/townhall/ - Townhall

Well here's a false dichotomy if I've ever seen one.

It is niether a sign of progress, something that should ne done or is it an act of extreme leftism.

It's just human social psychology, an expression of the need to outcast those who violate the highest social norms of the group, something that's been happening throughout human history. This isn't some new thing the left came up with nor is exclusive to the left, to America, nor to western culture. Calling it 'cancel culture' is just bad faith spin doctoring used to play the part of underdog victim

>>14543
One can counter-argue that in Western civilization, throughout most of history going back centuries, women and children of both genders were considered to be the property of men, exactly like a group of livestock or a pile of timber or such.

Thus, the very moral standard in the first place that a famous and wealthy manly man who sexually preys upon young women ought to be singled out and condemned by civilization is a very radical and very novel concept. It's a part of post-Enlightenment culture that didn't get going that much before the times of the printing press.

If Donald Trump was born a millennia ago, then he could openly, even, rape a bunch of his female sex slaves in public view without basically anybody batting an eye of care.

>Should celebrity figures such as P. Diddy who're accused by multiple individuals of sexual assault and/or sexual harassment be "cancelled" by the broader culture?

They should be arrested.  On account of the sexual assault.  No one should even have to consider "cancelling" anyone.  Cancelling is what you pull out when what someone is doing isn't so morally reprehensible that everyone agrees it should be illegal.

What's it like to need the negative attention of others in order not to taste lead?

>>14544
But society changed, and that is no longer the social norm.

>>14544
I hope that you do feel that it is a repugnant thing to do and don't just feel that it's some sort of twisted moral leftists have.

>>14548
I feel like with stuff like MeToo and whatever, it's just been so wide spread and in the end just got accepted as a quirk, rather than something people would be in jail for.


I suppose that cancel culture as it exists right now is a consequence of the digital revolution and social media.

In the past, people would boycott companies when they disagreed with their practises. And people would be outraged about celebrity gossip, but all we knew at worst was what paparazzi could get a hold of.

Nowadays everything is on the internet. We no longer only see the stuff celebrities do on stage, but celebs themselves are prone to post about their social lives and the opinions they hold, or others would post about their interactions with them. And millions of people consume that material.
Furthermore, social media is a platform where you broadcast your own opinion on people and where people from all over the world gather behind your cause. So cancel culture is just a result of that.

(And it's absolutely dumb to think that only leftist liberals do cancel culture)

One aspect of cancel culture that I do dislike is how easy personal beefs can get aired before the masses and how we erode fundamental concepts like narcissism, gaslighting, abuse and the likes.

Like, if I have a bad reak up with my ex girlfriend, in the past I was just the asshole to her and the friends she told about me to.
Now she can go to social media and tell the world how big of an asshole I have been. She can claim I was cheating on her and she can even say that I'm an abusive asshole who treated her horribly.
Perhaps she can claim that I was sexually assaulting her because I asked for that blowjob one drunk night, even though I never engaged in forceful behaviour.

And I think people on social media have become so open about these things that often there no longer is a filter and there's no longer a caution for consequences.

>>14548
>>14552
>>14553
I suppose my belief is that this is just a flat and simple case in which the left-wingers are morally correct and people in the center as well as in the right-wing are morally incorrect. Because "cancel culture", in this sense, is a good and positive thing.

Which is not to say that the left-wing position on everything is always correct or even correct in a majority of situations, of course.

Use your best judgement

>should active sex offenders be cancelled
Yes.

>is cancel culture always good all the time in all cases forever
No.

>should people stop supporting alleged sex offenders
Not until any allegations are proven.

>is cancelling active sex offenders unethical and bad
No, it's basic human decency.

There, that was easy.

>>14558
So if, like, a musician admitted to downloading and sharing NSFW child abuse media, would you want all of his or her songs to no longer get listened to? By anybody? You'd want more censorship in society?

>>14560
Do you think a person that admits to having and distributing CSAM should be given a platform?

>>14560
Wouldn't it infringe on the freedom of speech more if people wouldn't be allowed to call out a celebrity's horrible deeds?
Tht they wouldn't be allowed to come forth in protest and create a moral outrage over such a person's deeds?

P Diddy did nothing wrong.

>>14561
>>14562
Cancel culture is a good thing in this case. I think.

If and when Mr. Combs is convicted I vote for woodchipper.