expand...
B actor and comedian who tries to hard.....when she stepped over the line trying to be edgy to impress the Hollywood lefty elite, and if back-fired, she acting like a big baby.

In reality she should've been cancelled for her role as Sally Weaver on Seinfeld.....worst Character ever.....although, maybe that's the point.....she good at being annoying.

 
Manster said:
B actor and comedian who tries to hard.....when she stepped over the line trying to be edgy to impress the Hollywood lefty elite, and if back-fired, she acting like a big baby.

In reality she should've been cancelled for her role as Sally Weaver on Seinfeld.....worst Character ever.....although, maybe that's the point.....she good at being annoying.
Click to expand...
I think people don't realize how successful she was.  Maybe a B/C actor - but she was killing it for a while standup.  Didn't she also have her own Emmy award winning reality show?

I'd bet she made better $ than most you would call A listers over that 10-15 year period.

eta - Yea - multiple Emmy's, estimated $75 million. jesus.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
matuski said:
I think people don't realize how successful she was.  Maybe a B/C actor - but she was killing it for a while standup.  Didn't she also have her own Emmy award winning reality show?

I'd bet she made better $ than most you would call A listers over that 10-15 year period.

eta - Yea - multiple Emmy's, estimated $75 million. jesus.
Click to expand...
Yep, few comedians made as much as she did. Her crowd was women/gay, and when you cater to that crowd, you have them all to yourself. She was crushing it. 

 
Manster said:
B actor and comedian who tries to hard.....when she stepped over the line trying to be edgy to impress the Hollywood lefty elite, and if back-fired, she acting like a big baby.

In reality she should've been cancelled for her role as Sally Weaver on Seinfeld.....worst Character ever.....although, maybe that's the point.....she good at being annoying.
Click to expand...
Man you guys are getting worse around here.  

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
OP/ED "The Trouble With Socialism Is That Eventually You Run Out Of Other People's Money." (4/22/22 21:05PST)
2 3
Replies
138
Views
3K
Toby2ElectricBugaloo
T
GordonGekko
OP/ED: Explaining Why Donald Trump Going To Prison Would Be Good For America (7/12/22 21:26 PST)
Replies
3
Views
343
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
Hypothetical: Does Japan's Birth Rate Crisis Justify The Permanent Banning Of All Their Abortions? (6/22/22 00:50 PST)
Replies
4
Views
488
Zigg
Z

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top