[Report] Don Cherry Fired

[TNucks1]

wow, havent really read up or anything about it untill today, he got fired over that.?

Edited November 13, 2019 by TNucks1

[Maninthebox]

1 hour ago, ilduce39 said:

Hiding behind semantics is a terrible cop-out.  You aren’t fooling anyone with that junk and you don’t need to be “offended” to think what he said was dumb.

If it is merely dumb then why are people offended?

 

You think it is somehow appropriate to take something out of context and yet argue that semantics are a cop out? Seems like the perfect excuse to justify complete ignorance, one of the defining traits of social justice activism.

[awalk]

19 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

 

 

It depends on how the term SJW is being used.  If someone says it solely because they disagree with what you say on a subject, then it's someone being lazy in lieu of making a proper counter-point or argument.

 

If it's used to refer to a person, or people, who are constantly looking to get an outrage high from being outraged over any and all social issues then it's being used as originally intended.

 

A month or two ago I came across an article that studied people who were seen as continually being outraged over social issues.  When they were given scans, the reward center of their brain would go into overdrive. 

 

Those kind of people seeking to be offended on the behalf of others because they get pleasure from it are why the term SJW was created. 

 

Even before clicking on this thread for the very first time 30 minutes ago, I knew for sure that one well known CDC poster here would be all over this thread, especially in the beginning because he fits into the SJW mould almost perfectly.  I was right.  He just couldn't resist the social justice siren song.

 

Also, what some of you consider to be social justice, others may not have the same opinion.

 

I used to live with two people like that, it was a nightmare. 

 

But it's also used as a derogatory term in the same way that so-called "SJW's" call anyone who disagrees with them a racist, so it ends up being a lot of people in glass houses throwing stones on both sides thinking they are sooo right and everyone else is soooo wrong.

[IBatch]

1 hour ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Just imagine if they didn't go or any of the current day evil "oppressors" that need punishing for great great grandpa's sins. How many freedoms would there be?

 

Many new people just don't know what the poppy represents

 

Not allowed anymore, the Lord's prayer and God Save The Queen, a song commemorating our roots and ancestors

 

I still remember the words - we stopped singing it all of a sudden in grade school - but ever day we sang that and O Canada to start the day.  On that note I was at my daughters ceremony yesterday (grade 12) and she did a reading - as did another student on the on the First World War including the man who wrote the Flanders Fields poem.   One of the poets was a Doctor from London Ont. but went to serve - and died.   If I got it right he’s the one who observed the poppies growing in the Spring at Flanders fields and it inspired him to write about it.   At least where I am the message is still been transferred on to the next generation.  As an aside it’s not a stat holiday in ON - when I lived in BC it was.  Our national anthem is played every day at the start of school here though - I live within a KM and can hear it when I’m outside having coffee every morning which is great. 

[awalk]

1 hour ago, ItTakesAnArmy said:

Just imagine if they didn't go or any of the current day evil "oppressors" that need punishing for great great grandpa's sins. How many freedoms would there be?

 

Many new people just don't know what the poppy represents

 

Not allowed anymore, the Lord's prayer and God Save The Queen, a song commemorating our roots and ancestors

 

I for one am happy there's no prayer in school. Forcing everyone to celebrate the same religion sounds an awful lot like facism.

[Maninthebox]

1 hour ago, Curmudgeon said:

What exactly is this SJW movement? Are there membership cards? Meetings? Pledges of allegiance? Local chapters? International governing bodies? Or is the term SJW just a kind of dog whistle to rally opponents of, well, social justice? Perhaps you would prefer social injustice? As far as I can see there are extremes at either end of the spectrum. Try for the common ground and go from there, but if you insist on labelling those who disagree with you SJWs, you are being just as militant as the people you disparage. Then nobody can hear each other over the shouting. Let's all try a little tolerance and recognize that not agreeing with your world view isn't bad or evil or stupid, it is just different and labelling it with some nebulous catch all term doesn't help anyone.

Who are you trying to convince?

[SabreFan1]

2 minutes ago, awalk said:

I used to live with two people like that, it was a nightmare. 

 

But it's also used as a derogatory term in the same way that so-called "SJW's" call anyone who disagrees with them a racist, so it ends up being a lot of people in glass houses throwing stones on both sides thinking they are sooo right and everyone else is soooo wrong.

 

People are being politically tribal.  It's the radically conservative along with the radically liberal that will take a term and twist it to their own uses.  They'll pretty much bastardize it and run it into the ground and then move onto the next thing.

 

If you use a term like SJW, you should be able to back it up with a balanced argument.  When I got called out on using it in a thread I created, I was able to flesh out my original argument because I properly used the term.  Then of course as the thread gained a measure of popularity and longevity, people eventually got stupid in it and got it locked up.  By then I had stopped keeping tabs on it and it took me almost 3 weeks until I noticed what had happened.

[Sbriggs]

1 hour ago, Nucksfollower1983 said:

I have no problem with that. The SJW movement however.... And if you don't share their opinions then you are a racist and a bigot.

I'm not far right and I'm not far left, Like the majority I'm in the middle leaning left and I have my own opinions never needed anyone to follow

[HerrDrFunk]

1 hour ago, Nucksfollower1983 said:

I have no problem with that. The SJW movement however.... And if you don't share their opinions then you are a racist and a bigot.

Meanwhile on the flip side, it’s pretty easy to just label anyone who has different opinions than you an SJW and say they just want a reason to be offended.

[SabreFan1]

14 minutes ago, TNucks1 said:

wow, havent really read up or anything about it untill today, he got fired over that.?

 

Technically he did, but in reality his job performance was fading and his contract was overpriced for his contributions. 

 

Sportsnet wanted out of the Don Cherry business and he provided them the perfect excuse to cut ties as cleanly as possible.

[Alflives]

5 minutes ago, HerrDrFunk said:

Meanwhile on the flip side, it’s pretty easy to just label anyone who has different opinions than you an SJW and say they just want a reason to be offended.

Good point, and accepted.  

[Adarsh Sant]

 

 

A call to fire Cherry from 1992. 

 

27 years ago. Don't act like it was just this one instance and Cherry was good and proper the rest of the time.

[Sbriggs]

26 minutes ago, smokes said:

I am also sure that they would but to me it's not about that. It's about the attitude. People have the freedom to participate and not participate that's true but can there be something that can bring people together. The people who have been here for while with the people who have not? From what I have seen a vast majority of people who come here from other countries end up conglomerating with other people who come from the same parts of the world and stay within those social circles. If you immigrate to Canada, great! Glad to have you, now let's celebrate together and mourn together.

I understand your point but unfortunately alot of those people have come from war torn countries and have their own way to grieve, remember and like us prefer to do it with their own. Thats not to say they don't have respect for our way of doing things but they dont have to participate in the way we may expect them too. I went to a gathering yesterday here in 100 Mile House and there were all kinds of cultures there and some with a poppy and some without, including us white Canadians, I just dont see it that way, I see all Canadians because were a multi cultural country and were all here to remember in our own way and seeing the multiculturalism is what makes us Canadian, a great country, considered one of the best in the world and I wouldn't have it any other way and unfortunately Don Cherry doesn't see it that way. I really loved Cherry, wished he could see my two young girls play hockey some day, they are great players, one is captain of her team. Unfortunately they are also mixed race and now I see that that might not be such a good idea considering one was born outside of Canada. Sad.

[SabreFan1]

Just now, HerrDrFunk said:

Meanwhile on the flip side, it’s pretty easy to just label anyone who has different opinions than you an SJW and say they just want a reason to be offended.

It's not easy at all.  Especially on a message board.  Ask the person to explain their usage of the term.  If they can, then they weren't wrong and a conversation can be had.  If they can't explain their usage, they were being lazy and trying to use an insult in which case you just point out their laziness and move on.

 

There are several people on this board that I consider to be SJW's.  I don't just dismiss their opinions when given in a discussion, I keep that fact in mind when I craft my responses to them.  If I find that an SJW is just looking to be outraged no matter what, I don't bother continuing the discussion because it would be a waste of my time.

[awalk]

14 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

 

People are being politically tribal.  It's the radically conservative along with the radically liberal that will take a term and twist it to their own uses.  They'll pretty much bastardize it and run it into the ground and then move onto the next thing.

 

If you use a term like SJW, you should be able to back it up with a balanced argument.  When I got called out on using it in a thread I created, I was able to flesh out my original argument because I properly used the term.  Then of course as the thread gained a measure of popularity and longevity, people eventually got stupid in it and got it locked up.  By then I had stopped keeping tabs on it and it took me almost 3 weeks until I noticed what had happened.

Political tribalism, that's a good way to describe it for sure. If you are not 100% in agreement with me you are my enemy, or so it seems. 

[HerrDrFunk]

4 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

It's not easy at all.  Especially on a message board.  Ask the person to explain their usage of the term.  If they can, then they weren't wrong and a conversation can be had.  If they can't explain their usage, they were being lazy and trying to use an insult in which case you just point out their laziness and move on.

 

There are several people on this board that I consider to be SJW's.  I don't just dismiss their opinions when given in a discussion, I keep that fact in mind when I craft my responses to them.  If I find that an SJW is just looking to be outraged no matter what, I don't bother continuing the discussion because it would be a waste of my time.

That’s fair but I certainly don’t believe most people who toss around the term put as much critical thought into it as you do.

[SabreFan1]

Just now, awalk said:

Political tribalism, that's a good way to describe it for sure. If you are not 100% in agreement with me you are my enemy, or so it seems. 

That's where the US has been for years now and the rest of the world is quickly catching up.

 

Sadly it's a large part of human nature to be tribal.  That's why we see nationalism and political party tribalism these days.  What was once concentrated in religion has now spilled over into the secular.  When people used to concentrate their tribalism on religion, they either killed each other or their religious leaders were able to preach peace.  Now that religion is playing less and less a part of people's lives, that re-emerging tribal need is being fulfilled with politics.

[guntrix]

Why is this even a thing. I stopped watching coaches corner years ago because the only “interesting” thing he brought to the table were his suits. 
 

Like others have said, this was long overdue. Wouldn’t even doubt that they were just looking for a reason to get him fired, Cherry being an icon and all that. 

[SabreFan1]

2 minutes ago, HerrDrFunk said:

That’s fair but I certainly don’t believe most people who toss around the term put as much critical thought into it as you do.

It's why I'm beginning to have a negative opinion of social media.  Any jackass can broadcast their stupidity to the other idiots of the world. 

 

Separately idiots can be pointed at and laughed down.  It's not as easy to do when they form giant groups.  Then you end up with imagined underage sex rings in pizza shops which inevitably one of those same idiots ends up attacking with a rifle in hand.

[gregthehockeynut]

  Certainly Grapes is a repeat offender and it makes me wonder if he had a code of conduct clause in this last contract that was a bit slow in the making.

 Rogers has been cost cutting already and Grapes made it easy for them to dump his fat salary while doing virtue signalling,

over reactive preening in front of the left wing media. A censure and an apology for poor wording choices seems more appropriate. but I doubt Grapes would do that even if he had been offered the chance.