What ever, do you have anything to say what's occurring to Halle Berry? She can't play a role because she's not transgender, the public backlash forced her to withdraw from it. This is an apolitical person of color, not to mention an extremely talented actress.

loooooooooooool

If I had to make an argument to someone why "cancel culture" is good I would just show them these two posts and say nothing else

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...qGu_B5hvNKntdg

Here is the Pinker letter FWIW. I'm doing something else right now, and even it if wasn't I would probably wait out the Wookie-Goofy-Itshot storm before commenting.

I will say, I remember 3 years ago when Brett Weinstein got ran out of Evergreen by armed mobs (literally) he said he was concerned this was just the beginning, but he said at the time all his peers assured him this was just a matter of "LOL Evergreen" (I remember WN even making a comment to this effect). And here we are and it looks like Brett Weinstein was correct, although it is looking like a pyrrhic victory indeed.

I dont really follow film star gossip, but 1 second on Google is enough to tell me your summary of events is disingenuous.

I'm sure that I wouldn't entirely agree with itshot's dismissal of DiAngelo's work (which I haven't read), but it's not clear to me that it's hypocritical to agree with the concerns in the letter while also being dismissive of someone's work. The criticisms in the letter are not about people being too dismissive, or arguing badly:

I think there is a meaningful distinction between refusing to take someone seriously and trying to have them fired.

I also think there's a danger of a false dichotomy, or maybe the problem is confusing equilibriums and limits. I don't think every point of view is worth debating, or providing a platform for. I don't feel obligated to respond seriously to every idea anyone puts forward. I don't think the argument is that "open debate" is a principle that must be upheld even to the furthest limit. I think the argument is that the equilibrium might be moving in the wrong direction.

If you can simply dismiss a work as wrong a priori then any problems you are alluding to become magnitudes worse.

That's bullshit, though, I laid out some reasoning in that post, and am more than willing to defend that reasoning, but no one questioned it. Her dissertation is essentially what she wrote her book about. You are pretending that post only included one word. I'm also not shutting her down, I posted her work, and her words.

Exactly, there is nothing close to a forced to withdraw from that message.

Thanks for confirming that you indeed were being disingenuous.

Great statement. She gets it.

What do you think Halle Berry would say about your posts here?

Nope.

From that post.

Here is her dissertation.

Its nonsense.

I don't think they are really concerned about the right exploiting it, I read it to just be about old guard leftys feeling attacked by the new identity politics left. The right is just being used as a boogeyman here to convince people to get their **** together.

I don't agree with bolded, however. The identity politics left most certainly attacks the leftys they feel aren't falling in line. No one would confuse JK Rowling as being alt-right, but now she's canceled for being a "TERF."

Its also worth pointing out that which is dismissed so casually as nonsense, is a fairly standard PHD level summary of an anthropological study into racism, social structures, identity and language.

Whatever, you just ignored everything else in that post that was discussing that lady and her work. it's cool though, I mean you just trivialized cancel culture as paranoia then embrace it within 5 minutes, so if we want to talk about hypocrisy.

Nothing else you wrote was specifically about her dissertation.

Keep doubling down on obviously disingenuous.

....

I mean, you're never going to admit that you're wrong but I think this is pretty clear.

Exactly.

What is going on here, you keep posting things which prove the accusation made against you.

Timely:

Only because of people with poor reading comprehension or dishonest interpretation of context. "Ideas" include everything to do with her ideas including her dissertation. It is basic reading comprehension, bro. That sentence explicitly links my criticism to her dissertation.

I mean I guess I am technically wrong that you casually dismiss her dissertation as nonsense, because you also casually dismiss her ideas (not her dissertation specifically) as "outright destructive and terribly counter-productive."

You dont hang any reasoning on these pure naked assertions.

Guys guys, its ok, I was not just casually dismissing her dissertation, but the whole entirety of her ideas.

Im not into cancelling tho.

Just like we do to all racist.

Hello?! He said the ideas were destructive. What more could you possibly need?

Which racist?