That’s news to me; he had a whole skit about how you can’t even hurt his feelings because he’s a White guy in America.
ETA:
Google results: Half Mexican on his dad’s side.
Melz response: No fucks given, regardless. Anyone can be a bigot, anyone can be a predator.
As you say, CK presents as White, and can pass as such, and therefore has access to the privileges of being White, by virtue of mere perception.
Sorry to butt in but that is not what LurksNoMore was talking about. I don’t think anyone disputed the fact that wealthy, powerful white dudes usually don’t suffer significant setbacks from being called out/revealed to be the dicks they are. But - and this was the point, I think - they’re not the ones who are usually affected by what is called “cancel culture”. If you think they are, do look around on progressive/leftist online spaces, prominent content creators get attacked all the time, sometimes for actually putting their foot in their mouth or actualy shitty things being revealed about them, but a disturbing amount of time it’s for basically having opinions that could be called controversial, unpopular, or just basically not being the flawless humans that people who decided to treat them as figureheads and representatives expect them to be.
And even aside of that - as someone who’s been online for a very long time, and has been in online fandoms pretty much since I first stepped on the internet, social justice is very often used as a justification for basically bullying, and it can get absolutely, incredibly vicious. In many communities it’s created some incredibly toxic atmosphere. (In fact, from what I remember, before GamerGate this is what “social justice warrior” used to refer to, people who use over the top concern driving trollies over social justice to paint people in a bad light for shipping the “wrong” ship, liking the “wrong” show, having the “wrong” taste in art, and so on. Obviously “sjw” has taken on a different meaning and overtone since then, but the phenomenon still very much exists.)
One, it’s not just Contrapoints talking about this, I just posted her video because I think it’s the most comprehensive take on the whole thing. There’s been quite a lot of discussion over this in the past years. Two, as someone who has followed Contrapoints for years, she’s been under fire constantly from certain members of certain corners of the online trans community, and while I don’t think it’s my place to decide if their arguments against her are valid or not (I have my opinion though), I do think that what’s happening with her, and other prominent members of the progressive online community, is exactly what “cancel culture” is. And I don’t think calling it as such is “minimizing the problem” - partly because well, the people doing the canceling is calling it exactly that. Cancel content creator X, cancel content creator Y, influencer Z is now cancelled, etc. Two, considering how incredibly toxic this behavior is, and how destructive it is, calling out people on “our side” for toxic behavior is not minimizing a problem, it’s taking a look at the online community because there’s obviously something very wrong with it.
I don’t think we’re going to see eye to eye on this, but I just wanted to reply so that you can see, and perhaps give some thought to, where I’m coming from.
Well, yeah. They sadly do that to everything. There was a brief moment of time when “SJW” was an actually useful term, referring to people on social media who were loudly in favor of social justice, but behaving in counterproductive ways; and to bullies who just picked up a cause to excuse their bad behavior. Then the right-wing types seized on it, and started using it for everyone to the left of Donald Trump, and/or showing any kind of basic decency and sense of empathy.
Why do people always complain about single Jewish women?
You could’ve just canceled them. /s
In other words, they don’t play nice.
Good on them
Imo it was always a divisive and counterproductive term.
I concur; I don’t think it ever had a positive connotation, but mere words and semantics aren’t the core of the problem, regardless.
In the context of Steven King and Woody Allen it seems weird to shift the focus to infighting in minority groups though…
Like moving the goalposts, even.
I’ve never watched her. But as a trans person- I tend to take what trans people say about issues regarding themselves with a bit more weight than others.
And what women who may have a trans history say about themselves more than a man with several fairly well documented instances of misogyny and trans misogyny. Even if the dude is trans himself.
Oh for f’s sake. Way to demonstrate my point about bad-faith interpretations and jumping to exaggerated conclusions.
No, it’s not weird to “shift the focus” on something other than what the original article was talking about. This is how discussions tend to go, people digress all the time, also people are still free to talk about Steven King and Woody Allen and other pricks. If you follow the thread of my conversation it’s blindingly obvious how we ended up talking about what we ended up talking infighting in minority (and liberal/progressive/etc. in general) groups.
My post was held for approval and was eventually approved so I have to assume it wasn’t inappropriate or off topic. And “moving the goalposts”? What on earth are you even talking about? I started my post with saying that nobody disputes what you were saying about rich powerful white dudes, I was politely disagreeing with you about this being the proof that cancel culture doesn’t exist, because in my experience it very much exists. And now here I am, having to defend myself against snide accusations of - of what? defending rich white dudes? Dear god.
I’m not entirely sure why you’re bringing up Buck Angel and Bo Winegard, as neither are Contrapoints and neither has been “endorsed” or “platformed” by her. You might try watching Contrapoints’ stuff? Even if you disagree with her, I think it’s only fair to actually see what she’s about and what she’s saying before writing her off solely based on internet hearsay and the opinion of people who hate her. 
You’re not sure why some segments were criticizing contrapoints - but thought it was a good example to use of people criticizing in a fashion you find objectionable?
It’s important to remember that Allen’s book cancellation had nothing to any online purported culture or even a movement online to have it discontinued.
It was due to workers at that business- everyone else was pretty much unaware it was coming out.
“Hachette Book Group (HBG) acted on Friday a day after its employees staged a walkout in New York and Boston to protest against the publication.”
“ A statement by HBG spokeswoman Sophie Cottrell called the decision to pulp Allen’s autobiography - Apropos of Nothing - “a difficult one”.
“At HBG we take our relationships with authors very seriously, and do not cancel books lightly. We have published and will continue to publish many challenging books,” she added.
She said that listening sessions had been held with staff members, which led the publisher to come “to the conclusion that moving forward with publication would not be feasible”.”
Nor was it without any serious discussions with the workers.
Workers during walkout:
Sorry - maybe it’s my lacking English skills but I honestly don’t get what you’re saying. In any case, what I find objectionable is not criticism, it’s when criticism devolves into ostracization, dogpiling, putting words in other people’s mouths, wildly exaggerating what they did say, jumping to over the top conclusions about their intentions (not even presumed), harrassing their friends and those who speak up in their defense, pressuring them to turn against the victim or face ostracization themselves, etc. Basically, public shaming and bullying, on the basis of personal likes and dislikes. Calling someone a fascist or a sexual predator in face of evidence of them supporting racism/nationalism/etc. or behaving in sexually predatory way - that’s not the same as declaring someone the same thing and calling for their ostracization, for enjoying a villain character or a ship involving a villain that you personally strongly dislike. Same with declaring someone a/n {insert bad thing here} and calling for their ostracization, because they are in any sort of non-antagonistic relationship with someone who has been decided as being a {bad thing} based on having been in contact with a person who they may or may not know is an unsavory character for whatever reason.
I’m not getting what you’re saying. Is this happening with King and Allen? Did trans people not met your standards in commenting on trans issues?
No, I’m not talking about King and Allen, I think I’d made that abundantly clear.
But at this point I’m getting out of this discussion because it’s clear that you’re not interested in having a conversation or understanding what I’m trying to say. Feel free to proceed with the mocking and the memes.
Then you’e OFF TOPIC.
End of story.
Did I post a meme in response to to you here? Not that it’s beneath me - but if you’re going to attribute something to me - I prefer that it’s accurate.
