Yes. It’s quite common in the deaf community to not view deafness as a disability but as a shared culture and heritage.
yes and that means a lot of them don’t want implants that would allow them to hear.
Yes, it is. Any other questions?
Punishing a comedian for the content of his jokes is censorship, it is their tv show so it is their right to censor what is on it. However, it is a bad sign for society when censorship of comedians is common just because someone without a sense of humor took offense.
I have a sense of humour. Hell, I have a twisted, dark sense of humour.
The tweet that has been shared in this thread (multiple times) is NOT FUNNY. AT ALL.
That’s true enough. The problem with Mr. Hart, however, is that it isn’t people “without a sense of humor” who are taking offense. It’s all kinds of people, some of us with perfectly intact senses of humor.
It’s not bad for society when people are encouraged to stop making “I hate gays” jokes. There are plenty of ways to make jokes about gays that could be funny and even edgy. “I’d beat my son if he was gay” isn’t one of them.
So, they have the right to censor what is on it, but when they exercise that right, it’s a bad sign for society?
ETA: Oops, I didn’t read the next page, which had several responses.
I mean, those aren’t inconsistent beliefs.
People have the right to say hateful things, but it’s generally bad for society when they do so.
People have the right to do lots of stuff that’s bad for society if they actually do it.
Sure, or Sean Spicer
But, if only.
I don’t think people having the right to say hateful things is generally bad for society. Hearing those people and recognizing them for the hateful thing-sayers they are is generally GOOD for society IMO.
If I thought a right was generally bad for society, I would probably be against that right and arguing for removing that right. As people do for other rights.
More to the point, people have the right to do all kinds of things for which people can refuse to associate with them.
You have the right to not bathe or wear clean clothes or swear at everyone you meet. And the people around you have the right to shun your company or refuse you jobs.
That’s not a violation of your rights and it’s not the sign of a “sick” society.
It’s like saying that it’s censorship to refuse to vote for a political candidate who expresses support for slavery or genocide. That’s not censorship.
Well yeah, if it’s the legal system that’s doing it.
But if private parties ‘punish’ someone by refusing to associate with them in some way, that’s freedom of association, not censorship.
I don’t have to hang out with assholes, and neither do the people running the Oscars. The assholes don’t have a right to my company, and they don’t have a right to be on a particular TV program.
Never ever say you’d be a failure of a father if your son was gay, just in case it happens to reinforce long-standing bigoted bullshit. If I was employing someone and they said something like that, I would fire them. Full stop. That’s not okay. You don’t get to believe that, any more than you get to believe “black people are inherently stupid”, and be considered a part of polite society.
Kevin Hart was offered the opportunity to apologize for those statements and keep the gig, and he refused. He has never apologized for his homophobia, and as recently as 2015, he has doubled down on it. This ain’t James Gunn. This is Roseanne Barr.
If I say something shitty 30 years ago, then when it’s brought up yesterday I double down on it, the problem is not that I said something shitty 30 years ago, it’s that I said something shitty yesterday.
Y’know, there are a lot of celebrities who go their whole lives without saying anything anywhere near as awful as “if I caught my son playing with a dollhouse I’d beat him over the head with it”. Like, a lot. Like, almost all of them. It’s really not a high bar to clear.
Everything we know about the sociology and psychology of humor says that you are dead wrong. This is just not true. You have no background in this, so maybe you should either learn something about it or at least stop talking about it. Everything about this framing is dead wrong and I’m tired of having to teach people about it.
Meanwhile, Kevin Hart deserves to be fired. Not from his Oscar gig, from hollywood. Yeah, I’m gonna be that guy. If we never saw him in another standup tour, hollywood movie, or fucking podcast, the world would be better for it. He’s a bigoted, homophobic prick with no interest in changing that, and that shit ain’t right. The most apt comparison here is to Roseanne Barr, who just kept saying shitty bigoted things about race. Well, Kevin Hart keeps on saying shitty, bigoted things about gender. He deserves another movie gig the way Roseanne Barr deserves another comeback: he doesn’t.
There are lots of people here that think that saying hateful things is a net negative. Sure, it reveals hateful people for who they are, but it has other bad effects.
People’s tendency to not want to associate with the sayers of hateful things kind of implies that saying those things is bad. If it weren’t bad, people wouldn’t refuse to associate with them!
Generally, people support a right to free speech that includes the right to say hateful things not because they believe that saying hateful things is generally good for society, but because giving the government power to control speech has much worse effects than the smaller bad effect of people saying hateful things.
You can totally believe that people saying hateful things is a net positive for society and that if it weren’t we shouldn’t have the right to say hateful things, but that would be a fairly nonstandard argument in favor of the right to say hateful things.
Is there nothing about your identity or experience that is outside the norm, that you may have faced some additional struggles over, but that you feel gives you a different and valuable perspective, despite the fact that it made your life more difficult?
I don’t think it’s so unreasonable to have dealt with and overcome adversity, to realize that the characteristic that led to it is a rich and beautiful part of the human experience, and to hope to connect with your child over that shared experience.
“What’s best for their kids” is a highly subjective standard.
Well, I said the **right **to say hateful things is not generally bad for society. I said nothing about people actually SAYING hateful things.
I agree. And I notice you used the term “government power” there. Because a government punishing someone for speaking is “censorship”, while a commercial entity not allowing a person to host an award show is NOT “censorship”.
Of course, I also hold a non-standard view of what “Free Speech” means, so there is that.
Once again I reiterate, I wasn’t talking about Kevin Hart specifically, because I was not familiar with the details his case. If it’s true that he’s still the same person now than he was then, that makes a difference, though some people have said he has apologised already, and others say he hasn’t, so it’s been a contradictory thread.
My problem is that this is an ongoing trend, to discredit people from singular misdeeds of the distant past, judging them by who they used to be and not who they are today. As long as what they did is not a crime, I don’t think it’s fair to do that.
Considering there have been cases of parents killing their children because they though they were gay I think the Academy was definitely warranted in rescinding their offer to Kevin Hart. I really don’t think his comments were funny. By themselves, the comments were probably harmless. But the cumulative effects of his comments with rampant homophobia in the United States, they help contribute to the atmosphere where parents can abuse and even kill their children if they are gay.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12081186
-
I request specific examples that fit this “trend,” specifically as described in this post.
-
Do you not think it legitimate for people to be held accountable for things they say? What does it matter whether something was “singular” or in the “distant past”?
-
Do you think that people should be required to continue employ people—particularly as a spokesperson, like an Oscars host is—when they have espoused bigotry?