We're talking about two different things here, I think. I'm talking about how I'm sick of people looking for something to be offended by, and when they finally find it, they're messing with people's personal lives. Lives that they don't even know. People they don't even know. If you can't agree that's messed up, then we'll never agree. I think interfering in someone's life, that you don't know, over words they used, is despicable. It's one thing if there's video and they are threatening one particular person with slurs and whatnot, but I'm talking about someone just posting something in general, however stupid that may be. The worst is draft night. People go out seeking to find something controversial in these kids' Twitter history from when they were 14, and they find it, sit on it, until the their greatest moment in life, and then release it. Despicable. But, realize things are not black and white completely. There are for sure cases where things are so egregious, I support firing. Like, in my town, a top cop wrote a racist letter to the news, and they published it. He was fired within hours. Great move. That's the kind of stuff I agree with. Jo Blo posting that the name "Redskins" isn't racist and shouldn't be changed because they're honoring the culture? That's a dumb opinion, but it's his. I just think we're talking two different levels here. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-07-12/boeing-cancel-culture-free-speech-reckoning This is the kind of stuff I'm talking about here. The article is too long for me to post. It centers around how a Boeing executive just got fired for a piece he wrote 33 years ago on how he didn't think women should be in combat. It was half satirical, so obviously it was a bit of hyperbole. So, are we no longer allowed to use satire? Cancel culture is a very real threat, in the wrong hands, to stifling the first amendment and ushering in Newspeak.
Is the only basis of offense that the person is Hispanic? As Vlaurelio noted that would definitely be against the law. Also the nature of this culture those people launching the boycott are probably going to suffer their own consequences as boycotting a company simply for hiring a Hispanic is racist. If their boycott was based on something such as the employee was Hispanic but he was targeted because he said white people are all pedophiles then that would probably be OK. People can be fired for individual actions that hurt the company line but it is pretty established law they can't be fired based on group identity regarding race, gender, sexual orientation, religion or age.
With the explosion of both information from both cameras everywhere but also information about people's past and especially information that people put up themselves we definitely need to rethink as a culture how we handle this. It isn't just politics but embarrassing and shaming people over things like sex. The height of this is revenge p*rn and one of the good things in the last few years is that laws have been passed to try to stop that. I also think most of us have done things when we were younger that we aren't proud of. I get the feeling that most of us especially the 99'ers were teenagers and young adults before cell phones and social media. I imagine most of us wouldn't have liked having a lot of what we did shared online or have it dredged up to be shared online now. For most of us we probably don't feel like we are the same people that we were at 18 or even 25. I think there needs to be a place for understanding and also forgiveness. Christian Cooper, the Central Park birdwatcher, recently said, we shouldn't ruin someone's life over 60 seconds. That's a very powerful statement to make and one that we need to hear more of. For the record in his case I think his case is more serious than just an embarrassing video but admire him for saying that. For many of the "Karens" and others out there all we know about them is just a tiny snippet of their lives seen on handheld video in many of these cases they aren't intending any real harm but just acting out. Behavior like that should be called out but to cost someone their livelihood might be going to far.
I agree. both sides are complicit. I have yet to see anything that makes me believe Kaepernick can make a team. If they gave Mike Vick a chance because of talent, they surely would sign CK if he still 'had it'. Hell, look at Josh Gordon. He gets a sniff every time his suspensions end. I just don't believe he can play at that level anymore. I had a buddy who whined about taking the knee and said he swore off football, only to see him respond to group messages about the Texans game (O'Brien has to go! Surely, the Left can agree with me here.) Point being, he was all talk when it came down to it and I think if Kap really could play, he would be playing or would've played on a team over the last couple of years. That's my take. Looking back, I feel his statement got it right. Protesting is protected by the 1A. So, yeah, the right is not innocent. That should be pointed out as you do. But it takes both sides to realize this in order to stop the madness. So, when football season comes and my buddies start to hem and haw about the kneeling, I'll be the first to point out they're being a bunch 'Karens'. I suppose at some point somebody has to stick up for real white girls named Karen who are innocent in all of this....lol.
If the objective is to mess with people's personal lives, I agree that is going too far. But it's hard to know intention. Women shouldn't have to suffer sexual comments from their boss, but there's a lot of grey areas and a lot open for interpretations. There's a reason sexual harassment isn't deemed a one time occurrence but rather a pattern. In terms of this article, I read it and a few things I disagree with you here - his article doesn't read like satire, it sounds like he is making a legitimate argument. Furthermore, he wasn't fired but resigned. Boeing may have asked him to resign but at the end of the day, it was still a resignation. The other examples in the article are better. The data scientist being fired seems like a travesty. The NY Times editor being fired seems wrong as well, but then the article reveals the Tom Cotton opinion piece was poorly edited and the guy hadn't even reviewed it before it was published. Perhaps he was fired for those reasons and not for the choice of op-eds? I do think fairness should be considered when evaluating people's behavior. One time comments, things said decades ago, or innocuous statements that were not meant to offend shouldn't lead to drastic action. But at the end of the day, a company can fire you for almost any reason.
So when has woke cancel culture ever flaunted society norms and health to make a point? This makes no sense.
This is simply not true. The decision of the employer is most likely impacted from public pressure, these decisions or not done in a vacuum.
I don't know.. How did Hakeem all of sudden start to suck when he was traded to Vancouver (or the year before)? Athletic skills deteriorate pretty quickly when they start to go. I wouldn't say it was overnight either. He wasn't exactly lighting it up. He already peaked, IMO. But I'm not gonna rule out a 'blacklist' by the owners. They've colluded before and will again. I just think Kap's skills were in decline. Certainly didn't have him on any of my fantasy teams....lol.
Do you seriously believe that Kaepernick has not been in the NFL the last few years because of talent? I’m not talking about starting I’m saying just being in an NFL roster. Consider the Sean Manions and Brian Hoyers our there occupying roster spots or even the Ryan Fitzpatricks still getting starts. Look at the revolving doors of quarterbacks for teams like the Dolphins and the Browns and you honestly don’t think that Keapernick didn,t have enough talent to find a roster spot on even one of those teams?
Dream went to the Raptors at the Twilight of his career when he was almost 40. Kaepernick was in his late 20’s when he was released and is only in his early 30’s now.
I really don't know. I don't dismiss the idea that he was blacklisted by the owners. It's more likely that it's a combination of being blacklisted because he didn't have enough skills left in the tank. If he was playing at a Michael Vick level, he probably wouldn't have been blacklisted. And I'm not saying the blacklisting is OK. I didn't care that much when he kneeled at the time. The thing that bothered me about it at the time was the veterans felt slighted. Looking back at it now, I see it as a 1A issue, and in today's climate I find myself more supportive of 1A issues, even when I disagree with whatever the message is. The whole censorship thing is really problematic and I think everyone should be concerned when a small group of people are trying to control the messages, to shape a narrative.
He does not actually think that he is just being contrarian, I should have not responded but the argument that Kap just lost it was so ludicrous I had to respond. Him comparing Hakeem to Kap is just doubling down. Either somebody is very bored or they are getting paid by the post.
