I agree.
Having had a post edited, before the rule was even official, for using a couple of said ““bad”” words in a context where I think it should have been clear that they were not my words.
Which words have you uttered or posted here in the last, oh, 10 years that were accidental?
If you are in the habit of uttering or posting “accidental” words, then should we take that into consideration in reading your posts?
Why not just answer the question instead of making some sort of pseudo-accusation against TriPolar?
If it’s cancel culture, he’s both the victim and perpetrator!
No one heard anything till HE announced this.
There was no public pressure whatsoever.
Exactly!
Post 9.
Just today, Ahmed Aubery’s murderer was finally sentenced to life in prison, more than two years after he was captured on video committing the murder, and he almost got away with it. But sure, a football coach getting fired is why progress is difficult. It’s the folks advocating progress, not the folks murdering black men, that are the problem.
As you say: unbelievable.
Two things are clear to me.
(1) He was effectively fired. It’s vanishingly unlikely that he just up and resigned entirely voluntarily without this being discussed extensively within the school. The “resignation” is the usual fig leaf.
(2) We don’t know exactly what happened that led to this. I’m very doubtful that he just innocently and accidentally read this word aloud as though he were reading a passage from a novel in a literary criticism class.
So I think people who are arguing that he wasn’t effectively “cancelled” are wrong. And the people who are arguing that he’s totally innocent and this is “cancel culture gone mad” are probably wrong too.
If the full story is as told in this article, then him resigning was an overreaction. Is it the full story? I don’t know. All I know is that the coach himself did know the full story, and decided to resign (or at least, decided not to fight the bureaucratic process that would have ended in him leaving the school).
Pretty sure “woke mob” is supplanting “cancel culture”.
I disagree with this, for sure. Cancel culture is supposed to be about an uprising of, I don’t know, the woke mob or something, that boycotts and protests, or says mean things on Twitter, in order to get someone fired. There was no uprising here, so using “cancelled” is just wrong.
Maybe there would have been an uprising, when the story got out? Who knows. I don’t think that there would be an uprising for someone reading that word one time, while looking over a player’s shoulder.
So, there’s probably more to the story, but this was NOT “cancel culture.”
He was fired for using hate speech. If that doesn’t fit the definition of “cancelled”, fine. What I was pushing back against were people claiming that this technical resignation was all his idea.
It really doesn’t, not to me. “Cancelled” has to involve some uprising from the masses – protesting a speaker, Twitter war, something outside of an employer-employee relationship.
If I fuck up at work and get fired, I’m not getting “canceled”, regardless of the fuckup. If conservatives all rush to Truth Social to get me fired because I drove an electric car to work, then, sure, you can say I was “canceled”.
Sure, I agree with that. If the administration just fired him for good reason, which is most likely what happened, that’s not what you’d usually call “cancelling”.
Maybe the OP can explain why he thinks it’s cancel culture.
He wasn’t fired, and if he had been fired, that would be the definition of “fired”.
What? Wasn’t “If you don’t see this as a part of the cancel culture, then you’re just being pedantic.” clear enough?
Apparently, “cancel culture” means that free speech comes with consequences.
So I’m not taking a stance on whether this happened in this case, but if an employer is so worried that they will become a target of “cancel culture” that they try to get out ahead of it by forcing a resignation before it becomes an issue of major attention so they avoid the bad PR by fixing the problem ahead of time, that’s still the result of the pervasiveness of “cancel culture” even if the public had not yet caught wind of this one, or perhaps wouldn’t have at all. In the absense of heightened public sensitivity and organized action against this sort of thing, they probably would not have asked for his resignation (assuming that’s what happened). People can definitely be affected because of the anticipation of a problem in the current climate even if it never had the chance to get noticed enough to provoke a public response.
I’m sorry, but this is just question begging. I don’t agree that cancel culture really is a problem – I think it’s a right-wing snarl word, like SJW and woke. The times it has been brought up on this board, it was obvious that there was more to the story, or the person wasn’t canceled at all.
Person 1: “Cancel culture has gone too far!”
Person 2: “What? This is the first I’ve heard of any of this. Who was asking for this person to be fired?”
Person 1: “Well, if word had got out, there would have been a backlash, and then there would have been cancel culture stuff.”
Person 2: “???”
Soooo…“If” and “Probably” automatically add up to “Cancel Culture”?
Not taking a stance. Right.