Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
|
You completely missed my point. I'm not saying that aren't people out there saying stupid things that one can disagree with. I'm saying, why don't you actually engage with what those people are saying? True to form, you have posted a bunch of links to other people complaining about "cancel culture," none of whom appear to engaging with actual people with whom they disagree. For example, your first link leads to a list of academics apparently under fire, the first for telling a Vietnamese to change her name, which sounded to him like an expletive. But who is criticizing him for what? (Presumably that's the person you disagree with, and you think it's ducky for the professor to have said what he said, but who knows?) The second link takes you to a Kevin Williamson piece in the New York Post, enough said. Earlier today I saw that the New York Post had used "surfboards" as a verb to describe what Mark Zuckerberg was up to off a beach in Hawaii, so I've read enough of the New York Post for the day. After the first two, I didn't click on your third link. Should I have?
When I said, "If there is someone out there saying things you disagree with, why not (quote and cite and) respond to them specifically?", what I meant is, instead of complaining about cancel culture in the abstract, and risk sounding like a parody of it, why don't you quote, cite, and respond to one of the people you disagree with. Can you see how linking to Kevin Williamson is not that?
