[GentleHands McCoy]

I'm with you. I don't think this is a good thing at all. I couldn't care less about her acting or the Mandalorian, but this 'she said things I don't like so mob her until fired/cancelled" is fucking stupid.

I think Alex Jones is a nut, but I also think he has a right to say what he wants....and I have the right not to listen. WTF people?

Crooks was being sarcastic dude. No one (here) says that with a straight face. If you need the reasoning why this is ridiculous, I will present it here in meme form.

Every actual conservative knows this is perfectly fair. This has nothing to do with first amendment rights, this has to do with right wing idiots idiotically clarifying that everything they believe about how private business should be regulated suddenly doesn't apply when the right wing snowflakes get their feelings hurt. :lol:

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

Well I saw somewhere the star of the show posted some questionable stuff and nothing happened to him. I just don't like it, think it's a slippery slope.

Free speach means sometimes you have to let the garbage spew too not just what you like to hear.

That is what free speech means, but it's not what "free markets" mean.

Where was she punished by federal or state law for her actions?

Conservatives espouse looking out for the bottom line at the expense of everything else, except when one of them gets fired for being an idiot that hurts the company they were previously employed at in the "bottom line" department.

 

[Drew]

Well I saw somewhere the star of the show posted some questionable stuff and nothing happened to him. I just don't like it, think it's a slippery slope.

Free speach means sometimes you have to let the garbage spew too not just what you like to hear.

The only "questionable stuff" I've heard attributed to Pedro Pascal recentrly was tweeting in support of his sister, when she came out as trans. If there was something I missed, then by all means, point me to it.

As far as Alex Jones, he's free to say what he wants, true. However, he's NOT free from the consequences of saying what he wants, which is why the courts have refused to toss the defamation lawsuits brought by four of the parents of Sandy Hook children, for his continued claims that it was a false flag operation, no one died, and everyone involved were child actors. A lot of his being "cancelled" was companies removing him from their platform to limit their own legal liability.

I don't know a single person who's been "cancelled" for saying we should cut taxes or spend less, you know?

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

A lot of his being "cancelled" was companies removing him from their platform to limit their own legal liability.

I love when right wing think tanks like Fox un-ironically make the claim that private companies should be required to give everyone a platform no matter what their views.

How many anchors are there on Fox that don't worship Donald Trump? Certainly looks like Disney/Twitter/etc aren't the only massive companies not giving every possible viewpoint a platform.

That's just part of the massive entitlement complex Conservatives buy into. Freedom of speech isn't the same thing as, "Private Companies are constitutionally required to make you a movie star, no matter your views".

I don't think conservatives actually understand that everyone means everyone. That means that not only does Gina Carano have freedom of speech, Disneys customers and Gina's bosses also have the freedom of speech to say what they think about the views she used her freedom of speech to express. Since actors, especially franchise actors, represent the companies they are working for, Disney is within the rights granted to them under the whole "freedom of speech" to terminate someone who is representing them for not representing them in the way they wish to be represented.

It's actually ridiculously anti freedom of speech to imply that companies are required to keep spokespeople that don't reflect their views. :lol:

That's karma for you. Conservatives shit on Affirmative Action for decades, the idea that governments can impose quotas of how much of a certain demographic private companies are legally required to hire.

Of course conservatives were only against Affirmative Action when the minorities being discriminated against were blacks, when the "oppressed minorities" companies refuse to hire are flat earther anti vaxxer holocaust denier QAnon cult card carrying members they are all for imposing extremely heavy handed Affirmative Action regulations on private companies for their sake. Suddenly elected conservative officials are vested with the absolute right to tell private companies who they can and can't hire/fire. :lol:

 

[Valtteri]

Companies don't want morons representing their brand and Disney is especially hardcore about this. If it was actually a Disney employee and not on Star Wars they'd have been shitcanned way faster.

I remember there being a bit of drama a couple of years ago when Chuck Wendig, who wrote a few of the recent SW books, and has completely opposite political views from that of Gina Carano, was fired. This was most likely due to his Twitter potty mouth and not his actual political views though.

 

[1377]

That is what free speech means, but it's not what "free markets" mean.

Where was she punished by federal or state law for her actions?

Conservatives espouse looking out for the bottom line at the expense of everything else, except when one of them gets fired for being an idiot that hurts the company they were previously employed at in the "bottom line" department.

My go-to line on this is always this: if conservatives (or Democrats, for that matter) really cared about protecting the right of employees to speak their mind and/or not be fired on a whim, they would pass laws to end at-will employment or require stuff like just cause or progressive discipline before firing someone. They'll never do that, of course, because nobody in a position of power actually wants to protect Joe Worker. They just want to selectively complain when someone on their side gets smacked by the invisible hand of the free market.

Anyway, I'm old enough to remember when Republicans successfully ran the Dixie Chicks off the radio because they objected to Bush's war.

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

My go-to line on this is always this: if conservatives (or Democrats, for that matter) really cared about protecting the right of employees to speak their mind and/or not be fired on a whim, they would pass laws to end at-will employment or require stuff like just cause or progressive discipline before firing someone. They'll never do that, of course, because nobody in a position of power actually wants to protect Joe Worker. They just want to selectively complain when someone on their side gets smacked by the invisible hand of the free market.

Anyway, I'm old enough to remember when Republicans successfully ran the Dixie Chicks off the radio because they objected to Bush's war.

They'll just respond with the classic "Plot synopsis of 1984 from someone who has clearly never read 1984".

Apparently they are too stupid to know the classic, "You can tell everyone what a book says even though you have never read it and that part clearly wasn't in it" trick only works with the Bible.

I do enjoy the whole "plot synopsis of 1984 from someone who has clearly never read 1984" thing though. I like seeing how bizarre it gets. Like, "Ok, that wasn't even close to the plot of 1984, what you just described to me sounded like a hybrid of a bad erotic Water World fan fiction story crossed with Peter Pan and Atlas Shrugged, and I am 90% Toby Keith is not actually a character in 1984".

And then they are like "FUCKING LIBERALS GIVE ME ANOTHER CHANCE TO EXPLAIN THE PLOT OF 1984". And you give them another chance and it's like,

"Nope, that was essentially a retelling of one of the Transformers movies with some Wuthering Heights thrown in. The riddle contest bit was also stolen directly from The Hobbit."

 

[Flexkill]

They'll just respond with the classic "Plot synopsis of 1984 from someone who has clearly never read 1984".

Apparently they are too stupid to know the classic, "You can tell everyone what a book says even though you have never read it and that part clearly wasn't in it" trick only works with the Bible.

I do enjoy the whole "plot synopsis of 1984 from someone who has clearly never read 1984" thing though. I like seeing how bizarre it gets. Like, "Ok, that wasn't even close to the plot of 1984, what you just described to me sounded like a hybrid of a bad erotic Water World fan fiction story crossed with Peter Pan and Atlas Shrugged, and I am 90% Toby Keith is not actually a character in 1984".

And then they are like "FUCKING LIBERALS GIVE ME ANOTHER CHANCE TO EXPLAIN THE PLOT OF 1984". And you give them another chance and it's like,

"Nope, that was essentially a retelling of one of the Transformers movies with some Wuthering Heights thrown in. The riddle contest bit was also stolen directly from The Hobbit."

I'm not a conservative dude. Just passing my opinion, no need to start talking down to me. I just think you should be able to say what you wan't, period. That means left and right. Not just one side. I hear some nut spewing nonsense I turn it off. How easy is that?

You ride on an awful high horse Garrett, careful not to fall my friend.

For the people that say you can say what you want but Twitter etc is a private company and can remove you, Why are Jones and such not removed until people start whining? Google let Jones have his channel for how long until this getting people cancelled became a thing?

My simple idea is just don't listen to what you don't like. Why must they be removed? Words aren't dangerous actions are, and if we live in a society where we can't have people saying things we/you don't like because you are afraid some nut might do something crazy...well how do you stop that? We can't live in a padded bubble.

I for one wan't to hear what people that think different than me are saying, as long as it's reasonable. Hell you might even LEARN something.

 

[Flexkill]

The only "questionable stuff" I've heard attributed to Pedro Pascal recently was tweeting in support of his sister, when she came out as trans. If there was something I missed, then by all means, point me to it.

He posted tweets comparing Trump supporters to Nazis and in 2018 compared America to concentration camp prisons.

Now I AM NOT a TRUMP supporter but how is this fair?

A simple search on google will link you to what I am talking about.

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

The "I just think it's a slippery slope, you should get off your high horse, they'll be coming for you next you hypocrite" argument is bullshit designed to get you to provide cover for idiots. :lol:

People love to cite the,

"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out-
Because I was not a socialist............."

thing. They understand that even less than they understand 1984.

You ever notice how the first stanza isn't, "First they came for this specific idiot who had many chances to be a decent person and pissed them all away"? That's because there is a clear difference between "them" coming for you next because "they" are an out of control evil conspiracy and a specific individual facing responsibility for their actions.

It's BS to paint "judging people for the content of their words and actions" as "ravenous out of control vigilante mob justice".

Also, the "they" that menacingly came for everyone in this case is a fucking cartoon mouse. So who is really whining here? The people who say "well, they got what was coming, sow the wind, reap the fucking whirlwind" or the "I was treated very unfairly be a cartoon mouse" crowd?

No one "whined" about Alex Jones. Finally deciding that you've had enough of someone's shit after they have had many, many chances to cut it out isn't "whining". Cause and effect isn't "cancel culture". Is Newton's Third Law of Motion also cancel culture?

"Cancel culture" is the final evolution of conservatives unwillingness to take responsibility for their own actions and blame them on everyone else. The idiots in question could have stopped digging their own grave at any point. But suddenly they belatedly realize that they've been digging their grave this whole time and of course it's everyone elses fault. That's not an attack on freedom of speech, that's an affirmation of its existence. No one stopped them from saying all that stupid shit. They had the freedom to say it, and other people had the freedom to say what they thought about their stupid bullshit. The actual attacks on freedom of speech in these situation are always the idea that everyone except the protected conservative idiots aren't allowed the freedom of speech to say what they think about their inane drivel.

No one in this thread is holding Gina to different rules then they hold themselves too, that sounds less like "cancel culture" and suspiciously like "we should just throw out the whole all men are created equal thing because some demographics shouldn't be held to the same rules as everyone else".

 

[Lozek]

I was with her on the 'not being mob forced to support a cause' (Not actually actively supporting her, just from what I lazily read in this thread), but comparing the current US political clown show to the seeds of actual genocide is probably a step too far. Let's be honest, Disney ultimately did this to sidestep any negative press and protect the bottom line. No corporation wants to be on the wrong side of history (I'm looking at you, IBM)

I honestly think that people should be able to speak their mind without fear of recrimination, as Flexkill said it's actually useful to be able to hear other voices and figure out where you stand on their point of view, no matter how abhorrent. However, I'm also pragmatic enough to know that in the modern climate, it fosters division and tribalism which is why we're in such a mess in the first place.

Tl;dr Fucked if I know.

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

That's just confusing Natural Selection with Cancel Culture.

Her idiotic twitter was full of conservative memes about telling snowflakes that "Actually society doesn't owe you shit", when ironically, conservatives are the ones with the massive entitlement complex who think society owes them luxuries afforded to no one else.

She can speak her mind as much as she wants, no one owes her an unlimited supply of second chances to judge her based on the content of her speech.

You think there would be the same uproar if Disney fired one of their Disney World Janitors or someone who wears a suit to entertain kids at Disney parks over something idiotic they said like, "Actually, eugenics are quite a good idea!" or something far left like, "I'm something of an eco terrorist myself"? Of course not. Freedom of speech means everyone's speech is held to the same rules. Conservatives don't want freedom of speech, they want protections no one else has.

 

[1377]

Again, if people are truly concerned about the ability of people to speak their minds without retaliation from their employer, the answer is stronger labor law that requires some kind of due process where the employer has to show what policy the employee violated before they can fire them. Everything else is just hand-wringing because we're all inundated with a million articles a day about cancel culture and how omg free speech is dead!!1. There's no actual mechanism to compel people to stop speaking out about speech they don't like (nor should there be - that's kinda how the whole marketplace of ideas thing works), so it just amounts to whining about how the kids these days don't act right.

Gina Carano is allowed to say whatever dumb shit she wants.

Other people are allowed to say "hey Gina, that thing you said sucks shit," or even "I don't really want to watch a show that stars a proud bigot."

Disney is allowed to decide who they do and don't want to employ and on what basis they make that decision.

Dassit. No one's free speech rights were harmed in the making of this film.

I for one wan't to hear what people that think different than me are saying, as long as it's reasonable. Hell you might even LEARN something.

This is a pretty inoffensive statement that most people would agree with. I think the disconnect comes in when you assume that I need to hear the lady from the star wars regurgitate right wing conspiracy theories that I've already heard a thousand times. I'm not going to learn anything from that!

Like there's this line that's always being pushed that liberals/progressives close themselves off from conservative viewpoints because they can't handle disagreement or whatever, but buddy, I hear plenty of conservative viewpoints in my day to day life. My family is full of conservatives, I have conservative neighbors, I've worked with conservatives. I am not depriving myself of exposure to the other side's opinions and thoughts if a private company decides they don't want to be a platform for some other asshole to shout those same opinion and thoughts.

The correct analogy is if someone comes to your house and starts saying a bunch of rude, upsetting shit. They're allowed to say whatever they want, but you have no obligation to host them in your home while you do it. If you tried to kick them out and they started ranting about how actually, you just can't handle hearing different opinions, most people would label them the asshole, not you.

The idea that conservatives are being silenced when someone boots them off they're platform is also just preposterous on its face. It wasn't even 24 hours from Carano getting fired to her announcing that she's making a movie with Ben Shapiro's media company. Every one of these people that gets "canceled" gets a ton of billionaire cash thrust at them to become a right wing media celebrity, Meanwhile, do you have any idea how many academics get fired/denied tenure for criticizing the Israeli government's treatment of the Palestinians, just to take one example? A bunch of states have laws on the books right now that bar anybody who participates in boycotts of Israel from doing business with the state government. They still ask you if you're a communist when you immigrate to this country. :lol:

I think people don't realize the extent to which the whole cancel culture meme is being pushed by right wing billionaires as a way to protect unpopular conservative views that would otherwise be pushed out of the marketplace of ideas (because they suck). The thing is, those same right wingers have no problems shutting down left wing speech when it suits them. You know all those stories you hear about college kids banning general tsos chicken from the school cafeteria because it's cultural appropriation or whatever? One of the Koch brothers foundations pays a literal bounty to people who send them stories like that, so they can push them nationally to create this narrative about out of control left wing political correctness. College kids go overboard and say/do dumb shit all the time, of course, but it's shocking how often and how badly the basic facts of these stories are misrepresented to suit that narrative. IIRC, the general tsos one was actually just an article in the school paper where they interviewed a bunch of Chinese American students about how embarassingly bad the Chinese food in the cafeteria was.

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

...preposterous on its face....

Oh look, it's the conservative crowd always ranting about a "groupthink" secret cabal that is "telling people what to think" telling us we aren't allowed to have our own thoughts on Gina's dumb ideas again.

Conserva-bros who quit watching the NFL because some players hurt their feelings telling others they are unreasonably offended by entertainers in mass media is somewhat plainly ridiculous in my view.

Also, the people saying that Pedro deserves the same treatment for his tweet comparing Trump to Nazis have no argument.

Yeah, the comparison is overdone and has lost any impact by being so commonplace and overused, but he compared one xenophobic white supremacist with a ridiculous propaganda campaign blaming everyone else, especially a secret "outside enemy" plotting his downfall, to another, it's not a perfect equivalency, but it's not apples to oranges either.

Gina claimed that history has been "edited" (which is true, just not in the directions Gina thinks) to suppress the fact that what the Nazis did wasn't that bad because "everyone was doing it, including Jewish children beating other jews to death in the streets". :lol:

If people can't see how that's not even kind of the same thing, I'm not sure what to tell them. Not to mention that they were treated the exact same and claiming otherwise is a distortion of the truth. Neither had their civil liberties taken away for speaking their mind.

 

[noodles]

For the people that say you can say what you want but Twitter etc is a private company and can remove you, Why are Jones and such not removed until people start whining? Google let Jones have his channel for how long until this getting people cancelled became a thing?

My simple idea is just don't listen to what you don't like. Why must they be removed? Words aren't dangerous actions are, and if we live in a society where we can't have people saying things we/you don't like because you are afraid some nut might do something crazy...well how do you stop that? We can't live in a padded bubble.

Companies only care about their bottom line. They're in business to make money, nothing more, no matter how many feel good commercials they might make to drive people to their product. Alex Jones made Twitter money...until he didn't. That didn't point came when the negativity he brought shifted from him to Twitter for giving him a platform. Dropping him had nothing to do with his actual views, and everything to do with the negative response to his views outweighing the positive response to his views. I guarantee you some group at Twitter did a cost benefit analysis of Alex Jones, and he came out on the losing end.

The entirety of social media is a commercial enterprise, not a public one. If the government started a social media company, then you would be correct that no one's speech could be deleted, prohibited, or censored, and that no one could lose access to the platform (except through judicial due process). Those are the two dots you are failing to connect here: the difference between commerce and government. Social media was not the privatization of a government enterprise. Social media didn't even replace something that came before it, in the way that television replaced radio. Before social media, the way you exposed complete strangers to your views is by going out in public and talking to people. And just like social media, most of the places you went were a commercial enterprise that could and would decide how much of your speech they would tolerate. So, if you disrupted the patrons at the local bar with your opinions, the bartender would have you kicked out.

This is not living in a padded bubble. This is being a member of society. Sometimes, society shows you the door. Everyone is guaranteed freedom of speech, but no one is guaranteed a platform for it.

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

The entirety of social media is a commercial enterprise, not a public one.

It would be a real shame if conservatives were to very loudly complain about not understanding that on the heels of a decision in which they were adamant that wedding cake makes weren't required to make cakes for gays if they didn't like gays. Would certainly make a lot of people complaining about it look like they had no idea what they are talking about.......

No wedding cakes for the gays, but definitely wedding cakes for the holocaust deniers. That's my stance. Try to refute it. You can't

 

[1377]

Also, the focus on how this stuff plays out on social media specifically is interesting because, well...there's a ton of evidence that both conservative media and the social media companies have regularly gamed the system to propagate right wing viewpoints. People get distracted because of these high profile cases where someone gets banned for inciting violence or posting holocaust denial, but let's not forge t what's been going on with Facebook these last few years.

After 2016 and all the discussion of the spread of fake news, Facebook said they were going to develop staff and policies to help keep bogus information from spreading on its platform. What happened? Articles from fairly mainstream right-wing outlets kept getting de-listed because, well, they were full of fake information. Conservative media personalities and elected officials threw an absolute shitfit about how liberal media orgs weren't being treated the same (ignoring that it's because they post less outright bullshit) until a bunch of them got invited to a meeting at Facebook's office where they whined about being silenced. Since then, it keeps coming out that Facebook's algorithms are actively promoting these same outlets and bogus stories, and that their moderation teams regularly step in to keep conservative content from being de-listed even when it clearly violates Facebook's rules. I deleted Facebook almost a year ago and hadn't really been using it regularly for another year or two before that, but anyone can tell you it's become an absolute cesspit of right wing garbage, and this is a big reason why.

People have been bitching at Twitter for years, even before Trump, that there are a ton of literal nazis and other violent far right wing groups recruiting on its platform as well as doxxing and threatening people, but they didn't do shit about it until shit really came to a head and they had no other choice.

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

Also, the focus on how this stuff plays out on social media specifically is interesting because, well...there's a ton of evidence that both conservative media and the social media companies have regularly gamed the system to propagate right wing viewpoints. People get distracted because of these high profile cases where someone gets banned for inciting violence or posting holocaust denial, but let's not forge t what's been going on with Facebook these last few years.

*Points to something that is not statistically a trend, not even kind of a trend*

"I JUST THINK THIS IS A WORRYING TREND OF CENSORING CONSERVATIVES AND FREE SPEECH"

Let's google population of the US and then whip out our pocket calculators to see if Alex Jones and Gina Carano facing the consequences for their actions is a trend. Those are called "outliers". In statistics that term refers to a statistically insignificant group of "liars" who were kicked "out" of private organizations for being shitty that whine very loudly, skewing data.

 

[1]

I'm really just ok with racists and hate mongering assholes getting fucked over regardless if it's fair or not.

 

[GentleHands McCoy]

The non stop irony of the people that fetishize American Exceptionalism who have done nothing to contribute to it getting smacked down by tech companies that actually do contribute to the idea of American Exceptionalism is hilarious though.

"DAMN YOU JEFF BEZOS AND BILL GATES FOR NOT CATERING TO MY EVERY WHIM, WHY DO YOU HATE THE AMOUNT OF AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM I BRING TO THE TABLE THAT IS CLEARLY WHAT HAS KEPT US A WORLD SUPERPOWER FOR MANY DECADES?"

Imagine being stupid enough to think that America could still maintain its economic/cultural/economic place in the world by getting rid of Silicon Valley/Hollywood/Amazon/Microsoft/etc. etc. etc. because clearly all the exceptionalism came from Trump supporters? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Who's left to fuel the doctrine of American Exceptionalism at that point? Pillow guy? The irony of the non stop cries of "America First!" by people who have done nothing to put the US in first place is amazing. BRB, gonna get rid of all our technological/economic/cultural superpowers that do actually fuel the doctrine of American Exceptionalism who were mean to conservatives. Then we'll be #1 for sure.