it kind of is, as least in the way you are using it here as a reply to Trolly.

Twitters AI with no human direction can discern and understand what a person will engage with and escalate with.

Hmmm. In my quote it seems pretty clear I am not presenting myself as an authority who can judge others. I asked you to provide some data to back up your claims and so far you haven't provided any.

Ok. If you don't want to provide data, can you just share whatever justification you seem to think is persuasive to justify your claims? I'm trying to learn WHY you believe what you have claimed.

I'm a bit confused. When I look around, I see ads featuring attractive people everywhere. Only occasionally do I see plus size people at all, and morbidly obese people featured in ads seems to be far below their proportion in the population. It doesn't seem to me that cancelling beautiful people in ads is happening in any significant enough of numbers to be considered a "large factor" in the obesity epidemic today. What am I missing?

I think you, of all people, understand how figurative language works.

Strange, though, that I actually have provided data on this topic. And it doesn't support the claim you're making. But you're just tossing it aside in favor of feelings?


But we can Google and find pages among pages of information about how our recent elections have been rigged. That doesn't make the claims true, as actual data shows. Why are you so sure that the pundits speaking to the dangers of leftist cantal culture aren't wrong and aren't greatly exaggerating the situation? Why are you so sure that its liberal messaging leading to greater rates of obesity?

And just in case you are serious and did not read any of the prior stuff I posted, I may consider digging some of it back up, but read these and comment and I will decide.

No i do not take you seriously uke and see you as a just a troll.

I can say confidently the far left is using its form of cancel culture, calling people groomers, etc in an attempt to silence them and I do not have studies to substantiate that.

The troll tactic is to go into areas like this where we can all see it is happening and happening often, and its a trend and deny calling for 'data or it is does not exist'.

You know no one is tracking something like that nor the left woke shaming. No one is trying to aggregate all internet talk to determine percentages for woke shaming, etc. But you play this game as do others to try and hand wave any thing as existing if one cannot back it up with data,

Would you deny this trend on the far right to call everyone groomers and pedophiles is clear and is also a silencing technique as crazy right wingers shout it out at School board meetings, etc and online? Do you have stats we can view on them doing it?

I dont think you are very familiar with the far left if you think this is true. you are talking about mainstream libs.

as for the fat acceptance people, well they are often funded by big business for obv reasons.

Would like to see a list of folks who have been cancelled.

Do vegans live longer than non vegans and if that's the case would that debunk the idea that there are no good or bad foods?

Hmmm. Don't you have that exactly backwards? Isn't the "groomers" a homophobic attack the far right levies on LGBT allies? Heck you even tell us this:
Regardless, the question I asked was what evidence, data, really any justification you have at all, for your claim that a large part of the obesity epidemic is due to liberals trying to cancel things. You haven't substantiated that claim. I can't quite tell, since you don't seem to give much of any justification for your claims, but I think one of the issues going on here is that you are looking at a string of social-media curated example of "bad liberals", a narrative you are already fully bought into, and even if you are completely correct about every single one of these "bad liberals", it doesn't get you close to the hyperbolic claims you've imagined these "bad liberals" cause.

Why do believe that Cuepee, who considers you a liar and troll (among other things), expends so much time and effort engaging your posts?

Seems to me a -EV proposition on his part.

That, of course, would not logically follow.

Even if it were literally proven that vegans lived longer than meat-consumers, it could be that vegans tend to also make other lifestyle choices that increases their life span.

There would also be the likely problem that veganism is a privilege enjoyed by much wealthier than average people. To compare you would have to control for wealth.

salads at walmart, premade, cost less than fast food. i just had 1!

also, know what's interesting? that Chicago Beach Boys video seems to enjoy universal pertinence

are they vegan salads?

I love salad. Yum Nua is awesome. It's not cheap though and probably not very vegan

either way, this is a silly abstraction

I'm glad that after promising not to ever post in the trans thread due to being unable to share your young earth creationist views you immediately found yourself back after a tangent got excised.

Do they have to be close to 100% cancelled to count?

I'm not interested in a list but the typical highly dishonest tactic of the old silly P brigade is to use the 100% cancellation trick. when cancel culture is mostly about pressure (for better or worse) or specific instances like the BBC desiciding someone is not aceptable anymore (nearly always correctly imo)

So if you feel the need to make a list, make one of the cases where anyone has ever not said something or appeared because they felt pressured (for better or worse) or were dropped.

That, too!

I think you know why I don't post in the Transgender Issues thread, right? My opinions on that subject would get me banned pronto.

My takes on obesity and fat-shaming aren't particularly provocative.

And you and Cuepee going round-and-round the mulberry bush is perfomance art par excellence.

addendum: I think this might be my first tri-lingual post.

No.

Getting "cancelled" happens all the time. But the phrase "cancel culture" implies a systematic silencing imposed by one group against another. Let's use your BBC example: Nobody has a "right" to have a platform on BBC. I suspect anyone famous enough and/or with enough expertise to be on BBC in the first place will continue to find venues.

People always have and always will be "dropped" for any variety of reasons. Has been happening for decades and decades. The implication by those who use the phrase "Cancel Culture" is that something brand-new and nefarious is happening. I don't see it.

If you are agnostic, why are you arguing against my point, other than arguing for arguments sake? Weird.

I will also note that I have not taken a strong view that any type of message is "obviously superior" to another. What I have clearly NOT said is anything around the current messaging around losing weight. I'm certain a lot of GPs, healthcare professionals, etc could improve their messaging when it comes to the issue of addressing weight loss. People have less control over their weight than I think most people realise, whether that is genetic, environmental, biological or an interaction.

However, what I have in fact pointed out is a catastrophic logical failure of one type of message that is completely at odds with the data, in other words that you can be "healthy at any size". This statement is not true, and a mountain of data support this.

Does it need debunking? By which I mean, does anyone other than maybe the odd extremist, and then a lot of people who want to make someone's extreme views a big deal, actually support this idea?

Donuts are wonderful.