Syrc @ Syrc @lemmy.world

Posts

10

Comments

720

Joined

2 yr. ago

I honestly didn't see much of that, except in cases where it was a legal issue like Weinstein or Kevin Spacey. Rowling is still around and didn't care in the slightest. Kanye can't shut his damn mouth and still sells like crazy. Not to mention Musk who keeps getting worse. It seems unless the law is involved, it only works on small creators and people with a slight sense of guilt.

"Your media"? "You guys"? My guy I'm not right-leaning. I'm not even American, and if I was I would've wanted Bernie in charge. But I've seen a lot of times people facing backlash for stuff like that. Those news get on mainstream media as well (talking mainly about Kobayashi, Oyamada fits the definiton too but that's way less excusable). Not to mention, if you follow content creators online you get to know about the backlash firsthand (like with the dumb #Jojisoverparty that luckily didn't gain traction).

The person I replied to brought up the thematic of "cancel culture" as a whole, and I said what happened in the article was good. I get why people misunderstood but I think I was clear enough in my first comment in saying this is a (rare) instance where it achieved a good thing and I wasn't talking about that.

And what I said was "Let’s not excuse it because of some rare cases where it achieved something good." I'm not trying to frame this specific case as a bad thing, I absolutely don't think it was.

Uhh… I’m pretty left-leaning you know. 1 2 3 4 5

Just because I’m against cancel culture it doesn’t mean I’m right-leaning. Even Obama complained about it. I don’t think there’s a single American right-wing view I share (no, not even about cancel culture because they love doing it as well), and probably the only American politician I like is Bernie.

Take a look at my profile and see if you find anything similar to what you’re “accusing” me of, you really got the wrong person.

I don’t think anyone sane found jokes about Trans Rights funny 10 years ago, but yes, kind of like the ‘f’ word.

And what’s the point of “growing up” if mistakes of the past keep being brought up to you? No point in becoming a better person and supporting minorities if the one thing you said 10 years ago will still ruin your life sooner or later, right?

So if someone ever said something barely racist in a satirical context or whatnot and then went on to have a successful career by joking about less offensive stuff they should live in fear of that one thing getting dug up and their whole life crumbling in front of them.

Cool, I guess you’ve never changed your views on anything during your life, good for you. I mean, what’s the point of becoming a better person if the one mistake you did is forever etched in history.

Oh you meant people who get harassed because they complain about those things. I thought you were saying the opposite.

Well then no, it’s the opposite of what I was saying. Arguably everyone was on board with the fact that vaccines were good before covid, and then it became “controversial”. No one is getting “cancelled” because of a 10-year old tweet against vaccines, because if they tweeted that 10 years ago people would’ve already been angry at that time.

I’m talking specifically about the times a satirical thing from ages ago that no one cared about at the time gets dug up and ruins careers because if it was said now it would be problematic.

Exactly. But there’s not really a distinction in the term.

I said it’s terrible as a whole, because actions taken in case one rarely have any considerable effect, while I can list a few for case two. If they were two separate terms I would’ve obviously been against the second definition only, but they’re all under the same umbrella.

Not to mention people can make bad faith arguments for both (“yeah we just found out that guy raped 27 girls last year, but after that we don’t know anything so he’s changed!” / “ok, the only racist remarks that person did were 40 years ago, but have they really changed or are they just hiding it?”) so the line gets blurry.

Overall, the number of “campaigns” that actually worked at “cancelling” a bad person is way too small to justify the harassment to all the other people. That’s why I think it’s not worth it, just support who you want, let people live their life and only harass them if they’re currently doing something bad (or if the bad thing they did in the past was straight-up illegal like the aforementioned Weinstein).

unless they’re currently doing something bad and you want it to stop, which is not the case most of the time.

That’s the difference.

You want to stop buying Nestlé products because they are currently exploiting child labor? Nothing wrong with that, I’m on board. They need to stop.

You want to “cancel” a musician because of comedy videos on a Youtube he already stopped posting 3 years earlier? That’s just stupid.

Weinstein did slightly worse than a blackface on youtube. The stuff he did would’ve been clearly seen as wrong even when he did them, it’s just that people didn’t know.

No one cared about a random youtuber painting their face for a satirical video in 2011. But suddenly when it got dug up 10 years later she was the most horrible person on earth. That’s just hypocrisy.

Kobayashi is a Japanese comedian that was chosen to direct the Tokyo Olympics opening ceremony. Suddenly a guy online posts one sketch from 20 years earlier where he mentioned the holocaust and poof, job gone. Because you wanted to be a little edgy on a comedy sketch about “stuff you can’t say on tv” on Japanese TV in 1998. Is that okay to you?

Again, as I said in other comments, I’m not talking about boycotting. You obviously shouldn’t support people you don’t like. But you also shouldn’t create online campaigns against them, unless they’re currently doing something bad and you want it to stop, which is not the case most of the time.

I don’t really see it like that, unless it’s something mainly done on right-wing circles.

If people don’t want to stay on Twitter or Facebook because of all the stuff their owners are doing, that’s not Cancel Culture, that’s just having a brain. To me, a response to serious offenses is definitely not cancel culture, you can’t “cancel” billionaires.

If not “cancel culture” though, what would you call what happens to those “less serious” offenders? Just “large-scale harassment”?

Most of the times I see the term in regards to people, not products/brands/companies, so I think the boycotting part is way less prevalent and rightfully called just “boycotting”.

I’ll admit I haven’t researched the origin of the term (and it’s probably on the same level as “woke” in number of different definitions), but to me it’s mostly about people saying or doing something “controversial” and getting harassed/ostracized for that.

And I say it’s terrible because when it affects fragile people, or generally people with a conscience, it works and ruins careers. When it’s towards ones like J.K. Rowling or Kanye West they just don’t care and keep working, making money like crazy while still being openly transphobic/racist.

I only insulted you once but whatever, do what you want, for some reason it doesn’t seem like you want to discuss in a civil manner with me specifically anyway.

I’m “throwing a hissy fit” over people chiming into discussions and giving their opinions on stuff they know zero about. If people are talking about something I don’t know, I either look it up or ignore the discussion.

Your comment had the same depth as a 7-years old commenting on YouTube “I don’t know who this Ukraine guy is, but if people are angry at them I guess they did something bad”. And it’s a shame because I see you usually do your research in other comments.

And I think you shouldn’t be a condescending ass online, but I guess your ego doesn’t care about what others think.

Uhh… yes? Are you trying to frame me as some sort of right-wing nutjob? People who complain online about Drag Shows and Vaccines are not okay in the head, but what does that have to do with the discussion?

So you just wanted to chip into an argument without any knowledge whatsoever, mock people you don’t know anything about and then dip out. Peak internet discussion I guess?

It’s not about not supporting, it’s generating outrage online about stuff nobody cared about until the day before.

I’m all for not supporting people who don’t deserve it, I regularly do it too. But one thing is ignoring and another is actively harassing people for stuff they probably already forgot about.