Gina Carano, Who Plays Cara Dune On The Mandalorian, Will No Longer Be On the Show (gizmodo.com) 683
"Gina Carano is not currently employed by Lucasfilm and there are no plans for her to be in the future," said a Lucasfilm spokesperson. "Nevertheless, her social media posts denigrating people based on their cultural and religious identities are abhorrent and unacceptable." io9 reports: The news comes after a day in which the hashtag #FireGinaCarano trended on Twitter for hours. The night before, the actress shared an anti-Semitic story on her Instagram. It was soon deleted but many fans captured it and shared it on social media. That, of course, came after months of complaints about Carano's online presence, including mocking covid mask mandates, spreading conspiracies about the United States election, liking posts disparaging the Black Lives Matter movement, and deriding pronoun usage.
Carano's character, Cara Dune, was one of the main characters on the award-winning Disney+ show. And it was assumed, though never confirmed, that she might play a role in the upcoming Star Wars: Rangers of the New Republic show. That, apparently, is not happening anymore. Even if it was.
Carano's character, Cara Dune, was one of the main characters on the award-winning Disney+ show. And it was assumed, though never confirmed, that she might play a role in the upcoming Star Wars: Rangers of the New Republic show. That, apparently, is not happening anymore. Even if it was.
So wait (Score:5, Informative)
This person says that "jews were beaten (and avoided, ratted out) by their neighbours" and all of a sudden that's an anti-semitic statement?
Just for the record - Jews were also hidden and saved by their neighbours. But the first statement is in no way anti-semitic, it rightly points out that it wasn't just the government who hated on Jews, it was the ordinary citizens who picked up on the hate, too. In fact ordinary citizens were instrumental in spreading the hate.
Re:So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait, is that all there is to this story? Do people not know how Anne Frank and her family were discovered?
Re:So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait, is that all there is to this story?
Look deeper and you find that every single claim being made about her in the summary is just as long of a stretch.
Re:So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
She had faced calls to add her pronouns to her Twitter biography (a common practise among transgender and cisgender social media users to help avoid misgendering).
However, in response to the demand, the actor added the words “boop/bop/beep” to her Twitter name, in apparent ridicule of the convention.
And why should she? Does she not have the right to use whatever pronouns she wishes (including none at all) to describe herself on her own public profile?
She’s also shared unproven theories about both the presidential election results and COVID-19 mask mandates.
Unproven theories? Are we no longer allowed to talk about theories until they've been proven now? How are people supposed to debate and research?
Unproven theories are there for debate. Even theories which are disproven are subsequently there for mockery of anyone who still promotes them. People should be free to talk about such things.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe so but I have yet to see anything she said that's actually hateful. So far I've just heard that she said other things... So, if she said something worse than what has been mentioned already then out with it people, what did she actually say? The most I can see is that she's a bit of a dimwit.
Fighting bad rubbish.... with a rubbish statement.
I'm strongly against all prejudices, but FML this is just a lame witch hunt.
Re: So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone claiming today that the election was stolen cannot be trusted in any job.
By that logic, anyone that believes in any of the Abrahamic religions (and other religions) cannot be trusted in any job.
Re: So wait (Score:4, Insightful)
Not really (Score:4, Insightful)
That said, if you're say a Young Earth creationist you're not going to be a very good biologist. Evolution isn't compatible with Young Earth creationism and, well, the contortions you'll need to make in order to line up scientific fact with your particular interpretation of the Bible will make a mess of your professional life. There are actually a few examples of this and they usually work as "apologists" for Young Earth creationism because they can't do much else, or just double think and accept the two contradicting ideas.
But otherwise Christianity, Islam and Judaism are all compatible with science so long as you're not desperately trying to literally interpret every word in the bible in the exact manner that the American Evangelicals do.
Re:Not really (Score:5, Insightful)
To be a little more specific, we (Jews) believe that the majority of the bible is simply a *history* book, and most of the rest is a collection of stories, parables, personal accounts, and songs.
Sure, there are various laws and rules to be found in it, but we don't believe it was ever meant to be treated as if yester-millennium's norms should (or even can) apply today.
Of course, just *how much* of it can reasonably be shrugged-off as stories and nonsense varies by denomination and individual interpretation.
It's okay to look for answers and meaning in the text, just don't go around acting like it's a be-all, end-all, meaning-of-life book.
Re:Not really (Score:5, Informative)
That's a pretty bold statement to make on behalf of all Jews.
Maybe you believe that. There are millions of Orthodox Jews who take not only the bible literally, but the Talmud as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Jews believe the bible can and should be open to reinterpretation
Eh sort of but not in the way the way that's usually meant. What we love doing is engaging in a great detail of the most amazing pedantry in order to stick precisely to the spirit of the law as it's written while avoiding the spirit to the greatest extent possible especially where inconvenient.
Like if the law says you can only do X in your home on the sabbath, that's it, you can only do X in your home on the sabbath no way of debating that. It
Re: So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you? If there is no evidence of election fraud it is a belief based entirely on faith. The poster limited it to abrahamic religons, likely because of his own familiarity with them and the fact there is no better evidence to support them than the election fraud.
The assertion was that someone who holds a belief in the election fraud can't be trusted with responsibility because of holding a position without sufficient evidence. Since a person with a belief in religion similarly holds a belief without sufficient evidence by that same logic they also could not be trusted with responsibility.
The irony is that THIS position actually is anti-semitic and actually makes the point of Gina Carano. Another historical parallel would be the blacklisting of communists.
Re: So wait (Score:5, Informative)
I wouldn't mind if it was just Trump Derangement Syndrome, but now it has festered into Derangement Syndrome Over Anyone Who Might Have Been Associated With Trump In Any Way.(DSOAWMHBAWTIAW).
Re: So wait (Score:4, Insightful)
If youâ(TM)re not mad a about a misogynist, nepotist, lying, self-dealer who tried to take over the US government, youâ(TM)re either in on it or a bad person.
Re: So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone claiming today that the election was stolen cannot be trusted in any job.
What the fuck? Since when does acting require adhesion to reality and sane thinking?
The only thing Society should be demanding of people who act is that no laws are broken and the people can act. Their hold on reality is not relevant.
Save the crusades for the people in power. Leave the normal people alone. I have no idea what this particular actor said, but it really doesn't matter what her opinions are unless she is inciting violence.
Re: So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
Actress posts that for the government to persecute a people their neighbors must persecute them first and that she believes that is happening to people like her.
Company fires her. Gina didn't lose a job, she won an argument.
Re: So wait (Score:5, Informative)
Exactly. A relatively brief twitter witch hunt was conducted and another very powerful company decided to listen to a few thousand pointless hashtag following zombies. Why the media pays any attention to twitter causes continues to escape me. There is absolutely no pushback to ignoring those assholes yet they keep whining companies into doing their bidding? It's mind boggling. This isn't the 60's or 70's when a hand written letter from an angry viewer represented thousands or tens of thousands more that just didn't take the time to write in. It's 2021 and clicking "follow" or typing #somethingsomething has zero effort associated with it. Tweets are the opposite of those letters. For every thousand tweets on something you could safely assume at least half of the people making it trend wouldn't have even bothered to make the original complaint if they weren't led there.
Re: So wait (Score:3, Insightful)
You statement does not appear to be supported by evidence.
Re: (Score:3)
Your link to list of litigation and whether it went "Trump's Way" and discussion of it is extremely misleading, to the point of being fraudulent itself.
According to your list, most all of the "went Trump's way" stuff is litigation that took place before the election, while all of the arguments are about the baseless shit that was entered after the election in order to steal it, and that shit did not go Trump's way. I don't know how you got modded up so high, either you got a pack of True Believers behind yo
Re: So wait (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
"Well hopefully you can see why that might not get a positive reaction."
I can see that it would get a positive reaction from some and a negative reaction from others. In this country it is roughly split down the middle. I don't see that any government construct and is allowed to function as engine in our public economy and granted tax breaks to enable it to do or access to fractional reserve banking system should be allowed to deny gainful employment or otherwise discriminate against the public based on pol
Re: (Score:3)
Re:So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
Really, it's not this post that's the issue - it's only bad within the context of her other posts, because she's comparing being a republican in 2021 with being a Jew in 1940s Germany, which is one hell of a stretch. But even so, reading this particular post as anti-semitic, even in the larger conspiracy-nutcase context, is one hell of a stretch as well. The post only works if she is saying anti-semitism is real and is a bad thing.
Re:So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey, I'm not saying the comparison isn't both misguided and borderline whataboutism when put in context. I'm just saying it's not actually anti-semitic, as it requires belief that the Holocaust happened, and that it was wrong.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's not forget that the holocaust didn't happen over night, and that jews were not the only victims of the regime.
Persecution started many years earlier, with propaganda against jews, political opponents and various other groups. It started small, and gradually built up hatred for these groups among the population.
Now we are seeing persecution against people with particular political views, so let's hope it doesn't progress towards the "final solution" stage.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Y'know, of the two political parties, both have been unhappy about various election results over the last decade, but only one of the parties showed up armed, stormed the capitol, and attempted to kill elected officials they disagreed with.
The Democrats had an even worse reaction to the Republican victory in the 1860 election.
Re: (Score:2)
Hah! Took me a moment to notice the 1860. Right you are, very funny. Arguably not the same party now. Republicans are certainly no longer the party of Lincoln.
Re: So wait (Score:5, Informative)
Bear spray, metal baseball bats, knives, improvised weapons and pipe bombs. That I have video evidence of so far. I hardly think that's the whole list.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, the guy lounging in the speaker's desk had a tazer in his belt. I seriously doubt it was the only one.
Re: So wait (Score:5, Informative)
They were armed. They had clubs, poles, tasers, pepper spray / bear spray, body armor, restraints, and other tactical gear.
They came equipped for a fight.
Re: So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
would they be described as "armed" even in European utopias that ban guns? You can say "armed with clubs, poles" etc., but in English "armed" with no other details means guns.
Well logically, in a place that has banned guns, where they are rarely used in crimes, "armed suspect" could be read as "had a knife", isn't that what most would assume?
Unarmed _definitely_ doesn't mean no gun, but holding a knife, in the dictionary or common usage.
"Police shot an armed suspect" would apply to a person with a bulge in their pocket that later turned out to be any kind of weapon. That's a a very common usage, in America.
Re:So wait (Score:4, Informative)
Re:So wait (Score:5, Funny)
Let the hate flow through you.
This whole thing Is actually kind of heartening to me. Watching tolerance take hold, I realize now that I was always tolerant. Even before tolerance became something to aspire to, I was already cancelling people who disagreed with me. I’d always assumed I was a narcissistic, self-righteous, asshole who focused on other people’s flaws in order to cover for my own glaring imperfections. As it turns out, I was just a Democrat.
Re:So wait (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
"One day", said Brizz, "I'm going to stop worrying what the thought-bullies think! I'm going to make up my own mind, have my own opinion, and if they don't like it, they can fuck the hell off!"
Hey, I'm not saying the comparison isn't both misguided and borderline whataboutism when put in context.
"Baby steps", said Brizz, "Rome wasn't built in a day."
Re: (Score:3)
Re:So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
No point trying to pretend it's not what everyone can see it is. The link is in the summary: https://twitter.com/djarincult... [twitter.com]
Jews were beaten in the street, not by N@zi soldiers but by their neighbours... even by children.
"Because history is edited, most people today don't realize that to get to the point where N@zi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the Government first made their own neighbours hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views?"
Accompanied by a photo of a Jewish woman being chased through the streets.
If it isn't obvious, the US government is not encouraging people to hate conservatives, and this is not a slippery slope towards fascism. Suggesting that it is serves to compare conservatives to those Jews, which is obviously deeply insulting to Jewish people.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, it is an offensive comparison. Yes, it's a bad faith argument making use of false equivalency. But as the post relies on the base statement being "the holocaust and larger systemic Jewish persecution is one of the worst things ever" I don't think it's correct to label it as anti-Semitic. Her post is problematic in many ways, but labeling it as anti-Semitic distracts from its actual problems.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I don't think it trivializes the holocaust. It doesn't at any point say that it wasn't an absolutely horrible event. What it does is it attempts to make a bad-faith argument about how "bad" Republicans have it right now. This is a false equivalency argument. False equivalency arguments can be used to either claim something isn't as bad as it seems, or that something is worse than it is - the use in this case is the latter, not the former.
Re:So wait (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:So wait (Score:4, Insightful)
She didn't claim equivalence to the holocaust she claimed parallels to the social and political climate which led to humans down the path to the holocaust. One would hope that it is acceptable to do so at some point BEFORE we reach anything which could credibly be compared to the holocaust!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't help but feel that while it comes across as insulting it's more a case of an actor not fully grasping the scope of a war crime 75-80 years ago on the other side of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly, if your first instinct is to trivialize persecution of Jews by comparing it with conservatives nowadays, you deserve what's coming your way. This is not something attributable to ignorance - she was perfectly aware of the point she made, and that point is horseshit.
Saying nothing is always an option, you know.
Re: (Score:3)
These complaints are voiced by the same people that called the previous president "literally Hitler" for the last four years. Pot, meet kettle.
Re: (Score:2)
No it is not all there is to the story, far from it. You could easily find that out for yourself.
Re: So wait (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If you're the public face of a $120 million dollar budget Disney show, you can bet your ass your public opinions matter.
Specially when those are related to mocking mask wearers, claiming the 2020 election was rigged, or comparing yourself to Jews during the holocaust because you're "silenced".
Re: (Score:2)
And none of the Republicans present in the room at the time called "foul!"?
Uhuh.
Re:So wait (Score:5, Informative)
It sounds like Disney planned to let her go before that post.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021/02/disney-fires-mandalorians-gina-carano-over-abhorrent-unacceptable-posts/ [arstechnica.com]
Re:So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
As for Lucasfilm/Disney's statement, I wouldn't be surprised if they don't really know what happened, they just see an angry mob that needs to be dealt with, and in the current climate "capitulate" is safer for the employees handling the call than "ignore"
Re: (Score:3)
And I think you are right about Lucasfilm. That’s why cancel culture is so effective; companies do not want controversy like this attached to their name. Easier to j
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Treating religion and culture are integral to a person's identity has been the standard since at least the writing of the Constitution, which forbids religious tests for federal office. In theory someone convinced that a talking snake doomed mankind should be open to the idea that we are all being dreamt by a god. But it does not work that way in practice and the society is better for allowing this polite fiction.
Anti-trans people bitch about biological men who think of themselves as women and want it to be
Re: (Score:3)
Sadly Jarwulf is most likely well into adulthood. He's got a lower uid [530523] than mine and I remember signing up sometime around 2003-4.
Damn, way to make me feel old.
Re:So wait (Score:5, Insightful)
There is NOTHING anti-Semitic in her post. WHATSOEVER.
Here is the official definition of anti-Semitism: https://www.holocaustremembran... [holocaustremembrance.com]
Her post does not violate it directly, indirectly or in any other way. It had the sticker of anti-Semite attached the same way Stalin's followers attached the Trockist sticker to anything that was in their way to achieve their aims. This is quite deliberate too. She pointed to the ridiculous, unhealthy and dangerous polarisation in today's political life in USA and elsewhere in the Western World. She pointed at it eloquently and without ad-hominem - it was pretty well written. She got nuked into the oblivion for it.
In the meantime, in the real world, USA has slipped on par (if not past) Belarus. One of the key political freedoms is the freedom of association and the freedom of expressing political views. It can be measured. PRECISELY too. When a voting intention poll is taken, there is always a certain systematic error in it due to people being AFRAID to express whom are they going to vote for. This is corrected by what is known as "pollster weights" - systematic correction to take into account this FEAR of expressing your political affiliation.Here is some food for thought for you - the pollster weights in USA needed for the last election are higher than in any developed country, higher than in Russia and on par with Belarus and Zimbabwe - in the > 20%.
Re: (Score:2)
One of the key political freedoms is the freedom of association and the freedom of expressing political views.
Exactly. Disney is expressing their freedom of association by distancing themselves from this individual.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You are absolutely, unquestionably wrong. This doesn't seem complicated - in fact, it seems like just about the most straightforward thing imaginable - but I'll assume you're speaking in good faith and explain it.
Both co-opting Holocaust imagery for one's own purposes or minimizing the reality of the Holocaust by comparing it to something trivial - i.e. in this case "someone was mean to me on Twitter!" have a long history, and yes, we Jews find both things to be offensive and anti-Semitic.
Also, it's really,
Re: (Score:3)
This person says that "jews were beaten (and avoided, ratted out) by their neighbours" and all of a sudden that's an anti-semitic statement?
People gotta get their outrage from something.
Re: (Score:2)
It may not be anti-semitic, but it's certainly insensitive - comparing the 'persecution' she experiences for her political views to the systematic genocide of the Jewish people. She might have managed to get away with that, if not for all the other horrible things she had said before. The transgender mockery, conspiracy theory promotion, that sort of thing. Any one of the alone might have just been embarrassing for her employer, but put them all together and she becomes too toxic to associate with.
Re: (Score:2)
it rightly points out that it wasn't just the government who hated on XXX, it was the ordinary citizens who picked up on the hate, too. In fact ordinary citizens were instrumental in spreading the hate.
Cue Donald Trump comparisons - every time he said "China Virus", etc.
Re: (Score:3)
>"This person says that "jews were beaten (and avoided, ratted out) by their neighbours" and all of a sudden that's an anti-semitic statement?"
It isn't. There absolutely were non-party collaborators, as there probably are in all such situations- people scared, manipulated, and cooerced by an evil regime. The summary is a joke and stretches and twists everything, just like those trying to "cancel" her. Here is another:
> "We need to clean up the election process so we are not left feeling the way we
Re: So wait (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't see the comparison, anywhere. What I do see, maybe, is a description of (and comparison to) what happened BEFORE - or what (arguably) led to - the Holocaust.
Re: (Score:2)
90% of all social media activity is the Left spouting extreme hyperbole
Prove it, or quit making this dumbass claim.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Working for Disney, for a start.
Re: (Score:2)
She likened criticism of Republicans to the Holocaust. That is highly inappropriate if not downright disgusting. You know that as well as I do.
Too many Parler critters slithering around in this thread.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: So wait (Score:3)
My progressive co worker called covid the boomer remover and opined that he hoped it would kill enough old people to get bernie elected. Most recently he said in a work happy our call that they should not give the vaccine to anyone over 55 so that the young progressives could take over. He wants his communist utopia at any cost. None of the young people in the call seemed outraged at all. If you are progressive you can say the most vile shit without consequences.
That is the future....
Anti semitic how? (Score:5, Insightful)
She made a factual statement, jews were indeed beaten by some of their neighbors and there is plenty of evidence documenting this. She then added a sad face emoji, showing her disagreement with these activities.
She then pointed out that hating someone for their political views is the same as hating someone for their religious views. She is clearly against both of these activities, and is drawing a comparison between them.
I don't see anything anti semitic there, she pointed out a historical fact and additionally expressed her disdain for these historical activities.
Re: Anti semitic how? (Score:2)
Basically it seems that in the wild west as soon as you utter the word "jews" that's it, done.
Re:Anti semitic how? (Score:4, Interesting)
Seriously, if there was ever someone who needed to learn when to shut their damn mouth it's this lady. She talked herself right out of a sweet job.
Re:Anti semitic how? (Score:5, Informative)
This incident isn't the only reason.
You don't really want one of your main actors spouting off about the virus us a hoax and spreading election conspiracies.
Re: (Score:3)
She then pointed out that hating someone for their political views is the same as hating someone for their religious views. She is clearly against both of these activities, and is drawing a comparison between them.
It's a false comparison and serves to minimize crimes against those who were hated for being part of an ethnic minority. Under equal protection jurisprudence, the factors courts look to are whether the characteristic involved is inherent and immutable - like ethnicity, but not like political beliefs; whether those with the characteristic have suffered a history of invidious discrimination - again, like ethnic minorities, and not like people with political beliefs; whether those with the characteristic have
Re: (Score:2)
Using one action as a comparison against another action is in no way condoning either of the actions.
Modern american right wing extremists are often compared to 1930s germans who supported hitler, and while there are some similarities in behavior and rhetoric these people are not the same. In fact, many germans in the 1930s despised americans and considered them enemies, and would not have supported today's right wing american extremists.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's nothing. (Score:4, Funny)
Half the country is being un-personed and excommunicated by the other half in high-handed, righteous loathing. Hell, they're so righteous, after all me-tooing and banishments and cancellations, there isn't going to be any one left who deserves to speak, or have a job, or even exist at all.
The last true believer in this orgy of flagellating of Wokeness will cancel himself out of self-loathing for his own white supremacy, and vanish, instantly sucked into his own asshole.
Re: That's nothing. (Score:2)
What group, Anonymous Coward?
Racist... (Score:2)
Take the Simpsons, the voices get a mention by name, but the talent that actually draws the cartoons, which is significantly harder, more time consuming and more talent, get paid next to nothing and dont even get acknowledged by name.
Re: (Score:3)
That's how the television industry has always worked. The actors are the celebrities that everyone worships, the technical staff get a line buried somewhere in the small print of the credits. Not even that, if they are contractors. Even the writers, arguably the people most important of all to producing a good show, toil in anonymity.
Cancel culture is the beginning of the end (Score:4, Funny)
Somewhere in the 6th - maybe even the 7th - ring of hell, there is a cauldron full of boiling feces waiting for every cancel-culturalist out there.
If I had a Disney+ subscription I'd cancel it.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Cancel culture is the beginning of the end
Somewhere in the 6th - maybe even the 7th - ring of hell, there is a cauldron full of boiling feces waiting for every cancel-culturalist out there.
If I had a Disney+ subscription I'd cancel it.
God damn, i love this place. You can't make this shit up.
Re: (Score:2)
Deep-fried potato-based micturation (Score:2)
Whiny conservatives (Score:5, Informative)
-Modern US Conservatives, unaware their entire world view was shaped by those corporation who bankrolled them just for financial gain, and are now cancelling them to ensure their continued financial gain. Don't worry though, I'm sure they'll tell you it's the leftists cancelling you, can't risk you thinking about who it is that's actually controlling your "free speech".
Re:Whiny conservatives (Score:4, Interesting)
Misunderstanding freedom of speech/cancel culture (Score:5, Insightful)
You have the right to say whatever you want (within the bounds of the law- not inciting violence for instance)
You still have to deal with and be accountable for the consequences of what you say.
Freedom of speech is not a pass to say what you want without repercussions. If you make homophobic, and-mask comments, you have to own those and be willing to deal with how others respond to those comments (such as your employer or media outlet). Cancel culture isn't the end of free speech, it's just the bluntest way that people have to show that someone has said something they don't agree with - and they are exercising their own rights to respond to it however they want.
Freedom of speech doesn't mean that people have to accept your views, or treat those views with sacred respect. It just means you can say them, and other people can decide how they want to respond to it.
Re:Misunderstanding freedom of speech/cancel cultu (Score:5, Insightful)
Repercussions from whom? 1st amendment freedom of speech means that the government cannot limit your speech (presumably that would include protection from being fired for what you say outside work as an employee of the government). But institutions like universities also declare something closely allied, "academic freedom", and that's supposed to mean that the institution will not limit your scholarly inquiry and speech. So yes, even an un-tenured faculty member or student should be safe from being removed for saying repellent things as long as it's done in an academic way. When any institution proclaims freedom of speech, they (ought to) make the implicit promise that they will not use any of their powers (censure,firing,etc.) to limit freedom of speech, and NOT merely acknowledge that the government won't throw you in jail or shut you down. The reality often differs from this, and it's very disappointing.
To support freedom of speech in a given context goes beyond the 1st amendment. It means a commitment to solve conflict through the exercise of speech, not play non-speech tactics by using your authority or influence to fire/cancel/etc. So if you support someone being fired for saying something, then you betray a lack of support for open dialogue, that you would rather silence / shut down / financially disadvantage / etc. someone than actually engaging, through your own speech, whatever it is that they're saying. One is under no obligation to support freedom of speech in all contexts, of course. For example, if my friend is grieving, I don't support the (beyond 1st amendment) freedom of speech of others to say things that might offend that person; I freely admit that. But there is a cost to limiting speech -- that people will increasingly find temporarily convenient ways other than speech to address their conflicts, that can only in the long term lead to escalation. They best way for a pluralistic society is to be tolerant and try to persuade. The alternative is not pretty.
Re: (Score:3)
So if you support someone being fired for saying something, then you betray a lack of support for open dialogue,
Free speech doesn't require open dialogue. It protects both speech and the right to not speak.
The First Amendment equally protects the right of free association with others (which includes the right to refuse to associate with others). (There are minor limits on this such as barring racial discrimination in commerce)
So if you say something I find offensive, I'm free to react to that by refusing to speak to you and by refusing to even be anywhere together with you, and this fits very nicely in the spirit of
Woman sacked for talking toomuch (Score:3, Insightful)
Meanwhile...
Hypocrites and new McCarthy-ism (Score:5, Insightful)
Cancel culture brought to you by the same mindset that tried to shun Elia Kazan for naming names during McCarthy's witch hunt of communists in Hollywood.
The complete lack of self awareness by the new SJW crowd along with their capricious and arbitrary demands that everyone obey (or else) is a testament to their intolerance. If this is the "unity" they profess while leading by decree, then I'll have no part of it.
"Believe what we tell you or we'll make it impossible for you to even earn a living."
She just wasn't a Hollywood Glamour-Girl (Score:3)
That's a shame (Score:5, Informative)
Unacceptable outrage. (Score:4, Insightful)
We cannot hand off decisions over who can work where to idiots on twitter who don't understand what the words they use actually mean.
It is not anti-Semitic to state facts about how the Nzis rose to power or what lead to the Holocaust. Especially since those facts do not reflect poorly on German Jews, only on their neighbors.
I really liked her character and her acting. She should not be fired because a few hypersensitive idiots on twitter got mad over things that didn't happen. She should sue them for libel. There is a list of twitter users linked from the summary who lied about what she said, leading to her losing her job. That is actionable. I'd sue Disney too.
But more importantly, we can't be making decisions on the basis of what a tiny sliver of the population says on twitter. Why should those angry morons have so much influence?
It's a tasteless comparison (Score:3, Insightful)
Ironically, her losing her job over her politics does more to confirm what she's posted than anything she could have written.
Re: Good riddance. (Score:2)
Agree, shitty acting.
Re:Seems like straightforward thinking (Score:5, Insightful)
First you demonise a group, then rally the sheeple to go after them
The republicans had both houses and the president two years ago. You lost the senate by the narrowest possible margin and have plenty of congress people, a good number of state legislatures and a lot of votes for president. You're not fucking oppressed at all never mind like the Jews in 1930s/40s Germany, and it's fucking disgusting that you think you are.
Oh and if you think she was fired for being right wing then you're claiming antisemitism is a right wing position. That's utterly insane.
Re: (Score:3)
How is this different from the left today
Republicans aren't being pulled off the street into vans and loaded into trains destined for crematoriums?
Re:Wasn't hating, was belittling (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
If you compare the Holocaust to the normal, every day it shows you don't really understand the depravity of the Holocaust.
Perhaps it shows how much the Holocaust depended on the careful guiding of grass roots support in the community to carry out its depravity. Had public opinion not been carefully molded, it is unlikely that the brown shirts could have carried out their pogroms at the level they did. The Holocaust was bad, but there are those that don't want these tools taken away from them or blunted should they need them to craft their own popular uprising.
This attack on Carano is just saying "Don't hate the haters. Becaus