We shouldn’t, I agree we should call them out. But does cancel culture really achieve that, or does it just sort of ‘plaster’ over the issue by ignoring it, rather than addressing/fixing it (presuming it can be fixed)? And why not just call it out? Why do we have to turn our backs on them/their output and ignore, why does that become the consequence en masse? Are there no stronger consequences?
Because people saying “Hey, that’s a dick thing to do/say. don’t do that.” and then nothing else has zero consequences. its just another person that doesn’t like them.
Cancel culture is more than that. It has ties to doxxing, harassment, death threats, employment loss, assault, suicide, etc. It’s like the full force of the internet has decided you are a problem and need to be eliminated; rather than your benign description. Pretending like it doesn’t have problems is disingenuous.
I completely agree that saying those things isn’t effective, but does ignoring them really have a significantly higher effect? I guess what I’m asking is, are there no alternatives we could try that might be more effective?
Ignoring a problem never makes it go away, it only in trenches the problem. Look at the catholic church, ignoring sexual abuse hasn’t made the problem go away. People who do it get promoted over time allowing those below them to do the same thing.
Same thing with media personalities, or sporting stars. All the open secrets about drug use, partner assault, match fixing. None of those have gone away by not watching a show or match.
Well that’s kind of the point I was trying to make: if it’s not working as it should or as well as it ought to, shouldn’t we look to alternative consequences? (And I don’t necessarily mean to completely replace the concept, but maybe to complement it or work alongside it to further punish dickheads)?
Well, if they’re dickish enough they go to prison or get put on a list.
Shunning is probably the oldest punishment in the book after Big Stick™.
These days it just doesn’t guarantee the death of that person like it would have in the past.
That’s what I thought: people subject to it are evolving their methods against it, so is it really still that effective (then again, we still know of the name Herostratus, so was it ever that effective?)
We shouldn’t, I agree we should call them out. But does cancel culture really achieve that, or does it just sort of ‘plaster’ over the issue by ignoring it, rather than addressing/fixing it (presuming it can be fixed)? And why not just call it out? Why do we have to turn our backs on them/their output and ignore, why does that become the consequence en masse? Are there no stronger consequences?
Because people saying “Hey, that’s a dick thing to do/say. don’t do that.” and then nothing else has zero consequences. its just another person that doesn’t like them.
Cancel culture is more than that. It has ties to doxxing, harassment, death threats, employment loss, assault, suicide, etc. It’s like the full force of the internet has decided you are a problem and need to be eliminated; rather than your benign description. Pretending like it doesn’t have problems is disingenuous.
I completely agree that saying those things isn’t effective, but does ignoring them really have a significantly higher effect? I guess what I’m asking is, are there no alternatives we could try that might be more effective?
Ignoring a problem never makes it go away, it only in trenches the problem. Look at the catholic church, ignoring sexual abuse hasn’t made the problem go away. People who do it get promoted over time allowing those below them to do the same thing.
Same thing with media personalities, or sporting stars. All the open secrets about drug use, partner assault, match fixing. None of those have gone away by not watching a show or match.
Well that’s kind of the point I was trying to make: if it’s not working as it should or as well as it ought to, shouldn’t we look to alternative consequences? (And I don’t necessarily mean to completely replace the concept, but maybe to complement it or work alongside it to further punish dickheads)?
Well, if they’re dickish enough they go to prison or get put on a list. Shunning is probably the oldest punishment in the book after Big Stick™. These days it just doesn’t guarantee the death of that person like it would have in the past.
That’s what I thought: people subject to it are evolving their methods against it, so is it really still that effective (then again, we still know of the name Herostratus, so was it ever that effective?)