Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Kurt Zouma
Comments
-
Cancel culture is yet another tactic to shoehorn half of society into the “lefty woke PC brigade” group. In short, it’s another facet of the so called culture war that we as a nation (along with our transatlantic cousins) are dumb enough to fall for. There is no cancel culture in reality, and if there is, then all that famous people have to do to avoid it is to not do things like volley cats online.Neil_Heaney said:
What examples make you feel like cancel culture is a real and serious thing? And why do you think it's an emergency?J BLOCK said:
It is and it does.Garrymanilow said:
It's funny, it's always these sorts of people who talk about 'cancelling' as if it's a real thing. They tend to often be the ones who talk about free speech and how people should be able to express themselves however they want. That's all that's happening with Zouma; people are disgusted by his actions and they're feeling very free to tell him that. Companies no longer want to work with him because he's bad for their brand and football fans, who get upset about haircuts and goal celebrations, are telling him what they think of him. He's still got his job, he's still free to earn £100,000 a week for many, many misguided kicks over 90 minutes, he just might have to hear people telling him what they think of his actions, which ws already happening to every footballer anyway. Those fans are free to express themselves as long as they're not crosing the line into illegal abusive territory. Cancelling is just like 'woke', a simple word that's been taken by old people and twisted into an emergency that doesn't exist.Bournemouth Addick said:
I know a lot of people feel this way so curious to understand why a bit better.2 -
Yep, couldn't agree more. It's the latest 'political correctness gone mad' to try and turn normal opinions/causes into some kind of anti-freedom conspiracy.BR7_addick said:
Cancel culture is yet another tactic to shoehorn half of society into the “lefty woke PC brigade” group. In short, it’s another facet of the so called culture war that we as a nation (along with our transatlantic cousins) are dumb enough to fall for. There is no cancel culture in reality, and if there is, then all that famous people have to do to avoid it is to not do things like volley cats online.Neil_Heaney said:
What examples make you feel like cancel culture is a real and serious thing? And why do you think it's an emergency?J BLOCK said:
It is and it does.Garrymanilow said:
It's funny, it's always these sorts of people who talk about 'cancelling' as if it's a real thing. They tend to often be the ones who talk about free speech and how people should be able to express themselves however they want. That's all that's happening with Zouma; people are disgusted by his actions and they're feeling very free to tell him that. Companies no longer want to work with him because he's bad for their brand and football fans, who get upset about haircuts and goal celebrations, are telling him what they think of him. He's still got his job, he's still free to earn £100,000 a week for many, many misguided kicks over 90 minutes, he just might have to hear people telling him what they think of his actions, which ws already happening to every footballer anyway. Those fans are free to express themselves as long as they're not crosing the line into illegal abusive territory. Cancelling is just like 'woke', a simple word that's been taken by old people and twisted into an emergency that doesn't exist.Bournemouth Addick said:
I know a lot of people feel this way so curious to understand why a bit better.
But it's a widely held view that 'cancel culture' is real and having a meaningful impact on the world, so I think it's important (or at least interesting) to get the other side's view.3 -
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/02/16/10-victims-of-campus-cancel-culture/BR7_addick said:
Cancel culture is yet another tactic to shoehorn half of society into the “lefty woke PC brigade” group. In short, it’s another facet of the so called culture war that we as a nation (along with our transatlantic cousins) are dumb enough to fall for. There is no cancel culture in reality, and if there is, then all that famous people have to do to avoid it is to not do things like volley cats online.Neil_Heaney said:
What examples make you feel like cancel culture is a real and serious thing? And why do you think it's an emergency?J BLOCK said:
It is and it does.Garrymanilow said:
It's funny, it's always these sorts of people who talk about 'cancelling' as if it's a real thing. They tend to often be the ones who talk about free speech and how people should be able to express themselves however they want. That's all that's happening with Zouma; people are disgusted by his actions and they're feeling very free to tell him that. Companies no longer want to work with him because he's bad for their brand and football fans, who get upset about haircuts and goal celebrations, are telling him what they think of him. He's still got his job, he's still free to earn £100,000 a week for many, many misguided kicks over 90 minutes, he just might have to hear people telling him what they think of his actions, which ws already happening to every footballer anyway. Those fans are free to express themselves as long as they're not crosing the line into illegal abusive territory. Cancelling is just like 'woke', a simple word that's been taken by old people and twisted into an emergency that doesn't exist.Bournemouth Addick said:
I know a lot of people feel this way so curious to understand why a bit better.
The above people may disagree2 -
Go on then, I'm excited for you to tell me more about this emergency.J BLOCK said:
It is and it does.Garrymanilow said:
It's funny, it's always these sorts of people who talk about 'cancelling' as if it's a real thing. They tend to often be the ones who talk about free speech and how people should be able to express themselves however they want. That's all that's happening with Zouma; people are disgusted by his actions and they're feeling very free to tell him that. Companies no longer want to work with him because he's bad for their brand and football fans, who get upset about haircuts and goal celebrations, are telling him what they think of him. He's still got his job, he's still free to earn £100,000 a week for many, many misguided kicks over 90 minutes, he just might have to hear people telling him what they think of his actions, which ws already happening to every footballer anyway. Those fans are free to express themselves as long as they're not crosing the line into illegal abusive territory. Cancelling is just like 'woke', a simple word that's been taken by old people and twisted into an emergency that doesn't exist.Bournemouth Addick said:
1 -
Might ask my wife, a chemotherapy nurse, if she can also tell those who are about to give an account for a wasted faithless life.Dazzler21 said:
LMAO. How is this guy still a member?ValleyOfTears said:
I've been on oncology wards and can tell you which blokes entered death with peace and which ones were absolutely terrified and realised they were about to give an account for their wasted faithless lifeSix-a-bag-of-nuts said:
"Comfort yourself in your denial"?ValleyOfTears said:
I do hope you are feeling better soon. Simply applying the phrase "By this logic ..." Apropos nothing anyone has said, and then restating your non sequiters again and again do not follow logic or indeed any kind of coherent argument.Henry Irving said:
This is very reassuring. By this logic we can ignore goals the other teams scores because they were mistakes.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
So by your logic any terrible atrocities committed in the name of religion were done by those who didn't really have faith and therefore it had nothing to do with the religion.ValleyOfTears said:
I agree. With the sentiment of personal responsibility. 100% And not blaming others. That is all good and right.Leroy Ambrose said:
Do me a favour. Christianity and its adherents have been responsible for more atrocities than every other religion combined over the centuries. Media by definition isn't 'atheist' - it's 'agnostic'. Exposure of the thousands of scandals globally affecting millions of people is not some 'atheist agenda', any more than reporting on climate change is a 'green agenda' or on abuse of womens' rights in Islamic states is 'an anti-Muslim agenda'. It's called 'reporting'.ValleyOfTears said:
But that's just it. Your "progressive utopia" is neither bringing evil (greenwood, Mendy, Zouma) out into the light or keeping evil hidden.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Post-Christian morality? When the Catholic Church has abused more young children than any other organisation on the planet.ValleyOfTears said:
Begs the question "What are the rules in this post-Christian 21st Century morality?"Carter said:Utter shithouse of the highest order, complete coward and a bully. Football will do what it does though, it will forgive, he won't get sacked because a club with a lower sense of morality will sign him up.
It seems noone really knows.
I like to think noone on these pages would ever do things the likes of Mendy, Zouma, Greenwood et al do/done/did. And seem to laugh at too.
But these things don't START with torturing animals, beating up and sexually assaulting young women.
These are outward behaviours (and probably regular behaviours too) reflecting their inner distorted thoughts that they believe are normal and acceptable.
We kid ourselves if we think by outlawing racist words from the terraces we have defeated hatred. If we prohibit the use of anti-LGBT expressions we have defeated hatred. And if we no longer condone any offensive terms towards women we suddenly create a loving ordered society where men and women can attain their highest most noble selves and we have relegated mysoginy to the history books.
It's utter rubbish. We merely eject those from the ground who openly reveal the contents of their hearts in song. What about the many people who also share their expressions but are "wise enough" to keep quiet? Aka "clever enough to go undetected". What therefore has changed?
We have merely reminded people there are things we are not allowed to say in public anymore. But that doesn't change anyone.
By all means do all these polite expressions and yes, courtesy is a dying art in this age but don't expect it to actually stop the Mendys, Zoumas, Greenwoods from causing absolute misery to others. (And to animals)
This new morality is not morality at all. It is a la carte Morality where we pick this issue and choose that moral issue but it isn't morality..It leaves plenty of room and acceptable room for people to be completely immoral. Evil in fact! And Mendy, Zouma and Greenwood have found that loophole in our fake new morality.
Of course things are changing for the better, whilst some may keep their own evil agenda hidden, many others are coming round to a more progressive way of thinking, which can clearly be seen in almost all statistics relating to crime, violent or otherwise.
While I agree great evils have taken place in Church organisations (the atheist media do all they can to highlight these evils of course too) it is not the teaching of Truth that is the cause but the failure to live by that Truth that is.
In our desperate attempt to bury Christianity for a post Christian society we haven't eradicated the evil of abuse (it's everywhere now!) but we have erased the teaching, the community of prayer and worship and the hope that these essential aspects of faith give to people.
Nice and convenient way for you to blame people for the ills of the world, rather than religion. "It's not the rules that are wrong, it's that people won't use them". How does that square with the numerous inconsistencies, atrocities and downright fucking meanness in the bible then? If this shit wasn't written down in a book somewhere for cretins to follow, they wouldn't have something to point to and say 'a magic man in the sky made me do it' - they'd have to justify their actions themselves. Might make it a bit harder, if they didn't have a 'sacred text' to hide behind, and thus more difficult to justify to the rest of the world...
All 'faith' ever gave to people was a reason to explain why their life was so shitty. It's *literally* why religion was invented - a convenient way to keep the masses compliant, and a set of guidelines to live by when they weren't educated enough to realise that eating raw meat could kill you.
I also don't believe that people should hide behind an ideology or "sacred text" to justify evil. Just one look at the state of America burning at the hands of the animals of antifa all through 2020/21 was a perfect example of what can happen when people erroneously believe that by waving flags with "anti-hate" on them, they can er hate and destroy anyone with impunity.
You are absolutely correct in asserting that great evils have occurred throughout history by those "calling themselves" this religion or that religion. Terrible things in fact. This still doesn't mean that faith itself has to be derided and binned and "cancelled" from the public square. . It just means that some people, who probably never had it, committed terrible crimes in its name. The common denominator is ...people without faith and without putting it into practice do seriously evil stuff.
The one thing always missing in these exchanges, is the bit, and significant bit at that, that reveals the great many good things that come from faith.
I fear it's THAT that many people take the greatest umbrage with in reality. The good that comes from faith. Because one knows instinctively that they have rejected this good and tried inventing their own versions of good and bad. It cannot be done. And the disintegration of the once powerful West is testament to this in this woke age. It will end terribly for its adherents.
So we beat Bolton 0 - 1 on Tuesday and there must be a few other wins we weren't aware of this season.
We are going up!
I get that you loathe people who have a faith. You have a free will.
I get that you cannot find a single positive thing to say about faith. (I feel your pain)
And I realise that the only way you can comfort yourself in your denial, is to unearth extreme stories of those who never had faith who have caused misery and suffering for others. That doesn't actually tell anyone anything about genuine people of faith that follow their faith and are transformed and transform those around them.
Surely you can acknowledge that a violent and wicked individual can infiltrate ANY group they wish and bring disgrace upon it? It doesn't require too much logic. Unsurprisingly for an atheist ~ is to THOSE individuals and ONLY those individuals you wish to refer as "people of faith". Surely you can do better.
LOL. Who needs comfort, those with confidence in the science and logic, or those governed by fear of the unknown and the finality of death?
And hey, why not blame the historic atrocities of the church on "infiltrators"? That's a classic.1 -
If this is the best Spiked online can come up with then no wonder it’s called a culture. I mean the third one down said being gay was a sin, again it goes back to my point about volleying cats, but I’ll simplify more, if you’re not a c*nt in public, you’ll be fine.holyjo said:
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/02/16/10-victims-of-campus-cancel-culture/BR7_addick said:
Cancel culture is yet another tactic to shoehorn half of society into the “lefty woke PC brigade” group. In short, it’s another facet of the so called culture war that we as a nation (along with our transatlantic cousins) are dumb enough to fall for. There is no cancel culture in reality, and if there is, then all that famous people have to do to avoid it is to not do things like volley cats online.Neil_Heaney said:
What examples make you feel like cancel culture is a real and serious thing? And why do you think it's an emergency?J BLOCK said:
It is and it does.Garrymanilow said:
It's funny, it's always these sorts of people who talk about 'cancelling' as if it's a real thing. They tend to often be the ones who talk about free speech and how people should be able to express themselves however they want. That's all that's happening with Zouma; people are disgusted by his actions and they're feeling very free to tell him that. Companies no longer want to work with him because he's bad for their brand and football fans, who get upset about haircuts and goal celebrations, are telling him what they think of him. He's still got his job, he's still free to earn £100,000 a week for many, many misguided kicks over 90 minutes, he just might have to hear people telling him what they think of his actions, which ws already happening to every footballer anyway. Those fans are free to express themselves as long as they're not crosing the line into illegal abusive territory. Cancelling is just like 'woke', a simple word that's been taken by old people and twisted into an emergency that doesn't exist.Bournemouth Addick said:
I know a lot of people feel this way so curious to understand why a bit better.
The above people may disagree1 -
So, what about the cases? Are you fine with them?BR7_addick said:
If this is the best Spiked online can come up with then no wonder it’s called a culture. I mean the third one down said being gay was a sin, again it goes back to my point about volleying cats, but I’ll simplify more, if you’re not a c*nt in public, you’ll be fine.holyjo said:
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/02/16/10-victims-of-campus-cancel-culture/BR7_addick said:
Cancel culture is yet another tactic to shoehorn half of society into the “lefty woke PC brigade” group. In short, it’s another facet of the so called culture war that we as a nation (along with our transatlantic cousins) are dumb enough to fall for. There is no cancel culture in reality, and if there is, then all that famous people have to do to avoid it is to not do things like volley cats online.Neil_Heaney said:
What examples make you feel like cancel culture is a real and serious thing? And why do you think it's an emergency?J BLOCK said:
It is and it does.Garrymanilow said:
It's funny, it's always these sorts of people who talk about 'cancelling' as if it's a real thing. They tend to often be the ones who talk about free speech and how people should be able to express themselves however they want. That's all that's happening with Zouma; people are disgusted by his actions and they're feeling very free to tell him that. Companies no longer want to work with him because he's bad for their brand and football fans, who get upset about haircuts and goal celebrations, are telling him what they think of him. He's still got his job, he's still free to earn £100,000 a week for many, many misguided kicks over 90 minutes, he just might have to hear people telling him what they think of his actions, which ws already happening to every footballer anyway. Those fans are free to express themselves as long as they're not crosing the line into illegal abusive territory. Cancelling is just like 'woke', a simple word that's been taken by old people and twisted into an emergency that doesn't exist.Bournemouth Addick said:
I know a lot of people feel this way so curious to understand why a bit better.
The above people may disagree
Who gets to decide what constitutes 'being a c**t'? You? Twitter?
You and others asked for proof; some of many examples were provided.
These weren't people defending animal cruelty, so trying to conflate the two is dishonest, as is saying that the problem is non-existent.
If you want to live in a society where people are effectively criminalised for challenging fashionable, narrow minded groupthink, why don't you just be honest about it?1 -
I am being completely and utterly honest pal.bigstemarra said:
So, what about the cases? Are you fine with them?BR7_addick said:
If this is the best Spiked online can come up with then no wonder it’s called a culture. I mean the third one down said being gay was a sin, again it goes back to my point about volleying cats, but I’ll simplify more, if you’re not a c*nt in public, you’ll be fine.holyjo said:
https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/02/16/10-victims-of-campus-cancel-culture/BR7_addick said:
Cancel culture is yet another tactic to shoehorn half of society into the “lefty woke PC brigade” group. In short, it’s another facet of the so called culture war that we as a nation (along with our transatlantic cousins) are dumb enough to fall for. There is no cancel culture in reality, and if there is, then all that famous people have to do to avoid it is to not do things like volley cats online.Neil_Heaney said:
What examples make you feel like cancel culture is a real and serious thing? And why do you think it's an emergency?J BLOCK said:
It is and it does.Garrymanilow said:
It's funny, it's always these sorts of people who talk about 'cancelling' as if it's a real thing. They tend to often be the ones who talk about free speech and how people should be able to express themselves however they want. That's all that's happening with Zouma; people are disgusted by his actions and they're feeling very free to tell him that. Companies no longer want to work with him because he's bad for their brand and football fans, who get upset about haircuts and goal celebrations, are telling him what they think of him. He's still got his job, he's still free to earn £100,000 a week for many, many misguided kicks over 90 minutes, he just might have to hear people telling him what they think of his actions, which ws already happening to every footballer anyway. Those fans are free to express themselves as long as they're not crosing the line into illegal abusive territory. Cancelling is just like 'woke', a simple word that's been taken by old people and twisted into an emergency that doesn't exist.Bournemouth Addick said:
I know a lot of people feel this way so curious to understand why a bit better.
The above people may disagree
Who gets to decide what constitutes 'being a c**t'? You? Twitter?
You and others asked for proof; some of many examples were provided.
These weren't people defending animal cruelty, so trying to conflate the two is dishonest, as is saying that the problem is non-existent.
If you want to live in a society where people are effectively criminalised for challenging fashionable, narrow minded groupthink, why don't you just be honest about it?I mean Spiked online is basically designed to call everything snowflake/cancel culture etc etc whatever the latest term is. And this article has a very small paragraph on people I know absolutely nothing about, and you expect me to nod and say ah yeah this shady funded brain dead publication has made me see the light, cancel culture is among us? Turn it in.
And if you’ve come this far in life and not figured out what being a c*nt looks like I can’t help you mate, unless you’re very very young I guess.What part of cancel culture do you fear then? What can’t you say now that will make you be cancelled? Humour me cos I genuinely don’t know.1 -
So, you kind of answered my question, it is you that decides what constitutes being a 'c*nt', you must have pretty infallible judgement. I could only wish to be as wise as you.
Let me choose one of the examples from the article:
'Phoenix is a criminology professor at the Open University. She was due to give a lecture at Essex University about the potential harms of putting trans women in women’s prisons. Staff and students attacked her as a transphobe and the talk was cancelled. Phoenix had given the same talk a month earlier in Canada without incident. Essex University cited security reasons for cancelling the talk. In other words, it caved to the demands of the mob.'
So, having concerns about women's safety by them being exposed to biological male sex offenders in women's prisons is being a 'c*nt', is it?
I know you're playing dumb here, but Universities used to be places where different opinions could be debated in a safe and rational way; the above example is one of many where citing an unfashionable rational opinion regarding prison safety leads to threats of violence and cancellation. Surely debating the issue would have been enlightening for those on all sides of the debate?
Do you think that this is reasonable in a 'free country'?
1 -
Hang about, so this lecturer was basically uninvited to speak at a university? You said “effectively criminalised” in your last post, so to confirm she wasn’t criminalised she just had a few silly students make a bit of a fuss about her turning up?bigstemarra said:So, you kind of answered my question, it is you that decides what constitutes being a 'c*nt', you must have pretty infallible judgement. I could only wish to be as wise as you.
Let me choose one of the examples from the article:
'Phoenix is a criminology professor at the Open University. She was due to give a lecture at Essex University about the potential harms of putting trans women in women’s prisons. Staff and students attacked her as a transphobe and the talk was cancelled. Phoenix had given the same talk a month earlier in Canada without incident. Essex University cited security reasons for cancelling the talk. In other words, it caved to the demands of the mob.'
So, having concerns about women's safety by them being exposed to biological male sex offenders in women's prisons is being a 'c*nt', is it?
I know you're playing dumb here, but Universities used to be places where different opinions could be debated in a safe and rational way; the above example is one of many where citing an unfashionable rational opinion regarding prison safety leads to threats of violence and cancellation. Surely debating the issue would have been enlightening for those on all sides of the debate?
Do you think that this is reasonable in a 'free country'?And you think this example is supposed to scare us into thinking “cancel culture” is an actual issue for a Joe Bloggs like me? Come on mate, I don’t wanna make this the BR7/bigstemarra show with all the back and forths but don’t you think this is all a bit dramatic?I’ll ask again, what is it you feel you can’t say nowadays that will have you actually cancelled?1 - Sponsored links:
-
the cat kicking will follow Zouma for the rest of his time in England .. persistent booing and jeering will eventually affect the other West Ham players and thus the team's performances .. they should cut their losses and sell him abroad to somewhere where animal cruelty is not such a big deal2
-
I think that if you say that you have difficulty accepting that a Transwomen is the same as someone born with an XX chromosome you would be de-platformed from a lot of Universities and piled upon if you shared that view on Twitter.BR7_addick said:
Hang about, so this lecturer was basically uninvited to speak at a university? You said “effectively criminalised” in your last post, so to confirm she wasn’t criminalised she just had a few silly students make a bit of a fuss about her turning up?bigstemarra said:So, you kind of answered my question, it is you that decides what constitutes being a 'c*nt', you must have pretty infallible judgement. I could only wish to be as wise as you.
Let me choose one of the examples from the article:
'Phoenix is a criminology professor at the Open University. She was due to give a lecture at Essex University about the potential harms of putting trans women in women’s prisons. Staff and students attacked her as a transphobe and the talk was cancelled. Phoenix had given the same talk a month earlier in Canada without incident. Essex University cited security reasons for cancelling the talk. In other words, it caved to the demands of the mob.'
So, having concerns about women's safety by them being exposed to biological male sex offenders in women's prisons is being a 'c*nt', is it?
I know you're playing dumb here, but Universities used to be places where different opinions could be debated in a safe and rational way; the above example is one of many where citing an unfashionable rational opinion regarding prison safety leads to threats of violence and cancellation. Surely debating the issue would have been enlightening for those on all sides of the debate?
Do you think that this is reasonable in a 'free country'?And you think this example is supposed to scare us into thinking “cancel culture” is an actual issue for a Joe Bloggs like me? Come on mate, I don’t wanna make this the BR7/bigstemarra show with all the back and forths but don’t you think this is all a bit dramatic?I’ll ask again, what is it you feel you can’t say nowadays that will have you actually cancelled?
If you wanted to debate the merits of CRT or White privilege I think you would be de-platformed or in some institutions your job would be under threat
Jon Ronsons - "Things fell apart" podcast series about culture wars talks a lot about this.
5 -
Okay that’s the reply I was looking for.holyjo said:
I think that if you say that you have difficulty accepting that a Transwomen is the same as someone born with an XX chromosome you would be de-platformed from a lot of Universities and piled upon if you shared that view on Twitter.BR7_addick said:
Hang about, so this lecturer was basically uninvited to speak at a university? You said “effectively criminalised” in your last post, so to confirm she wasn’t criminalised she just had a few silly students make a bit of a fuss about her turning up?bigstemarra said:So, you kind of answered my question, it is you that decides what constitutes being a 'c*nt', you must have pretty infallible judgement. I could only wish to be as wise as you.
Let me choose one of the examples from the article:
'Phoenix is a criminology professor at the Open University. She was due to give a lecture at Essex University about the potential harms of putting trans women in women’s prisons. Staff and students attacked her as a transphobe and the talk was cancelled. Phoenix had given the same talk a month earlier in Canada without incident. Essex University cited security reasons for cancelling the talk. In other words, it caved to the demands of the mob.'
So, having concerns about women's safety by them being exposed to biological male sex offenders in women's prisons is being a 'c*nt', is it?
I know you're playing dumb here, but Universities used to be places where different opinions could be debated in a safe and rational way; the above example is one of many where citing an unfashionable rational opinion regarding prison safety leads to threats of violence and cancellation. Surely debating the issue would have been enlightening for those on all sides of the debate?
Do you think that this is reasonable in a 'free country'?And you think this example is supposed to scare us into thinking “cancel culture” is an actual issue for a Joe Bloggs like me? Come on mate, I don’t wanna make this the BR7/bigstemarra show with all the back and forths but don’t you think this is all a bit dramatic?I’ll ask again, what is it you feel you can’t say nowadays that will have you actually cancelled?
If you wanted to debate the merits of CRT or White privilege I think you would be de-platformed or in some institutions your job would be under threat
Jon Ronsons - "Things fell apart" podcast series about culture wars talks a lot about this.
But again a non issue for me, these are Twitter arguments, campus clique rows, I can’t see how anyone can argue this is a problem for Joe Bloggs. In comes spiked online however, who inflate this stuff and try to convince us we’ll be sacked for picking your nose.0 -
How old is student reaction to controversial figures? Probably centuries, but this is an account from an incident nearly fifty years ago at the LSE.
http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-Salient36121973-t1-body-d26.html
At that time the term 'cancel culture' hadn't been established, the professor wasn't 'effectively criminalised'. He was physically attacked.
I ask when the golden age of what Universities with 'safe and rational debate' actually was?
Socrates participated in what was effectively an early example of University-like debate nearly two and a half thousand years ago, and the 'cancel culture' of the time came from Athenian authorities, who effectively obliged the death of Socrates, one of his apparent crimes was corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens.
The issue of liberty of expression is not a modern one at all.1 -
I very much agree with this sentiment. In the 60/70/80's you could be cancelled for having tolerant views about same sex marriage etc. For me its not an issue of left/right but rather the important issue that in most circumstances your views should not mean you should lose a job / be denied the right to speak etc.seth plum said:How old is student reaction to controversial figures? Probably centuries, but this is an account from an incident nearly fifty years ago at the LSE.
http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-Salient36121973-t1-body-d26.html
At that time the term 'cancel culture' hadn't been established, the professor wasn't 'effectively criminalised'. He was physically attacked.
I ask when the golden age of what Universities with 'safe and rational debate' actually was?
Socrates participated in what was effectively an early example of University-like debate nearly two and a half thousand years ago, and the 'cancel culture' of the time came from Athenian authorities, who effectively obliged the death of Socrates, one of his apparent crimes was corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens.
The issue of liberty of expression is not a modern one at all.2 -
You didn't answer my question. You labelled all the examples in the article as 'being c*nts'. Do you stand by that?
Anyone working in academia/education should be concerned about being cancelled, as should those in the media and many other professions. The example here is someone bullied out of their living:
'Professor Kathleen Stock resigned from her post at the University of Sussex back in October, following a campaign of intimidation co-ordinated by students. They were determined to have her ousted for her gender-critical views (that is, her belief that biological sex is real). Her detractors said they were protesting for the ‘safety’ and ‘protection’ of the vulnerable, which masked a great deal of vicious abuse targeted at one named individual. Shamefully, even when Stock received death threats, this was not enough to elicit unconditional support from her local branch of the lecturers’ union, the University and College Union (UCU).Stock’s resignation was followed by professor of criminology Jo Phoenix, another gender-critical feminist, quitting her position with the Open University. Phoenix pointed to abuse not from students, but from colleagues. In 2021, it has become increasingly clear that universities are at the forefront of preaching a modern-day version of transubstantiation and disciplining heretics, be they staff or students.'
So, cancelled, then. For saying that biological sex is real, which is, you know, scientific fact....and, in your opinion, apparently makes her a 'c*nt'.
3 -
Well you’re going to have to define cancel culture for me first? Because you said “effectively criminalised” and no one has been criminalised here. Just had an invite taken away.bigstemarra said:You didn't answer my question. You labelled all the examples in the article as 'being c*nts'. Do you stand by that?
Anyone working in academia/education should be concerned about being cancelled, as should those in the media and many other professions. The example here is someone bullied out of their living:
'Professor Kathleen Stock resigned from her post at the University of Sussex back in October, following a campaign of intimidation co-ordinated by students. They were determined to have her ousted for her gender-critical views (that is, her belief that biological sex is real). Her detractors said they were protesting for the ‘safety’ and ‘protection’ of the vulnerable, which masked a great deal of vicious abuse targeted at one named individual. Shamefully, even when Stock received death threats, this was not enough to elicit unconditional support from her local branch of the lecturers’ union, the University and College Union (UCU).Stock’s resignation was followed by professor of criminology Jo Phoenix, another gender-critical feminist, quitting her position with the Open University. Phoenix pointed to abuse not from students, but from colleagues. In 2021, it has become increasingly clear that universities are at the forefront of preaching a modern-day version of transubstantiation and disciplining heretics, be they staff or students.'
So, cancelled, then. For saying that biological sex is real, which is, you know, scientific fact....and, in your opinion, apparently makes her a 'c*nt'.
I know many working as teachers and one lecturer as it happens, they don’t have Twitter so have no idea what cancel culture is, interesting don’t you think..I think we both know that no one is being criminalised for saying biological sex is real, I mean at least you’ve answered my question about what it is you fear about the so called rife cancel culture, but for now I’ll go about my business as usual whilst you’re on edge about saying the wrong things and going prison.0 -
I reckon ol Souee G is in the first stages of early onset dementia .. some of his recent comments have been very strangeCallumcafc said:1 -
So, you won't deny that you consider having views in accord with scientific reality makes you a 'c*nt'?
Have fun with your brethren, the Flat Earthers, climate sceptics and anti-vaxxers!
I'll just leave this here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-51501202
Right, I'm off to 'check my thinking'
1 - Sponsored links:
-
You think I’m anti science because I said don’t be a c*nt and you won’t be criminalised. By the sounds of it you’ve skipped a few science lessons yourself good sir, enjoy.bigstemarra said:So, you won't deny that you consider having views in accord with scientific reality makes you a 'c*nt'?
Have fun with your brethren, the Flat Earthers, climate sceptics and anti-vaxxers!
I'll just leave this here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-51501202
Right, I'm off to 'check my thinking'2 -
This is what you said:
'If this is the best Spiked online can come up with then no wonder it’s called a culture. I mean the third one down said being gay was a sin, again it goes back to my point about volleying cats, but I’ll simplify more, if you’re not a c*nt in public, you’ll be fine.'
No mention of criminalisation, only cancellation. I only mentioned 'effective criminalisation' in a post AFTER yours. Why lie?
It's there for all too see, as is your post above. You value 'winning' an argument over honesty. There are people like you on the left and the right; it sounds like you'll fit in with the anti-vaxxers and climate change denialists just fine.
Enjoy.1 -
You’re still going here because you cannot answer simple questions, which is commonplace with those riddled with fear about silly things like cancel culture.bigstemarra said:This is what you said:
'If this is the best Spiked online can come up with then no wonder it’s called a culture. I mean the third one down said being gay was a sin, again it goes back to my point about volleying cats, but I’ll simplify more, if you’re not a c*nt in public, you’ll be fine.'
No mention of criminalisation, only cancellation. I only mentioned 'effective criminalisation' in a post AFTER yours. Why lie?
It's there for all too see, as is your post above. You value 'winning' an argument over honesty. There are people like you on the left and the right; it sounds like you'll fit in with the anti-vaxxers and climate change denialists just fine.
Enjoy.So 4th time, What do you fear in regards to cancel culture, for you personally? What can’t you say that you really wanna say?There’s nothing I wanna say in public that I can’t say therefore cancel culture is nonsense to me, an absolute myth, so I’m intrigued by those that are fearful of it.1 -
I've given you examples, you idiot.
I pointed out the bullshit in your post, namely that as regards cancel culture your assertion that 'if you’re not a c*nt in public, you’ll be fine'' was bollocks when the list that you were referring too included at least two examples of people whose crime was simply to state scientific fact. The c*nts.
But instead of conceding a minor point or even just toning down your statement, you refused, and ultimately then pretended that the quote concerned was in response to a post by myself, when I hadn't even been in the conversation at that point.
I'm not wasting my time debating with liars.
Goodnight.
3 -
Concede or tone down my statement that cancel culture, invented by Twitter, is something I should worry about, yeah I’m good thanks, and I’m the idiot 😂bigstemarra said:I've given you examples, you idiot.
I pointed out the bullshit in your post, namely that as regards cancel culture your assertion that 'if you’re not a c*nt in public, you’ll be fine'' was bollocks when the list that you were referring too included at least two examples of people whose crime was simply to state scientific fact. The c*nts.
But instead of conceding a minor point or even just toning down your statement, you refused, and ultimately then pretended that the quote concerned was in response to a post by myself, when I hadn't even been in the conversation at that point.
I'm not wasting my time debating with liars.
Goodnight.0 -
I think you explained your point very clearly Bigstemarra. And any person with common sense can see that clearly laid out in this thread. You are right, it is impossible to debate anything with such individuals. Fortunately there are many people and indeed a great many addicks that don't employ his tactics in discussion.bigstemarra said:I've given you examples, you idiot.
I pointed out the bullshit in your post, namely that as regards cancel culture your assertion that 'if you’re not a c*nt in public, you’ll be fine'' was bollocks when the list that you were referring too included at least two examples of people whose crime was simply to state scientific fact. The c*nts.
But instead of conceding a minor point or even just toning down your statement, you refused, and ultimately then pretended that the quote concerned was in response to a post by myself, when I hadn't even been in the conversation at that point.
I'm not wasting my time debating with liars.
Goodnight.2 -
Sell him to a Scottish club as a punishment.Lincsaddick said:the cat kicking will follow Zouma for the rest of his time in England .. persistent booing and jeering will eventually affect the other West Ham players and thus the team's performances .. they should cut their losses and sell him abroad to somewhere where animal cruelty is not such a big deal1 -
Are we punishing him or Scotland in that scenario??!!SantaClaus said:
Sell him to a Scottish club as a punishment.Lincsaddick said:the cat kicking will follow Zouma for the rest of his time in England .. persistent booing and jeering will eventually affect the other West Ham players and thus the team's performances .. they should cut their losses and sell him abroad to somewhere where animal cruelty is not such a big deal1 -
VoT disagrees with me, excellent news.ValleyOfTears said:
I think you explained your point very clearly Bigstemarra. And any person with common sense can see that clearly laid out in this thread. You are right, it is impossible to debate anything with such individuals. Fortunately there are many people and indeed a great many addicks that don't employ his tactics in discussion.bigstemarra said:I've given you examples, you idiot.
I pointed out the bullshit in your post, namely that as regards cancel culture your assertion that 'if you’re not a c*nt in public, you’ll be fine'' was bollocks when the list that you were referring too included at least two examples of people whose crime was simply to state scientific fact. The c*nts.
But instead of conceding a minor point or even just toning down your statement, you refused, and ultimately then pretended that the quote concerned was in response to a post by myself, when I hadn't even been in the conversation at that point.
I'm not wasting my time debating with liars.
Goodnight.2 -
Nope it will be forgotten in a few weeksLincsaddick said:the cat kicking will follow Zouma for the rest of his time in England .. persistent booing and jeering will eventually affect the other West Ham players and thus the team's performances .. they should cut their losses and sell him abroad to somewhere where animal cruelty is not such a big deal2
