Apologies for no links. As for the whole story, there wouldn’t be much freedom of speech if it only applied to perfect people. Regarding the situations I posted on earlier, they were this and this.
I don’t follow sports, but today came across mention of this. (which other posters likely know way, way, more about than I do) and this which they may not know of.
I have no evidence that one side of the political divide cancels more. The sports examples suggest to me a quote narrow range, in both directions, of acceptable speech by an employee.
And actually the New Yorker, host of that podcast, is a good example of what I mean by “cancelling is a way to make your voice heard.”
A few years ago, maybe 2016, the New Yorker at its annual festival invited Steve Bannon to speak. This is a private affair, they have every right to invite anyone they choose to speak, but I objected to giving Bannon a public platform to spout his dangerous ideas, so I cancelled my subscription to the New Yorker and I wrote them a note telling them why, after subscribing for 30 years, I was cancelling.
Then I moved, and I got an offer for a cheap subscription to new NYer subscribers (this was maybe 2019) so I re-subscribed. But I got to voice my disapproval in a way that the editors would have to view (if they viewed it all) as costing them something (my 100 bucks a year) and costing my something (a magazine I enjoyed reading). I assume they got quite a few cancellations, and (maybe) ended up rethinking the wisdom of inviting Bannon. Or maybe not.
But I felt I was doing something (symbolic) better than simply disapproving silently, and if it any effect on the NYer’s policy decisions, so much the better.
I was out with a group of friends and someone suggested we get food. Someone suggested Chik-fil-a. I mentioned that I don’t spend money there, so if that was where we were going I’d be heading home.
Turns out the person suggesting it had no knowledge about why some people didn’t eat there, and once she heard my argument withdrew the suggestion. We went to a Mexican place instead.
The first one I can see the argument that it’s overkill, but at the same time, if you were a Black person, would you be willing to take her class after her feelings were made known? Even if you were a white person, how would you feel about her statements towards your classmates? How do we know that Black people didn’t do more poorly under her specifically because of her biases and expectations?
I doubt that this was the first time that she expressed racial bias towards her students, I think it’s just the first time she was caught on video doing so.
With as prominent and important a position she has, and the power she has over young people’s lives, I wouldn’t want to keep her on faculty either. She completely ruined her own credibility as a fair instructor there.
The others are decent examples of cancel culture, from the right, and I’ve never claimed that the are in any way innocent of such shenanigans. You have a hyper conservative religious school not wanting anyone speaking anything other than the official narrative, and a situation where the president of the United States called for someone to be fired because of their political speech.
So, you are right, cancel culture is a real thing, it’s just that the right uses it as a tool, and then projects it onto the left, not only being disingenuous in the stories they claim are example of cancel culture, but also being completely okay with the hypocrisy of calling out something that they are more than happy to do themselves.
If the individual is in favor of racial preferences, they will be likley be outraged, regardless of race.
If the individual is against racial preferences, regardless of race, they will be likley be saddened by predictable consequences of preferential policies. I can’t find the link, but Brown Economics Professor Glenn Loury (who can say what he wants due to tenure) has described this with the word heartbreaking. (Although I’m wondering if the reason I can’t find the link is that Loury took it down – it is a difficult subject to talk about without smearing a great many accomplished people whose success has nothing to do with being in a group subject to invidious-to-me preferences, whether racial or legacy.)
Bias? You really think there is no relationship between law school admissions decisions and probable degree of academic success – or are you just saying it is taboo to suspect it? Saying something that is likely, or even unproven, isn’t bias. As for expectations, I expect that other professors think the same but don’t say it.
We don’t know that any teacher will grade fairly. But it’s pure guesswork to say that fairness as a grader is related to taboo adherence. And firing because of violating a taboo, against saying something that is plausibly true, is cancelling, regardless of ideology.
That’s “cancel culture”. It wasn’t enough for you to “not spend money there”. You could have just not purchased anything or politely excused yourself and went home. But instead you intentionally made a point of getting everyone to buy into your political agenda so they wouldn’t spend money there either.
Of course you and the other Liberals don’t feel that it’s cancel culture because you feel you are just being true to your values. But that’s what it becomes as soon as you make it about other people.
I’m curious. If your friends insisted on eating at Chik-Fil-A, would that have impacted your friendship with them?
I just told everyone I wouldn’t be going. They, being the cool, curious cats they are wanted the details. I would have gone home, but hearing the reasons for my decision they joined team notassholes.
I honestly can’t imagine that happening. They’re my friends because they are good peeps. But yeah, had they said, “know what, kayaker, we don’t give a fück about that shit, we just want sammiches”, yeah, it might put a crimp in our friendship. rollseyes
Ah, so this whole thing was actually just an anti-affirmative action rant. While I do have opinions on the subject, I think that they are outside the scope of this thread, so I will abandon this hijack of yours.
No, but we know that this one just admitted to having bias. Does she have white kids in her class that struggle? I’m sure she does, but she only notices the black students who do. That singles out the black students in her class reveals that she has given in to confirmation bias, and her differing expectations of students based on their skin color can affect the learning environment she provides. It’s not just about grades, it’s about the time and effort she is willing to put into a student to help them to learn. If she’s already decided that the black students are going to fail, then she’s going to give the time and attention to those students she hasn’t prejudged based on the color of their skin. Your concentration on grades entirely misses pretty much the entire point, not only of this discussion, but of education and learning altogether.
If I had an employee tell me that she was sad over the state of dogs brought in by black clients, I would fire her, since I would no longer be able to trust her to care for their pets properly. Sure, black clients bring in dogs in poor shape, but so do white clients. If someone singles out a group of people for the color of their skin, that’s racial bias.
This isn’t cancel culture, this was a decision made by someone’s boss based on their actions and how those can affect their work performance.
Like I said before, it’s easy to make a headline, but once you actually pay attention to the details, it’s easy to show that the headline doesn’t tell the whole story.
I wasn’t there so I don’t know what kind of discussion you had. For all I know, you jumped up on the counter screaming “NONE OF YOU IS WOKE FOR EATIN’ CHICK-FIL-A!” until they agreed to go to Chipotle or wherever.
Then again, they could have been completely ambivalent about where you went to eat.
But the point is, based on the scenario you presented, your friends cancelled their original plans in order to appear as if they were supporting your political agenda. That is the essence of cancel culture and virtue signaling IMHO.
A benign example perhaps. But it’s not hard to imagine a scenario where maybe I get a call from our corporate Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion head because one of my LGBQT coworkers felt triggered by the Chik-Fil-A wrappers cluttering my desk. Or lets imagine the same situation you described, but it’s a bunch of coworkers getting lunch. To what extent do I need to be sensitive to the team’s politics when picking a place to eat?
That’s how you probably imagine it, I’m sure, in order to be that upset about someone else’s decisions.
Or they changed their plans based on information they didn’t have prior to, not just to “appear as if” but because they actually do support LGBT rights. Once again, the accusation of virtue signalling contains the projection that since you are not in favor of LGBT rights, no else is either, and is just putting on a show.
I’m sure it’s not hard for you to imagine such things, but do they actually happen in the real world? No, they do not.
See, all this is is your overworked and paranoid imagination lashing out, not basing any of your objections on the actual world.
No. You are firing her for making a statement that you consider racist. You haven’t presented any evidence that she cares for pets differently based on the owners race or any other deficiencies in job performance. She made a statement that demonstrated potential bias based on her perceptions and that signaled to you she wasn’t “woke” enough to work for you.
If this is not hard for you to imagine, you need to take a hard look at yourself. I have worked 30+ years in companies you would definitely regard as WOKE and I have never seen anything remotely resembling this level of sensitivity.
I have seen the company or at least certain senior managers double down and circle the wagons to protect people who were ON VIDEO fondling breasts and buttocks of employees, managers who openly said that women and minorities were not suitable for certain jobs because of “cultural” or “psychological” reasons, people who went on LinkedIn to lambaste the CEO or CHRO for posting what they consider woke messages.
This idea that people are having their careers ruined by microaggressions that no one could see coming seems to be a figment of the deplorable’s imagination.
There weren’t any “original plans”. We discussed getting food and someone mentioned the Chik place. I commented that if that was the final choice I’d be skipping it and heading home. This was years ago and nobody in the group knew about the Cathy controversy, so I mentioned the details.
If I were to contact the people who were present, I’ll bet $20 none have been to a Chik place since.
Anybody remember the Nestlé boycott, from like … 45 years ago ?
This sort of activism is far from new. I’d imagine it goes back to the early days of the industrial revolution, if not farther.
What’s really new is the right wing – as others have so eloquently explained – creating and deploying snarl words to denigrate others who advocate voting with your wallet.
Can it ever be taken too far ? Of course. What can’t ? But the nature of voting with your wallet and advocating that others do, too – particularly when your logic is broadcast in a clear, concise, and compelling way that may bring others to your POV – is pretty time-honored and pretty societally useful.
Like labor tends not to have much leverage over business, consumers have few arrows in the quiver, and “consumer” is a term with an ever-broadening definition.
Until you get to the very outer fringe of bad actors, this is effectively little more than consumers using the tactics of business … against business.