Indeed, deplatforming and harassment are not the same thing. I’m a big fan of Wynn, and what she experienced was straight up harassment, though to be fair she did say some things she shouldn’t have. The punishment didn’t fit the crime, however, and that is a very valid point she makes in her video on the topic. That said, she still gets two million views on her videos, so it’s hard to argue she has been cancelled. Within the YouTube world, she’s arguing from a position of immense privilege. Any rank-and-file YouTuber would kill for one tenth of her audience.
14 Likes
Are you a billionaire?
3 Likes
Red Channels was an organised and well-funded smear campaign, conducted with the tacit support of the state, that attacked people and destroyed their lives and careers for innocuous or sometimes non-existent activities that supposedly benefited the Soviet Union (there were actual full-bore supporters of the Comintern on the list, but they weren’t hiding that fact like, e.g., Rowling tries to hide her transphobia). It bears little resemblance to what’s being objected to in this open letter. Did you even read the Wikipedia link you posted?
[I do have to say, it amuses me how American conservatives and Libertarians are suddenly wringing their hands over the evils of “McCarthyism” (in this context and in the context of Biff’s ties to Putin) while obviously not understanding what it was or how it applies in the current political context.]
17 Likes
I think you make a mistake to treat all examples of public shaming as fungible. I don’t speak for anyone else here, but I don’t think it is difficult or hypocritical to make a distinction between being public shamed for something that a person actually did that I consider bad with someone being publicly shamed for something that they might not have even done, and/or or I might not consider all that bad.
Not yet, but (and I don’t want to jinx it) I have gotten a couple emails re: Bitcoin that may be changing that. Fingers crossed!
5 Likes
@TornPaperNapkin said:
And Rowling is smart enough to know it is fallacious. If someone resorts to what she knows to be bad-faith arguments to support her position then she doesn’t deserve to be engaged in good faith on reputable platforms and her position is likely to be have very shaky foundations to begin with.
But hey, say the signatories, she’s wealthy and famous, so that’s persecution.
@melzimatic said…
And yet people like the signatories seem happy to pretend that her argument isn’t obviously fallacious and is therefore worthy of a fair hearing and debate on reputable platforms. All because she’s a member of the club.
Which at least makes sense for them – they’re protecting one of their own to protect their own privilege. What I don’t get is supposedly smart people who are very much outside the club carrying water for them on this issue. A variation of the “temporarily embarrassed millionaire” syndrome afflicting American white people, perhaps?
13 Likes
I think a lot of people are persuaded by the notion that unless they stand up against the mob coming for the powerful, the mob will be on their doorstep next. As everyone has been discussing here, that argument is flawed for any number of reasons, but I think it’s powerful nonetheless.
5 Likes
Mod Note: Gatekeeping isn’t going to be tolerated. If your argument starts with “You are not responding to what soandso said, but what you think soandso meant so it’s not valid”, then you have entirely missed the point of an online discussion forum.
16 Likes
I’m impressed that people have managed to figure out that “cancel culture” has existed for generations in the form of the powerful silencing decent, but then agree with those same powerful people when they say facing the consequences they imposed on others is unbearable and a sign society is failing.
EDIT
Like, the entire concept of modern cancel culture is that people immune to facing harm are now facing some the same harm As the people that have been dealing with it for generations. Saying it’s all the same isn’t solving the problem since the modern cancel culture prophets are just asking for a return to the good old days.
17 Likes
A lot of people have an unjustifiably high opinion of themselves. Unless one goes out of one’s way to be a high-profile arsehole, “the mob” usually doesn’t pay attention to one.
10 Likes
Unfortunately though appealing to people’s narcissistic paranoia works.
9 Likes
If the editor of the NY Times Op Ed page can be fired for something as benign as publishing a horrible op ed that he didn’t even bother reading beforehand, how can I, a salesman at the third largest lawn care company in the tri state region ever hope to be safe from the same pitchforks!?
9 Likes
I’m going to reiterate what I posted, because it’s a valid point and it IS on fucking topic;
The “logic” being applied when anti-Trans bigots bring up public bathrooms is that male rapists would utilize the acceptance of transwomen in that space as an opportunity to attack their potential victims.
This erroneously assumes that the majority of sexual assaults happen in public restrooms, when in fact most happen in one’s own home, or in other familiar environments. It also disregards the fact that most rape is committed by an assailant that is already known to the victim.
(Don’t even get me started on the fact that transfolks are at a much higher risk for being the victims of sexual assault and physical violence in general.)
Long story short, it’s a fucking scare tactic that has little connection to the reality we actually inhabit.
22 Likes
This is what is happening in Britain
There is no justice or open debate, just a privileged few oppressing marginalised people.
Trans and BAME people are being silenced, and the thing about silenced people is that they don’t have millions of followers to repeat that they have been silenced. When we come together so that there are enough of us that we can’t be ignored we are called a mob.
17 Likes
That this is not a new thing should not in any way mean that it is in any way less scary, hurtful or dangerous than it has been before. Voices can be amplified and carry further than they have in the past. When you find yourself the target of both sides of the political spectrum it hurts.
12 Likes
If you’re an editor who approves something you didn’t read - you’re not doing your job. Not doing your job is something an employer usually has issues with.
Lawyer to client - I filed that without reading it - why are you so upset? You’ll get out in only five years.
15 Likes
Just to avoid any misunderstanding, I was also putting forth that this is a ridiculous example for people to hang their hats on in decrying “cancel culture,” and it makes the part of the letter complaining “Editors are fired for running controversial pieces” fundamentally dishonest without context.
4 Likes
i think it was freud who pointed out that when you join two thoughts using “but” the speaker generally believes the opposite of the first statement.
in this case, that’d make the first sentence say that demands for police and cultural reforms are ill timed, insincere, and unnecessary. which is completely in keeping with the rest of the piece.
ugh.
3 Likes
It was also aptly paraphrased by that fictional eminent sage, Ser Davos;
9 Likes
