Cancel Culture

[hoopla]

So is redemption a concept of the past then?

Do we believe people can change or not? Or is it less that you don’t think someone can change, you just don’t care?

Personally, I believe people should be held to account for their actions, however we need to leave room for people to improve, otherwise why would they even try?

[altered]

It depends on the situation. Sorry, but I don’t think there should ever be redemption or forgiveness for people like Steve Bannon or Milo whatshisfuck. There is nothing they could ever do worth anyone’s time or energy. Same goes for pedos - they keep trying all this shit to get away with being pedos while pretending to be decent humans (idk how many of you are familiar with the fucking “MAP” bullshit but that’s fucking creepy and perfectly illustrates my point).

If you disagree with me, you’re going to need to justify the damage of letting those people in before I give a single fuck about the damage of keeping them out. Only one group /asked for this shit./

[Doktor Howl]

you are strangers in the internet,

And that's how we're going to stay.

[Doktor Howl]

So is redemption a concept of the past then?

Do we believe people can change or not? Or is it less that you don’t think someone can change, you just don’t care?

Personally, I believe people should be held to account for their actions, however we need to leave room for people to improve, otherwise why would they even try?

Looking back on things, the chance for redemption is handed out capriciously and has worked precisely once in PD history.

IRL, it's even worse.  Brock Turner got to skip the whole "taking your lumps" thing, and go straight to the "That's great, now vacate my convictions" section, while WoC go to prison for defending their own lives and the lives of their children.

NO.  Fuck that.  Fuck you.  Redemption - if it is allowed at ALL - is something you EARN, by WALKING YOUR STUPID ASS BACK INTO CIVILIZATION through ACTIONS that ameliorate the bad shit you did.

No repentance, no penance, then no fucking absolution. 

If you guys want to sit in Con-Troll's little kumbaya drum circle, feeling all squishy over how the poor ickle monsters feel, I can't stop you.  Shit, go ahead.  Have a Stephen Miller love-in. 

LET US KNOW HOW THAT WORKS OUT.

Getting weepy-eyed over active monsters is not a fucking virtue.

[Doktor Howl]

Aw, I hope not. I want to see if Cram puts on his “be-nice-to-the-shithead” hat or not. I’m guessing he’s about 70% of the way to where even nice-hat Cram will take a rancid dump on his open eyes, and that’s always an incredible sight.

somebody on the internet had a bad opinion so you want me to do this machismo threatening monkey thing? Detail the horrific violence I wish upon them? I'll pass--that's not my style, and it tends to make things worse.

*watches Nullfied go over the cliff*

Okay.

[altered]

So is redemption a concept of the past then?

Do we believe people can change or not? Or is it less that you don’t think someone can change, you just don’t care?

Personally, I believe people should be held to account for their actions, however we need to leave room for people to improve, otherwise why would they even try?

Looking back on things, the chance for redemption is handed out capriciously and has worked precisely once in PD history.

IRL, it's even worse.  Brock Turner got to skip the whole "taking your lumps" thing, and go straight to the "That's great, now vacate my convictions" section, while WoC go to prison for defending their own lives and the lives of their children.

NO.  Fuck that.  Fuck you.  Redemption - if it is allowed at ALL - is something you EARN, by WALKING YOUR STUPID ASS BACK INTO CIVILIZATION through ACTIONS that ameliorate the bad shit you did.

No repentance, no penance, then no fucking absolution. 

If you guys want to sit in Con-Troll's little kumbaya drum circle, feeling all squishy over how the poor ickle monsters feel, I can't stop you.  Shit, go ahead.  Have a Stephen Miller love-in. 

LET US KNOW HOW THAT WORKS OUT.

Getting weepy-eyed over active monsters is not a fucking virtue.

Thanks for saying what should have been obvious from he start.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Doktor Howl]

So is redemption a concept of the past then?

Do we believe people can change or not? Or is it less that you don’t think someone can change, you just don’t care?

Personally, I believe people should be held to account for their actions, however we need to leave room for people to improve, otherwise why would they even try?

Looking back on things, the chance for redemption is handed out capriciously and has worked precisely once in PD history.

IRL, it's even worse.  Brock Turner got to skip the whole "taking your lumps" thing, and go straight to the "That's great, now vacate my convictions" section, while WoC go to prison for defending their own lives and the lives of their children.

NO.  Fuck that.  Fuck you.  Redemption - if it is allowed at ALL - is something you EARN, by WALKING YOUR STUPID ASS BACK INTO CIVILIZATION through ACTIONS that ameliorate the bad shit you did.

No repentance, no penance, then no fucking absolution. 

If you guys want to sit in Con-Troll's little kumbaya drum circle, feeling all squishy over how the poor ickle monsters feel, I can't stop you.  Shit, go ahead.  Have a Stephen Miller love-in. 

LET US KNOW HOW THAT WORKS OUT.

Getting weepy-eyed over active monsters is not a fucking virtue.

Thanks for saying what should have been obvious from he start.

I am thinking I need to see myself out of this thread.  I've seen it before.

[Cramulus]

How do you create an opening to encourage self awareness that doesn’t put every victim and/or target of shitty people in danger?

How does Contrapoints do it?

Talking to the Bad Person as if they are another human and not a monster. That's how a lot of deprogramming / deradicalization works.

I say this as someone whose mind has been changed about bad things in the past. Telling me to die over and over again would not have worked, it would have made me dig in and go "okay, fuck you too".

If you leave the door open for some things to be “on a scale” you create a /fucking dangerous/ gap in your defenses.

If you're saying that Aziz Ansari and Harvey Weinstein did the exact same thing and deserve the exact same treatment, you're also creating a lot of damage.

There are things we should be deal with in absolute terms, no doubt. But saying 'I think we should try to understand why terrible people do those terrible things' is not exactly a nazi talking point.

What you’re talking about specifically above is a backdoor for concern trolls, sea lions, and a kind of troll I don’t have a snappy term for that promotes exactly one tiny shitty part of a larger shitty ideology, but publicly rejects the rest of it, in an attempt to win over community members, bit by bit, to being totally shitty.

As an aside, I want to point out a structural similarity to the welfare queen argument - some people will always abuse charitable systems. At what degree of abuse should we go "well fuck it, charity is cancelled now."

There is no foolproof methodology, no opening that cannot be exploited. Shit's complicated. Absolutism does not solve this for the right, and it won't work for the left.

Personally, one of the lines I draw is bad faith arguments. It's evidence of a closed mind, which is a waste of time to communicate with.

ITT, Con-Troll, for example, was not trying to troll us, he was trying to explain a genuine perspective (albeit poorly).
Someone like RP who is just trying to troll the board and piss people off is not worth the attempt at sincerity.

[Pergamos]

All sexual interaction without consent can cause /serious fucking damage/. All of it. It might look “minor” to you but I’m extremely fucked up over some of that “minor” shit.

Keep digging that fucking hole, sparky. I’ll gladly bury you when you’ve gotten it fucking deep enough.

Yes, but does that mean all sexual interaction without consent should result in the castration of the perpetrator?

[altered]

How do you tell the difference? And is it worth bringing danger into the lives of people who have already been victimized if you can’t tell till it’s too late? Is it worth allowing privileged shitheads to play poor baby at the expense of the safety of oppressed peoples who have been victimized by their exact behavior?

For me, no. It isn’t. It never will be. If they do the work, maybe I one day won’t despise them as openly and loudly and consistently, but they should never be allowed to forget that they fucked up. That should hang over their heads for the rest of their lives. And some people have caused far too much suffering to even be given a pass then. There is no amount of work they can do to undo the damage they’ve done. If you believe otherwise I will really need an explanation, because that is /unthinkable/ to me.



I keep dodging ContraPoints for a very good reason and you keep bringing her up. Fine. I don’t consume her content. I don’t consume almost any video content ever. I know nothing about her approach. But I don’t think there’s any value in pampering shitty people just in case they might not become any shittier. Disgust and outrage are /defense mechanisms/. They exist /for a reason/. There is little value in trying to understand the Nazi except in preventative terms, and shitty people don’t get that way because they’re fundamentally good but just /upset by fucking liberals/. There’s even less value in trying to understand the pedophile, which is one you haven’t mentioned yet as far as I know (these names mean absolutely nothing to me for the most part).

[hoopla]

So they should branded. Preferably somewhere super visible, like the forehead. Got it.

[altered]

You can make sure they don’t forget without branding them, ffs. We’re talking about how society reacts to them, most of these things have criminal punishments already that I don’t feel are in the scope of the topic.

ETA: Because we’ve gotten to the stage of intentional misinterpretation, let me be clear and say that no, we don’t fucking brand humans, period. What the fuck.

[Pergamos]

Some behavior is not fucking acceptable. I don’t give a fuck if they become pariahs. They asked for that the second they covered themselves in dogshit and started yelling slurs. I don’t care if they /can/ be saved, why would you fucking /want/ to?

Because allies are valuable.  I had a friend who used to be a nazi, back before there were nazis under every rock.  Now I didn't save him, I don't really know who did, but I was grateful for him in my life.  He understood white supremacists in a way that I never could and that sort of information can be incredibly valuable when trying to combat them.  The simplest, and most obvious example is that he taught me their codes, so I know HH and 88 mean nazi.

[Pergamos]

As far as pedos go there used to be a member here who felt that anyone accused of pedophilia should be destroyed.  Hopefully even the folks who didn't see the arguements about that can see the problem with her position.

[altered]

/Accused/ of pedophilia is someone I’ll probably shun without further evidence because of quite a few recent cases in circles I’m a part of where apparently baseless accusations got backed up much later when someone found old side blogs or sock puppet accounts.

Destruction is reserved for evidence, though. And before someone fucking goes there, I mean social destruction, not fucking murder.



To the prior post: Thanks for a direct answer finally to one of the core questions at the heart of this whole damn thing.

I don’t think that’s enough reason, because that sort of information is an open secret at best, but I can see there is /some/ value there. Now, what specifically caused his change? Ask him if you don’t know.