Brilliant pivot.

No Im genuinely confused here, but am pretty sure you are the one pivoting with the whole just as we do the racist line.

You don't see her as a racist, but I do. We can argue over the definition of racism, and all that, but the point is, we don't spend alot of time on something that is obvious, especially when simply expressing an opinion. I did not make or demand a call to action, or demand she be ostracized. I was critical of her ideas. Also, I'm more than willing to go more in-depth, but no one challenged my claims. Your equivocation of that post to this topic is absurd, because, as WN pointed out, it's not about dismissing ideas, it's about shutting them down.

The pivot exist because we disagree on what constitutes an obviously bad idea. You demand strict scrutiny on things I think are obviously bad ideas, but if they're obviously bad to you you don't require as much, obviously.

Yes, the right does it also, but that was not the point of the letter.

The letter is targeted at people on the left.

'the protests calling for racial/social justice are weakening the open debate and forcing ideological conformity'

The right is being mentioned here as an example of what not to do and of what to rally together against. 'Don't be like Trump.' Hence why the right is being used as a boogeyman in the letter.

that's reasonable, thanks for clarifying.

Yea I am claiming this person's ideas are outright destructive and terribly counter-productive and showing no work, but am not trying to shut her down. No need as her ideas are obviously bad (to me).

Jesus Christ.

Do you think calls to action are made in a vacuum?

There is a process, a precedent to the call. Such as casually dismissing ideas as obviously wrong and dangerous and destructive.

Your either dense as a diamond or being purposefully obtuse not to see this.

I'm not trying to get her to shut down from publishing books remove from boards get her fired or anything like that. Equivocating my criticism of her ideas to that letter people sent to get Pinker removed from a board is preposterous. you guys go to the stupid argument all the time but the reality is is you are really the f****** dumb ones.

DeSean Jackson said something really f****** stupid on Twitter. I don't have to do a deep dive on why it's bad to quote Hitler, nor does that mean I want DeSean Jackson fined, suspended, or removed from the NFL.

Bold strategy, Cotton!

You and MrWookie, on the other hand, should be cancelled, not because of your ideas, but because you just don't behave well with others.

lol

This is incredible.

This is about the extent of the response I expected once your criticism was exposed as bullshit. The fact Goofy is all over my nuts right now, should be an indication that you are on the wrong side (I've triggered his narcissistic rage).

Im not equivocating to that letter in anyway. jesus christ.

That is some leap, yea you equivocating to that thing you dont mention once, yea, that sure is a dumb argument.

wat.

Waaah waahhh its the mega pot meet kettle alarm.

The guy who says this:

Does not get to call out responses.

These idiots lost me after "[Trump] is a real threat to democracy "

Edit:. And I am NOT voting for Trump in November.

I am taken aback that Vegas and Kelhus are both defending a racist in this thread. It is really surprising!

I don’t necessarily agree with the acting issue as I think actors play all kinds of people whose lives they do not live. That is what results in the most compelling performances.

That being said, I think the trans community has a legitimate issue and that is trans people are not being given chances, with a handful of exceptions, and if they can not even get cast in trans roles they will never be cast in anything. This then guarantees there are no exceptional trans actors because they were never given the opportunity.

I have seen, as you noted, that Halle Berry was not forced out of the role but instead made an active choice to try and support trans actors getting a chance.

It is a ridiculous perversion of reality to claim she was run off by some subset of cancel culture.

It is a weird think about CNN centrists and people on the right. They view any capitulation to protests is a weakness and never about listening, learning and changing for the better.

Robin DiAngelo's entire premise of White Fragility relies on claims and intuitions that are not testable or falsifiable. They can only be accepted as truth or rejected, based on anecdotes and the readers own intuitions.

Ironically enough, in the "Cite your Work" thread Wookie frequently argues that positions I take vis a vis Evolutionary Psychology should be discounted exactly because they are not testable or falsifiable. And I am a completely untrained amateur Evolutionary Psychologist. One would think someone trained with a PhD in her field should be held to higher standards than untrained amateurs, yet here we are.

Anyways, I don't have particularly strong feelings about DiAngelo herself. I don't have a particularly high opinion of critical theory based academic fields, so she doesn't really disappoint me on that front. I have a low opinion of the actual science and scholarship involved, and she just reinforces this. (I am still planning on starting a Critical Theory thread, which seems especially timely right now, just have to find my "round-to-it")

The disappointing and concerning thing is that her work, and the work of a lot of similar academics, is being treated as revealed truth and is becoming a part of compelled diversity workshops in academia and corporate America. This is problematic for a couple reasons.

First, it is problematic to compel people to receive social conditioning training in a theoretical framework that cannot be tested for truth, especially in academia where one would think standards of rigor would and should be higher. Second, there is no indication that such training accomplishes anything productive. Even if we take the necessary leap of faith and accept White Fragility is a real thing, there is no evidence that compelling people to undergo seminars to examine their inner racist accomplishes anything productive.

I do find it interesting that at least in the small sample of this forum the far left and right both seems to reject the premises of the letter for completely different reasons.

FWIW, my main issue with the letter is not the content, but my belief it will be futile. You can't negotiate with mobs when they are in a moral panic (which is exactly what this paper is attempting to do), and as such I expect the intended audience for this letter will use this more as a check list for who should be silenced and canceled next than make any meaningful attempt to open a good faith dialogue.

I'm summation: *shrug*



Sent from my Nokia 6.1 using Tapatalk

Hey look, itshot finally found a lawless vandal he's willing to defend.

The issue is the hate crime part, but let's not let that stop your imagination.