Cancel Culture

[yorkie1999]

1 hour ago, TamworthFoxes said:

This made me chuckle. The part where he appeared to have been rehabilitated!! 😂. He was committing a further crime (however minor). Were you his defence solicitor by any chance?!

It'll all come out in court, the fact that they worked together at the same nightclub and had a history of not getting on makes me think that Derek Chauvin wasn't a copper being a bad man but instead a bad man who was a copper. On a lighter note, i've heard that British legion groups have decided to voluntary look after our nations statues, which means we'll have trained killers guarding them. 

[urban.spaceman]

43 minutes ago, Sir Shep said:

Well I’m guessing this will all come out when the court case arrives, then everyone should have a better idea on what actually happened. 

 

Just on a a side note having worked in retail, my brief at the time when dealing with counterfeit notes was to confiscate the note and give the customer a receipt. If you suspected that the customer was knowingly passing over a counterfeit note then yes you’d try and secure their face on CCTV and call the police but not detain them yourself. 

I used to work for Blacks (unfortunate shop name) and Millets; we were just advised to give it back to them and refuse service but let other shops know on the radio. I used to have quite a lot of fun wasting their time especially when they were doing dodgy cheques. 

[Fox92]

3 hours ago, twoleftfeet said:

Wasn't the statue in Bristol about a merchant who made money and made donation to his City. It could be argued that the statue being built by the club in the future because of his links to the royal family and the treatment of people in Thailand is inappropriate, I however believe we are remembering the greatest chairman in our history. Rose coloured spectacles and all that.

I've thought the same. Pretty sure King Power themselves have been caught up in stuff. Thailand is corrupt and I'm guessing anybody close to the King is close for a reason.

 

[urban.spaceman]

38 minutes ago, TamworthFoxes said:

It was the contrast between yours and @BKLFox slant and explanation of his pre cons which appeared in messages directly after each other. It reminded me of the prosecution and defence summing up. Just highlights the different slant on things the extreme end of both arguments can take with the same information.

Everyone’s got their own spin...

[Guest TamworthFoxes]

2 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

It'll all come out in court, the fact that they worked together at the same nightclub and had a history of not getting on makes me think that Derek Chauvin wasn't a copper being a bad man but instead a bad man who was a copper. On a lighter note, i've heard that British legion groups have decided to voluntary look after our nations statues, which means we'll have trained killers guarding them. 

I expect you are correct in that the previous history between the two was the reason for what happened. Police are trained and have positional asphyxiation whilst doing hands on techniques drilled into them. There is no way he would not have known the consequences of doing what he did. He must of known what the end result would be, the fact three colleagues watched and didn’t try to intervene is more baffling.

[Dan]

23 hours ago, Captain... said:

What? Cancel culture? Really?

 

Not systemic racism? The increase of far right activism? Fundamentalist terrorism? Cyber bullying? Normal bullying? Revenge porn? The institutionalised abuse of women in the film and music industry?

 

Cancel culture is about calling out people/organisations for current and past comments that are not acceptable, it arguably goes too far, but everything on Twitter goes too far, but it's not a bad thing, calling out racism and bigotry even if you don't agree with it being held to account for your actions is all that is happening.

Knew there'd be a reply like this. Yes those things are obviously bad as well - I don't really see how any of those change what I said. The idea that you can 'cancel' somebody for what is more often than not the most vague thing is ridiculous, all it is doing is appeasing and empowering the shouty minority and it's a dangerous precedent to set. I'm not a fan what so ever. The Inbetweeners was removed from Youtube last night. That's just outright taking the piss. It's to demonstrate power and nothing else.

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

23 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

Knew there'd be a reply like this. Yes those things are obviously bad as well - I don't really see how any of those change what I said. The idea that you can 'cancel' somebody for what is more often than not the most vague thing is ridiculous, all it is doing is appeasing and empowering the shouty minority and it's a dangerous precedent to set. I'm not a fan what so ever. The Inbetweeners was removed from Youtube last night. That's just outright taking the piss. It's to demonstrate power and nothing else.

 

The Inbetweeners has been removed from Youtube because certain rights have changed hands, it's nothing to do with anything that's happened over the past few weeks - I don't know why anyone would immediately assume it was. You can still watch it on All4.

 

[Captain...]

27 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

Knew there'd be a reply like this. Yes those things are obviously bad as well - I don't really see how any of those change what I said. The idea that you can 'cancel' somebody for what is more often than not the most vague thing is ridiculous, all it is doing is appeasing and empowering the shouty minority and it's a dangerous precedent to set. I'm not a fan what so ever. The Inbetweeners was removed from Youtube last night. That's just outright taking the piss. It's to demonstrate power and nothing else.

Well it was a little hyperbolic which is, ironically, a trait of "cancel culture".

 

Edited 11 June 2020 by Captain...

[Captain...]

28 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

Knew there'd be a reply like this. Yes those things are obviously bad as well - I don't really see how any of those change what I said. The idea that you can 'cancel' somebody for what is more often than not the most vague thing is ridiculous, all it is doing is appeasing and empowering the shouty minority and it's a dangerous precedent to set. I'm not a fan what so ever. The Inbetweeners was removed from Youtube last night. That's just outright taking the piss. It's to demonstrate power and nothing else.

 

2 minutes ago, Miquel The Work Geordie said:

 

The Inbetweeners has been removed from Youtube because certain rights have changed hands, it's nothing to do with anything that's happened over the past few weeks - I don't know why anyone would immediately assume it was. You can still watch it on All4.

 

Wildly jumping to baseless conclusions to fit your narrative is also pretty common in "cancel culture".

[Dahnsouff]

You are on fire. @Captain...  

[Lionator]

39 minutes ago, Miquel The Work Geordie said:

 

The Inbetweeners has been removed from Youtube because certain rights have changed hands, it's nothing to do with anything that's happened over the past few weeks - I don't know why anyone would immediately assume it was. You can still watch it on All4.

 

The Sun have produced a rage article about 'the left' trying to get Gavin and Stacey taken off of iplayer and what not. Except nobody has demanded that it be taken off, they quote no sources or tweets. It's just to try and create division and it's disgusting.

[Captain...]

2 minutes ago, Lionator said:

The Sun have produced a rage article about 'the left' trying to get Gavin and Stacey taken off of iplayer and what not. Except nobody has demanded that it be taken off, they quote no sources or tweets. It's just to try and create division and it's disgusting.

This is the ridiculous thing that people are trying to cancel "cancel culture" by doing the exact same thing as those that partake in "cancel culture".

[Strokes]

39 minutes ago, Lionator said:

The Sun have produced a rage article about 'the left' trying to get Gavin and Stacey taken off of iplayer and what not. Except nobody has demanded that it be taken off, they quote no sources or tweets. It's just to try and create division and it's disgusting.

Not just the sun.....

https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/gavin-stacey-race-row-viewers-22177971

[Dr The Singh]

40 minutes ago, Lionator said:

The Sun have produced a rage article about 'the left' trying to get Gavin and Stacey taken off of iplayer and what not. Except nobody has demanded that it be taken off, they quote no sources or tweets. It's just to try and create division and it's disgusting.

I've been demanding it get taken off TV for years..............cus it's shit

[Strokes]

46 minutes ago, Lionator said:

The Sun have produced a rage article about 'the left' trying to get Gavin and Stacey taken off of iplayer and what not. Except nobody has demanded that it be taken off, they quote no sources or tweets. It's just to try and create division and it's disgusting.

Here found the source for you.

 

[Jon the Hat]

 

[yorkie1999]

18 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

I've been demanding it get taken off TV for years..............cus it's shit

i thought it was good

[Pliskin]

I must admit, I’ve been quite proud of this forum. There’s been no fear of discussion, most of which has been balanced and rational. And general consensus seems to be things do need to change. It’s been great to have full discussions, about everything, varying in points and opinions all balanced. I do hope that if we have a diverse membership on here from the black communities and other ethnic groups, I hope that they do feel welcomed and part of our community. There’s nothing like a football club to bring people together. And obviously if there is ever anything that anyone feels is socially unacceptable then challenge (which I know we do). 
 

We are lucky to have such a diverse city, I’ve worked in the community of Leicester for a number of years and it never ceases to amaze me the vast array of cultures we have pleasure of integrating with, I for one, and extremely proud of this, and hope it only becomes more diverse as the years go by. 

[reynard]

There is much to be said for the movement to remove statues honouring people involved in slavery. Personally I wouldn't but I would ensure that each statue has a proper plaque explaining who the person was and what they did. This should be used in tandem with a much more widespread and comprehensive education in schools of British history. Basically we jump from the stone age to the Tudors to the Second World War. Nothing is taught about the East India Company, for eg, and the terrible killing of hundrends of thousands of people in India, some 400k because they couldn't pay their tax. The slave trade needs to be properly taught as well. Focus should not just be on the major slave owners but on the fact that many thousands of people, quite ordinary people such as vicars, teachers and widows, owned slaves and benefitted from the compensation given to them when slavery was abolished in this country.

There are church monuments all over the country on public display to these people. Should we remove all of them too? Obviously we shouldn't. Many people will live in houses built on the backs of slave labour. Pretty much anyone who can trace their family back to Victorian times in this country will have seen their family benefit either directly or indirectly from the profits of the slave trade. We can't change our family's past all we can do is acknowledge that some things they did were wrong.

I urge anyone who is interested to go to the National Archives in Kew, when it reopens, and ask to see the ledgers of slave owners and the amounts of compensation they were awarded. It was one of the most humbling experiences in my life.

We simply can't erase all our past, be it statues, books (I lost count how many times the word savage was used in Darwin's origin of species for eg), old films and TV programmes. Far more worthy is to learn from the understanding why things were as they were and to show how we as a world have moved on and improved.

 

The argument could be exemplified by one park in Leicester. Many of us walk through the Nelson Mandela Park on the way to the match. Should we now change the name of the park because at some stage in his life he was a terrorist,, in some eyes, whose actions probably resulted in the deaths of other people or should we celebrate his memory as someone who saw he needed to change his life and who embraced his enemies for the common good?

 

[urban.spaceman]

 

Now it's getting personal.

[Corky]

I don't think the Major will have any lines left after the review.

[goody2028]

20 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

Now it's getting personal.

Honestly...

 

This, Little Britain, league of gentlemen and mighty boosh... we’re going to have nothing left to watch soon. 

[Lionator]

38 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

Now it's getting personal.

Even Owen Jones thinks it’s gone too far. 

[CollinsLCFC]

39 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

 

Now it's getting personal.

Thankfully still on Netflix.. For now. 

 

Going to watch it tonight, just incase I don't get another chance. 

[Lionator]

1 hour ago, Strokes said:

Here found the source for you.

 

Oh dear haha! I’m not sure how it’s guilty of any of these things? The argument is about ‘Chinese Alan’ but what’s wrong with that?