Cancelling Dr. Seuss

[Wahoo Redux]

The Babylon Bee is banned from Tik Tok, and has already been banned from Twitter for not deleting a tweet. Tik Tok doesn't not believe they need to give a reason and they certainly don't, but I would be boycotting them now in response, except I can't because I've never used them.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jul/5/christian-satire-site-babylon-bee-banned-without-e/

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.

At the same time, a private corporate entity has no obligation to carry content it thinks will damage its image or business, including social media.  Free speech is also the freedom NOT to say something.  I know that enrages some Trumpees.

Seriously?  I see all sorts of things on tv that would not have been accepted in the past.  We must watch different programming.

They didn't used to be able to say pregnant on tv....

This whole thought that we are more easily offended these days is ridiculous.  People have always been offended.

An excellent point.  I should have been clearer.  Lots of stuff is over the top.  Consider Eddie Izzard.
Think of the Dumb and Dumber franchise.

Above I was specifically thinking about some of the gendered and racial jokes in the media I mentioned, particularly considering that these were considered mainstream "harmless" satire.  I think all three of those sources were excellent examples caricature regarding stereotypes and cultural divisions ("Excuse me, stewardess, but I speak jive") which I think might generate a lot of heat if these sources were produced today.

I suppose there is 1998's Something About Mary (which really is hilarious) jokes about genitals caught in zippers, black step-fathers who are clearly middleclass but very "urban," and developmental disability----but that was dangerous territory.

Maybe I am wrong.  I just see a bit of a seachange for what we think is offensive lately.

[mahagonny]

The Babylon Bee is a satiric broadside against the woke culture and the woke culture is famously humorless. It's like being in the stuffiest church you've ever attended. So Twitter hates them.

[mahagonny]

The Babylon Bee is banned from Tik Tok, and has already been banned from Twitter for not deleting a tweet. Tik Tok doesn't not believe they need to give a reason and they certainly don't, but I would be boycotting them now in response, except I can't because I've never used them.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/jul/5/christian-satire-site-babylon-bee-banned-without-e/

We are an increasingly offendable society.  I cannot imagine a Merry Prankster bus journey, the movies Animal House or Airplane, or the jokes in The National Lampoon being tolerated these days.

At the same time, a private corporate entity has no obligation to carry content it thinks will damage its image or business, including social media.  Free speech is also the freedom NOT to say something.  I know that enrages some Trumpees.

Seriously?  I see all sorts of things on tv that would not have been accepted in the past.  We must watch different programming.

They didn't used to be able to say pregnant on tv....

This whole thought that we are more easily offended these days is ridiculous.  People have always been offended.

The things that we are supposed to be offended by shift and in retrospect it seems almost arbitrary. But we have always been offended. 'In olden days a glimpse of stocking was looked on as something shocking...' but now with society so polarized the power struggle between political left and right and the dominance of the left mean that the same things are offensive or not offensive according to who says them. Double standard. Language and speech infractions are weaponized to the service of the culture war. For example, if a conservative were to say 'My daughter is talking about changing genders and wife I were horrified' he is branded a bigot. Whereas if Ibram X. Kendi says (he did) it isn't even news. The political left and most of the media start out with the idea that all republicans need to show they are not bigoted to be acceptable company and all democrats are assumed to be trying their utmost not to be bigoted, as evidenced by their party affiliation.

ETA: And along with that the idea being pushed is that bigotry in any form is the worst thing human beings do to each other, which isn't necessarily true at all.

[Wahoo Redux]

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Thousands Defend Professor Who Wished Queen Agonizing Death

Nearly 4,000 people have signed a petition defending Uju Anya, a Carnegie Mellon University professor whose viral tweet about a dying queen Elizabeth II — wishing her "excruciating" pain — drew scorn but also touched off a debate about free speech on college campuses.

<snip>

"As colleagues at other institutions, one thing that sticks out to us is that universities have nothing to gain by calling out individual employees on free speech—especially when they can be seen doing it selectively—as is the case for CMU. Professor Anya's Twitter clearly states: 'Views are mine,'" the letter reads in part.

I still think Anya is one sick lady, but I am very happy to see people supporting her right to privately express her opinion, no matter how shocking and offensive.  This is America, after all.

However, I am irritated and saddened to see the SJW's as always falling back upon race as a debate point when the furor is really not about the speaker's race but about the speaker's words, essentially turning an obnoxious and insensitive person into a martyr. 

"Yet, her institution took up the charge to admonish a Black woman professor, calling her response to her lived experiences of the real and tangible impacts of colonialism and white supremacy, 'offensive and objectionable.' This is unacceptable and dehumanizing.

At the same time, Anya's supporters make a very good point:

"Where is the space for this sort of discourse if not within the free speech that academia purports to uplift?"

[Langue_doc]

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Thousands Defend Professor Who Wished Queen Agonizing Death

Nearly 4,000 people have signed a petition defending Uju Anya, a Carnegie Mellon University professor whose viral tweet about a dying queen Elizabeth II — wishing her "excruciating" pain — drew scorn but also touched off a debate about free speech on college campuses.

<snip>

"As colleagues at other institutions, one thing that sticks out to us is that universities have nothing to gain by calling out individual employees on free speech—especially when they can be seen doing it selectively—as is the case for CMU. Professor Anya's Twitter clearly states: 'Views are mine,'" the letter reads in part.

I still think Anya is one sick lady, but I am very happy to see people supporting her right to privately express her opinion, no matter how shocking and offensive.  This is America, after all.

However, I am irritated and saddened to see the SJW's as always falling back upon race as a debate point when the furor is really not about the speaker's race but about the speaker's words, essentially turning an obnoxious and insensitive person into a martyr. 

"Yet, her institution took up the charge to admonish a Black woman professor, calling her response to her lived experiences of the real and tangible impacts of colonialism and white supremacy, 'offensive and objectionable.' This is unacceptable and dehumanizing.

At the same time, Anya's supporters make a very good point:

"Where is the space for this sort of discourse if not within the free speech that academia purports to uplift?"

In addition to being "shocking and offensive", her statements on the impact of colonialism are not borne out by facts.
https://www.britannica.com/place/Nigeria/Independent-Nigeria

If she had expressed similar sentiments about current rulers/people in power in Nigeria, she would most likely be in prison or worse.

It is disheartening to see academics rush to the defense of people like Anya, the California professor who falsely accused the security guard of racism, and the NYU professor who harassed her student and who was subsequently suspended. Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

[apl68]

One of the most disturbing aspects of our current culture wars is that so many seem to feel that because they belong to some disadvantaged group, they are therefore entitled to claim the privilege of exemption from any sort of expectations of civility or ordinary consideration for other human beings.  It shows a profound lack of self-awareness that they either don't recognize how their attitudes stem from hatred toward others, or else feel that their hate--as opposed to the hate that they themselves have experienced--is justified.  This is the sort of thing that helps put the "war" in culture war.

[Wahoo Redux]

Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

[marshwiggle]

Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

I think the point is that how much coverage something gets is more determined by the identities of the perpetrator and victim than the egregiousness of the crime. (In this case, the identity of the attacker makes it something no-one wants to talk about.)

[mahagonny]

Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

Does that include Ilhan Omar? I haven't heard her weigh in yet.

[nebo113]

Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

Does that include Ilhan Omar? I haven't heard her weigh in yet.

You are soooo predictable.  LOL.

[Wahoo Redux]

I think the point is that how much coverage something gets is more determined by the identities of the perpetrator and victim than the egregiousness of the crime. (In this case, the identity of the attacker makes it something no-one wants to talk about.)

This has gotten a lot of coverage.

Biden is considering sanctions against Iran.

What would we talk about?

This is a result of the fatwa against Rushdie and I suspect the suspect is mentally ill.

[Wahoo Redux]

Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

Does that include Ilhan Omar? I haven't heard her weigh in yet.

You are soooo predictable.  LOL.

Later our friend will feel victimized when someone asserts that the Republicans harbor racists in their camp.

[Langue_doc]

Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

I think the point is that how much coverage something gets is more determined by the identities of the perpetrator and victim than the egregiousness of the crime. (In this case, the identity of the attacker makes it something no-one wants to talk about.)

It's not only the coverage but the failure to ascertain that the facts posted are accurate. In the case of Anya, for instance, people have rushed to support her without checking to see if the facts are indeed accurate and if Anya's compatriots in Nigeria share her opinion.

BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/world suggests that this is not the case for at least one segment of the population.

Posted at 12:5012:50
Nigerian Anglicans remember 'courageous' Queen

Tamara Ebiwei

BBC News Pidgin

Scroll all the way to the end of the page for the report:

Hundreds of people packed out a remembrance service in Abuja for Queen Elizabeth lI organised by the Church of Nigeria Anglican Communion.

Rev Ali Buba Lamido, Dean of the Church of Nigeria, said that as the head of the Anglican Communion, the Queen was also "the head of our church".

Others described her as "lovable, soft spoken and courageous".

One of those at the service, Saratu Beatrice Chidoko, told the BBC that she "admired the Queen as one who loved colours".

"I am attracted to the Queen's dressing," she added.

British High Commissioner to Nigeria Catriona Laing and Defence Attache Matt Munro were also at the service.

Prayers were said for the Queen's soul to find eternal rest and those present also prayed for King Charles III.

This is particularly disheartening because part of our academic training is to check our sources and also to make sure that whoever we are championing has presented the correct facts as opposed to merely flinging accusations as in the case of Alex Jones.

As for Salman Rushdie although

...it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

the absence of strong condemnations by academics/universities is telling (see marshwiggle's comments).

[jimbogumbo]

Far more egregious is the silence on the attack on Salman Rushdie.

I've seen a couple of comments about this.  To be fair, what is there to say?

We're all horrified and angered.  Any organization can condemn the crime, but I think it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

I think the point is that how much coverage something gets is more determined by the identities of the perpetrator and victim than the egregiousness of the crime. (In this case, the identity of the attacker makes it something no-one wants to talk about.)

It's not only the coverage but the failure to ascertain that the facts posted are accurate. In the case of Anya, for instance, people have rushed to support her without checking to see if the facts are indeed accurate and if Anya's compatriots in Nigeria share her opinion.

BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/world suggests that this is not the case for at least one segment of the population.

Posted at 12:5012:50
Nigerian Anglicans remember 'courageous' Queen

Tamara Ebiwei

BBC News Pidgin

Scroll all the way to the end of the page for the report:

Hundreds of people packed out a remembrance service in Abuja for Queen Elizabeth lI organised by the Church of Nigeria Anglican Communion.

Rev Ali Buba Lamido, Dean of the Church of Nigeria, said that as the head of the Anglican Communion, the Queen was also "the head of our church".

Others described her as "lovable, soft spoken and courageous".

One of those at the service, Saratu Beatrice Chidoko, told the BBC that she "admired the Queen as one who loved colours".

"I am attracted to the Queen's dressing," she added.

British High Commissioner to Nigeria Catriona Laing and Defence Attache Matt Munro were also at the service.

Prayers were said for the Queen's soul to find eternal rest and those present also prayed for King Charles III.

This is particularly disheartening because part of our academic training is to check our sources and also to make sure that whoever we are championing has presented the correct facts as opposed to merely flinging accusations as in the case of Alex Jones.

As for Salman Rushdie although

...it is a given that the attack is condemned by all moral people.

the absence of strong condemnations by academics/universities is telling (see marshwiggle's comments).

Many writers have (see Twitter) including Stephen King, J. K. Rowling and the Writters Guild of America

Among academics:
Tim Winter, Islamic Scholar at the University of Cambridge
Juan Cole, Professor of History, University of Michigan
Daniel O'Gorman, Literature, Oxford

[jimbogumbo]

Sorry for the double. Also

Kathy Kiely, Lee Hills chair of free press studies at the University of Missouri
Tracy Higgins, Law, Fordham
PEN America