Current Events > I used to be so against cancel culture and SJWs

(+) Yeah! (+)

I kind of am seeing the benefit now though. The net positive. I actually think its a good idea to start holding people publicly accountable for the vial things they do. It may not be illegal to spew racist/anti-LGBT garbage from your mouth, but there should be a consequence for it.

Sure its not a flawless movement, and it screws up. But overall moving in the direction of more accountability is a good thing IMO.

---

Sure. But I feel like it's still going to continue snowballing and taking out things it didnt need to

Eliza3 posted...

I actually think its a good idea to start holding people publicly accountable for the vial things they do

What do they have in the vials? Is it poison?

---

People should be held accountable if that shit they've done is either recent or they haven't changed their behavior since then.
---

Comedy is finished.

---

Then you took a triggering to the knee.

---

There's a difference between cancel culture and holding someone accountable though. Digging through people's old tweets. That's cancel culture. Actively seeking things from the past to use against someone is cancel culture. People are allowed to grow and holding something against someone from 9 years ago is ridiculous. Someone who is an active piece of shit that's not the same as cancelling people for old shit.

---

lilJoe457 posted...

There's a difference between cancel culture and holding someone accountable though. Digging through people's old tweets. That's cancel culture. Actively seeking things from the past to use against someone is cancel culture. People are allowed to grow and holding something against someone from 9 years ago is ridiculous. Someone who is an active piece of shit that's not the same as cancelling people for old shit.

I think if its one bad joke or something then sure but a lot of the time its multiple instances. Have some people changed sure but if theres a public record of vile things youve said in the past then its your fault for saying it not the people that find it.

---

lilJoe457 posted...

There's a difference between cancel culture and holding someone accountable though. Digging through people's old tweets. That's cancel culture. Actively seeking things from the past to use against someone is cancel culture. People are allowed to grow and holding something against someone from 9 years ago is ridiculous. Someone who is an active piece of shit that's not the same as cancelling people for old shit.

Thats a very subjective distinction to make. And its valid, but tbf those are both a part of cancel culture. Digging up old dirt as well as pointing out new things people do.

I agree that certain things people did in their past should be forgiven if the person apologizes and shows growth.

---

I think it's amusing that the SJWs who are all for cancel culture for people who do stupid shit on their free time are also the same type of people who want to abolish drug testing, saying that what you do on your free time shouldn't affect your careers.

Stalolin posted...

What do they have in the vials? Is it poison?

Do you want to find out bby?

I dont recommend it

---

RoadsterUFO posted...

Cancel Culture is the Free Market at work.

It's exactly what AnCaps have always begged for, and they seem to be the ones most disturbed by it.

On the whole, holding people responsible for their actions is a good thing. We need to figure out what thay means and cut down on constantly jumping to conclusions. But the people who always parrot "personal responsibility" are the same ones who cannot handle being held accountable for their shitty behavior.

---

lilJoe457 posted...

There's a difference between cancel culture and holding someone accountable though. Digging through people's old tweets. That's cancel culture. Actively seeking things from the past to use against someone is cancel culture. People are allowed to grow and holding something against someone from 9 years ago is ridiculous. Someone who is an active piece of shit that's not the same as cancelling people for old shit.

Amen.

---

FunnyPies posted...

I think it's amusing that the SJWs who are all for cancel culture for people who do stupid shit on their free time are also the same type of people who want to abolish drug testing, saying that what you do on your free time shouldn't affect your careers.

What's wrong with that?

---

ChocoboMogALT posted...

It's exactly what AnCaps have always begged for, and they seem to be the ones most disturbed by it.

On the whole, holding people responsible for their actions is a good thing. We need to figure out what thay means and cut down on constantly jumping to conclusions. But the people who always parrot "personal responsibility" are the same ones who cannot handle being held accountable for their shitty behavior.

Because its personal responsibility for thee, not for me duh

---

I feel the same way as you. I've kinda come around. If we're truly going to spark change and start to make a difference in terms of racism and sexism I think that it's has it's part in it.

However, I agree with @lilJoe457 . There's some nuance to this that I wish they would get straight. I'd also add that when people start cancelling 12-16/18 year old kids that's taking it way too far.

There's plenty of kids that are a product of their shitty parents beliefs or their friends or something. But then as they grow up they realize how big of a piece of shit they were raised as because of their impressionable mind and can change their ways.

---

Talk about perfect timing, this just hit the BBC an hour ago:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53330105

Some 150 writers, academics and activists - including authors JK Rowling, Salman Rushdie and Margaret Atwood - have signed an open letter denouncing so-called cancel culture.

They say they applaud a recent "needed reckoning" on racial justice, but argue it has fuelled stifling of open debate.
The letter denounces "a vogue for public shaming and ostracism" and "a blinding moral certainty".

Cancel culture refers to online shaming of individuals who cause offence.

US intellectual Noam Chomsky, eminent feminist Gloria Steinem, Russian chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov and author Malcolm Gladwell also put their names to the letter, which was published on Tuesday in Harper's Magazine.

Her fellow British writer, Martin Amis, also signed the letter.

It was signed by New York Times op-ed contributors David Brooks and Bari Weiss.

One signatory - Matthew Yglesias, co-founder of liberal news analysis website Vox - was rebuked by a colleague on Tuesday for putting his name to the letter.

---

NoMeLx22x posted...

There's plenty of kids that are a product of their s***ty parents beliefs or their friends or something. But then as they grow up they realize how big of a piece of s*** they were raised as because of their impressionable mind and can change their ways.

I agree that people can change but its not societies fault that you said those things. Also, how would people know that you've change?

"hey guys you gotta believe me i dont do those things anymore!" isnt really enough when theres usually enough proof that you've felt and said those things in the past.

---

s0nicfan posted...

Some 150 writers, academics and activists - including authors JK Rowling, Salman Rushdie and Margaret Atwood - have signed an open letter denouncing so-called cancel culture.

I know it's serious, but all I can think is, "Fuck you Joanne."

---

It screws up 95% of the time, there's also the problem with every changing goalposts, and petty bad actors galore.
---

If you're worried about cancel culture harming people's livelihoods, make it harder for bosses to fire people.

---

Most of the people who are vehemently against it are people who have been canceled themselves for things theyve done/said. Definitely it wasnt justified sometimes, but what are these conversations/debates they claim youre not allowed to have?

---

The big issue with "cancel culture" is how it violates the principle of "fair punishment". Our legal system is designed such that people who break laws are given a punishment fitting the crime. You don't get life in prison for drug possession, nor do you simply get a fine for mass murder. We recognize the injustice of unfair sentences when we see them and we try to adjust until they are rectified even if we don't always succeed. Past crimes can be expunged from records and legal protections exist to ensure ex-cons can work.

So then question becomes: what is a "fair punishment" for saying bad words? The issue people have with "cancel culture" is the punishment in most cases is aimed at completely destroying the individual's life and livelihood. Get them fired, ostracized, divorced... it's like the ultimate goal is for the individual to end up alone in a motel with a pistol on the bed wondering if they're going to make it another day. Is that cruel and unusual punishment? Should saying bad words result in a more severe punishment than actual physical assault? "Cancel culture" bypasses the judiciary to dish out vigilante justice on people with no way to "appeal their sentence" before it is applied.

---

The "cancel culture" or "public shaming" seems to only affect a certain demographic, and not all bad behavior from all demographics.

Stories or videos go viral by support of the media and by people who have a large number of Twitter followers, etc.

We've been inundated with "Karens" and "racist white people" the past few months. I highly doubt that's because only white people have done racist things and there's just simply no instances of white people being the victim in any given scenario.

What is happening now in the current climate only "cancels", "shames", or "exposes" a specific demographic. And I don't think that reflects actual reality. It's selective shaming and selective exposure.

---

lilJoe457 posted...

There's a difference between cancel culture and holding someone accountable though. Digging through people's old tweets. That's cancel culture. Actively seeking things from the past to use against someone is cancel culture. People are allowed to grow and holding something against someone from 9 years ago is ridiculous. Someone who is an active piece of shit that's not the same as cancelling people for old shit.

Depends on what old shit it is. Rape? No man, at a minimum you need to do prison time and be ever-repentant.

---

I4NRulez posted...

I agree that people can change but its not societies fault that you said those things. Also, how would people know that you've change?

"hey guys you gotta believe me i dont do those things anymore!" isnt really enough when theres usually enough proof that you've felt and said those things in the past.

First, I was talking specifically a 16 year old who posted some stupid shit on social media and then has their life ruined over it, that's all.

But second, what do you mean? I didn't say it was societies fault for a kid to think that way. I said it was a parents fault. And then when you get out into the real world you realize how sheltered and toxic you were raised and realize the error of your ways.

And you're also making it seem like it's impossible for people to actually change for real. People can self reflect and recognize that they were wrong in their life and grow from it.

---

Hey, check out which posters have problems getting canceled. Wonder why...

---

NoMeLx22x posted...

First, I was talking specifically a 16 year old who posted some stupid s*** on social media and then has their life ruined over it, that's all.

16 years old is old enough to know that racism is bad.

---

Eliza3 posted...

I kind of am seeing the benefit now though. The net positive. I actually think its a good idea to start holding people publicly accountable for the vile things they do. It may not be illegal to spew racist/anti-LGBT garbage from your mouth, but there should be a consequence for it.

Sure its not a flawless movement, and it screws up. But overall moving in the direction of more accountability is a good thing IMO.

So you let social media decide?

muchdran posted...

So you let social media decide?

social media as in the general public?

---

Just saying if social media is the judge, jury, and executioner your priorities are wrong.

I4NRulez posted...

16 years old is old enough to know that racism is bad.

No shit, but it's not old enough to know the moral and ethical implications your actions hold. Especially if you're whole life you've grown up with people normalizing racism.

You're a kid. You learn and you grow.

---

s0nicfan posted...

The big issue with "cancel culture" is how it violates the principle of "fair punishment". Our legal system is designed such that people who break laws are given a punishment fitting the crime. You don't get life in prison for drug possession, nor do you simply get a fine for mass murder. We recognize the injustice of unfair sentences when we see them and we try to adjust until they are rectified even if we don't always succeed. Past crimes can be expunged from records and legal protections exist to ensure ex-cons can work.

So then question becomes: what is a "fair punishment" for saying bad words? The issue people have with "cancel culture" is the punishment in most cases is aimed at completely destroying the individual's life and livelihood. Get them fired, ostracized, divorced... it's like the ultimate goal is for the individual to end up alone in a motel with a pistol on the bed wondering if they're going to make it another day. Is that cruel and unusual punishment? Should saying bad words result in a more severe punishment than actual physical assault? "Cancel culture" bypasses the judiciary to dish out vigilante justice on people with no way to "appeal their sentence" before it is applied.

being fired from a job or divorced by your spouse does not automatically correlate to being alone in a motel room with a handgun in your mouth. quite a scenario youve made there.
and saying bad words isnt the same as spreading hate, misogyny, homophobia, etc. which, yea i do believe someone should be fired from their job for doing those things, and if for some reason their spouse didnt know they were such a terrible person theyre now rightfully embarrassed to be with them.

---

Because social media doesn't show both sides. It's a narrative, pick a side and you're always right.

Guide posted...

Depends on what old shit it is. Rape? No man, at a minimum you need to do prison time and be ever-repentant.

The only problem is that people don't get these folks arrested, tried, and thrown in prison, because victims use social media to report it instead of calling the cops. I'm like why are these suspects not in cuffs and chains.
---

Maybe people shouldn't be racist? Would you rather racism be illegal?
It's not even accurate to say it's all social media. Some people react to a bigot -> consumers pressure their employer -> employer fires worker. The employer could just as well say, "Sorry, we accept racism here."

---

Hop103 posted...

The only problem is that people don't get these folks arrested, tried, and thrown in prison, because victims use social media to report it instead of calling the cops. I'm like why are these suspects not in cuffs and chains.

dude wtf they usually go to social media after other attempts to go through authorities, coworkers, management, etc have failed

---

muchdran posted...

Just saying if social media is the judge, jury, and executioner your priorities are wrong.

executioner lmao
How many people are dying over this?
Should we not be calling out and retaliating against people who unapologetically harass minorities on the street?

---

CloneTheHero posted...

wrong. most of it is senseless cancellations of moderate to totally benign offenses. canceling someone for something they did 20 years ago is utterly insane. thats like arresting someone for breaking a law that didnt exist til 2020.

the only cancellations im on board with is the #metoo stuff. it actually moves the needle forward and puts sexist entitled pigs in their place

So you're okay with a racist realtors showing better houses or treating their white clients better? Or racist bankers? Or racist doctors? Interesting.

---

SSJCAT posted...

being fired from a job or divorced by your spouse does not automatically correlate to being alone in a motel room with a handgun in your mouth. quite a scenario youve made there.
and saying bad words isnt the same as spreading hate, misogyny, homophobia, etc. which, yea i do believe someone should be fired from their job for doing those things, and if for some reason their spouse didnt know they were such a terrible person theyre now rightfully embarrassed to be with them.

Of course it doesn't, but saying something shitty once on twitter doesn't automatically corellate to "spreading hate, misogyny, homophobia, etc" either. But since you decided to engage, why not address the core issue which is how it's punishment completely divorced from the actual justice system with inconsistent targets, inconsistent punishments, not way to appeal prior to punishment being doled out, no way to expunge a record, and no clear correlation between the harm caused and the punishment handed out.

You believe someone should be fired for a bad tweet made a decade ago? Why not speeding? Why not being drunk in public? Punishment has to match harm. That's how justice works. Show how loss of livelihood matches the level of actual harm caused. And even more so, if you believe justice should be rehabilitative rather than punitive, how does the punishment actually go towards actually changing someone's views?

---

NoMeLx22x posted...

So you're okay with a racist realtors showing better houses or treating their white clients better? Or racist bankers? Or racist doctors? Interesting.

That's against the law. for that kind of stuff, you need to lawyer up, the US is litigious as hell, use them.
---

s0nicfan posted...

The big issue with "cancel culture" is how it violates the principle of "fair punishment". Our legal system is designed such that people who break laws are given a punishment fitting the crime. You don't get life in prison for drug possession, nor do you simply get a fine for mass murder. We recognize the injustice of unfair sentences when we see them and we try to adjust until they are rectified even if we don't always succeed. Past crimes can be expunged from records and legal protections exist to ensure ex-cons can work.

So then question becomes: what is a "fair punishment" for saying bad words? The issue people have with "cancel culture" is the punishment in most cases is aimed at completely destroying the individual's life and livelihood. Get them fired, ostracized, divorced... it's like the ultimate goal is for the individual to end up alone in a motel with a pistol on the bed wondering if they're going to make it another day. Is that cruel and unusual punishment? Should saying bad words result in a more severe punishment than actual physical assault? "Cancel culture" bypasses the judiciary to dish out vigilante justice on people with no way to "appeal their sentence" before it is applied.

Could not agree more. Social media mob justice, where a mere accusation with no proof whatsoever can ruin someone's life, is absolutely disgusting.

s0nicfan posted...

Of course it doesn't, but saying something shitty once on twitter doesn't automatically corellate to "spreading hate, misogyny, homophobia, etc" either. But since you decided to engage, why not address the core issue which is how it's punishment completely divorced from the actual justice system with inconsistent targets, inconsistent punishments, not way to appeal prior to punishment being doled out, no way to expunge a record, and no clear correlation between the harm caused and the punishment handed out.

You believe someone should be fired for a bad tweet made a decade ago? Why not speeding? Why not being drunk in public? Punishment has to match harm. That's how justice works. Show how loss of livelihood matches the level of actual harm caused.Show how that crime is worse than other crimes with lesser punishments. And even more so, if you believe justice should be rehabilitative rather than punitive, how does the punishment actually go towards actually changing someone's views?

im saying if you found out one of your employees was making racist or homophobic tweets, you would probably want to fire them. if that was your spouse, youd probably be questioning why youre with them.

not saying anything about the justice system. and people dont usually get cancelled for saying a tiny little insignificant tweet. they get cancelled either after repeated behavior, or if the thing was so egregiously bad

---

Hop103 posted...

That's against the law. for that kind of stuff, you need to lawyer up, the US is litigious as hell, use them.

I mean it doesn't happen to me at all, my point was just to point how how he only cares about the sexist people but not the potential of racist in jobs that might hold power over minorities. And if they expose themselves as racist maybe it's okay if they lose a job like that.

---

CloneTheHero posted...

that doesnt warrant canceling, that warrants education. while im sure most of them are indeed racists the majority are just idiots tone deaf to the situation and simply need a little educating

That's being a little naive don't you think? You think someone that's been racist their whole life but finally gets caught slipping is going to just all of sudden educate themselves on the matter? And don't see how that can be a pretty slippery slope?

---