04-28-2021, 11:16 AM
(03-26-2021 06:46 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Sharon Stone's opinion
I guess some people will call for her to be blacklisted.
Conservative actors speak out on 'cancel culture' in Hollywood:
(03-26-2021 06:46 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Sharon Stone's opinion
I guess some people will call for her to be blacklisted.
(05-05-2021 08:46 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]Two more cancellations
What did these two do that merited this action?
(05-12-2021 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]"But now, the Biden administration wants to roll back these protections and return to the days when being accused was the same as being guilty."
(05-12-2021 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]If black lives matter, then due process must matter
I am a fan of due process, which seems to be anathema to cancel culture.
"Two years ago, things started to move in the right direction when then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued new guidelines that instilled some basic fairness into campus sexual assault proceedings."
"But now, the Biden administration wants to roll back these protections and return to the days when being accused was the same as being guilty."
Quote:The framework implemented by DeVos prevents schools from launching Title IX investigations into allegations of assaults that take place off campus, uses a narrower definition of sexual harassment compared to workplace standards and requires schools to presume that accused students are innocent at the outset of investigations...
Advocates for accused students praised DeVos' policies as ensuring evenhanded responses to assault allegations on campuses. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a nonprofit that focuses on due process on college campuses, said last month that it would not rule out suing to block a Biden administration rewrite of Title IX rules.
(05-12-2021 10:11 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]If black lives matter, then due process must matter
I am a fan of due process, which seems to be anathema to cancel culture.
"Two years ago, things started to move in the right direction when then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued new guidelines that instilled some basic fairness into campus sexual assault proceedings."
"But now, the Biden administration wants to roll back these protections and return to the days when being accused was the same as being guilty."
Reading another source paints a different picture of Devos' changes.
Quote:The framework implemented by DeVos prevents schools from launching Title IX investigations into allegations of assaults that take place off campus, uses a narrower definition of sexual harassment compared to workplace standards and requires schools to presume that accused students are innocent at the outset of investigations...
Advocates for accused students praised DeVos' policies as ensuring evenhanded responses to assault allegations on campuses. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a nonprofit that focuses on due process on college campuses, said last month that it would not rule out suing to block a Biden administration rewrite of Title IX rules.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/bid...l-n1263113
Would be interesting to hear what the Biden admin is actually proposing, and to hear a full discussion of the Devos rules. Neither the Examiner or NBC News seems to do that.
(05-12-2021 10:21 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:11 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]If black lives matter, then due process must matter
I am a fan of due process, which seems to be anathema to cancel culture.
"Two years ago, things started to move in the right direction when then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued new guidelines that instilled some basic fairness into campus sexual assault proceedings."
"But now, the Biden administration wants to roll back these protections and return to the days when being accused was the same as being guilty."
Reading another source paints a different picture of Devos' changes.
Quote:The framework implemented by DeVos prevents schools from launching Title IX investigations into allegations of assaults that take place off campus, uses a narrower definition of sexual harassment compared to workplace standards and requires schools to presume that accused students are innocent at the outset of investigations...
Advocates for accused students praised DeVos' policies as ensuring evenhanded responses to assault allegations on campuses. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a nonprofit that focuses on due process on college campuses, said last month that it would not rule out suing to block a Biden administration rewrite of Title IX rules.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/bid...l-n1263113
Would be interesting to hear what the Biden admin is actually proposing, and to hear a full discussion of the Devos rules. Neither the Examiner or NBC News seems to do that.
Agree with the last paragraph. finding out the facts is always good.
But it is clear that cancel culture, particularly in the Age of BLM, short-circuits due process. How many times have we heard "He needs to be fired immediately"? Any movement to enforcing due process is good in my book, whether the impetus comes from left or right.
(05-12-2021 10:42 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]It's clear that cancel culture CAN short circuit due process, but let's not act like immediate consequences outside the court of law haven't existed before "cancel culture" became a thing.
For example, did every firing that occurred before cancel culture became a prominent term happen following a thorough investigation? Or were people fired quickly and on the spot for their actions?
My biggest issue with cancel culture isn't the potential lack of due process, but the potential weight it can unfairly, and unjustly, place on someone's shoulders that follows them from place-to-place, job-to-job, etc. That issue, IMO, can be far more important than if someone was fired, expelled, etc. prematurely and without due process. People that do not receive due process often have some sort of recourse. But say you're branded X, Y, and Z because of a social media comment you made as a teenager? You've got little to no tools in your tool belt to get out from under that weight.
(05-12-2021 10:42 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:21 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:11 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]If black lives matter, then due process must matter
I am a fan of due process, which seems to be anathema to cancel culture.
"Two years ago, things started to move in the right direction when then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued new guidelines that instilled some basic fairness into campus sexual assault proceedings."
"But now, the Biden administration wants to roll back these protections and return to the days when being accused was the same as being guilty."
Reading another source paints a different picture of Devos' changes.
Quote:The framework implemented by DeVos prevents schools from launching Title IX investigations into allegations of assaults that take place off campus, uses a narrower definition of sexual harassment compared to workplace standards and requires schools to presume that accused students are innocent at the outset of investigations...
Advocates for accused students praised DeVos' policies as ensuring evenhanded responses to assault allegations on campuses. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a nonprofit that focuses on due process on college campuses, said last month that it would not rule out suing to block a Biden administration rewrite of Title IX rules.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/bid...l-n1263113
Would be interesting to hear what the Biden admin is actually proposing, and to hear a full discussion of the Devos rules. Neither the Examiner or NBC News seems to do that.
Agree with the last paragraph. finding out the facts is always good.
But it is clear that cancel culture, particularly in the Age of BLM, short-circuits due process. How many times have we heard "He needs to be fired immediately"? Any movement to enforcing due process is good in my book, whether the impetus comes from left or right.
It's clear that cancel culture CAN short circuit due process, but let's not act like immediate consequences outside the court of law haven't existed before "cancel culture" became a thing.
For example, did every firing that occurred before cancel culture became a prominent term happen following a thorough investigation? Or were people fired quickly and on the spot for their actions?
My biggest issue with cancel culture isn't the potential lack of due process, but the potential weight it can unfairly, and unjustly, place on someone's shoulders that follows them from place-to-place, job-to-job, etc. That issue, IMO, can be far more important than if someone was fired, expelled, etc. prematurely and without due process. People that do not receive due process often have some sort of recourse. But say you're branded X, Y, and Z because of a social media comment you made as a teenager? You've got little to no tools in your tool belt to get out from under that weight.
(05-12-2021 11:08 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]We are supposed to believe the women/victims/family/ben crump and move directly to the punishment phase?
(05-12-2021 11:04 AM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:42 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]It's clear that cancel culture CAN short circuit due process, but let's not act like immediate consequences outside the court of law haven't existed before "cancel culture" became a thing.
For example, did every firing that occurred before cancel culture became a prominent term happen following a thorough investigation? Or were people fired quickly and on the spot for their actions?
My biggest issue with cancel culture isn't the potential lack of due process, but the potential weight it can unfairly, and unjustly, place on someone's shoulders that follows them from place-to-place, job-to-job, etc. That issue, IMO, can be far more important than if someone was fired, expelled, etc. prematurely and without due process. People that do not receive due process often have some sort of recourse. But say you're branded X, Y, and Z because of a social media comment you made as a teenager? You've got little to no tools in your tool belt to get out from under that weight.
An employer isn't generally allowed to post allegations of 'why you were fired' on social media... If it's a high enough profile situation, You usually see a vague comment like 'actions inconsistent with our corporate values' or similar as opposed to 'he's a rapist', which would be common on social media. Why? Because a company could be sued... so too could an individual, but the pockets aren't usually nearly as deep.
The issue of cancel culture is that it is mob/vigilante justice. We're not talking about an employer firing an employee (with the ability to sue for wrongful termination etc) but about 'a mob' who often have zero skin in the game organizing to force a reaction. How is it any different? If you have no legal recourse, just organize a mob... often of simply disaffected (or unaffected) persons and 'pretend' that they are affected... and make a big enough stink to cause a business to do something they wouldn't otherwise do.
Being an 'activist' is actually a job, or major past-time for way too many people
(05-12-2021 11:08 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:42 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:21 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:11 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 10:04 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ]If black lives matter, then due process must matter
I am a fan of due process, which seems to be anathema to cancel culture.
"Two years ago, things started to move in the right direction when then-Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued new guidelines that instilled some basic fairness into campus sexual assault proceedings."
"But now, the Biden administration wants to roll back these protections and return to the days when being accused was the same as being guilty."
Reading another source paints a different picture of Devos' changes.
Quote:The framework implemented by DeVos prevents schools from launching Title IX investigations into allegations of assaults that take place off campus, uses a narrower definition of sexual harassment compared to workplace standards and requires schools to presume that accused students are innocent at the outset of investigations...
Advocates for accused students praised DeVos' policies as ensuring evenhanded responses to assault allegations on campuses. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a nonprofit that focuses on due process on college campuses, said last month that it would not rule out suing to block a Biden administration rewrite of Title IX rules.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/bid...l-n1263113
Would be interesting to hear what the Biden admin is actually proposing, and to hear a full discussion of the Devos rules. Neither the Examiner or NBC News seems to do that.
Agree with the last paragraph. finding out the facts is always good.
But it is clear that cancel culture, particularly in the Age of BLM, short-circuits due process. How many times have we heard "He needs to be fired immediately"? Any movement to enforcing due process is good in my book, whether the impetus comes from left or right.
It's clear that cancel culture CAN short circuit due process, but let's not act like immediate consequences outside the court of law haven't existed before "cancel culture" became a thing.
For example, did every firing that occurred before cancel culture became a prominent term happen following a thorough investigation? Or were people fired quickly and on the spot for their actions?
My biggest issue with cancel culture isn't the potential lack of due process, but the potential weight it can unfairly, and unjustly, place on someone's shoulders that follows them from place-to-place, job-to-job, etc. That issue, IMO, can be far more important than if someone was fired, expelled, etc. prematurely and without due process. People that do not receive due process often have some sort of recourse. But say you're branded X, Y, and Z because of a social media comment you made as a teenager? You've got little to no tools in your tool belt to get out from under that weight.
I think the author of the piece quoted is a good example of how due process being ignored has long term effects. He was ousted from school two weeks before graduation and had to fight a year before getting his degree. Not sure how a year not working in his field helped him. All to often we see this mob action against somebody accused of something. We are supposed to believe the women/victims/family/ben crump and move directly to the punishment phase? In this country, the accused have rights, too.
Sounded like the DeVos policies guaranteed those rights. Could be a lie.
(05-12-2021 11:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]In the conversation with OO, we're talking about sexual assault allegations at a university and how that can lead to expulsion. You disagree that this situation isn't analogous to an employee being fired?
This wasn't mob/vigilante justice, but a lack of due process. Thought OO made that really clear.
(05-12-2021 11:30 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]Did the author deal with mob action? Based on what you said, he went back, won his case, got a degree, and I bet he is looking to receive some sort of compensation for the unjust actions. Should universities change how they handle sexual assault accusations? Absolutely (I think they should be out of that business entirely, for the record).
Quote:The issue I was talking about, the one I said was a bigger concern IMO, is the potential for mob action to follow someone in an unjust way. It doesn't sound like that happened to this guy, or is relevant to DeVos' policies. That's why I made the comment I did. But if this was made public, and he dealt with the impacts of the stigma attached with these kind of allegations, then this issue morphs into what I was talking about.If by mob action, you restrict it to the pitchforks and torches crowd, no, he did not face a mob, that we know of. But he still was the victim of a moblike action, where the mob/administration/public substituted its opinion of what must be true for facts determined by due process.
(05-12-2021 12:07 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 11:30 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]Did the author deal with mob action? Based on what you said, he went back, won his case, got a degree, and I bet he is looking to receive some sort of compensation for the unjust actions. Should universities change how they handle sexual assault accusations? Absolutely (I think they should be out of that business entirely, for the record).
I am beginning to think you did not read the article. What I said was based on what he said, which was that he was immediately suspended from school two weeks before his scheduled graduation, and had to fight legal battles for a year to eventually get the degree he was due in two weeks. No mention of compensation for the legal and social costs, or the professional cost of a year without a degree.
Quote:Quote:The issue I was talking about, the one I said was a bigger concern IMO, is the potential for mob action to follow someone in an unjust way. It doesn't sound like that happened to this guy, or is relevant to DeVos' policies. That's why I made the comment I did. But if this was made public, and he dealt with the impacts of the stigma attached with these kind of allegations, then this issue morphs into what I was talking about.If by mob action, you restrict it to the pitchforks and torches crowd, no, he did not face a mob, that we know of. But he still was the victim of a moblike action, where the mob/administration/public substituted its opinion of what must be true for facts determined by due process.
(05-12-2021 12:19 PM)tanqtonic Wrote: [ -> ]All I know is I am good friends independently of two people.
On has made a mint suing state universities for lack of due process in assault allegation issues. The stories I have heard from him are pretty insufferable about the lack of such in Title IX processes typically brought by universities. He told me the DeVos rules at issue would seriously cut into his 'income stream'.
The articles each are accurate.
"prevents schools from launching Title IX investigations into allegations of assaults that take place off campus" --- makes sense, a sexual assault that takes place off campus is subject to the jurisdiction of the local authorities.
"requires schools to presume that accused students are innocent at the outset of investigations" --- this is a problem?
In the first link, from the outlines of the cases handled by my friend, the account there is not atypical of the cases he has handled. No effective notice to the accused, no access to evidence being presented until a hearing, no idea of whom might be a witness account, no ability to cross examine an accuser, and at times no presumption of innocence.
These are the main things addressed by the DeVos rules.
(05-12-2021 12:01 PM)Hambone10 Wrote: [ -> ](05-12-2021 11:22 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote: [ -> ]In the conversation with OO, we're talking about sexual assault allegations at a university and how that can lead to expulsion. You disagree that this situation isn't analogous to an employee being fired?
This wasn't mob/vigilante justice, but a lack of due process. Thought OO made that really clear.
Then carry on your conversation with OO. I'm not limited in my responses to aspects that YOU want to talk about. The thread is about 'cancel culture', which doesn't simply involve one example, nor do the DeVoss vs Biden rules being discussed only apply in this single situation.
Actually it IS vigilante justice, because the University is often only doing what they're doing because of protests or pressures by 'mobs'.... and you're asking me if I 'disagree that this isn't analogous'?? Is that a triple or just a double negative??
If it involves actions NOT on campus (which was the specific DeVoss distinction YOU quoted) the University has no investigative authority, so why are they opening an investigation that they can't possibly (or legally) undertake?? Things that happen on campus are different. There is a clear difference between taking some protective steps like allowing (or even proscribing) remote work as a result of the off-campus charges which COULD include some pretty severe steps, and opening their own 'investigation'.
And vigilante justice by definition lacks due process.... so your admonition is not only not needed, but IMO, false on its face. It COULD be that the University itself is engaging in virtue signaling or however you want to define what they would be/are doing (that we are discussing)... but I don't think it unreasonable to say that 'the mob' can and does influence (especially) Universities
Finally to the 'disagree that it isn't'... You seem to clearly be implying that it IS analogous... hence your comment that this happened BEFORE cancel culture, where businesses fired people without due process... without waiting for the outcome of the case... and my answer was pretty clear. I disagree that it IS analogous, for the reasons I clearly stated and more.... things like 'who pays for you to be there' are clearly different... as well as the expectations of you 'representing' the University as opposed to 'representing' your company. Sure, there CAN BE similarities, but there are also some clear differences. Cancel culture does things like making a university responsible for the private actions (not related to what happens in the classroom, but as part of the 'living situation' that almost no companies have) of students that it admits... and in your specific DeVoss example (in the quote you presented), of events that don't take place on campus.
It's like saying apples and oranges are 'the same'. They both grow on trees... they both have seeds... etc etc etc... all sorts of similarities.... but we use the term apples:oranges to describe things that AREN'T the same.