Cancel Culture

[Dr Nowt]

1 hour ago, Rico1304 said:

Fox and Beverly Turner are weird.  It’s like they’ve seen Katie Hopkins disappear and thought ‘I’ll have a bit of that!’ 

Pure grifters, shilling for people who as improbable as it should be are markedly worse.

[Bjornebye]

'royal biographer' Angela Levin spouting on Sky News that harry & meghan weren't invited to Obamas 60th and 'sources tell her' Meghan was distraught not to be invited. Of course it's a higher story in the DM than anything about Prince Andrew and the comments section is the same people accusing everyone of a 'witchhunt' against Prince Andrew absolutely slating Meghan Markle. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

10 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

 Of course it's a higher story in the DM than anything about Prince Andrew and the comments section is the same people accusing everyone of a 'witchhunt' against Prince Andrew absolutely slating Meghan Markle. 

What a thoroughly unforeseeable turn of events.

[Mudface]

25 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

'royal biographer' Angela Levin spouting on Sky News that harry & meghan weren't invited to Obamas 60th and 'sources tell her' Meghan was distraught not to be invited. Of course it's a higher story in the DM than anything about Prince Andrew and the comments section is the same people accusing everyone of a 'witchhunt' against Prince Andrew absolutely slating Meghan Markle. 

A couple who don't want to play the media game is much worse than a nonce.

 

 

[Bjornebye]

 

 

 

 

 

[redinblack]

8 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

 

 

 

 

 

She could have retorted that his several chins and huge gut reminded her of a fat cunt, but I guess its good that she didnt stoop to his level.

[Rico1304]

2 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Is this your approach to every news story, Consistency Kid?

"Immigration? I'd better pop down to Dover to actually see it happening."

No, but you seem to be consistently avoiding the opportunity to see it happen.  As if there’s CCTV but you won’t watch that and would rather read a report about it.  

[AngryOfTuebrook]

56 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

No, but you seem to be consistently avoiding the opportunity to see it happen.  As if there’s CCTV but you won’t watch that and would rather read a report about it.  

Yes. I would rather read a report about it. I would rather someone else wades through it all and summarises it. If an impartial report comes back with dramatic tales of mobs and people being forced to do stuff against their will, then I'll go and have a look - I might even do some trawling. But if an impartial report says "someone wrote something, got criticised and agreed to change it" then that's really not a story worth following; it's something that's always happened.

[mars]

8 hours ago, Section_31 said:

 

It's the death of culture, no different at all to what happens in authoritarian regimes.

 

You can't write or say certain things or depict certain situations or characters, for any number of reasons, for fear of sensure, and that has now resulted in a situation where people are going BACK over what has already been produced and removing what people have been offended by to produce an acceptable version that's been duly sanctioned and approved by the Twitter commentariat, with the original 'offending' material now maybe only being available in small numbers under the counter from a man with a pipe and trilby hat, and only then if someone vouches for you. Like the Grasshopper Lies Heavy. One day soon old David Walliams books will be passed around like bibles in Leningrad.

 

I genuinely find it quite bizarre that prize winning authors rewriting publsihed works due to being attacked doesn't horrify people. What a time to be alive.

I'm uncomfortable with deciding what should and should not be offensive to a person of colour. "Chocolate-coloured skin" shouldn't be used, in my opinion, because it's poor writing, it's a cliché; if my skin wasn't white I might feel very different about the phrase.

 

Then you have to wonder why Kate Clanchy acknowledged that the terms people were criticising her for using were racist but then claimed people were making up the quotes and that they weren't in her book. 

I can understand why people became annoyed, especially as instead of apologising for being mistaken, Ms Clanchy then switched to a "taken out of context" defence. I'd also say that as a teacher she should have been far more careful in what she wrote about her students. While it is honest for her to say that spending more than an hour a week with autistic students would be irritating, does it really need to be said, especially as the students will be able to identify themselves in the book?

 

As for the people who criticised the book, why were they abused online? I'd be as worried if we lived in a society where reasonable criticism leads to grief from strangers. Do we just stand back and let Johnson get away with "watermelon smiles", etc?  

[Rico1304]

Here’s the girl with the ‘almond eyes’. 
 

 

[Section_31]

For me the issue is changing creative works which have already been produced. I've got no issue with, say, the publisher saying 'don't like this description it's a bit dodgy' and giving them the option of taking it out or going elsewhere.

 

That's completely different though to something being produced, then going back and changing it, under pressure, as though it never happened. 

 

People say things are Orwellian or 'like 1984' all the time and often it's not the case, but this was literally Winston Smith's job. It's terrifying in terms of its implications for arts and culture and risks it becoming like the state sanctioned shit you'd get in East Germany or whatever. 

 

'what's your book called?'

 

'triumph of the state. It's about how a worker briefly loses faith in the state then realises the state is, in fact, great.'

 

'sounds boss, if anyone needs me I'll be under the stairs quite literally risking my life listening to the sex pistols.'

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, Section_31 said:

For me the issue is changing creative works which have already been produced. I've got no issue with, say, the publisher saying 'don't like this description it's a bit dodgy' and giving them the option of taking it out or going elsewhere.

 

That's completely different though to something being produced, then going back and changing it, under pressure, as though it never happened. 

 

People say things are Orwellian or 'like 1984' all the time and often it's not the case, but this was literally Winston Smith's job. It's terrifying in terms of its implications for arts and culture and risks it becoming like the state sanctioned shit you'd get in East Germany or whatever. 

 

'what's your book called?'

 

'triumph of the state. It's about how a worker briefly loses faith in the state then realises the state is, in fact, great.'

 

'sounds boss, if anyone needs me I'll be under the stairs quite literally risking my life listening to the sex pistols.'

Are you sure you're not overreacting a bit? This isn't a new phenomenon - for example, the Agatha Christie book And Then There Were None wasn't always called that. It's always been normal for subsequent issues of a publication to be amended, where the author thinks it's right to do so.  Nobody is being forced to change anything "as though it never happened".

[Bjornebye]

The whole "woke" "cancel culture" is manufactured by right wing racist wankers who want to be allowed to say or do what they want without any consequences. 

[Rico1304]

1 hour ago, Bjornebye said:

The whole "woke" "cancel culture" is manufactured by right wing racist wankers who want to be allowed to say or do what they want without any consequences. 

Really. Let’s see how this pans out then. 
 

Peter Herbert OBE, the chair of the Society of Black Lawyers and human rights activist has just been picked up for calling someone a ‘house n****’. He’s been called out and obviously is claiming that his account has been hacked. But he’s actually used that insult on multiple occasions.  Think he’ll be cancelled? 

[Bjornebye]

16 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

Really. Let’s see how this pans out then. 
 

Peter Herbert OBE, the chair of the Society of Black Lawyers and human rights activist has just been picked up for calling someone a ‘house n****’. He’s been called out and obviously is claiming that his account has been hacked. But he’s actually used that insult on multiple occasions.  Think he’ll be cancelled? 

He won’t be cancelled mate. Unfortunately 

[Chip Butty]

As I'm relatively new to the internet and this place, is this an Incel forum?

[Rico1304]

1 minute ago, Chip Butty said:

As I'm relatively new to the internet and this place, is this an Incel forum?

TK, NV,RP and the Uber incel Hades are all cancelled out by Alan Sex. 

[VladimirIlyich]

21 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

He won’t be cancelled mate. Unfortunately 

He's black and used the N word? Is this correct?  To another black person?

[Rico1304]

2 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

He's black and used the N word? Is this correct?  To another black person?

He called him a ‘house nigga’.   

[Jose Jones]

16 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

Here’s the girl with the ‘almond eyes’. 
 

 

What's wrong with "almond eyes" anyway?  Is that a race signifier thing that I don't know about?

It probably is.  

[AngryOfTuebrook]

13 hours ago, Rico1304 said:

Really. Let’s see how this pans out then. 
 

Peter Herbert OBE, the chair of the Society of Black Lawyers and human rights activist has just been picked up for calling someone a ‘house n****’. He’s been called out and obviously is claiming that his account has been hacked. But he’s actually used that insult on multiple occasions.  Think he’ll be cancelled? 

People don't get "cancelled". Lots of things do get cancelled - magazine subscriptions, TV series, shopping orders, etc. People don't.

 

If you want to rephrase the question like an adult - "Think he'll be reprimanded?" or something - then the answer is probably yes. But he won't be"cancelled".

[VladimirIlyich]

So 'cancelled' doesn't actually mean 'cancelled?' It may mean 'reprimanded' or 'fired' or 'relocated' or similar? I really need to start reading more dictionaries and thesauruses(or is it thesauri?)

[AngryOfTuebrook]

5 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

So 'cancelled' doesn't actually mean 'cancelled?' It may mean 'reprimanded' or 'fired' or 'relocated' or similar? I really need to start reading more dictionaries and thesauruses(or is it thesauri?)

Wallopers use it to mean just about anything. Usually, being criticised in more than one tweet is enough for the pearl-clutchers to moan about Cancel Culture gone mad.

[VladimirIlyich]

Just now, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Wallopers use it to mean just about anything.

A shapeshifter of a word? A bit like 'sick' or 'wicked?' This is too confusing for me.

[Stickman]

Looks like Laurence is conjuring up images from his public school days