The world has become too fragile

[dualshowman]

On 12/14/2020 at 5:17 PM, MTH said:

I hate pro sports anymore...

This. The spotlight is too bright, too hot, and too revealing. 

On 12/14/2020 at 5:31 PM, Kayen said:

ITT: People upset at "cancel culture". 

Personally I don't think respect for one another is something to be upset about, and as with anything due diligence is always required. Art or not, and especially when said art is supposed to be an homage. 

This is not a bubble wrapped planet.

This is not woke culture. 

This is not left wing, right wing. 

It's just respect. 

I see this point. Respect is, unfortunately, vague enough that some on the left, some on the right, those self-described as 'woke' might say that they don't care about garnering respect as much as they care about the truest, purest representation of a thing, for good or evil. Asking the experts the most succinct questions about accomplishing the most representative thing in the most accurate way in no way presupposes respect for said thing. Maybe someone just likes the process. Certainly, I would hate to assume that someone DIDN'T have an agenda in today's world (sarcasm font).

[CJ Boiss]

1 hour ago, dualshowman said:

I have and will continue to enjoy your posts on this topic, but I respectfully disagree that nobody is cancelling Holtby. If he is accused of cultural appropriation for paying homage through honest, although ignorant and inaccurate, artwork and the climate is such that he feels moved to apologize for his honest ignorance, I believe there is at least a toe over the line of cancellation. I have yet to read or hear of any other professional athlete going as far as this to correct a wrong regarding logos, artwork or similar. Have any of the member of the NFL Washington Football Club or MLB Cleveland Baseball Club apologized for perpetuating known derogatory logos and word marks? 

I'm curious, what do you consider "cancelling".

Is it inaccurate criticisms and overreactions being thrown around on social media? Is it that Holtby decided to redo his mask? Is it that he publicly apologized for messing up?

Because, Holtby is still playing for the Canucks. He's not abandoning his mask design, he's redoing it to be better than it was before. And publicly apologizing for your mistakes, honest or not, takes an incredible level of character. Make no mistake, nobody forced him to say anything, Holtby could just as easily have said and done nothing and all this would have blown over by the time the season starts.

I am genuinely confused as to why anyone would think he's been "cancelled".

[CJ Boiss]

5 minutes ago, coopaloop1234 said:

Eh, there's enough twitter responses that are upset at Holtby. It's not as massive as some things that have popped up, but to say it's clear of any cancel culture isn't true.

Same question I asked dual: what do you mean when you say "cancel culture"?

Quote

I still think it's unnecessary. If you want to hit a super authentic look I think collaboration is recommended. But stating it's a necessity I don't agree with.

You can't be authentic if you get the details wrong. Consulting with experts, if you aren't one yourself, is the best way to ensure you get the details right.

Quote

See now the goalposts have shifted. It's now OK if you grew up surrounded by it. Alright, that's fine.

What's the take on Europeans or Asian countries appropriating that music culture as well? Shouldn't this fall into the wheelhouse of unacceptable usage to you?

No, it's that Eminem is an expert in part because he grew up with it. He doesn't (necessarily) need to talk to people from the black community to ensure that his art is authentic, because he is an expert in his own right. Eminem is also very aware of where his sits in the conversation, contributes to the culture with his art, and doesn't just parasitically siphon from it (Elvis, similarly, used his success to contribute to the black community and fight against systems that disadvantaged black people). Simply growing up beside, but not in, a culture doesn't mean you'll know enough to create authentic art from that culture.

So far as European and Asian countries mimicking music created by African Americans, eh, doesn't feel great to me. But that physical distance, the lack of historical oppression within those countries (more specifically, Asian countries) changes the context of the situation. Like I said before, nobody creates in a vacuum. I'm not equipped enough to say more on that matter.

Quote

So what was your take on Miller's Vancouver mask? There was zero outcry and controversy in 2014 when Miller commissioned a white American to do this mask without any input from the local first nations community.

Design was mostly created by Miller and the expanded upon from Bishop Designs.

https://ingoalmag.com/masks/first-nations-art-adorns-millers-first-canucks-mask/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjcjnAJ79DM

At the time? I didn't think anything of it, because I didn't pay attention to it. It wasn't at the forefront of popular social issues, and I hadn't done much of anything to educate myself on the issue of cultural appropriation. It seems that Miller made the same mistake that Holtby did, it just wasn't picked up by social media and flew under the radar. But that doesn't mean he didn't make a mistake, or that the criticisms made of Holtby's mask are unwarranted.

Quote

I still don't agree on this gatekeeping of art. These imposed, and always shifting, barriers to whom can use what is so counter productive of being inclusive that it's leaning towards a type of segregation.

You see the same thing with gatekeeping hairstyles, or venues, or dances, clothes, or whatever. It feels like what a good amount of people took from trying to do the right thing and it's manifested itself into this unnecessary decisive stance of who's allowed to do what solely based off of the colour of their skin. Shit, you see people get blasted for wearing kimono's solely because they aren't Japanese.

It's such a nonsense type of mentality that it boggles my mind that people gobble this up so readily.

It's not gatekeeping, it's about maintaining what are (effectively) professional standards. It's about being respectful of the source material. And it's not equivalent to hairstyle or clothes (it is more similar to dance, as that is another kind of art). Art is a moment in time, and takes a level of expertise to create, which usually brings with it appropriate respect for the original material. Hair and dress are more like a living document, a way of telling the world around you who you are and where you come from, and you don't need to know anything about where it came from or what it means in order to wear it.

People don't like to see their cultures get commodified and paraded about in an inauthentic way, because that almost always results in people confusing the stereotypical facsimile for the reality. And when your culture has been so heavily damaged, as is the case with American First Nations, that's a serious problem. It's less of an issue for Japan, because Japanese culture is alive and well in a country with over 126 million Japanese people living in it. It's less of an issue for Americans, because American culture has been exported across the entire world in an unprecedented display of cultural imperialism.

[CJ Boiss]

23 minutes ago, CJ Boiss said:

There is a great deal of thought that has been given to Eminem/Elvis type situations in the creation of art. The general consensus is that the music they made is what they grew up with, and they interacted with the community in an authentic way. There's a great video all about it that i'll link to later, but basically, they were experts in the culture because they were raised in and alongside it, so the art they created was authentic.

Anyways, here's the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBD1AYOMqmE

Most relevant part (11:20 - 16:27): https://youtu.be/kBD1AYOMqmE?t=680

I'd recommend watching the whole video, especially if you like music, because it's very interesting and covers a lot of ground. Highlights include:

• Country music, as a modern genre, was astroturfed by Henry Ford because he hated jazz, as it fostered a more liberal attitude with regards to alcohol, tobacco, and sex; things he associated with African Americans, "recent immigrants", and "the international Jew". (Henry Ford was a huge asshole)
• Finding white people to mimic the sounds and styles of other cultures, as a way to bring them into the mainstream, has been a conscious decision of  people within the music industry for a very long time. (Hound Dog and Tutti Frutti being prime examples)
• Rock, as a music genre, was started by black people
• R&B was a politically correct remarketing of the term "race music", so that the record industry could continue pretending they weren't being racist by labelling any music created by a black group the exact same thing, regardless of what the music actually was
• Egyptian Jingle Bells (yes, that Jingle Bells)

[dualshowman]

14 minutes ago, CJ Boiss said:

I'm curious, what do you consider "cancelling".

Is it inaccurate criticisms and overreactions being thrown around on social media? Is it that Holtby decided to redo his mask? Is it that he publicly apologized for messing up?

Because, Holtby is still playing for the Canucks. He's not abandoning his mask design, he's redoing it to be better than it was before. And publicly apologizing for your mistakes, honest or not, takes an incredibly level of character. Make no mistake, nobody forced him to say anything, Holtby could just as easily have said and done nothing and all this would have blown over by the time the season starts.

I am genuinely confused as to why anyone would think he's been "cancelled".

Agreed concerning his character. Agreed concerning the mask redo and all of the positive consequence of the attention this brings to the subject matter.

Yes: I cannot abide that a single, solid, heartfelt and reformative apology is not enough of an apology for the obtuse Twitter users with their obtuse replies. It may be a matter of semantics, but if one person casts any aspersions toward Holby or the mask artist after such a genuine apology, this is most certainly 'cancelling'. Perhaps I would have be in better service if I had explained when the 'cancelling' took place. The article isn't cancelling. The owner(s) of the original artwork are not the folks cancelling. Those that pile on after everything has already been set in place to correct the mistake are the one's that are cancelling. 

I'm not sure we've reached the point where everyone must universally agree that a person has been cancelled in order for them to actually be cancelled. Cancelling is a concept, not a title, right? 

Bill Cosby wrote some funny material. Bill Cosby did awful, non-consensual things to women. Someone still hasn't cancelled him, I'm sure. 

[Chenner29]

And now Holtby's wife had to shut down all of her social media because of online harassment - just a week ago, she used social media to help them get their tortoises across the border.

I doubt she had anything to do with the conception and design of the artwork.

[CJ Boiss]

23 minutes ago, dualshowman said:

Agreed concerning his character. Agreed concerning the mask redo and all of the positive consequence of the attention this brings to the subject matter.

Yes: I cannot abide that a single, solid, heartfelt and reformative apology is not enough of an apology for the obtuse Twitter users with their obtuse replies. It may be a matter of semantics, but if one person casts any aspersions toward Holby or the mask artist after such a genuine apology, this is most certainly 'cancelling'. Perhaps I would have be in better service if I had explained when the 'cancelling' took place. The article isn't cancelling. The owner(s) of the original artwork are not the folks cancelling. Those that pile on after everything has already been set in place to correct the mistake are the one's that are cancelling. 

I'm not sure we've reached the point where everyone must universally agree that a person has been cancelled in order for them to actually be cancelled. Cancelling is a concept, not a title, right? 

Bill Cosby wrote some funny material. Bill Cosby did awful, non-consensual things to women. Someone still hasn't cancelled him, I'm sure. 

There's the miscommunication. "Cancelling" is not a concept. It is social and professional ostracism, with social and professional consequences that are clear and measurable.

A right-wing pundit that gets "cancelled" by left-wing pundits, but suffers no social ostracism from their viewers and no professional consequences from their employer, has not been cancelled.

When a draft pick gets cancelled, the team that chose them may renounce their rights. When a hockey player gets cancelled, he may get suspended by the league, and released by his team. Clear-cut social ostracism and measurable professional consequences.

Bill Cosby was cancelled. He was largely abandoned by fans and public opinion, and lost out on a variety of professional opportunities as employers dropped him or refused to work with him.

Holtby received some very mild criticism on social media, and... that's all. Being criticized, accurately or otherwise, is not the same thing as being "cancelled".

People harassing Holtby and his wife is not "cancel culture", it's online trolls. Fundamentally, it's "angry village/bully the Other" mob mentality. That shit has been around since forever.

[Mike24]

What I’ve learned or already knew from this thread.  
Holtby is a decent human being. A better one than me. Social media is a complete cesspool. I refuse to join it unless this is considered social media. Is it? Asking for a friend.

 Maybe the real solution is to “cancel” social media? Think about it.
Since we touched on music I’m thinking about John Lennon’s Imagine.  Rewrite it for today “Imagine there’s no Twitter no Facebook too... It’s easy if you try imagine all the people you wouldn’t hate..... (Original line) no wars 

looks like wars are encouraged on social media though it claims to bring folks together. I believe it does more to divide.

But sadly too many folks live or die with it they think it’s their personal stage.  

[dualshowman]

On 12/14/2020 at 6:56 PM, Chenner29 said:

And now Holtby's wife had to shut down all of her social media because of online harassment - just a week ago, she used social media to help them get their tortoises across the border.

I doubt she had anything to do with the conception and design of the artwork.

Here we go...

On 12/14/2020 at 6:57 PM, CJ Boiss said:

"Cancelling" is not a concept. It is social and professional ostracism, with social and professional consequences that are clear and measurable.

I came here for the goalie talk, but stayed for the argument about semantics?1? Fuck my life. 

I'm not at all setting out to make you wrong about this or me right about this, but on this I'm pretty certain: Informally, 'cancelling' someone is actualizing the idea of 'cancel': 'Cancel' is the concept; 'Ostracism' and 'Social and consequences' are the actualization of the concept. So, yes, some miscommunication. You, however, quite literally just used a concrete example of an Oxford definition of 'concept' -  "a plan or intention; a conception'. First, a person thinks about hating Holtby because of mask artwork (the 'cancel' concept), then you go on Twitter and write a shitty reply after an apology (the actualized 'cancel'). The intention by some (see above quoted post) is to make Holtby feel like a complete pile of shit and ostracize him. Hurt his feelings. Hurt his wife's feelings. Make them feel the pain, the anger, the hate. This guy hasn't even suited up for a game in Vancouver...

Bill Cosby is no longer working, from what I understand. Louis C.K. is working, from what I understand. There are gradations to 'cancelled', just as with anything else.

[CJ Boiss]

27 minutes ago, dualshowman said:

I'm not at all setting out to make you wrong about this or me right about this, but on this I'm pretty certain: Informally, 'cancelling' someone is actualizing the idea of 'cancel': 'Cancel' is the concept; 'Ostracism' and 'Social and consequences' are the actualization of the concept. So, yes, some miscommunication. You, however, quite literally just used a concrete example of an Oxford definition of 'concept' -  "a plan or intention; a conception'. First, a person thinks about hating Holtby because of mask artwork (the 'cancel' concept), then you go on Twitter and write a shitty reply after an apology (the actualized 'cancel'). The intention by some (see above quoted post) is to make Holtby feel like a complete pile of shit and ostracize him. Hurt his feelings. Hurt his wife's feelings. Make them feel the pain, the anger, the hate. This guy hasn't even suited up for a game in Vancouver...

Bill Cosby is no longer working, from what I understand. Louis C.K. is working, from what I understand. There are gradations to 'cancelled', just as with anything else.

"Cancelling" is a combination of social ostracization and professional consequences. Someone has to meet both criteria on some level, however small, to be "cancelled".

Holtby has not, and will not, suffer in his career for this. He just won't. It's not a big deal, nobody is ever going to say "you know, I'd sign/trade for Holtby, but that whole mask thing, yeesh..." So, on that alone, Holtby is not being cancelled.

Social ostracization though, requires widespread participation. It has to be social. A few people saying means things about someone to make them feel bad is not social ostracization; it's bullying, which, admittedly, can result in people ostracizing you in small and insular environments (like a school). But a few assholes on the internet trying to bully Holtby and his wife is not social ostracization.

This isn't "cancel culture". This is a few assholes on the internet being blown wildly out of proportion.

[CJ Boiss]

59 minutes ago, Mike24 said:

What I’ve learned or already knew from this thread.  
Holtby is a decent human being. A better one than me. Social media is a complete cesspool. I refuse to join it unless this is considered social media. Is it? Asking for a friend.
 

 Maybe the real solution is to “cancel” social media? Think about it.
Since we touched on music I’m thinking about John Lennon’s Imagine.  Rewrite it for today “Imagine there’s no Twitter no Facebook too... It’s easy if you try imagine all the people you wouldn’t hate..... (Original line) no wars 

looks like wars are encouraged on social media though it claims to bring folks together. I believe it does more to divide.  

But sadly too many folks live or die with it they think it’s their personal stage.  

I have a feeling that, at some point, history will look back on social media as one of the greatest mistakes we ever made as a species.

It can be used for good purposes, and if you heavily curate your profiles you can avoid a lot of the shit that goes on, but most people don't do that.

[Mike24]

1 hour ago, CJ Boiss said:

I have a feeling that, at some point, history will look back on social media as one of the greatest mistakes we ever made as a species.

It can be used for good purposes, and if you heavily curate your profiles you can avoid a lot of the shit that goes on, but most people don't do that.

Agreed

[HP29]

5 hours ago, Peter36 said:

@HP29 is one confused guy

Hey man, what's your fucking point?

I've opted not to post a response thus far, as I felt I didn't have anything concise or thoughtful enough to make a meaningful contribution to this thread. I did, however, use the reaction button that is available for everyone to use at their discretion, to express my confusion over specific thought processes and conclusions. I'm reading along here, reacting, as many others have done. Do you have anything to offer to this conversation, or am I some sort of backdoor to a narrow worldview you're too chickenshit to actually share?

[Mike24]

 @HP29
Easy Friend, easy....  

Don’t let it bother you.  You can react to all posts as you see fit using the systems  of this websites.  
 

What’s concerning to me is someone is keeping score and calling you on it. 

Not cool....

[HP29]

9 minutes ago, Mike24 said:

 @HP29
Easy Friend, easy....  

Don’t let it bother you.  You can react to all posts as you see fit using the systems  of this websites.  
 

What’s concerning to me is someone is keeping score and calling you on it. 

Not cool....

Thanks!

Yes, EXACTLY...

[Mike24]

@HP29 Call em as I see em. 

Butl Let’s ALL try and remember we are a community. A community that loves all things goalie. Goalie gear,  masks , strapping techniques (porn in any other message board IMO) , stories about games won and lost. Hoarding old gear....  etc 

Point being our differences fail in comparison to what we all agree on. So let’s all try and focus on that. That’s what will continue to make this board great for us.  I’d rather the convo go back to bitching about graphics on new gear. And topics like that.  Let’s not beat each other up.  The world has done that for us, enough.  

[Chenner29]

A couple things here folks.
I've been monitoring this thread for a little bit. 
I don't mean this as a threat, as you've all been keeping it more or less on the civil side of things. 
Let's make sure it stays that way.

Second thing is my contribution to this discussion -

The first thing that came to my mind when this news broke was to compare it to non-native speakers/readers asking tattoo artists for work featuring Chinese or Japanese lettering/characters.  It was kind of a big trend a little while ago, I don't know if it's still a thing.
I think we've all seen the LOL threads on Reddit or elsewhere of someone meaning to put something like "Warrior" in Japanese and getting "Hamburger" instead.
In fact, I've googled a quick-hits list.
As an Asian-American (although admittedly, I am very westernized), I do not feel like my culture has been "appropriated" in these instances - but it does underscore an importance to check with someone before committing anything to ink/paint/print. 

I do not know anything about First Nations culture. 
But I can imagine scenarios where DaveArt unwittingly corrupts an important image because he did not run it by anyone.
As an example, I didn't know it was a sin in certain sub-sects of Islam to depict the prophet Muhammad...until I watched that episode of South Park.
Now imagine if that level of mistake was made at the NHL level...what a PR nightmare

 

And a little levity -

The last time that I can recall people flipping out about a goalie mask was Bryzgalov's Star Wars mask in Philly.
Yoda had an orange lightsaber until fans saw it and LucasFilm found out.

https://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2013/3/4/4063392/ilya-bryzgalov-star-wars-mask-lightsaber-flyers

[Peter36]

On 12/14/2020 at 10:22 PM, HP29 said:

Hey man, what's your fucking point?

I've opted not to post a response thus far, as I felt I didn't have anything concise or thoughtful enough to make a meaningful contribution to this thread. I did, however, use the reaction button that is available for everyone to use at their discretion, to express my confusion over specific thought processes and conclusions. I'm reading along here, reacting, as many others have done. Do you have anything to offer to this conversation, or am I some sort of backdoor to a narrow worldview you're too chickenshit to actually share?

Calm down, I'm joking...just thought it was funny how many confused faces I saw under posts . 

On 12/14/2020 at 10:45 PM, Mike24 said:

 @HP29
Easy Friend, easy....  

Don’t let it bother you.  You can react to all posts as you see fit using the systems  of this websites.  
 

What’s concerning to me is someone is keeping score and calling you on it. 

Not cool....

How am I keeping score? I just make a little comment because I saw that and I thought it was a funny. Don't take everything so seriously.

[coopaloop1234]

On 12/14/2020 at 6:06 PM, CJ Boiss said:

Same question I asked dual: what do you mean when you say "cancel culture"?

You can't be authentic if you get the details wrong. Consulting with experts, if you aren't one yourself, is the best way to ensure you get the details right.

No, it's that Eminem is an expert in part because he grew up with it. He doesn't (necessarily) need to talk to people from the black community to ensure that his art is authentic, because he is an expert in his own right. Eminem is also very aware of where his sits in the conversation, contributes to the culture with his art, and doesn't just parasitically siphon from it (Elvis, similarly, used his success to contribute to the black community and fight against systems that disadvantaged black people). Simply growing up beside, but not in, a culture doesn't mean you'll know enough to create authentic art from that culture.

So far as European and Asian countries mimicking music created by African Americans, eh, doesn't feel great to me. But that physical distance, the lack of historical oppression within those countries (more specifically, Asian countries) changes the context of the situation. Like I said before, nobody creates in a vacuum. I'm not equipped enough to say more on that matter.

At the time? I didn't think anything of it, because I didn't pay attention to it. It wasn't at the forefront of popular social issues, and I hadn't done much of anything to educate myself on the issue of cultural appropriation. It seems that Miller made the same mistake that Holtby did, it just wasn't picked up by social media and flew under the radar. But that doesn't mean he didn't make a mistake, or that the criticisms made of Holtby's mask are unwarranted.

It's not gatekeeping, it's about maintaining what are (effectively) professional standards. It's about being respectful of the source material. And it's not equivalent to hairstyle or clothes (it is more similar to dance, as that is another kind of art). Art is a moment in time, and takes a level of expertise to create, which usually brings with it appropriate respect for the original material. Hair and dress are more like a living document, a way of telling the world around you who you are and where you come from, and you don't need to know anything about where it came from or what it means in order to wear it.

People don't like to see their cultures get commodified and paraded about in an inauthentic way, because that almost always results in people confusing the stereotypical facsimile for the reality. And when your culture has been so heavily damaged, as is the case with American First Nations, that's a serious problem. It's less of an issue for Japan, because Japanese culture is alive and well in a country with over 126 million Japanese people living in it. It's less of an issue for Americans, because American culture has been exported across the entire world in an unprecedented display of cultural imperialism.

This isn't the first time I've had a discussion on this topic online/irl, and it sure isn't the first time the other side I converse with falls back onto this arbitrary rule set of who's allowed to do what, based off of skin colour, power structure, and/or "who'd had it worse".

I've always seen it as a cop out for these social rule sets that always seem to be evolving. Instead of a define rule set that should be applicable to all, the people I argue with twist what's allowed to meet their narrative.

It's not like the baseline thought process is coming from a place of malice either. It's just that it's warped into this "Opression Olympics" that's pitting everyone against each other to who's had it worse.

How is that helping or joining people together?

It's not, it's creating further divide and perpetuating the current social issues we're having. There's plenty of examples too. We can take our discussion here, we can take the gatekeeping in the black community as some people don't have dark enough skin, we can look at TERFS, or other exclusion of specific groups in the LGBT community.

It's asinine to me. What's the purpose/end goal?

On 12/14/2020 at 6:06 PM, CJ Boiss said:

Anyways, here's the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBD1AYOMqmE

Most relevant part (11:20 - 16:27): https://youtu.be/kBD1AYOMqmE?t=680

I'd recommend watching the whole video, especially if you like music, because it's very interesting and covers a lot of ground. Highlights include:

• Country music, as a modern genre, was astroturfed by Henry Ford because he hated jazz, as it fostered a more liberal attitude with regards to alcohol, tobacco, and sex; things he associated with African Americans, "recent immigrants", and "the international Jew". (Henry Ford was a huge asshole)
• Finding white people to mimic the sounds and styles of other cultures, as a way to bring them into the mainstream, has been a conscious decision of  people within the music industry for a very long time. (Hound Dog and Tutti Frutti being prime examples)
• Rock, as a music genre, was started by black people
• R&B was a politically correct remarketing of the term "race music", so that the record industry could continue pretending they weren't being racist by labelling any music created by a black group the exact same thing, regardless of what the music actually was
• Egyptian Jingle Bells (yes, that Jingle Bells)

I'll give this a watch when I get home tonight. I'm curious.

On 12/14/2020 at 6:56 PM, Chenner29 said:

And now Holtby's wife had to shut down all of her social media because of online harassment - just a week ago, she used social media to help them get their tortoises across the border.

I doubt she had anything to do with the conception and design of the artwork.

Are you surprised?

On 12/14/2020 at 10:22 PM, HP29 said:

Hey man, what's your fucking point?

I've opted not to post a response thus far, as I felt I didn't have anything concise or thoughtful enough to make a meaningful contribution to this thread. I did, however, use the reaction button that is available for everyone to use at their discretion, to express my confusion over specific thought processes and conclusions. I'm reading along here, reacting, as many others have done. Do you have anything to offer to this conversation, or am I some sort of backdoor to a narrow worldview you're too chickenshit to actually share?

The joke

________

 

Your head

[MTH]

It's another social media pile on. 

Everyone get on this! Hurry!

[HP29]

On 12/15/2020 at 10:39 AM, coopaloop1234 said:

This isn't the first time I've had a discussion on this topic online/irl, and it sure isn't the first time the other side I converse with falls back onto this arbitrary rule set of who's allowed to do what, based off of skin colour, power structure, and/or "who'd had it worse".

I've always seen it as a cop out for these social rule sets that always seem to be evolving. Instead of a define rule set that should be applicable to all, the people I argue with twist what's allowed to meet their narrative.

It's not like the baseline thought process is coming from a place of malice either. It's just that it's warped into this "Opression Olympics" that's pitting everyone against each other to who's had it worse.

How is that helping or joining people together?

It's not, it's creating further divide and perpetuating the current social issues we're having. There's plenty of examples too. We can take our discussion here, we can take the gatekeeping in the black community as some people don't have dark enough skin, we can look at TERFS, or other exclusion of specific groups in the LGBT community.

It's asinine to me. What's the purpose/end goal?

I'll give this a watch when I get home tonight. I'm curious.

Are you surprised?

The joke

________

 

Your head

Indigenous Peoples have been raped of their culture for decades. This is an ongoing issue, that @CJ Boiss has eloquently highlighted in a number of ways, and frankly, everything tracks. This is misappropriation, that has been handled in what I think is a delicate way, by both sides - and good on Holtby & co for handling this as such.

I think to myself, Coop can't possible be this obtuse, but then I remember you're a master troll. Your generally dismissive and flippant attitude is cute most of the time, and we do get a laugh, however...

I understand your frustration in challenging the status quo, but the fact is that you're receiving an absolute clinic in how your belief system around this subject is utter horseshit. Good try, though, at highlighting the irony of my post (it isn't there), but that's some low hanging fruit, man, even for you.

[HP29]

2 hours ago, Peter36 said:

Calm down, I'm joking...just thought it was funny how many confused faces I saw under posts . 

 

How am I keeping score? I just make a little comment because I saw that and I thought it was a funny. Don't take everything so seriously.

 

 

[coopaloop1234]

25 minutes ago, HP29 said:

Indigenous Peoples have been raped of their culture for decades. This is an ongoing issue, that @CJ Boiss has eloquently highlighted in a number of ways, and frankly, everything tracks. This is misappropriation, that has been handled in what I think is a delicate way, by both sides - and good on Holtby & co for handling this as such.

 

I think to myself, Coop can't possible be this obtuse, but then I remember you're a master troll. Your generally dismissive and flippant attitude is cute most of the time, and we do get a laugh, however...

 

I understand your frustration in challenging the status quo, but the fact is that you're receiving an absolute clinic in how your belief system around this subject is utter horseshit. I can appreciate your attempt at highlighting the irony of my post (it isn't there), but that's some low hanging fruit, man, even for you.

Just decades? You should probably brush up on your history a bit.

I'm not being obtuse, I'm just trying to make sense of the ever changing ruleset of what's allowed and what isn't allowed. My confusion can't come from the arbitrary ruleset in place that's malleable based solely upon a person's colour of their skin. You know, like racists do.

It's weird that my viewpoint that there shouldn't be racial divides is being held as a shitty belief system. The past oppression of people should have zero impact on being able to use art styles, but apparently I'm wrong because dwelling on the past and not moving forward is apparently a healthy attitude.

But I am glad you chimed in. When the peanut gallery get's involved is my favourite. Especially when it comes as their own expense for overreacting to a small joke.

 

24 minutes ago, HP29 said:

 

 

"I didn't understand you were kidding at the beginning so now I'm going to double down on my ignorance."

C'mon man. It was clear from the start he was kidding. Not his fault you misinterpreted it.

[Peter36]

@HP29 You just sent me a whole 18 minute video because I said I was joking. Didn't mean to start anything, sorry if my little comment offended you .

[coopaloop1234]

13 minutes ago, Peter36 said:

@HP29 You just sent me a whole 18 minute video because I said I was joking. Didn't mean to start anything, sorry if my little comment offended you .

"The world has become too fragile"

How fitting this thread title had become.