Comments by "Mark Zuckergecko" (@markzuckergecko621) on "Jon Stewart REAMS Bill Maher's 'Cancel Culture' Take | Krystal Kyle u0026 Friends Podcast" video.

It's a nebulous concept that has a lot of grey area. Obviously if you walk into your bosses office and stick your bare ass in his face and fart, you're probably going to get fired, that's a justified "cancellation". But attacking a celebrity that had an opinion you don't like by digging up 10 year old tweets is obviously childish and could be used against practically anyone, for any reason you want. But there's a lot more circumstances that aren't as obvious as those 2 extreme examples. But I also think it's delusional to act as though the left doesn't generally sway way too far to the ridiculous side of cancellation, and many, many of the examples we have in recent history were more about people having political opinions that they don't like than them actually doing or saying something that was culturally taboo. And everyone knows this. Anyone who denies it is just lying. Simple as.
3
@Ryuujinv01 completely missing the point. As expected.
3
@Music-vr7sz that's kinda what I'm saying, I'm just saying there isn't a clearly defined line between the ridiculous and the justified. And the left uses this to great effect by constantly shifting the ridiculous in their favor.
3
The overwhelming majority of people disagree with you.
3
@JohanSven42069 you're an imposter. I'm the real Zuck.
2
@heyzeuscreestow9394 Kaepernick was benched the year before he started kneeling, because he was trash. His numbers were atrocious, most of the backup QBs in the league were better than him.
2
@Ryuujinv01 I don't think you've actually read anything that I said.
2
Kaepernick was benched because he was bad, the league adjusted to his tendencies and he couldn't adjust along with that. This was the year before he kneeled for the first time. The whole thing is a race grift because he wasn't good enough to be a starter anymore.
1
Nobody should be a "protected class" over any other class, we should all have equal protections under the law. Anti discrimination laws being applied only to a group or groups is necessarily discriminating against all other groups.
1
@ravedubin3983 if you want equal treatment, that means equal treatment, even the bad parts. That means sometimes people are going to be an asshole to you. That's how life works. If they break the law then they already broke the law, your identity group shouldn't have any impact on how that's carried out. Otherwise they were just being an asshole, get over it.
1
@ravedubin3983 so you're in opposition to equal rights then?
1
@ravedubin3983 so you're ok with people who aren't in your favorite victim groups being abused?
1
@ravedubin3983 well if a certain group gets special protections, then all other groups have less protection under the law. That's just reality, regardless of what you think reality is.
1
@ravedubin3983 no, that's exactly how it works, if someone applies for a job and gets denied, they can file a lawsuit for discrimination based on protected class and likely win, but if they're not a member of a protected class, then tough shit, they just have to deal with it. That's quite literally making that person a discriminated class because they're not part of a protected class. That's exactly how it works.
1
@ravedubin3983 so if they have an employee that just kind of sucks at their job but didn't do anything wrong necessarily, they can fire them, as long as it's a straight white guy. But if they're any protected group, they can't fire them. Again, that's discrimination.
1