Current Affairs Culture wars & The rise of grifting

[ChesterBlue]

Great response from Graham Norton there. Says some very important things regarding 'cancel culture' really being about accountability and also touched on something I've said on this thread about actually talking to trans people and parents of trans kids before shouting your mouth off about the subject.

Of course, 'She who shall not be named' waded straight into the conversation:



Somehow, in her mind, Norton's comments are somehow supporting threats of violence against women???
She's one seriously deranged woman.

She is such a horrible bigoted human. Funnier that she does the “it’s about women’s rights” grift too when she interacts with shitbags like Matt Walsh (a man who is anti contraception, pro life, and unsurprisingly anti trans).

 

[Amw79]

Great response from Graham Norton there. Says some very important things regarding 'cancel culture' really being about accountability and also touched on something I've said on this thread about actually talking to trans people and parents of trans kids before shouting your mouth off about the subject.

Of course, 'She who shall not be named' waded straight into the conversation:



Somehow, in her mind, Norton's comments are somehow supporting threats of violence against women???
She's one seriously deranged woman.

I’d marginally disagree with Norton (although I don’t think he specifically said ‘cancel culture isn’t real’ as the Times tweet stated). I think there is something there worth talking about. Jon Ronson’s book on public shaming is excellent on the topic.

But yeah, hearing from Cleese about cancellation while he’s being given a show on GB News, or hearing from Piers Morgan about being cancelled, as he writes about it in his weekly column winds me up.

Rowling’s response is bizarre, as in that clip Norton didn’t even get near talking about what a woman is or isn’t. He just said about hearing more voices from within the community, which seems reasonable.

 

[Walken]

She’s lost it.

She is perfectly entitled to hold her views on women and the trans community but as usual it’s based around nastiness and that always ends up coming out.

Why take what is an incredibly successful literally career and throw it away to obsess about something that has no impact on you.


Strange women. She’ll go the way of the other idiot who lost his actual family so he can be nasty about trans people on the internet.

It's where that view leads to aswell, it really is amazing how one nasty view becomes an overwhelming obsession that can't be reasoned with, and then before you know it they are divorced hard core right wingers whose friends, family and former colleagues can no longer bear the company of.

 

[Walken]

I’d marginally disagree with Norton (although I don’t think he specifically said ‘cancel culture isn’t real’ as the Times tweet stated). I think there is something there worth talking about. Jon Ronson’s book on public shaming is excellent on the topic.

But yeah, hearing from Cleese about cancellation while he’s being given a show on GB News, or hearing from Piers Morgan about being cancelled, as he writes about it in his weekly column winds me up.

Rowling’s response is bizarre, as in that clip Norton didn’t even get near talking about what a woman is or isn’t. He just said about hearing more voices from within the community, which seems reasonable.

I actually thought Norton can reasonably avoided having a direct opinion or engaging with the interviewers name dropping of Rowling, which marries with Norton stating he is not an authority on the subject. Though Rowling negging him for wearing a pink suit is quite enlightening

 

[Amw79]

I actually thought Norton can reasonably avoided having a direct opinion or engaging with the interviewers name dropping of Rowling, which marries with Norton stating he is not an authority on the subject. Though Rowling negging him for wearing a pink suit is quite enlightening

Yeah, I rewatched and don’t actually disagree with Norton at all. The framing of the tweet made out he said “cancel culture isn’t real”, which I don’t quite agree with, but he didn’t say (in that clip, at least). I agree with his point that the ‘cancellation’ terminology is wrong.

I think it’s better to talk about instances of ‘public shaming’ for a specific action, and then whether the shaming was justified/proportionate, what the consequences of the shaming was, and whether the consequences represent a reasonable reaction to the action which caused the shaming.

A horribly clunky explanation, but for me, more accurately describes the phenomenon which people just call “cancel culture”, which is now so broad as to be almost meaningless.

 

[Walken]

Yeah, I rewatched and don’t actually disagree with Norton at all. The framing of the tweet made out he said “cancel culture isn’t real”, which I don’t quite agree with, but he didn’t say (in that clip, at least). I agree with his point that the ‘cancellation’ terminology is wrong.

I think it’s better to talk about instances of ‘public shaming’ for a specific action, and then whether the shaming was justified/proportionate, what the consequences of the shaming was, and whether the consequences represent a reasonable reaction to the action which caused the shaming.

A horribly clunky explanation, but for me, more accurately describes the phenomenon which people just call “cancel culture”, which is now so broad as to be almost meaningless.

There is a good podcast episode from the 'You're wrong about' series that hits on some of the points you raise above. As someone who has zero public identity in that sphere, it is at least interesting to here from people who would be more vulnerable to such matters. The term being weaponised as a broad blanket, and often just the wrong word being used is something they mention on the podcast without eliminating the possibility of public shaming.

Again, I'd also recommend Natalie Wynn's thoughts and experiences on the matter.

 

[Black Belt Jones]

It's where that view leads to aswell, it really is amazing how one nasty view becomes an overwhelming obsession that can't be reasoned with, and then before you know it they are divorced hard core right wingers whose friends, family and former colleagues can no longer bear the company of.

They hate her on mumsnet - can't bear her.

To think that JK Rowling is a lioness of epic proportions? - Mumsnet

I don't think I'm being unreasonable. She's put everything out there to safeguard children in the face of vile misogyny and cowardice from many of her...

www.mumsnet.com

 

[Amw79]

There is a good podcast episode from the 'You're wrong about' series that hits on some of the points you raise above. As someone who has zero public identity in that sphere, it is at least interesting to here from people who would be more vulnerable to such matters. The term being weaponised as a broad blanket, and often just the wrong word being used is something they mention on the podcast without eliminating the possibility of public shaming.

Again, I'd also recommend Natalie Wynn's thoughts and experiences on the matter.

Ah, coincidentally, I listened to that ‘you’re wrong about’ podcast for the first time ever this week (not that episode, but stuff about satanic panic), so will dig that out and give a blast.

 

[Walken]

Ah, coincidentally, I listened to that ‘you’re wrong about’ podcast for the first time ever this week (not that episode, but stuff about satanic panic), so will dig that out and give a blast.

I think that is one of Sarah Marshalls favourite topics, I not all that interested in the satanic panic beyond the media projection implications but some very good episodes in their catalogue. Stonewall riots, dyatlovs pass, the clarence thomas one and pretty much anything going near reagan, bush snr and atwater are all a good listen.

 

[Prevenger17]

It's where that view leads to aswell, it really is amazing how one nasty view becomes an overwhelming obsession that can't be reasoned with

This is it really. Even looking at Linehan talk now, his body language is tense, the way he delivers has that sort of manic tinge, he's clearly let this consume his mind.

If I was asked whether I think if people who were born men should compete in women's sports, I would say no. I've never felt uneasy saying it, either on here or in real life. But there's a couple of factors here:

• It's an opinion born of gut instinct, frankly I don't know even near enough. It's not some profound fact that I need to inflict upon the world at every given opportunity
• Does my opinion matter more than sports scientists, women's athletic groups, trans rights groups, doctors in the field etc.? Not even close, these are the sorts of groups that need to be (and are) grappling with what is a complex situation. There'll be no answer tomorrow, or the next day; it's an evolving social conundrum for which the solution will be incremental, born of research, trial and error.
• Would I throw this unsolicited opinion on to Twitter every day and insert myself into debates about it just to get my piece in? Absolutely not, I don't know enough and neither do the dweebs quoting Ben Shapiro on social media.

People like Linehan and Rowling just seem to have an inability to say their bit and move on. Rowling is still posting her almost exclusively anti-Trans spiel on Twitter and nobody has cancelled the mad bint yet. Nor should they. But if you're going to insist on taking a hard and fast line on social media about a hot topic, prepare for feedback on that opinion from the millions of other users of that platform, who think (correctly) that their take is just as important as yours.

 

[Walken]

This is it really. Even looking at Linehan talk now, his body language is tense, the way he delivers has that sort of manic tinge, he's clearly let this consume his mind.

If I was asked whether I think if people who were born men should compete in women's sports, I would say no. I've never felt uneasy saying it, either on here or in real life. But there's a couple of factors here:

• It's an opinion born of gut instinct, frankly I don't know even near enough. It's not some profound fact that I need to inflict upon the world at every given opportunity
• Does my opinion matter more than sports scientists, women's athletic groups, trans rights groups, doctors in the field etc.? Not even close, these are the sorts of groups that need to be (and are) grappling with what is a complex situation. There'll be no answer tomorrow, or the next day; it's an evolving social conundrum for which the solution will be incremental, born of research, trial and error.
• Would I throw this unsolicited opinion on to Twitter every day and insert myself into debates about it just to get my piece in? Absolutely not, I don't know enough and neither do the dweebs quoting Ben Shapiro on social media.

People like Linehan and Rowling just seem to have an inability to say their bit and move on. Rowling is still posting her almost exclusively anti-Trans spiel on Twitter and nobody has cancelled the mad bint yet. Nor should they. But if you're going to insist on taking a hard and fast line on social media about a hot topic, prepare for feedback on that opinion from the millions of other users of that platform, who think (correctly) that their take is just as important as yours.

I was thinking of Lineham as I wrote that, randomly I re-watched Charlie Brookers love letter to the wire this week and Lineham was one of the talking heads as a fan of the show, he is like a different person in more ways than just a political or social outlook. How you can flip from appreciating David Simon's work to a spokesperson for GB news is quite some journey and shows the dangers of the algorithm traps once a singular view takes hold.

 

[Moomin]

This is it really. Even looking at Linehan talk now, his body language is tense, the way he delivers has that sort of manic tinge, he's clearly let this consume his mind.

If I was asked whether I think if people who were born men should compete in women's sports, I would say no. I've never felt uneasy saying it, either on here or in real life. But there's a couple of factors here:

• It's an opinion born of gut instinct, frankly I don't know even near enough. It's not some profound fact that I need to inflict upon the world at every given opportunity
• Does my opinion matter more than sports scientists, women's athletic groups, trans rights groups, doctors in the field etc.? Not even close, these are the sorts of groups that need to be (and are) grappling with what is a complex situation. There'll be no answer tomorrow, or the next day; it's an evolving social conundrum for which the solution will be incremental, born of research, trial and error.
• Would I throw this unsolicited opinion on to Twitter every day and insert myself into debates about it just to get my piece in? Absolutely not, I don't know enough and neither do the dweebs quoting Ben Shapiro on social media.

People like Linehan and Rowling just seem to have an inability to say their bit and move on. Rowling is still posting her almost exclusively anti-Trans spiel on Twitter and nobody has cancelled the mad bint yet. Nor should they. But if you're going to insist on taking a hard and fast line on social media about a hot topic, prepare for feedback on that opinion from the millions of other users of that platform, who think (correctly) that their take is just as important as yours.

Linehan called Norton Homophobic earlier.

Amazing.

 

[Prevenger17]

I was thinking of Lineham as I wrote that, randomly I re-watched Charlie Brookers love letter to the wire this week and Lineham was one of the talking heads as a fan of the show, he is like a different person in more ways than just a political or social outlook. How you can flip from appreciating David Simon's work to a spokesperson for GB news is quite some journey and shows the dangers of the algorithm traps once a singular view takes hold.

It's sad what has happened to him. An absolute genius comedic writer turned utterly deranged by some single-issue crusade

 

[Prevenger17]

Linehan called Norton Homophobic earlier.

Amazing.

I missed that. What??

 

[Walken]

It's sad what has happened to him. An absolute genius comedic writer turned utterly deranged by some single-issue crusade

I think Robin Ince hit on a good point when he was asked about gervais and his anti-woke obsession. Ince was basically saying as a public figure you also have to examine who is cheering what you are saying and not just the original intent of your words. This was just after the truly awful sarah vine was lauding the 'bravery' of gervais and his weak stand up. Obviously Linehan has gone waaaaaay beyond that point now.