[world_peace42]

Cancel culture is not about canceling people who say racist, misogynist, homophobic, etc things. It is about canceling (read: disenfranchising and taking revenge on) straight white males, who are at the bottom (top? intersection? whichever) of the intersectional hierarchy. Kamau Bobb is not a white male, therefore this does not apply. He is receiving the same treatment that any powerful person, regardless of skin color, would have received 10 years ago in the western world: tuck them away until the scandal blows over.

[f38zf5vdt]

What? This event seems to match the collectively assigned definition fine.

"Cancel culture or call-out culture is a modern form of ostracism in which someone is thrust out of social or professional circles – whether it be online, on social media, or in person. Those subject to this ostracism are said to have been "cancelled". The expression "cancel culture" has mostly negative connotations and is commonly used in debates on free speech and censorship.

The notion of cancel culture is a variant on the term call-out culture and constitutes a form of boycotting or shunning involving an individual (often a celebrity) who is deemed to have acted or spoken in a questionable or controversial manner." [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture

[justaman]

I don't agree with the guy above, but take a look at what Nick Cannon said and how he is still employed.

[world_peace42]

That definition is neither empirical, nor is it collectively defined. It is selectively assigned and selectively enforced. And here we are, in a thread where the top level post provides an obvious example.

[f38zf5vdt]

Miriam Webster also seems to agree. [1]

https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/cancel-culture...

[fouric]

Miriam Webster is even further from "collectively defined" than Wikipedia is.

[f38zf5vdt]

I'm more concerned with individuals attempting to rewrite the modern lexicon to their own benefit.

[world_peace42]

Then go have a chat with Jimmy Wales about diversifying the political beliefs of his editors. And good luck.

[world_peace42]

Great, now also link me to a cacophony of Twitter activists who've defined it the same way, I am proven wrong.

But, and of course it's a silly request, can you provide any objective large-scale studies as to who (their demographics) is being canceled, for what categorization, and the net effect of their cancellation? It doesn't matter, granted, because the Wikipedia definition of highly politicized terms is, of course, what counts.

[throwkeep]

Not quite. It's about ideological alignment and purity. The cancel mob just got Antonio García Martínez fired, for example. And they are constantly trying to cancel Glenn Greenwald, a gay man married to a minority POC, and with minority kids.

[world_peace42]

I don't know Antonio García Martínez's ethnicity, but he looks and sounds very much like a straight white male, so I would not consider that a counterexample. Also, certainly there are no absolute laws of who is always targeted and who is never, just clear trends.

However, it is true that to some small degree I am oversimplifying something quite complex, partially because the cited example was James D'Amore. Other examples you might cite include Dave Rubin or Ric Grennell. Certainly gay white men and straight white women (specifically if they are Republican) are targeted. What happened at Disney with the treatment of Gina Carano vs. Krystina Arielle is evidence enough of that.