The cancel culture run wild

[+OverSword]

3 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Haha, I know I always look to white people to determine what is 'overblown' concerning racism.  It's about as valid as some dude holding forth on how overblown the pain of childbirth is.

Actually if you watch them talk about the study it's not about what's overblown concerning racism.  Give it a go before dismissing it because they're white. That could be interpreted as pretty racist.

Edited February 16, 2021 by OverSword

[rashore]

3 hours ago, susieice said:

I was talking about female fashion. The picture with the 54" TV remark was from the 1700's. Even back into the 1400's and 1500's,, women wore the large skirts and tons of undergarments. This was Catherine of Aragon. And Anne Boleyn. Elizabeth I in the 1600's. I bet some of these outfits weighed 30 or 40 pounds.

       

Oversword mentioned the Renaissance Fairs and a lot of people dress up for them. I've seen Medieval themed weddings. It doesn't mean the participants endorse torture and beheadings. These are fashion, not racist. 

My misreading then.

And good examples of farthingales. The one Catherine is wearing is a Spanish farthingale. The second pic isn't Anne Boleyn- it's a modern production based off a young Queen Elizabeth portrait- and has insufficient and short hoops (like wedding hoops) under it. It should have a Spanish Farthingale for it's form to be right. The last is delightful- it's a doll created off a real Queen Elizabeth portrait, and shows the change to the French farthingale- and the artist does amazing other historical dolls.  https://www.galleryhistoricalfigures.com/elizabeth-i

And no, none of them are racist, though it may well be argued they come from an age of the religious versions of racism that were rife at the time. Or getting a bit more back to antebellum in ways... the overly fabulous and non-working gowns the women of the elite and wealthy were able to afford and wear- quite often based off the backs or labors of peasants, slaves.. folks pretty much trapped into having to serve so those ladies could have lovely dresses like that. 

 

[+OverSword]

Seriously people, think for a moment honestly.  Is wearing frilly hoop dresses racist?  You have to travel a pretty convoluted path to make that connection.  The fact that anyone could be easily persuaded to see it a racism is a very sad and at the same time, also a positive (in a way) commentary of our time but one which is explained in the study discussed in that video I posted above.  In any truly racist society there would be an overabundance of actual racist things going on that nobody in their right mind would see the wearing of fancy clothing from a different time period as racist.  the fact that people need to stretch that ridiculously far in an attempt to find racism is a good indicator that real racism isn't that easily found in our society.  Not saying it doesn't exist.  Can someone give an example of real racism?  It's out there and easy to spot without leaping mental hurdles to recognize it.  How about the black guy that was enjoying the pool in his own apartment building?  How about the guy drug behind a truck until dead?  How about the cops pulling over and detaining a black man because he had two white children he was babysitting in the car with him? 

Okay now add to that list pretty 19 year old girls wearing frilly puffy dresses and big hats that hearken back to the 1830's.  

Edited February 16, 2021 by OverSword

[+Liquid Gardens]

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

Actually if you watch them talk about the study it's not about what's overblown concerning racism.  Give it a go before dismissing it because they're white. That could be interpreted as pretty racist.

Depends on what your definition of 'racism' is.  It's not sexist to note that non-physician men are not in any position to evaluate the pain of childbirth, since they haven't and will never experience it, so what's different about racism?  The problem with these two is their hip-shot judgments; 'everyone would agree that white supremacy was vanishingly rare 15 years ago'.  Who is this 'everyone'?  Is that what minorities 'agreed'? 

One of the main assertions they talk about, that links to the study, is that as instances of racism decrease over time, which they obviously have when looked at historically, then people see racism where these two at least think there is none.  I'm sure that does happen, but it's not a very intelligent or compelling point in this context without the analysis that shows the extent of it.  Incidents of racism probably generally decreased after the Emancipation Proclamation; that doesn't mean that people from Arkansas spitting on black children who are trying to go to school a century later is 'racism where there is none', on the contrary it is clearly racist.  So apparently decreases in the prevalence of racism is also accompanied by continuing racism, even 100 years later.  Isn't then the real question to what extent racism continues compared to 'people seeing racism where there is none'?  These two buttress this aspect of it with their opinions, not 'scientific results'.

In addition they make some really stupid arguments.  To paraphrase, the dude seems to think he's pointing out some discrepancy or inconsistency concerning why there are protests/riots in Portland concerning anti-black racism when Portland is liberal and presumably then there aren't as many incidents of anti-black racism there.  Maybe because the protests aren't about anti-black racism in only Portland?  Maybe it's because liberals are more likely to protest against racial injustice?  That is so 'duh' that it's reasonable to then assume that either he's not very smart, not bothering to look into the things he's criticizing, or it's just propaganda to get more eyeballs on their videos.  

Edited February 16, 2021 by Liquid Gardens

[+OverSword]

13 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Incidents of racism probably generally decreased after the Emancipation Proclamation;

I'll bet they increased.

 

13 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

In addition they make some really stupid arguments.  To paraphrase, the dude seems to think he's pointing out some discrepancy or inconsistency concerning why there are protests/riots in Portland concerning anti-black racism when Portland is liberal and presumably then there aren't as many incidents of anti-black racism there.  Maybe because the protests aren't about anti-black racism in only Portland?  Maybe it's because liberals are more likely to protest against racial injustice?  That is so 'duh' that it's reasonable to then assume that either he's not very smart, not bothering to look into the things he's criticizing, or it's just propaganda to get more eyeballs on their videos.  

You could be right but ignore the commentary and focus on the study.  And if you would like ignore about racism and concentrate on the berries.  The less good berries there are the harder you have to look and the lower your standards for what constitutes  a good berry becomes.  That's where we are.  As I said above to make the leap that 19 year old girls wearing frilly dresses and big hats from the 1830's are being racist is a leap that Evel Knievel would have yearned to make.  That canyon is pretty big in my mind.

Edited February 16, 2021 by OverSword

[Myles]

11 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I'll bet they increased.

 

You could be right but ignore the commentary and focus on the study.  And if you would like ignore about racism and concentrate on the berries.  The less good berries there are the harder you have to look and the lower your standards for what constitutes  a good berry becomes.  That's where we are.  As I said above to make the leap that 19 year old girls wearing frilly dresses and big hats from the 1830's are being racist is a leap that Evel Knievel would have yearned to make.  That canyon is pretty big in my mind.

It would be his greatest feat.  

 

 

[tortugabob]

Wait a minute.  Isn't the girl in that pink dress an African-American?  She must be a white supremacist like the African-Americans who owned slaves during the Southern Antebellum period?.

[Michelle]

A toned down version of those dresses was popular for proms in the 70's and 80's. It didn't matter what color you were...

[Myles]

Trying to protect people from the "cancel culture" leads to hate from Democrat.  

State Sen. Melissa Melendez, R-Lake Elsinore, claims a "climate of intolerance has been established" in the Golden State – so she says she political affiliation should be a protected class under state law so residents can’t face discrimination over their political beliefs.

She says her "Diversity of Thought Act" would protect people from discrimination over politics when seeking housing, bank loans or employment by amending the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

Her second bill would help protect students from facing bullying over their political views.

But Democratic state Assembly member Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego – who drew attention last May for her "F--- Elon Musk" tweet in reaction to the Tesla CEO threatening to pull jobs out of California – fired back at Melendez.

"Your choice to hate & actively puruse hate does not make you part of a protected class," Gonzalez wrote on Twitter.

ust three months before her anti-Musk tweet, Gonzalez was caught on video shouting "F--- Donald Trump!" at a campaign event for then-presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.

 

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-state-republican-aims-at-cancel-culture-with-two-bills-but-faces-quick-dem-backlash

[+Desertrat56]

49 minutes ago, Myles said:

Trying to protect people from the "cancel culture" leads to hate from Democrat.  

State Sen. Melissa Melendez, R-Lake Elsinore, claims a "climate of intolerance has been established" in the Golden State – so she says she political affiliation should be a protected class under state law so residents can’t face discrimination over their political beliefs.

She says her "Diversity of Thought Act" would protect people from discrimination over politics when seeking housing, bank loans or employment by amending the Fair Employment and Housing Act.

Her second bill would help protect students from facing bullying over their political views.

But Democratic state Assembly member Lorena Gonzalez of San Diego – who drew attention last May for her "F--- Elon Musk" tweet in reaction to the Tesla CEO threatening to pull jobs out of California – fired back at Melendez.

"Your choice to hate & actively puruse hate does not make you part of a protected class," Gonzalez wrote on Twitter.

ust three months before her anti-Musk tweet, Gonzalez was caught on video shouting "F--- Donald Trump!" at a campaign event for then-presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.

 

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-state-republican-aims-at-cancel-culture-with-two-bills-but-faces-quick-dem-backlash

???!   There are already federal legislation to do everything she listed in her "diversity of thought act".  What is wrong with her?  Is California legislation so crazy it goes against the federal standards of the Fair Employment Act and Fair Housing Act?

 

[spartan max2]

2 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

???!   There are already federal legislation to do everything she listed in her "diversity of thought act".  What is wrong with her?  Is California legislation so crazy it goes against the federal standards of the Fair Employment Act and Fair Housing Act?

 

Discrimination based on Political views actually isn't protected under the civil rights act and most federal laws.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-employers-discriminate-based-on-political-beliefs-or-affiliation.html

[+Desertrat56]

1 hour ago, spartan max2 said:

Discrimination based on Political views actually isn't protected under the civil rights act and most federal laws.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-employers-discriminate-based-on-political-beliefs-or-affiliation.html

I thought it was illegal to ask a prospective employee or tenant about their political affiliations and beliefs.  It falls under the same rules as religion.   Maybe it is a protection from the states I have lived in.

Edited February 17, 2021 by Desertrat56

[+Desertrat56]

If I ever applied to rent an apartment/house or applied for a job and there was a question about my politics or religion on the application I would just walk away.  Obviously not a place I want to live or work no matter what their criteria is, those things are no one's business unless I want to share them.

[spartan max2]

1 minute ago, Desertrat56 said:

Are you sure?  I thought it was illegal to ask a prospective employee or tenant about their political affiliations and beliefs.  It falls under the same rules as religion.

I'm not entirely sure. I'm just going off the link. It sounds like nonething on the federal level but some states have their own laws I guess?

Quote

A few states explicitly prohibit employers from making job decisions based on an employee’s or applicant’s politics. In California, for example, employees are protected from discrimination based on their political affiliations and activities. New York and the District of Columbia have similar laws. And, in Oregon and Wisconsin, employees may not be penalized for refusing to attend meetings intended to allow their employer to communicate its political or religious opinions.

 

[+Desertrat56]

Just now, spartan max2 said:

I'm not entirely sure. I'm just going off the link. It sounds like nonething on the federal level but some states have their own laws I guess?

 

Yeah, I think I will look for more information on that because it is possible that the person on that link did not do due diligence or misread something.

[+Desertrat56]

 Well, right off the bat I found that nolo.com is owned by MH sub 1, which on Bloomberg news says "MH Sub I, LLC, doing business as Internet Brands, operates as an internet media company. The Company provides customized and programmatic advertising solutions to home and travel automotive, health, and legal markets, as well as develops and licenses Internet software and social media applications. Internet Brands serves customers worldwide."

based in California,  

WEBSITE

www.internetbrands.com

FOUNDED

07/23/2013

 

"Welcome to Internet Brands. We’re the vertically focused internet company. We focus on four core verticals in which we are the proven leaders: Automotive, Health, Legal, and Home / Travel. Our fully integrated vertical approach combines leading web solutions for businesses and media websites for consumers."

 

So the link @spartan max2 gave may be correct.  I went to the HUD website and clicked on rentors rights and it breaks it down by state.

 

 

[+Liquid Gardens]

16 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

So the link @spartan max2 gave may be correct.  I went to the HUD website and clicked on rentors rights and it breaks it down by state.

I was on the opposite end from you I think, I always thought that political views are fair game as it's not as easy to link it to some kind of protected right from the Constitution or otherwise.  I didn't know that some states actually forbid it.

[+OverSword]

Is cancel culture a dress rehearsal for genocide?  

[+Desertrat56]

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

Is cancel culture a dress rehearsal for genocide?  

Nope.   His polarization of communists and socialists invalidates his argument.   You can come back and tell me I am wrong if you ever notice this really happening.    People don't need to be on social media.   Forums like this are different, but the monopolies or attempted monopolies like Google, Facebook, etc. are not socialist or communist, their ideology is capitalism.  

Edited February 18, 2021 by Desertrat56

[+OverSword]

17 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Nope.   His polarization of communists and socialists invalidates his argument.   You can come back and tell me I am wrong if you ever notice this really happening.    People don't need to be on social media.   Forums like this are different, but the monopolies or attempted monopolies like Google, Facebook, etc. are not socialist or communist, their ideology is capitalism.  

I think he was saying that the cancel culture at it's heart is a means of dehumanizing, that is inarguably a necessary step on the way to genocide.

[+Desertrat56]

22 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I think he was saying that the cancel culture at it's heart is a means of dehumanizing, that is inarguably a necessary step on the way to genocide.

If that is what he was saying, he should have said that instead of bringing up the idea that "communists and socialists" will kill you.

[+OverSword]

1 minute ago, Desertrat56 said:

If that is what he was saying, he should have said that instead of bringing up the idea that "communists and socialists" will kill you.

They will.  Ever met someone that fled from a communist country?  I've lived with them.  

[+Desertrat56]

Just now, OverSword said:

They will.  Ever met someone that fled from a communist country?  I've lived with them.  

So, you agree it is a great fear mongering tactic.    Do you really think that the extremes are really communists and socialists?   There is more going on than that, and as long as you are polarized and fearful of one "side" or the other the tactics are working.  

[Setton]

On 2/15/2021 at 6:33 PM, Desertrat56 said:

It's a damn costume party!   So what, I am sure there are british equivalents as well as French and Spanish etc.

Well ****.

I spend the odd weekend dressed as a viking.

Guess I'll go and get myself fired for obviously supporting the killing of monks, mass slavery and piracy.

And of course, enjoying hitting my friends with bits of metal.

[preacherman76]

16 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

If that is what he was saying, he should have said that instead of bringing up the idea that "communists and socialists" will kill you.

Communists entire premise is the idea that you take a section of the population and tell them the other parts of society are holding them down, until said people get so mad they kill, often millions of people. Then they place in a dictator, who in turn ends up killing millions more. That has been the norm historically.