|
DC Murderverse posted:Disney is the largest media company in the world and is going to get significantly larger in the next 1-2 years because of the Fox acquisition. Their goal is to not get on the bad side of anyone, and since they (rightfully) shitcanned Roseanne for being a lovely racist a couple months ago, they are likely saying "this is our new line, if someone has done/said something lovely we need to get rid of them quick, we don't need them, we can just find someone else because we have more money than god". At the same time, a bunch of bad faith actors (which might as well be the subtitle of the whole alt-right movement) who were pissed when Roseanne got fired (because they also are lovely racists) were looking for someone to target to make Disney take that same stand again.  good stuffsome comments: - As Disney did this time, they will do next time. It's a purely robotic risk/reward calculation to them -- does the situation threaten their cashflow? Gunn is a minor player so he's an easy firing. Depp is still a big name for some reason, it'll take more to get him fired. They might even rehire Gunn if the backlash becomes scary to them. - I don't think a lovely origin of a doxx should negate it (provided its true). I mean if cernovich released the piss tape tomorrow? - anyone whos a known person who hasnt cleaned up their old social media is an idiot In the end, I guess it's all subjective. The idea of 10 year old lovely tweets + a heartfelt* apology is much easier to digest than a recent rape + a sorry-not-sorry * im too tired to re-read his whatever so i no longer know if it was actually hearteflt Carthag Tuek fucked around with this message at 09:15 on Jul 21, 2018 |
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 05:35 |
|
|
Safeword posted:It shouldn't matter who is complaining about these tweets, but rather the content itself. “Who” being Actual rapist Mike Cernovich who has said the following on Twitter far more recently than Gunn: “Have you guys ever tried “raping” a girl without using force? Try it. It’s basically impossible. Date rape does not exist.” Cernovich also has a history of faking content and accusations to try and get other people fired along similar grounds, like Sam Seder who was fired and then rehired by MSNBC as well as Chuck Schumer comically enough. Gunn has acknowledged his poo poo was hosed up and wrong. He’s cleaned up his act. If you refuse to let people change and become better then you are playing into the exact hands that Actual Rapist Mike Cernovich, who is a Nazi shithead, who only made a stink because Gunn is outspokenly anti-Trump, wants. So you can either punish “bad men” for lovely jokes from a decade ago and reward an Actual Rapist Defending An Actual Rapist, or refuse to fall for this concern troll horseshit. Disney chose the former as they continue to employ and profit from far worse than Gunn. So gently caress them, sorry, no, fingerwag all you want but this is entirely inconsistent and wreaks of complete horseshit. I don’t even like Gunn or his edgelord poo poo but you have to have actual standards if you want to play moral authority. My standards don’t come from actual rapists like Mike Cernovich and neither should yours. The people who are cheering the loudest in celebration of Gunn’s firing are, hold on, let me check... Donald Trump supporters on Reddit. Which should loving tell you something. Taintrunner fucked around with this message at 09:20 on Jul 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:16
|
|
|
I don't buy the idea that someone's accuser being vile invalidates another person's crimes. If we go down that route where do we draw the line? Just because I want Gunn to be held accountable doesn't mean I believe the likes of Mike should go untouched, and I'm pretty disgusted you're trying to draw the parallel there.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:24
|
|
|
Gunn has been held accountable in the past, and apologized and cleaned up his act. That's where people are finding a sticking point on this and how it isn't the same as say, Roseanne saying something vile in 2018 and being punished in 2018. Do we forgive Roseanne in 10 years? I don't know. It depends on if she's made real steps to stop being a piece of poo poo and If she has then yes, I probably would myself. If she hasn't then gently caress her. You can't fix the world without allowing people to learn from their mistakes. e: also Roseanne isn't the best example for me personally w/r/t the Gunn thing because Gunn was flinging vile jokes about nobody in particular, while Roseanne was being loving vile about an actual person who exists esperterra fucked around with this message at 09:31 on Jul 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:27
|
|
|
Safeword posted:I don't buy the idea that someone's accuser being vile invalidates another person's crimes. If we go down that route where do we draw the line? Just because I want Gunn to be held accountable doesn't mean I believe the likes of Mike should go untouched, and I'm pretty disgusted you're trying to draw the parallel there. Mike Cernovich is not an accuser. He is a rapist and has a history of making poo poo up, falsifying poo poo, and being a white nationalist provocateur Actual Rapist. He was literally in court for it and took a plea deal down to battery with community service. He also is uh outspokenly pro rape. On multiple occasions! Regularly! Disney gave the moral high ground to an actual rapist and his cult of personality fans that sought to lash out at someone for being outspoken against Trump. That’s all that happened today, because Gunn’s bullshit as dumb as it is, which nobody here is defending as good or funny, is not an actual loving crime he can be accused of. Unlike people still employed by Disney!
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:32
|
|
|
Safeword posted:Right, but where's the cut off? Do we give Roseanne ten years and suddenly forget everything? What if it had been an alt right member who flagged up her original tweet, would that lessen the outrage about the comments? Comparing the two is a little disingenuous because A: Roseanne's comments were literally tweeted out the day that she got fired, whereas Gunn's tweets were old. This doesn't make what Gunn said any less offensive, but I would believe him if he said "i know now what I said was wrong, and those jokes were offensive and ill-spirited" because he's had lots of time to learn and be better. He also hasn't really done anything in the interim that's really tripped these particular triggers. B: Roseanne was accused of being racist, for which there was plenty of evidence, most prominently the joke she made about Valerie Jarrett that day. Gunn made inappropriate offensive jokes, but based on the poo poo that was posted in here as examples of what these people are saying, they're accusing him of being a child molester (or being child molestation-adjacent). this is a common attack for this group, see: Pizzagate, many various Hillary Clinton conspiracy theories, etc, but there's no actual evidence of Gunn being a child molester, and I think even the people who think he should lose his job for posting offensive things don't actually think he's a child molester. This is part of where the whole "bad faith" thing carries actual weight; if you fire Gunn after these unfounded accusations, you're just giving weight to the people making them and encouraging them to make that same argument in the future. To bring it around to Roseanne again, if an organized group of people took her tweets about Valerie Jarrett and made an effort to get Disney to fire her based on the argument that these tweets implied that she was a literal member of the Klan or had slaves or something, it might be closer to a fair comparison. C: Roseanne's apology after the fact was clearly disingenuous because like, a week later she started defending herself again, and her actions in the months following her booting are not the actions of someone who realized that what they said was wrong and insensitive. If James Gunn comes out and starts to defend the poo poo he said and say "it wasn't wrong to say that" or complain about PC culture I might feel differently, but he does seem to be sincere in his contrition. It should also be noted that if you want to compare this to other comedians who have been the center of various arguments about this sort of thing, the only comedians who have really lost their careers over something like it have been people like Roseanne or Michael Richards. Guys who make really blue jokes like Daniel Tosh or Parker & Stone don't generally hurt their careers by making this sort of joke. It's possible that Twitter being the medium for the message has something to do with it (I imagine if a video of James Gunn saying most of those things on stage in the context of a stand-up act popped up, he wouldn't have been fired, but I'm not sure).
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:34
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:Comparing the two is a little disingenuous because I'm pretty sure Disney won't be hiring Parker and Stone any time soon though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:39
|
|
|
Safeword posted:I don't buy the idea that someone's accuser being vile invalidates another person's crimes. If we go down that route where do we draw the line? Just because I want Gunn to be held accountable doesn't mean I believe the likes of Mike should go untouched, and I'm pretty disgusted you're trying to draw the parallel there. I actually agree with this point. A lot of people had to grapple with this during the 2016 election when Donald Trump started talking about Bill Clinton's history of sexual abuse. Now, Donald Trump was obviously not doing this because he cared about the women Clinton has assaulted, and clearly *was* doing it to muddy the waters surrounding his own history of abusing women, but at the same time, when Donald Trump said that Bill Clinton was just as bad as he was, he wasn't wrong. But Bill Clinton was still able to speak during his wife's campaign and for the most part, liberals were fine with disregarding this argument by saying things like "well Trump is only bringing it up because he's an abuser, it doesn't count". But that doesn't change the fact that Bill Clinton has, in all likelihood, sexually assaulted at least one woman and possibly more, and he probably shouldn't be allowed anywhere near democratic party politics. This isn't quite the same as this situation because the worst that James Gunn has done is make some crass, insensitive jokes, and that wades into the whole "offensive comedy or just offensive" argument, and Gunn has apologized while Clinton still refuses to admit wrongdoing, but I don't think the source being a piece of poo poo rapist inherently makes the argument null and void.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:43
|
|
|
Safeword posted:Right, but where's the cut off? Do we give Roseanne ten years and suddenly forget everything? What if it had been an alt right member who flagged up her original tweet, would that lessen the outrage about the comments? Thats the rub, I guess. It sucks because the parallel is that if we hold old comments of writers etc to modern considerations, a large portion of literature and art and film is automatically included and should therefore be invalidated too. Context and perspective matters. If it was complemented by tweets promoting transphobic petitions, or it was tweeted like, last year, then yeah its a problem. As far as validating any apology regarding such material, again context (shock comedy writer of films literally filed under subgenre 'trash' makes lovely jokes) and perspective (ten years ago was a shockingly long time ago in terms of LGBT acceptance) and requires acknowledgement of any wrongdoings (ie, not "sorry you were offended" which Gunn succeeded in saying) and whether their contrite-ness continues. I think the "bad faith" part of this particular case can't be ignored, though (considering its been spearheaded by a literal remorseless convicted rapist and has political drive). It lies more in discussion of censorship than #metoo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:44
|
|
|
LIVE AMMO ROLEPLAY posted:I'm pretty sure Disney won't be hiring Parker and Stone any time soon though. they hired Sarah Silverman to do the voice of a character in one of their animated movies, I don't think they're inherently scared of that sort of comedian. Maybe not the SP guys in particular but offensive comedians are not explicitly on a "DO NOT HIRE" list
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:45
|
|
|
Krankenstyle posted:I mean if cernovich released the piss tape tomorrow? This is a bullshit line of thinking because you're juxtaposing something literally impossible happening against something with the nuance of reality. It feels like the same sort of false equivalency poo poo that centrists use that enables the actual bad people to get away with their vile poo poo. In non James Gunn news, Anthony Anderson under investigation for assaulting a woman: https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/anthony-anderson-assault-investigation-for-assault-1202880247/
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:45
|
|
|
Also yeah, I 100% agree that just because the accuser is a piece of poo poo doesn't automatically invalidate them bringing evidence of some kind of crime or misconduct forward. But the context in which this guy did and the evidence we have of Gunn already having said he was sorry and making an effort, it muddies the waters there. Say, if we were talking about formerly unknown evidence that Gunn was some kind of abuser, and it was still this Mike rear end in a top hat bringing it up but it was conclusive and could be backed up, that would be different and I'd roll my eyes at people going 'but Mike is a rapist so let's not listen to him!'. As it is tho he just brought forward poo poo that was already known and had been accounted for.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:45
|
|
|
Ultimately, I just don't think that this kind of thing should go without consequences, especially for people in positions of influence within the industry. Yes, ten years on is a bit silly, but at the same time he avoided serious repercussions because of an online apology - something that, to me, isn't particularly spectacular, and being a better person because you no longer joke about raping kids isn't something I feel should put anyone on a pedestal. It's just a messy situation overall, not helped by an intense need to downplay it on the basis of others being worse. That is a really weird route to go down, and I'm hugely uncomfortable with it. Taintrunner posted:Mike Cernovich is not an accuser. He is a rapist and has a history of making poo poo up, falsifying poo poo, and being a white nationalist provocateur Actual Rapist. He was literally in court for it and took a plea deal down to battery with community service. He also is uh outspokenly pro rape. On multiple occasions! Regularly! Mike deserves to be punished. His existence does not invalidate the behaviour of others.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:46
|
|
|
Safeword posted:I don't buy the idea that someone's accuser being vile invalidates another person's crimes. If we go down that route where do we draw the line? Just because I want Gunn to be held accountable doesn't mean I believe the likes of Mike should go untouched, and I'm pretty disgusted you're trying to draw the parallel there. Also yo this is not about a crime, it's about words. Gunn is not being fired for raping children, he's being fired and targeted because he made lovely jokes about it. That's a huuuuuge distinction. E: I'd also agree that even though Cernovich is a huge known piece of poo poo, it doesn't invalidate any complaints. It doesn't mean that he and his claims are immune to scrutiny. I, Butthole fucked around with this message at 09:50 on Jul 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:47
|
|
|
I, Butthole posted:Also yo this is not about a crime, it's about words. Gunn is not being fired for raping children, he's being fired and targeted because he made lovely jokes about it. That's a huuuuuge distinction. I don't really buy this. For both my sexuality and gender identity I've been the source of a number of vile jokes, belittled for it, and suffered outright abuse. Even without going into the actual, physical aspect of this..."just words" does not diminish their impact.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:49
|
|
|
Safeword posted:Mike deserves to be punished. His existence does not invalidate the behaviour of others. Instead, you and others that give him any sense of legitimacy have only enabled, rewarded, and emboldened him to commit further hanus acts of dishonesty and outright lies like he has done to Sam Seder and Chuck Schumer (who is a dirt bag for reasons unrelated to anything Cernovich brought up) and will continue to do so now, with all of Trump Reddit cheering him on. So great job, the actual rapist won. Woo-hoo. I bet that feels real good. Gunn did not commit an actual crime. Some lovely words 10 years ago he has since owned up to, but not an actual hanus sexual assault, which is what he was accused of with no evidence and what Cernovich actually did and is an outspoken supporter of, rape.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:52
|
|
|
Taintrunner posted:Instead, you and others that give him any sense of legitimacy have only enabled, rewarded, and emboldened him to commit further hanus acts of dishonesty and outright lies like he has done to Sam Seder and Chuck Schumer (who is a dirt bag for reasons unrelated to anything Cernovich brought up) and will continue to do so now, with all of Trump Reddit cheering him on. Don't you dare accuse me of supporting a rapist. I'm not discussing this with you any longer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:55
|
|
|
It should also be remembered that we’re only about 6 months past Disney punishing a Sportscenter anchor for criticizing Donald Trump on Twitter, which happened before Roseanne’s reboot even started, let alone her firing. This was pushed by the same sorts of people, although that one ended up going all the way to Trump himself because Donald Trump loves to publicly criticize black women. This is another shot in a broader culture war. We have to decide whether we want to win at the cost of sometimes doing the wrong thing, or we want to always do the right thing, at the cost of occasionally losing battles to an opponent who has no concerns about what is right or wrong. And unfortunately, the battleground is a corporatist structure with no concerns other than financial ones, which puts doing the right thing at an inherent disadvantage because money has no morals.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 09:59
|
|
|
Safeword posted:I don't really buy this. For both my sexuality and gender identity I've been the source of a number of vile jokes, belittled for it, and suffered outright abuse. Even without going into the actual, physical aspect of this..."just words" does not diminish their impact. As a straight white guy this is the part of the dialogue that I feel no effect of and I can't write anything about it without coming off as either super defensive or dismissive. I'm aware these words hurt, but I also believe the context matters - would these words hurt if they were in a script of South Park? If so, and you were offended, and the writer of said comments apologised and made no further use of that situation, should that person be fired ten years down the line for those comments? It just seemingly ignores a lot of reason for personal growth - especially something so personal thought driven as comedy ("comedy" in this case, because Gunn's jokes weren't funny to begin with), where that person's objectivity on that subject has likely changed alongside raised social acceptance of the issue? (almost demonstratively given Gunn's outspoken socially liberal views on twitter, which reaches back around to this being a strike of censorship) Comparing that to actual, penetrative rape is where it throws me. I, Butthole fucked around with this message at 10:02 on Jul 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:00
|
|
|
Safeword posted:I don't really buy this. For both my sexuality and gender identity I've been the source of a number of vile jokes, belittled for it, and suffered outright abuse. Even without going into the actual, physical aspect of this..."just words" does not diminish their impact. I'm also a member of the LGBT community and I 100% respect your decision to remain steadfast in the stance, I just think it might be an 'agree to disagree' kind of situation w/r/t whether Gunn deserved this harsh a punishment or not. I've had to put up with a lot of vile poo poo in my life, too, but we've come such a long way in ten years that it's hard for me personally to stay too angry at someone who seems to have made an effort to change that behaviour. Hell, even just five years ago it would have been more overall 'acceptable' to make all sorts of poo poo jokes about people within the LGBT community, let alone the kind of poo poo people wouldn't raise a fuss about ten years ago. The other jokes are vile, too, but again the internet has changed a lot in ten years and you could get away with casually throwing out a lot of dumb poo poo then. As for the 'just words' thing, I'd hope nobody here is trying to say that words can't be harmful as gently caress. For me it isn't that what he said were just words, but that there are people in the business and hell even at Disney who have done worse than just make lovely trash jokes, and have hurt people in much more direct ways. It's kinda lovely when one of the people who admitted they did wrong and tried to change get thrown out over people who deserve that punishment more than he does. This is also kind of new territory so there's bound to be some people like Gunn caught in the crossfire of what is and isnt the right kind of outrage to take action over. It's good that people who do bad things in public are facing consequences, like that poo poo with Roseanne was 1000% the right thing to do, for example. Taintrunner posted:Instead, you and others that give him any sense of legitimacy have only enabled, rewarded, and emboldened him to commit further hanus acts of dishonesty and outright lies like he has done to Sam Seder and Chuck Schumer (who is a dirt bag for reasons unrelated to anything Cernovich brought up) and will continue to do so now, with all of Trump Reddit cheering him on. Taint, boi, I'm with you on the Gunn firing but I hella can't get behind you accusing people on the forum of supporting a rapist just because they might be on the fence or disagree with you on whether Disney did the right thing or not. That's a bridge too far imho unless you can somehow find someone actuall defending Mike himself. Like it blows that Mike is the person who resurfaced the tweets, but there are a lot of people who are just learning about the jokes/etc now and you need to let 'em go through whatever process of reactions they're going to have to them, whether it's stuff Gunn's already apologized for or not. Blame Disney if you wanna blame someone for emboldening Mike imo
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:02
|
|
|
Taintrunner posted:Instead, you and others that give him any sense of legitimacy have only enabled, rewarded, and emboldened him to commit further hanus acts of dishonesty and outright lies like he has done to Sam Seder and Chuck Schumer (who is a dirt bag for reasons unrelated to anything Cernovich brought up) and will continue to do so now, with all of Trump Reddit cheering him on. James Gunn isn’t going to jail duder, he’s just not directing a movie. It’s at worst kinda unfair and lovely that it makes awful people feel like they got a win but it’s a rich guy not getting to make a third blockbuster. James Gunn will land on his feet, and at the very least, perhaps this will be a warning shot for people making lovely jokes about molestation in the year 2018.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:03
|
|
|
Gunn's work alone since 2009 is proof that he isn't the same person who wrote lovely, edgy tweets.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:04
|
|
|
Also yeah let's not act like Gunn's career just got taken out behind the shed and shot lmao, he'll be fine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:06
|
|
|
Safeword posted:Don't you dare accuse me of supporting a rapist. I'm not discussing this with you any longer. Doing what a rapist wants is uh, supporting them. You’re literally sitting here typing “it doesn’t matter if it’s actual rapist Mike Cernovich with a long history of making poo poo up that has led to actual violence against innocent bystanders, we have to take it seriously.” Which is precisely what actual rapist Cernovich wants, that legitimacy, no matter what level of scum you acknowledge him as. And you’re giving it to him, after his bullshit has led to a loving pizza parlor getting shot up. Now he’s going to keep digging and making poo poo up and causing more shitshows because he got precisely the result he wanted, while still being an outspoken pro-rape rapist that will face no consequences for it. I’m not discussing poo poo. I’m telling you precisely what is happening here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:07
|
|
|
I, Butthole posted:As a straight white guy this is the part of the dialogue that I feel no effect of and I can't write anything about it without coming off as either super defensive or dismissive. I'm aware these words hurt, but I also believe the context matters - would these words hurt if they were in a script of South Park? If so, and you were offended, and the writer of said comments apologised and made no further use of that situation, should that person be fired ten years down the line for those comments? It just seemingly ignores a lot of reason for personal growth - especially something so personal thought driven as comedy ("comedy" in this case, because Gunn's jokes weren't funny to begin with), where that person's objectivity on that subject has likely changed alongside raised social acceptance of the issue? (almost demonstratively given Gunn's outspoken socially liberal views on twitter, which reaches back around to this being a strike of censorship) South Park is kind of a bad example because there are actual things in a lot of those episodes that are terrible and I have a sneaking suspicion, based on everything I know about Trey and Matt, that they’d happily stick up for most of them. I don’t think it would stick but it is not had to make a very compelling “South Park is terrible and should be cancelled” argument
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:07
|
|
|
esperterra posted:Also yeah let's not act like Gunn's career just got taken out behind the shed and shot lmao, he'll be fine. I mean being publicly fired from a corporation thats gonna own something like 40% of entertainment output is not gonna do him any favours. He's probably not going to be offered gigs with Marvel money any more.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:08
|
|
|
Safeword posted:Don't you dare accuse me of supporting a rapist. I'm not discussing this with you any longer. You haven't been reading posts either, so that should realistically wrap up your time in the thread. If you want to police online discourse for committing or advocating criminal behavior, jumping into bed with Mike Cernovich as your first move means you are now teaming with the worst offenders of all. Not great police work there. If it were up to Mike you'd be hanging from a meat hook, but here you are cheering on a right wing hit job over ten-year old tweets (that Disney knew about) that occurred entirely because Gunn is vocally anti-Trump.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:10
|
|
|
I, Butthole posted:I mean being publicly fired from a corporation thats gonna own something like 40% of entertainment output is not gonna do him any favours. He's probably not going to be offered gigs with Marvel money any more. He won't be doing Marvel money good, I just mean I'm sure he'll land on his feet. Like he won't be run out of the business for this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:10
|
|
|
Even if Gunn specifically ends up okay there is a legitimate question about whether this sets a precedent for how companies handle similar incidents in the future. Like Gunn will probably be fine. A cashier who said something dumb a decade ago on a forum or tweet or whatever, gets doxxed, and then fired over said dumb thing being brought to the attention of their boss I'm less sure about.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:12
|
|
|
It is 100% a slippery slope and I am not looking forward to it. I'm just a hopeful dope that we'll come out on the other side with the right mindset about how to handle the context and time passed in this kind of poo poo. twitter was a mistake
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:14
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:You haven't been reading posts either, so that should realistically wrap up your time in the thread. Why does taking issue with Gunn's comments, and online commentary in general, mean I'm "jumping into bed" with Mike? Taint has explicitly said I was on his side, purely because I'm against Gunn's comments. In a discussion talking about context and bad faith, painting me as rape apologist is the shittiest, seediest thing you could do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:15
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:You haven't been reading posts either, so that should realistically wrap up your time in the thread. If someone came to those tweets organically and thought “oh these are awful James Gunn sucks” and didn’t feel bad when he got booted from Guardians 3, all without learning the origins of the movement, why should their feelings change if they learn that Cernovich is behind it? That shouldn’t change how they feel about what was said, even if they can also understand that he’s an even shittier person.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:16
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:South Park is kind of a bad example because there are actual things in a lot of those episodes that are terrible and I have a sneaking suspicion, based on everything I know about Trey and Matt, that they’d happily stick up for most of them. I don’t think it would stick but it is not had to make a very compelling “South Park is terrible and should be cancelled” argument It's been a while since I've watched any so just *insert any controversial TV show here* I guess The flipside is that Team America is still hella gay-panicy (and came out in 2004) but I'd bet those views aren't defended by them at all
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:16
|
|
|
Raxivace posted:Even if Gunn specifically ends up okay there is a legitimate question about whether this sets a precedent for how companies handle similar incidents in the future. This has been possible and has happened countless times since employers started checking candidates' social media presence. For a brief while, no doubt encouraged in this practice by the economy being bad, some employers were even asking for Facebook passwords. Twitter is essentially a stupid platform to post anything to if you are using your real name and doing anything besides promoting business. It's a huge liability.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:18
|
|
|
esperterra posted:It is 100% a slippery slope and I am not looking forward to it. I'm just a hopeful dope that we'll come out on the other side with the right mindset about how to handle the context and time passed in this kind of poo poo. Again, Disney suspended a Sportscenter anchor for simply criticizing the president literally 6 months ago, honestly, Gunn getting fired isn’t nearly as outrageous as that and nerds only care now because none of them watch Football
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:18
|
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:If someone came to those tweets organically and thought “oh these are awful James Gunn sucks” and didn’t feel bad when he got booted from Guardians 3, all without learning the origins of the movement, why should their feelings change if they learn that Cernovich is behind it? That shouldn’t change how they feel about what was said, even if they can also understand that he’s an even shittier person.  Just because someone is reacting badly to seeing Gunn's tweets does not automatically mean they're supporting or empowering Cernovich. Cernovich I'm sure was banking on people coming in blind to this stuff and getting angry about what they see, not knowing the context/etc or needing more time to form an opinion on it. Him wanting that to happen doesn't mean it's wrong for people to react to seeing this poo poo. Especially a member of a community that some of those jokes were pointed toward. Like yeah it sucks Gunn got canned over poo poo from ten years ago, but drat give people some room to process what they may just be learning about Gunn's past. Just because Safeword may not agree with some of us on whether what happened was good or bad does not a rape apologist make.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:19
|
|
|
Yeah, let me just emphasise here I fully understand why people are leery of firing him (professional blowback, in my opinion, is something that should be enforced for this kind of thing on a regular basis - if only to stymy the awful cultural stuff around it - but outright firing is not the only approach), it's just absolutely infuriating to see people get lumped in with Mike. I didn't even know Mike was the source of this until I was compared to him, and that's just...ugh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:27
|
|
|
Safeword posted:Why does taking issue with Gunn's comments, and online commentary in general, mean I'm "jumping into bed" with Mike? Taint has explicitly said I was on his side, purely because I'm against Gunn's comments. In a discussion talking about context and bad faith, painting me as rape apologist is the shittiest, seediest thing you could do. Put simply, what you should be focusing your attention on is that Twitter is allowing the extremist psychopaths you're actually worried about to flourish virtually unchecked on its platform. By supporting a naked attempt to ruin someone's career for purely political reasons (Mike Cernovich 100% does not care about rape and saying lovely gross things), you've become the textbook definition of a useful idiot. quote:If someone came to those tweets organically and thought “oh these are awful James Gunn sucks” and didn’t feel bad when he got booted from Guardians 3, all without learning the origins of the movement, why should their feelings change if they learn that Cernovich is behind it? That shouldn’t change how they feel about what was said, even if they can also understand that he’s an even shittier person. Context matters, and if you don't know the context of the topic, your opinion on it doesn't matter beyond its usefulness to someone else's agenda.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:28
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:Put simply, what you should be focusing your attention on is that Twitter is allowing the extremist psychopaths you're actually worried about to flourish virtually unchecked on its platform. I agree, when Donald trump criticized Bill Clinton we should have stood proudly behind him and said “I understand that this man is a rapist, but you are also a rapist, and since you are calling him out, in order to be on the right side of this issue we must stand behind this rapist and support him.” Edit: Twitter is run by a guy who really sympathizes with the alt-right so really the only correct thing to do is to never ever ever ever ever read Twitter
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 05:35 |
|
|
DC Murderverse posted:If someone came to those tweets organically and thought “oh these are awful James Gunn sucks” and didn’t feel bad when he got booted from Guardians 3, all without learning the origins of the movement, why should their feelings change if they learn that Cernovich is behind it? That shouldn’t change how they feel about what was said, even if they can also understand that he’s an even shittier person. This is such a massive “if” and wholly off the mark. Nobody would have came to it “organically” forever ago as they were already deleted or they were outright looking for it, whatever the case. It exists solely in the discourse because Gunn is outspoken against Trump, an actual rapist, and Cernovich, an actual rapist, wants to lash out at anyone who speaks out against his rapist hero because he’s a little Nazi shithead rapist. Mike “date rape isn’t real” Cern will never actually leak or uncover anything actually damning or factual because he has a history of being a dishonest provocateur, on multiple occasions, so you can happily never take anything that comes out of his rear end at face value. People keep pretending like he has or he will someday while he still played a large part in boosting poo poo like pizzagate which ended in actual gunshots against innocent pizza parlor employees. That is what is so loving dangerous here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2018 10:34
|
|