 | | | 
14.01.2021, 13:15
| Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: ZH
Posts: 1,131
Groaned at 14 Times in 14 Posts
Thanked 1,989 Times in 833 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Genuinely I am confused You mean female uterus, right? Why is it mad to say the obvious? | | | | | Transsexual rights has issues with the statement.
| This user would like to thank Ato for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 13:27
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Aug 2020 Location: ZH
Posts: 948
Groaned at 43 Times in 22 Posts
Thanked 1,722 Times in 657 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Transsexual rights has issues with the statement. | | | | | Ok got it, so if a female with a uterus identifies/feels like a male then because she still has uterus, saying "only female have uterus" offends them. Did I understand correct?
| 
14.01.2021, 13:43
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Oct 2019 Location: Suhr, Aargau
Posts: 1,983
Groaned at 23 Times in 23 Posts
Thanked 2,578 Times in 1,213 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Ok got it, so if a female with a uterus identifies/feels like a male then because she still has uterus, saying "only female have uterus" offends them. Did I understand correct? | | | | | You know, there are limits. Police in Quebec said you cannot self-identify as a dog to evade the covid19 curfew https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7ap...him-for-a-walk | The following 2 users would like to thank Axa for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 13:44
| Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: ZH
Posts: 1,131
Groaned at 14 Times in 14 Posts
Thanked 1,989 Times in 833 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Ok got it, so if a female with a uterus identifies/feels like a male then because she still has uterus, saying "only female have uterus" offends them. Did I understand correct? | | | | | I'm not up to date with the exact definitions, but I think it's for People identifying as women being told "only women have uteruses", the whole sex vs gender argument.
I think this is what got JK Rowling or Graham Linehan into hot water. One of them has said they've been cancelled, but he went on a bit of a crusade.
Not the rabbit hole I want to venture into.
| This user would like to thank Ato for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 13:58
|  | A modal singularity | | Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Morgins, VS (and Alsace)
Posts: 8,865
Groaned at 362 Times in 234 Posts
Thanked 15,049 Times in 6,520 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Ok got it, so if a female with a uterus identifies/feels like a male then because she still has uterus, saying "only female have uterus" offends them. Did I understand correct? | | | | | Something like that, but probably more the inverse, that a M2F TS won't loike being told "you're not really female because you don't have a uterus".
Personally I doubt that many genuine TSs would be that much offended by a simple general statement, but clearly it could be used in an insulting/derogatory fashion, and I think some of the reaction by "rights activists" is based on the idea that if something can be insulting it must always be insulting, so let's avoid it altogether. | The following 2 users would like to thank Ace1 for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 14:11
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Sep 2019 Location: Hopefully soon to be Aargau
Posts: 1,006
Groaned at 414 Times in 245 Posts
Thanked 2,402 Times in 1,141 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Parler is pretty much an alt-right echo sewer, much like Reddit. They also have pretty stringent rules and regs and chuck folk off when it suits. Mostly for saying mad stuff like only women have uteruseses. Private companies.
Who are the Big Tech giants?
I'm still waiting on what the Dems did to try and cancel Trumo post 2016. Unless collectively worrying that a dangerous narcissist had just been elected to the office with the big red button counts? | | | | | Big Tech giants are Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Google and Apple. It is not their job, nor should it be their right to judge whether Parler is "an alt-right echo sewer". There is laws and a judiciary for that.
| 
14.01.2021, 14:30
|  | A modal singularity | | Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Morgins, VS (and Alsace)
Posts: 8,865
Groaned at 362 Times in 234 Posts
Thanked 15,049 Times in 6,520 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Big Tech giants are Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Google and Apple. It is not their job, nor should it be their right to judge whether Parler is "an alt-right echo sewer". There is laws and a judiciary for that. | | | | | It's their right to do whatever they damn well want. Is there any law to support the idea that they should give equal space to all apps, regardless of political views thereof? No, there isn't.
And in any case, the reasons given were that the app was being used to organise unlawful activities, which isn't quite the same thing.
They also react to possible legal repercussions, of course. If there were an armed rebellion and it could be shown that they knew the platform was being used to organise it but did nothing, wouldn't they potentially be open to charges of aiding and abetting? Even if not legally culpable, I would definitely see it as their job to crack down on any illegal activity they're aware of, if not even to actively look for it.
Just like they do for drug dealing or child pornography. Do you think they shouldn't be allowed to deny access to these as well?
Last edited by Ace1; 14.01.2021 at 14:50.
Reason: typo, illegal not legal
| The following 2 users would like to thank Ace1 for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 14:49
| Senior Member | | Join Date: Sep 2020 Location: In your head
Posts: 266
Groaned at 29 Times in 26 Posts
Thanked 881 Times in 313 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Genuinely I am confused You mean female uterus, right? Why is it mad to say the obvious? | | | | |
Exactly. It offends ths self ID lot. | Quote: | |  | | | Transsexual rights has issues with the statement. | | | | | Only a certain faction who are mostly dysphoric /have AGP. | Quote: | |  | | | Ok got it, so if a female with a uterus identifies/feels like a male then because she still has uterus, saying "only female have uterus" offends them. Did I understand correct? | | | | | They also say there are more than two sexes. Is a very odd offshoot. | Quote: | |  | | | I'm not up to date with the exact definitions, but I think it's for People identifying as women being told "only women have uteruses", the whole sex vs gender argument.
I think this is what got JK Rowling or Graham Linehan into hot water. One of them has said they've been cancelled, but he went on a bit of a crusade.
Not the rabbit hole I want to venture into. | | | | | This. Mostly it's folk who think being a woman is a feeling. Indeed. Not a fun rabbit hole. | Quote: | |  | | | Something like that, but probably more the inverse, that a M2F TS won't loike being told "you're not really female because you don't have a uterus".
Personally I doubt that many genuine TSs would be that much offended by a simple general statement, but clearly it could be used in an insulting/derogatory fashion, and I think some of the reaction by "rights activists" is based on the idea that if something can be insulting it must always be insulting, so let's avoid it altogether. | | | | | This. It's mostly a very noisy, very keen to be offended group who are mostly fetishing "being female".
| This user would like to thank RufusB for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 15:10
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Sep 2019 Location: Hopefully soon to be Aargau
Posts: 1,006
Groaned at 414 Times in 245 Posts
Thanked 2,402 Times in 1,141 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | It's their right to do whatever they damn well want. Is there any law to support the idea that they should give equal space to all apps, regardless of political views thereof? No, there isn't.
And in any case, the reasons given were that the app was being used to organise unlawful activities, which isn't quite the same thing.
They also react to possible legal repercussions, of course. If there were an armed rebellion and it could be shown that they knew the platform was being used to organise it but did nothing, wouldn't they potentially be open to charges of aiding and abetting? Even if not legally culpable, I would definitely see it as their job to crack down on any illegal activity they're aware of, if not even to actively look for it.
Just like they do for drug dealing or child pornography. Do you think they shouldn't be allowed to deny access to these as well? | | | | | They can do what they like in removing people from their platform yes, however when it comes to collusion with one another to prevent competitors then it becomes a monopoly. Unfortunately being America, I hold little hope for the issue of censorship to be addressed by antitrust lawsuits. Here however there is far more hope outside the borders of the US
You say that Parler was allegedly being used to organise unlawful activities. How many times over the past decade has Facebook and Twitter been used to organise violent protests and riots? From the London Riots in 2011, right up to and including the attack on the Capitol this year. Where is the repercussions for these platforms?
| 
14.01.2021, 15:22
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Milky Way
Posts: 1,734
Groaned at 150 Times in 101 Posts
Thanked 4,680 Times in 1,841 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Yes, but how many of us here are using the EF to project an online persona and to collect "followers?" How many people here invest their egos in their EF identities and post selfies for compliments, etc.? | | | | | Every last one.
Don't underestimate the power of your ego.
We post selfies of how we want to project our personalities, like it or not.
Can't help but get a dopamine hit from a thank you!
| The following 4 users would like to thank pilatus1 for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 15:29
|  | A modal singularity | | Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Morgins, VS (and Alsace)
Posts: 8,865
Groaned at 362 Times in 234 Posts
Thanked 15,049 Times in 6,520 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | They can do what they like in removing people from their platform yes, however when it comes to collusion with one another to prevent competitors then it becomes a monopoly. | | | | | It would become a cartel, not a monopoly, if that were the case. But it isn't. | Quote: | |  | | | How many times over the past decade has Facebook and Twitter been used to organise violent protests and riots? From the London Riots in 2011, right up to and including the attack on the Capitol this year. Where is the repercussions for these platforms? | | | | | I can't see why that would be in any way relevant to decisions now. Just because things have been allowed in the past is in no way a reason to let them remain unchecked. There was (apparently) a time when child pornography was easily exchanged without consequence to the ISPs and platforms being used, but that's hardly a reason to suggest that it shouldn't be cracked down on now, is it?
| The following 3 users would like to thank Ace1 for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 15:45
|  | Forum Veteran | | Join Date: Sep 2019 Location: Hopefully soon to be Aargau
Posts: 1,006
Groaned at 414 Times in 245 Posts
Thanked 2,402 Times in 1,141 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | It would become a cartel, not a monopoly, if that were the case. But it isn't.
I can't see why that would be in any way relevant to decisions now. Just because things have been allowed in the past is in no way a reason to let them remain unchecked. There was (apparently) a time when child pornography was easily exchanged without consequence to the ISPs and platforms being used, but that's hardly a reason to suggest that it shouldn't be cracked down on now, is it? | | | | | Cartel, yes that's the word I was looking for.
The point is that this Big Tech cartel shouldn't be the ones judging a competitor. I don't think child pornography is a reasonable comparison as this is clearly illegal. Speech on the other hand is more of a grey area.
What's also interesting is that US lawsuits have clearly recognised Twitter and Facebook as "public forums". This is why they have blocked attempts to restrict convicted (sex) offenders from accessing social media and the internet as unconstitutional (see Packingham v. North Carolina).
Another lawsuit also prevented President Trump from blocking people on Twitter. Which is ironic as President he wasn't allowed block people on Twitter, however Twitter is allowed to block the President.
| 
14.01.2021, 15:51
| Senior Member | | Join Date: Sep 2020 Location: In your head
Posts: 266
Groaned at 29 Times in 26 Posts
Thanked 881 Times in 313 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Big Tech giants are Facebook, Amazon, Twitter, Google and Apple. It is not their job, nor should it be their right to judge whether Parler is "an alt-right echo sewer". There is laws and a judiciary for that. | | | | | They can do as they wish - they are private companies. Right to refuse etc | Quote: | |  | | | It's their right to do whatever they damn well want. Is there any law to support the idea that they should give equal space to all apps, regardless of political views thereof? No, there isn't.
And in any case, the reasons given were that the app was being used to organise unlawful activities, which isn't quite the same thing.
They also react to possible legal repercussions, of course. If there were an armed rebellion and it could be shown that they knew the platform was being used to organise it but did nothing, wouldn't they potentially be open to charges of aiding and abetting? Even if not legally culpable, I would definitely see it as their job to crack down on any illegal activity they're aware of, if not even to actively look for it.
Just like they do for drug dealing or child pornography. Do you think they shouldn't be allowed to deny access to these as well? | | | | |
Exactly.
| 
14.01.2021, 16:00
| Senior Member | | Join Date: Sep 2020 Location: In your head
Posts: 266
Groaned at 29 Times in 26 Posts
Thanked 881 Times in 313 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Cartel, yes that's the word I was looking for.
The point is that this Big Tech cartel shouldn't be the ones judging a competitor. I don't think child pornography is a reasonable comparison as this is clearly illegal. Speech on the other hand is more of a grey area.
What's also interesting is that US lawsuits have clearly recognised Twitter and Facebook as "public forums". This is why they have blocked attempts to restrict convicted (sex) offenders from accessing social media and the internet as unconstitutional (see Packingham v. North Carolina).
Another lawsuit also prevented President Trump from blocking people on Twitter. Which is ironic as President he wasn't allowed block people on Twitter, however Twitter is allowed to block the President. | | | | |
They aren't judging a competitor. They are refusing to host an app. If Parler etc was a true competitor they wouldn't need other platforms to launch it.
Twitter is a private company.
Try this:
Person A wants to sleep with Person B.
B says no. Doesn't actually need to give a reason because their body, their choice etc but they do: they don't like A's politics. Or shoes. Or haircut. Whatever.
A takes exception and says "that's discriminatory because those things are irrelevant to the fact that i want to sleep with you".
Makes no damn difference. The reasons were provided by B to be polite etc. All they needed to do was say No. Because their body, their choice.
A monopoly decision, if you will, but still final.
End of.
| The following 3 users would like to thank RufusB for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 16:17
| Forum Legend | | Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: ZH
Posts: 7,501
Groaned at 74 Times in 60 Posts
Thanked 11,044 Times in 4,496 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Just because things have been allowed in the past is in no way a reason to let them remain unchecked. There was (apparently) a time when child pornography was easily exchanged without consequence to the ISPs and platforms being used, but that's hardly a reason to suggest that it shouldn't be cracked down on now, is it? | | | | | This. | Quote: | |  | | | Another lawsuit also prevented President Trump from blocking people on Twitter. Which is ironic as President he wasn't allowed block people on Twitter, however Twitter is allowed to block the President. | | | | | Twitter can block anyone, anytime.
A third party outside of Twitter, such as you, me, or Donald Trump, cannot block a Twitter user. After all: | Quote: | |  | | | Twitter is a private company.
Try this:
Person A wants to sleep with Person B.
B says no. Doesn't actually need to give a reason because their body, their choice etc but they do: they don't like A's politics. Or shoes. Or haircut. Whatever.
A takes exception and says "that's discriminatory because those things are irrelevant to the fact that i want to sleep with you".
Makes no damn difference. The reasons were provided by B to be polite etc. All they needed to do was say No. Because their body, their choice.
A monopoly decision, if you will, but still final.
End of. | | | | | This, exactly.
Seems this is another moment to re-visit Tea and Consent. https://youtu.be/pZwvrxVavnQ
Just because Twitter said yes to tea before, it doesn't mean that they have to say yes to tea, again.
| The following 3 users would like to thank doropfiz for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 16:21
|  | Forum Legend | | Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Baden
Posts: 3,274
Groaned at 46 Times in 41 Posts
Thanked 5,444 Times in 2,092 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture
Parler is a competitor to google, amazon and apple? | The following 4 users would like to thank Ouchboy for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 16:37
| Senior Member | | Join Date: Sep 2020 Location: In your head
Posts: 266
Groaned at 29 Times in 26 Posts
Thanked 881 Times in 313 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Parler is a competitor to google, amazon and apple? | | | | | Not even slightly.
| This user would like to thank RufusB for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 16:41
| Forum Legend | | Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Zurich
Posts: 8,038
Groaned at 291 Times in 220 Posts
Thanked 18,182 Times in 6,372 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | They can do as they wish - they are private companies. Right to refuse etc | | | | | Can you provide the legal basis for that?
| The following 2 users would like to thank k_and_e for this useful post: | | 
14.01.2021, 16:43
| Senior Member | | Join Date: Sep 2020 Location: In your head
Posts: 266
Groaned at 29 Times in 26 Posts
Thanked 881 Times in 313 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture | Quote: | |  | | | Can you provide the legal basis for that? | | | | | Can you provide the legal basis why that isn't the case?
They are not gov't owned. Therefore private. They may be publicly traded (is that the phrase) but still owned by (groups of) private citizens. FB is such, I think. So can set their own Ts and Cs.
Incidentally, Parler is privately owned. I'll wager folk get kicked off that all the time for certain viewpoints. The earth not being flat, etc.
I'm finding it difficult to understand why folk are getting so out of sorts with this. Unless those folk are all Trump supporters. In which case, get thee to Parler.
Last edited by RufusB; 14.01.2021 at 16:54.
| 
14.01.2021, 16:52
| Junior Member | | Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Argau
Posts: 50
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanked 87 Times in 36 Posts
| | Re: Cancel Culture
Pretty sure that when you open an account you agree to a number of things, such as sort of rules and policies....
| This user would like to thank errepierre for this useful post: | |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | | Thread Tools | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:44. | |