Straight Dope Message Board

[Lance Turbo]

Cyclist who flipped off Trump wins county supervisor seat representing his golf club

She was fired for exercising her first amendment rights...

The moment was captured by a photographer, whose picture of Briskman — her back to the camera, finger raised — found its way to Twitter and set off a social media storm. Days later, after she told her bosses that she was the woman behind the finger, her employer, Akima, a government contracting firm, fired her.

However in a victory for free speech and presumably a defeat for Cancel Culture SJWs...

On Tuesday, Briskman got a new job, winning a seat on the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors — ousting a Republican in the process.

The cherry on top...

As it turns out, Briskman’s district includes a certain golf course owned by a certain president.

1

[bobot]

What is this cancel culture? 2

[Tired and Cranky]

SJW is a pejorative term for liberal, Democratic, or left-wing activists. Briskman was certainly espousing Democratic viewpoints, so I'm going to call this a win for SJWs.

"Cancel culture" is a pejorative term for a certain type of collective action that the user doesn't agree with. The term is used by people who don't want to bear the public image consequences of their anti-social actions. Briskman publicly admitted that she was the person in the photograph and she was willing to bear the consequences. She wasn't fired because the majority of public opinion was against her. She was fired by people who lick Trump's boots. "Cancel culture" did the best it could to express its support of Briskman and its opposition to her employer's action. This was, if anythingm a win for cancel culture. 3

[bobot]

Thanks for that. I'm happy she got the job, and I hope she gets another chance to flip him off again. But I'm not getting into all that cancel culture whozawhatsis. 4

[Derleth]

"Cancel culture" means using collective action (boycotts, letter-writing, social media activity) to convince some business or other organization to "cancel" a person who did something that collective dislikes, where you can take "cancel" to mean "as in a TV show"; that is, the group wants someone to get cancelled as in fired or otherwise run out of their position.

They don't consider the effects being fired would have on the cancelled person's family, but I'm probably not supposed to say that part.

This is nothing new, except now it's On The Internet and, therefore, a New Moral Hazard we must all be up in arms about. 5

[Hermitian]

Originally Posted by Tired and Cranky

She was fired by people who lick Trump's boots.

I know this sentiment is probably shared by most on this board, but I would say this is not necessarily a fair assessment.

I have worked for a federal contractor before and there, like all businesses, you are mandated to treat your customer with courtesy and respect. If you are a federal contractor, you only have one customer, and it is your entire business. Whether you like it or not, the president (of either party) is your customer's boss' boss' boss. If you can't handle that, then maybe you need to work somewhere else.

If I owned the company, would I have fired her? Probably not. Once it was made well known that my employee flipped off the president I probably would have put out a statement saying something like "Our employee made a private statement on her own time. That statement does not reflect the position of this company. We will work with her to ensure she understands how she should treat our customer." and then send her to customer service training (even though I know it won't make any difference).

However, most business people see half-measures as not worth taking, they have 7,500 other employees to think about, and it is easier to just fire her. That doesn't necessarily make them Trump boot-lickers. 6

[Skywatcher]

Originally Posted by Tired and Cranky

She was fired by people who lick Trump's boots.

Originally Posted by Hermitian

I know this sentiment is probably shared by most on this board, but I would say this is not necessarily a fair assessment.

I asked Google about her former employer and found this:

Briskman says she was initially told she was being fired because the government contractor feared retaliation and because she violated company policy banning obscene content on social media.

Briskman alleges inconsistent treatment because a senior director at the company wasn’t fired after calling someone “a f—— Libtard a——” in a Facebook discussion about Black Lives Matter.

7

[Tired and Cranky]

Federal contractors have a first amendment right to criticize the government. There are no federal contracts of which I am aware that have as a condition of their award or performance that the contractor not criticize the government. A government contractor can have an employment policy which prohibits its employees from criticizing the government. Such a policy might be motivated by (1) legitimate concerns that an employee's speech will reflect badly on the employer in other ways, (2) cowardice that they might have to fight illegal retaliation due to an employee's speech, (3) laziness because having a policy is easier than figuring out what can affect their contracts and what can't.

This contractor doesn't seem to have had a policy prohibiting employees from criticizing the government.

And, to my knowledge, she wasn't fired because of her social media posts. She was fired because of other peoples' social media posts and coverage in the news media. This was a rationalization they used to do exactly the thing that they wanted to do. 8

[Hermitian]

Originally Posted by Skywatcher

I asked Google about her former employer and found this:

The first statement is not surprising, that is what I expect the reason to be.

Neither is it surprising that senior directors don't get the same punishment as the peons. Especially when the director isn't insulting the customer. 9

[Skywatcher]

Who else but a Trumpeteer would seriously use the term "Libtard"? 10

[Hermitian]

Originally Posted by Tired and Cranky

Federal contractors have a first amendment right to criticize the government. There are no federal contracts of which I am aware that have as a condition of their award or performance that the contractor not criticize the government.

Absolutely true. She has 100% right to criticize the government and is free from any government repercussions. However, she doesn't have the guaranteed right to do that and keep her job for a private company that serves the government.

Originally Posted by Tired and Cranky

A government contractor can have an employment policy which prohibits its employees from criticizing the government. Such a policy might be motivated by (1) legitimate concerns that an employee's speech will reflect badly on the employer in other ways, (2) cowardice that they might have to fight illegal retaliation due to an employee's speech, (3) laziness because having a policy is easier than figuring out what can affect their contracts and what can't.

Totally agree.

Originally Posted by Tired and Cranky

And, to my knowledge, she wasn't fired because of her social media posts. She was fired because of other peoples' social media posts and coverage in the news media. This was a rationalization they used to do exactly the thing that they wanted to do.

Well, if you post it or someone else posts it, the result is the same to the company, no? Once again, I am not saying I completely agree with them, but I think a company SHOULD be able to fire a employee for this and not necessarily be called a Trump lover. 11

[Pantastic]

Originally Posted by Derleth

"Cancel culture" means using collective action (boycotts, letter-writing, social media activity) to convince some business or other organization to "cancel" a person who did something that collective dislikes, where you can take "cancel" to mean "as in a TV show"; that is, the group wants someone to get cancelled as in fired or otherwise run out of their position.

The term 'cancel culture' is also only used for causes that qualify as left-wing to Republicans. When NRA members boycotted Smith and Wesson over it's support of gun restrictions, or outraged Catholics protested Sinead O'Conner ripping a picture of the pope, or when outraged parents find out that a teacher is gay and get them fired from a school, it doesn't count as 'cancel culture' - generally the thing objected to has to be something like rape, molesting children, or using racial slurs.

Which is why it's weird to use the phrase as the subject line in this case, because 'insulted Trump' is not something that those nasty liberals actually object to. 12

[bobot]

Yes. In fact, if I ever get the chance I'm gonna flip him off myself. I'll probably add one of those finger flick under the chin things that movie stereotype Italians do. I could do them both at the same time, like double wielding in Skyrim. 13

[Tired and Cranky]

Originally Posted by Hermitian

Absolutely true. She has 100% right to criticize the government and is free from any government repercussions. However, she doesn't have the guaranteed right to do that and keep her job for a private company that serves the government.

You implied upthread that the contractor had a responsibility to ensure that its employees don't disparage the government. You said "I have worked for a federal contractor before and there, like all businesses, you are mandated to treat your customer with courtesy and respect." You didn't say who was "mandating" this. What I can tell you is that the government is not and cannot "mandate" that its contractors desist from criticizing the government. Not "all businesses" that do business with the government prohibit criticizing the government. For example, there is no evidence that Ms. Briskman's employer did. She was not disciplined under any such policy, according to published reports.

Originally Posted by Hermitian

If you are a federal contractor, you only have one customer, and it is your entire business. Whether you like it or not, the president (of either party) is your customer's boss' boss' boss. If you can't handle that, then maybe you need to work somewhere else.

I'm not sure I understand your point. There is nothing inconsistent with working for the government as a contractor and criticizing the government. Again, you have a first amendment right to do so. This company needs to own their decision to fire her because that's what they wanted to do.

Originally Posted by Hermitian

Well, if you post it or someone else posts it, the result is the same to the company, no? Once again, I am not saying I completely agree with them, but I think a company SHOULD be able to fire a employee for this and not necessarily be called a Trump lover.

Is it? Because I think there is a difference between doing something somewhat privately which is, outside of my wish or control, disseminated to a wider audience and my taking affirmative efforts to spread a particular message to the widest audience I can muster. It's also, frankly, just weird to punish someone for someone else's social media activity. Would you like it if I posted terrible things about your employer and they just decided to fire you because you didn't stop me? That's what happened to her. She wasn't fired for her gesture; she was ostensibly fired because of what other people posted to accounts on social media that they control and that she does not control. This is irrational. 14

[Steve MB]

As I noted on another thread, the results indicate that flipping off Trump in public is more politically effective than appearing at a rally with him. GOP Candidates, take note! 15

[Lance Turbo]

Originally Posted by Pantastic

Which is why it's weird to use the phrase as the subject line in this case, because 'insulted Trump' is not something that those nasty liberals actually object to.

That's the joke.

Furthermore her victory is not really, "presumably a defeat for Cancel Culture SJWs."

The people who complain about cancel culture and how cancel culture stifles free speech are generally the same type of people who think Juli Briskman should die in a fire. These people are hypocrites.

I, on the other hand, just found it amusing that the woman who entered the public eye by flipping off Trump's motorcade basically won an election by campaigning on that in a county where Trump owns a golf course. 16

[aruvqan]

Originally Posted by Derleth

They don't consider the effects being fired would have on the cancelled person's family, but I'm probably not supposed to say that part.

While I agree that a more passive form of protest [letter writing, sit ins, classic carry a sign picket protests] are worthy, I have gotten heat many times by pointing out that in general the family members of people fired or otherwise damaged by 'cancel activity' gets fucked over [especially when I use the example of Casey Jones - where the 'strike breaking scab' engineer who is killed by the actions of the protesters just totally fucks over his family as the wife and kids no longer have an income providing for them in a time when there was sod all for social safety nets. WHile it is commendable the strikers want a better income, poor Casey Jones is just trying to put food on his families table by actually WORKING his job.

Originally Posted by bobot

Yes. In fact, if I ever get the chance I'm gonna flip him off myself. I'll probably add one of those finger flick under the chin things that movie stereotype Italians do. I could do them both at the same time, like double wielding in Skyrim.

sounds like a plan.

Nothing anybody does as a form of protest while they are off the clock and off work premises should definitely fall under First Amendment protections. 17

[HMS Irruncible]

Originally Posted by Lance Turbo

That's the joke.

Furthermore her victory is not really, "presumably a defeat for Cancel Culture SJWs."

It would be helpful to be a little less subtle in your sarcasm in a board where it's routine for people to non-ironically wring their hands about cancel culture, SJW, liberal elites, etc. 18

[Lance Turbo]

Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible

It would be helpful to be a little less subtle in your sarcasm in a board where it's routine for people to non-ironically wring their hands about cancel culture, SJW, liberal elites, etc.

Noted. 19

[Pantastic]

Originally Posted by Lance Turbo

That's the joke.

Posting something that a Republican would believably post on a sub forum intended for political discussion runs into Poe's law in a big way. 20

[Darren Garrison]

Originally Posted by bobot

What is this cancel culture?

This is a recent piece on it at the NYT. 21

[Derleth]

Originally Posted by aruvqan

While I agree that a more passive form of protest [letter writing, sit ins, classic carry a sign picket protests] are worthy, I have gotten heat many times by pointing out that in general the family members of people fired or otherwise damaged by 'cancel activity' gets fucked over [especially when I use the example of Casey Jones - where the 'strike breaking scab' engineer who is killed by the actions of the protesters just totally fucks over his family as the wife and kids no longer have an income providing for them in a time when there was sod all for social safety nets. WHile it is commendable the strikers want a better income, poor Casey Jones is just trying to put food on his families table by actually WORKING his job.

Since we're doing this, I'll mention another thing nobody's supposed to mention: There are emergency vehicles which don't get lights and sirens.

How is that relevant? Well, when the protest is centered around blocking traffic, the people in support of the protest are always careful to say that the protestors will let emergency vehicles through.

How do they know what an emergency vehicle is? Why, it's the vehicle with the lights and sirens, of course!

The ambulance bringing the patient to to the hospital gets through.

The surgeon called in to save the patient's life is blocked by the protest.

Nobody likes me when I say that second bit.

Originally Posted by Pantastic

The term 'cancel culture' is also only used for causes that qualify as left-wing to Republicans. When NRA members boycotted Smith and Wesson over it's support of gun restrictions, or outraged Catholics protested Sinead O'Conner ripping a picture of the pope, or when outraged parents find out that a teacher is gay and get them fired from a school, it doesn't count as 'cancel culture' - generally the thing objected to has to be something like rape, molesting children, or using racial slurs.

Which is why it's weird to use the phrase as the subject line in this case, because 'insulted Trump' is not something that those nasty liberals actually object to.

This is hardly new: Look at how "Political Correctness" is used, and how it's not used to describe the things Republicans must believe in despite all evidence because belief in those things is a lodge-pin for Republicans, a mark of in-group status.

You can't be a Republican if you don't believe that global warming is a hoax. That isn't considered Political Correctness because shut up. 22

[HMS Irruncible]

Originally Posted by Derleth

The surgeon called in to save the patient's life is blocked by the protest.

Nobody likes me when I say that second bit.

Probably because you can't name one case in all of recorded history where this actually happened. 23

[Derleth]

Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible

Probably because you can't name one case in all of recorded history where this actually happened.

By making this argument, you're admitting it can happen, and that you have no way to prevent it from happening, which is my whole point.

Thank you for making my case for me, I suppose. 24

[enalzi]

Originally Posted by Derleth

How do they know what an emergency vehicle is? Why, it's the vehicle with the lights and sirens, of course!

The ambulance bringing the patient to to the hospital gets through.

The surgeon called in to save the patient's life is blocked by the protest.

The surgeon could also be held up by sitting behind me in traffic while I'm on my way to get pizza. 25

[Icarus]

Originally Posted by enalzi

The surgeon could also be held up by sitting behind me in traffic while I'm on my way to get pizza.

Or he could have been hit by Skylab! (Damn you NASA!)

Or he could have hit an icy patch and skidded off the road! (Damn you county street maintenance!)

Or he could have choked on a deli sandwich! (Damn you Mr. Goldblatt!)

Or....or....or...(I can literally do this all day). 26

[Defensive Indifference]

Originally Posted by Lance Turbo

That's the joke.

I got the joke and thought it was nicely done. FWIW.

Originally Posted by Icarus

Or he could have been hit by Skylab!

Don't joke about that! When I was a kid, I was terrified that Skylab was going to fall on our house. No appeals to reason or probability could mollify me. I was like 6 at the time. 27

[D'Anconia]

Originally Posted by aruvqan

Nothing anybody does as a form of protest while they are off the clock and off work premises should definitely fall under First Amendment protections.

First Amendment protections do not apply to her case. 28

[Lance Turbo]

Originally Posted by Defensive Indifference

I got the joke and thought it was nicely done. FWIW.

Thanks. 29

[Derleth]

Originally Posted by enalzi

The surgeon could also be held up by sitting behind me in traffic while I'm on my way to get pizza.

We usually assign a different moral status to a pure accident and the result of something you did very much on purpose. 30

[Steve MB]

Originally Posted by enalzi

The surgeon could also be held up by sitting behind me in traffic while I'm on my way to get pizza.

Originally Posted by Derleth

We usually assign a different moral status to a pure accident and the result of something you did very much on purpose.

Personally, I hate it when I'm just minding my own business and then by pure accident I somehow find myself on the road headed toward a pizza parlor. (Oh dear FSM, at least let it not be the one where Hillary is conducting all sorts of untoward activities in the basement...!) 31

[CairoCarol]

Originally Posted by Derleth

They don't consider the effects being fired would have on the cancelled person's family, but I'm probably not supposed to say that part.

Surely most victims of "cancel culture" are by definition already famous/rich, or there would be nothing to cancel. Like Rosanne Barr. I suspect she can provide for her family with or without her slot on the new ABC show. And if she can't, that's on her, not the people who don't want to watch a show with her in it. 32

[CairoCarol]

Originally Posted by CairoCarol

Surely most victims of "cancel culture" are by definition already famous/rich, or there would be nothing to cancel. Like Rosanne Barr. I suspect she can provide for her family with or without her slot on the new ABC show. And if she can't, that's on her, not the people who don't want to watch a show with her in it.

On reflection, I can think of examples where that is not necessarily true, like performers getting their first big break only to have it snatched away when their Twitter history reveals unsavory remarks.

Still, I'm not sure that "it could affect their family" is a strong argument. We don't automatically let assholes escape the consequences of their actions because of adverse impact on people around the offender. Responsibility still lies with the offender, not with those dealing out appropriate consequences.

(Not that I am an unthinking fan of cancel culture. My feelings are mixed.) 33

[Derleth]

I'm just waiting for the first time a Cancel Culture brigade charges headlong into an active and competent union.

"At-will employment" is the underlying principle Cancel Culture is leveraging for its own ends, here; I'd say something about Identity Politics Left versus Labor Left but I'm sure that would just make everyone angrier. 34

[Gyrate]

Originally Posted by bobot

Yes. In fact, if I ever get the chance I'm gonna flip him off myself. I'll probably add one of those finger flick under the chin things that movie stereotype Italians do. I could do them both at the same time, like double wielding in Skyrim.

"I used to be a federal contractor like you. Then I took a finger to the Presidential motorcade." 35

[jz78817]

Originally Posted by bobot

What is this cancel culture?

ask this extreme right winger.

Or this one.

unfortunately, the actual right wing types have co-opted it to mean "anyone who tells me something I said was not cool." 36

[bobot]

I'm getting too old to keep up with all of the buzz words right wingers throw around. I'm only now settling in to the idea that everything is a "narrative". 37

[octopus]

Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible

It would be helpful to be a little less subtle in your sarcasm in a board where it's routine for people to non-ironically wring their hands about cancel culture, SJW, liberal elites, etc.

That's because those are real concepts that the many on the left live their lives by but like to downplay the existence of because it makes them seem emotionally stunted and ridiculous. 38

[Steve MB]

Originally Posted by octopus

That's because those are real concepts that the many on the left live their lives by but like to downplay the existence of because it makes them seem emotionally stunted and ridiculous.

Wrong definition of "real concepts". Hallucinations are a real concept; people do in fact hallucinate. The hallucinatory images are not real concepts; they do not exist outside the mind of the subject. You have conflated the latter with the former. 39

[Pantastic]

Originally Posted by octopus

That's because those are real concepts that the many on the left live their lives by but like to downplay the existence of because it makes them seem emotionally stunted and ridiculous.

Nah, they're labels and myths that right-wingers throw around because it makes them feel good and Fox News tells them to. Like I pointed out before, they won't apply 'cancel culture' to things like conservative protests against gay teachers teaching, Sinead Oconnor ripping the pope's picture, Janet Jackson's nipple, Harry Potter including magic, Starbucks holiday cups, or interracial kissing on TV. I mean, how can cancel culture be this new left wing thing when conservatives lost their shit back during the original run of Star Trek over such 'immoral' behavior? 40

[Gyrate]

Originally Posted by Pantastic

Nah, they're labels and myths that right-wingers throw around because it makes them feel good and Fox News tells them to. Like I pointed out before, they won't apply 'cancel culture' to things like conservative protests against gay teachers teaching, Sinead Oconnor ripping the pope's picture, Janet Jackson's nipple, Harry Potter including magic, Starbucks holiday cups, or interracial kissing on TV. I mean, how can cancel culture be this new left wing thing when conservatives lost their shit back during the original run of Star Trek over such 'immoral' behavior?

It's quite simple: when liberals get upset about things like businesses promoting bigotry and persecution, it's because they're easily-triggered snowflakes, but when conservatives get upset about things like Starbuck cups, people saying "Happy Holidays", having to "press 1 for English", American Sniper not winning the "Best Picture" Oscar or the president wearing a tan suit, it's because those things are important. 41

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by Pantastic

Which is why it's weird to use the phrase as the subject line in this case, because 'insulted Trump' is not something that those nasty liberals actually object to.

The kind of person who supports Trump and uses terms like "cancel culture" and "social justice warrior" is most likely somebody who doesn't really understand the political issues they talk about. 42