As do you. And you know why. And if you really examine your posts here since yesterday you’ll see the similarities. All requests for evidence of why you feel how you do have been met with the same brick wall response you’re accusing me of. The one concrete example of Rowling being cancelled I easily refuted and even after I provide my evidence you just dismissed it.
If the shoe fits.
The thing about it these things do not have to be in plain sight for a few to glorify it
Weird stance to take but go off, I guess. Still why they fought the war.
I think there are better ways to teach that history than having literal monuments to people like Robert E. Lee.
Have a monument or an exhibit that shows the truth of what the slaveholding south was all about, not some random bust of a very dead white guy who thought owning people was cool and profitable.
@shamrockgooner you keep banging on about JK she is uncancellable due fact she makes so much money for her publisher. Doesn’t mean she doesn’t face the death threats, bomb threats, doxing of her home and etc.
Now what bout folks who don’t have the luxury of being a billionaire like those above
All of the removed Confederate statues are either in storage because they are unsure what to do with them yet, or they are already rehomed.
They aren’t being destroyed/erased.
Your argument amounts to saying that you can never contest somebody’s claim to be cancelled. Here the inital assertion that they have been cancelled is based on speculation that can neither be proved or disproved because you can’t point to something conxrete like someone being fired, having their show cancelled, or being abandoned by sponsors. It’s really bizarre reasoning on a logical level.
The argument is not that people never get cancelled, it’s that you have to be able to point to some tangible damages to convincingly make the case that someone has been cancelled in any meaningful sense. Otherwise literally anyone can claim that they or someone else has been cancelled and there’s no way of refuting it.
I’m not familiar with the examples you posted and I haven’t looked into them. As with the example provided by Forever earlier if those are as you say they are then yes, those are tangible examples of someone being cancelled (the actual topic under discussion here).
In regards to death threats do you think I would be anything other than disgusted by those and that I would do anything other than condemn those doing it?
Sorry bro why do you write like that? “A dead white guy” I know you are professional established lawyer why do you write like some colleague girl
[quote=“Joshua, post:163, topic:5556, full:true”]
But then, the Confederates aren’t the only ones who thought that in American history. Even it’s founding fathers in the best cases refused to let some states holding slaves be a barrier to uniting with them.
Even on this side of the Atlantic the view is t consistent. There’s a huge column dedicated to Horatio Nelson in the square named after his most famous victory. He very much subscribed to the racial views of his time and had no problem with slavery, and indeed profited from it as much of British society did.
You can’t remove the ideas of the past by removing physical reminders of it. In fact, in some cases you only entrench them further.
If you can tell me where I’ve been name calling in this thread in the manner you just have, then by all means have at it. Otherwise, I’ve seen how you engage (or rather don’t) with others on this topic and how quick you are to get personal and it’s no kind of debate I’ve got any interest in having further with you. So frankly, you can back off replying to me.
I honestly think this is a bit or satire at this stage. You literally ignored my requests for evidence and then when I provided one you dismissed it rather than dispute it with some of your own. My own flippant responses were born out of being greeted with the very same when I initially engaged. Which I really fucking wish I hadn’t now.
The thread jumped the shark for me a long time ago too.
For the record I didn’t say you had been name calling.
Exactly.
There are statues and buildings all over London to Henry VIII, Cromwell, Victoria, Churchill, etc.
There won’t be any left if the wokists get their own way.
When will they stop?
For some of them, you can’t be woke enough so perhaps they will just wipe each other out.
Anyone who doesn’t believe there is at least a cultural change where those on side of woke will not tolerate anyone who disagrees with them and try to get them banned, have a look at all the left leaning people who have stood up and said it’s wrong.
I just fundamentally disagree with the idea that removing statues venerating Confederate soldiers or the Confederacy (some of which were erected after the war in what is a clear sign of intimidation towards the black population in the south) will lead to entrenching the idea that slavery is a cause worth fighting for.
You generally speaking don’t see statues honoring what is ostensibly a rebellion against the sitting government in favor of upholding slavery that resulted in a brutal civil war.
There should be statues and monuments about the war and the trans atlantic slave trade but we don’t need statues honoring the men who were so misguided and frankly evil that they thought it was a good idea to start shit over the institution of slavery.
But there are plenty of monuments to people who thought slavery was a good idea outside of the South and indeed outside of the US. It doesn’t advance the cause of fighting what these people thought was ok (and I don’t just mean enslavement but the attitudes that went with it) to ringfence these particular monuments in this particular part of the world and say this is what is bad and must be destroyed.
Even in a case where society tracked down every monument to every person that supported or profited from slavery, I think it’s fair to ask what the aim of that would be? Because even if the aim is good, I could almost guarantee we’d be no nearer accomplishing it.
Wasn’t there slavery in the bible that wasn’t considered evil or wrong?
That was a pretty commonly cited justification for slavery in the 18th and 19th century. Like most uses of religious scripture to justify complete evil, it is at best a bastardisation of mainstream beliefs and without being massively familiar with the text I seem to remember it centred on a dubious interpretation of the word “master”
@shamrockgooner ah so now people having a difference in opinion means they are like me, by that logic you are considering me as an immoral person thus my name can be used to insult other people.
You should have no issue if from now I on I just get personal no matter context then.
[quote="mhappy, post:176, topic:5556, full:true”]
You should have no issue if from now I on I just get personal no matter context then.
[/quote]
Obviously that isn’t the case.
I answered this.
Based on historical information, you can satisfactorily assume that someone has been a victim of the “cancel” campaign.
We do this all the time in real life.
and these are just top-of-head recalls related to football. I bet I can make hundreds of such examples if I go after every general discussion.
The majority of time we use our intuitive sense and say “yeah that seems about right”.
“Nketiah signed a new deal and based on recent trends, 100k seems about right.”
That’s not true. Not every claim will have the same merit because even in a general discussion where the bar is quite low, we would question the legitimacy of Kevin Sateri getting cancelled as opposed to Pedro Pascal getting cancelled.
It makes so much sense if the claim is that “J K Rowling must have lost a few million over brand deals due to recent controversies” as compared to “Holly Black probably lost a movie deal…”
Nope I don’t think you are immoral.
This is so dumb. We’d ask you for a reliable source to back up the claim that Nketiah earns 100k a week, which would take the form of an article from the media. Which is the same burden of proof that’s being asked for here. We’re not asking for scanned copies of her accounts or private correspondence from her agent detailing all the missed professional and financial opportunities, we’re asking for some sort of evidence of her being tangibly cancelled, a lost opportunity or cancelled deal, anything at all, and just like with Nketiah’s wage, a news article that makes sense from a decent source would suffice.
This is the kind of thing that I think at least requires some level of reasoning to back it up, even if not hard evidence. I don’t think it is a given that JK Rowling has lost out on any deals as a result of her views. She can get a book published any time she likes, no publisher would turn down the guaranteed hit that is a book written by one of the most famous authors on the planet. Everything she releases sells very, very well. There’s no indication that people don’t want to continue to licence the Harry Potter IP to produce theatre productions, films, or video games, or lego sets, or a million other types of merch.
I honestly see no reason to look at JK Rowling and the continued popularity of her work and say with any confidence that fewer games, plays or films are being made based on her work, or that she is getting any fewer books published than she would have done had she been less outspoken on gender issues and not been so criticsed for doing so. Therefore I really can’t buy the idea that she has been cancelled. Whereas in cases like Kevin Spacey, you could very clearly look at his earnings in previous years pre cancellation and make fairly specific estimates about the financial costs of his actual cancellation.
It’s clear you think the opposite on Rowling, so I really don’t think there’s much more to be discussed (not to suggest you dont have the right to reply)