Cancel culture attacks Shakespeare for being a racist and misogynistic

1. 80

   Lone Wolf Primeposted 4 years ago

   Now I've heard everything.  Earlier in 2020, products like Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben's were considered "racist" products due to featuring black people on their logos.  Then the Washington Redskins had to change their name because it was offensive to a small group of Native Americans.  I mean screw the fact that some tribal leaders actually said that the name "Redskins" wasn't offensive, but fuck him.  I guess the woke media knows best.  Also, I'm part Native American myself, yet I never found that name offensive, but what do I know. 
   
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSjk-0sUu5A
   
   Now, it seems William Shakespeare is now being attacked by cancel culture because many teachers find his work to be highly offensive.  A Shakespeare scholar, Ayanna Thompson, a professor of English at Arizona State University was quoted saying that, “Shakespeare was a tool used to ‘civilize’ Black and brown people in England’s empire.”
   
   Head of Michigan's High School English Literature Department, Jeffrey Austin, insists that teachers need to “challenge the whiteness” of the assumption that Shakespeare’s works are “universal.”
   
   Other teachers said they'll continue teaching the works of Shakespeare, but would do so reframing it through a more modern lens.
   
   Sarah Mulhern Gross, who's an English teacher at High Technology High School in Lincroft, NJ, has been teaching her students about "Romeo and Juliet", but with a with a side of toxic masculinity analysis.
   
   One person was quoted saying this about Shakespeare's literary work:
   
   “Shakespeare’s works are full of problematic, outdated ideas, with plenty of misogyny, racism, homophobia, classism, anti-Semitism, and misogynoir”
   
   Uh I'm not a Shakespearian scholar, but to be fair, he did have men play women in his plays if I'm not mistaken so... doesn't that count towards something with these SJW's?   
   
   And it was also quoted in the New York Post:
   
   A slew of English literature teachers told the School Library Journal (SLJ) how they were ditching the likes of “Hamlet,” “Macbeth” and “Romeo and Juliet” to instead “make room for modern, diverse, and inclusive voices.”
   
   So what are your thoughts on this?  Should William Shakespeare be cancelled because his stories have toxic masculinity and misogyny?   Do you find any of his stories to be racist, sexist, homophobic and etc?  His stories not as "universal" as many people believed?   
   
   And should teachers abandon teaching their students with his work because they're problematic for today's generation?   Do you think it's right for teachers to teach his work anyways but doing so through a reframed modern lens?  Do you think teachers are right to teach "toxic masculinity analysis" when teaching their students the story of "Romeo and Juliet?"   Please discuss. 
   
   Also here's a link to know more about the situation.   
   
   
   https://nypost.com/2021/02/16/shakespea … ny-racism/

   replyreport
   1. 82

      peterstreepposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      O dear, we've got a new slogan. Cancel Culture. Who is making these things?
      Stop the Steal - Cancel Culture - Lock her up - Black Lives Matter -
      What a load of nonsense.
      Never ever trust one-liners as they are not true and only put labels on things and make divisions. Live is more complicated than that.
      
      Shakespeare is an amazing author
      Plato an amazing philosopher (but he had no problems with slaves)
      Picasso was an amazing painter but he was a macho
      James Brown was an amazing musician but a dictator for his band.
      Lots of genius people are very difficult in their personal life. Should we, therefore, dismiss the artwork?
      
      Shakespeare did not decide about men playing women. Women were not allowed to work in a theater at the time, so men had to play women roles.
      
      Everything and especially art has to be seen in the day it was made. You need context to understand art.
      Today we live in a different society with different moral codes. And actually, the plays of Shakespeare are timeless as they talk about deep-rooted problems and emotions. And often the plays are modernized. A play has many facets. If you want you can accentuate a crooked greedy hooked nose Jew. Or you can just show him as a greedy person, without the anti-semitic characteristics. The play won't change much. It depends on the director what to do with a play and you should blame him, not Shakespeare.
      The colour red can be seen as communism or as the colour for love.
      
      What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Okay, your closing line was classic wit. I liked it. ;-)
         
         But . . .  although all you say about slogans and one-liners is true, they also act as symbolic shorthand. One gets the gist of the message from them but must examine that "gist" to get the actual message.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 79

            lobobrandonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Sadly, a majority of the populace does not examine stuff and when they do they do it wrong. Him allowing men to play the role of women for example. If this fact was examined they would have come to the conclusion that peterstreep was kind enough to point out. Alas, they did not do their research.

            replyreport
            1. 85

               GA Andersonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               You are right. Folks don't bother to look around when what they hear agrees with what they already believe.
               
               GA

               replyreport
   2. 85

      tsmogposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      That is one thing I very much dislike about the far leaning left liberal culture today. Their intent seems to be change the world with their world view examining history with a slant, with political correctness, and now cancel culture. I can understand examining past cultures and society and comparing with today's. Yet, to change history like the 1619 project and as pointed out study Shakespeare in literature as a sociology class is nuts.

      replyreport
2. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago

   ... and we should allow  C a n c e l  C u l t u r e ? ? ?
   
   Really?
   
   That canceling is fine with everybody?
   We should just shut down the history of whites? of the Anglo Saxon race?
   ... and we should focus on the present time alone?
   just the present? because what good is history and knowledge of past cultures and of previous times and ways?
   Oh my Gosh!
   N O !

   replyreport
3. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago

   Who teaches that Shakespeare and his time were exemplary?
   His works are from the darker ages. We are more enlightened now.
   His brilliance and creativity exists as a portion of history in England.
   Why judge it?
   Why hate it?
   Why be afraid it will influence the youth in detrimental ways?
   
   Good grief.
   
   If you want to cancel something, cancel Two and a Half Men. Still on air every single night.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      Lone Wolf Primeposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      No idea.  Personally, I think it's ridiculous to attack a dead man like this since he can't even defend himself.  Plus, stories like "Romeo and Juliet" are timeless stories, which is why it's been retold a million times over in other mediums like "West Side Story" for example and many others.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Exactly.

         replyreport
4. 78

   wildernessposted 4 years ago

   I imagine it was with great shock that those people found that Shakespeare's ideas and concepts of morality are outdated.  Sounds like they aren't smart enough to understand that Shakespeare lived 400 years ago or that morals change with time; that they are never static.  It also sounds as if they aren't even attempting to teach literature, but their ideas of ethics and morality instead. 
   
   Perhaps these teachers and professors need to take their education all over, starting in the first grade and learning to count.  Or create a church where the purpose is to teach morality rather than literature.

   replyreport
5. 82

   peterstreepposted 4 years ago

   Yes, I know. It's just that I don't like labeling. We all do it though. Like the "tax the rich" thing..;-)
   But it plays with our minds. Sometimes I see headlines in the newspapers that are so crude and simplistic. Half-truths, suggestive ideas, click bates..Like "Stop the Steal." It's a good soundbite and mime. That's why it's great to spread information as fast as possible.
   And one can only hope that people will examine the "gist" of the message..

   replyreport