Or is what you mean by "cancelled" is that a lot of people said mean things about her on Twitter? Yes, I suppose they did at that. Perhaps she can console herself by rolling around in her giant bin of money.
Generally, yes that is what I and much of society means. An organized bullying campaign that tries to destroy someone to enforce their version of politically correct behavior.
And the fact remains that the behavior she was attacked over, whether or not you want to regard her as a human capable of being victimized or suffering nagatively from such things, was not related to any neo-nazi or otherwise objectively "evil" behavior we can wave away as deserving. Or was it? That was actually my question.
She lost a lot of fans and faced a lot of criticism due to her extremist views. That's a consequence of saying things most people don't like.
We were talking about what it takes to get someone cancelled. I'd say the uproar that ensued qualifies. And what's with all the snark and cross-examination I'm getting in return for even asking the question? Why are you guys emotionally invested in this argument about JK Rowling?
What evidence do you have that "we are emotionally invested"?
What is "the uproar", some posts on Twitter?
All of the above is weasel words to try to get around the fact that "cancel culture" really just translates to "people facing the consequence of saying unpopular things".
Rowling, who, again, was not "cancelled", faced criticism for her TERF views. TERFs are considered extremists, one that will get you kicked off of platforms for hate speech. This is because at its core they *very unpopular* in all kinds of polls.
Having unpopular views will get you backlash. That is on you.
Cross-examination such as this is precisely my evidence regarding being emotionally invested. And despite the fact that you agree with my point ultimately. I have no idea why you care so much to disagree with all the people (certainly you know it isn't just me) that think Rowling was "cancelled", but clearly you care.
The thread is about the dangers to ordinary people in being doxxed by hackers, and none of these angles you come at me with are making the case against it. Of course you're not here for "curious conversation" about that, are you?
Some people will have a much lower tolerance for such opinions, just like I know for a fact there are people in the midwest who wouldn't hire me because I'm an "out of touch coastal liberal" or such. Like, I could name names. Similarly, there are people who wouldn't think a thing of it.
Also, I truly don't believe there's such a thing as "cancelling". In every case I've seen of it, the root cause was someone who had been making an ass of themself and the people around them had enough.