Canadian whites under fire for refusing to more to the back of a concert

[Islam Imamate]

@panamaican defended himself better than I expected.

 

[Grenz]

1. That's a matter of opinion. You're not the first to say it and I think it's only valid if you believe that the only way to capture the event is from the front of the crowd. However, in this case, taking pictures from the before and after positions could just as effectively convey the effect of the artist's request. That the venue agreed with the artist certainly suggests that the artist was entitled to order this photographer during the artist's performance.

She had no authority to order around event staff. However, artists do this all the time and make all sorts of demand, many of which are often ceded by organizers. The especially unreasonable and overbearing ones are referred to as divas and 'hard to work with'. Quite ironically as it pertains to this situation, this is pure entitlement on the artist's part. But entitlement means getting something without actually having a right to it, as in this case, her ordering around of staff she neither hired or paid.

2. The artist's political views are part of her performance. We know this because she makes this request at many of her previous performances. And, yes, the artist is entitled to express her political beliefs in a way that encroaches on the audience, within reason. That's what the audience is paying for - the artist's performance. A performance that is entirely up to the artist. If the audience is disinterested in aspects of that performance then they're free to leave. And the artist never imposed any direct action on the audience. She made a request, she made no attempt to enforce it upon the audience (why people keep ignoring this surprises me).

She's not free to make that request, not if it involves an action a part of the audience is involuntarily required to take. The audience didn't give up their autonomy at the door, and if they don't want to move, they shouldn't be required to. They paid to be there. Also, stopping specifically to target one person angrily is stronger than simply making a request, it's coercion via indirect means, in this case public shaming.

 

[panamaican]

@panamaican defended himself better than I expected.

I'm disappointed that you didn't think I had well reasoned arguments for what I wrote.

I don't expect everyone to agree with me but I know which posters are open to an honest exchange of perspectives and which ones aren't. I'm trying very hard to limit how much time I spend debating the latter.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

1. That's a matter of opinion. You're not the first to say it and I think it's only valid if you believe that the only way to capture the event is from the front of the crowd. However, in this case, taking pictures from the before and after positions could just as effectively convey the effect of the artist's request. That the venue agreed with the artist certainly suggests that the artist was entitled to order this photographer during the artist's performance.

2. The artist's political views are part of her performance. We know this because she makes this request at many of her previous performances. And, yes, the artist is entitled to express her political beliefs in a way that encroaches on the audience, within reason. That's what the audience is paying for - the artist's performance. A performance that is entirely up to the artist. If the audience is disinterested in aspects of that performance then they're free to leave. And the artist never imposed any direct action on the audience. She made a request, she made no attempt to enforce it upon the audience (why people keep ignoring this surprises me).

The highlighted part in green isn't true. All it means is that the venue publicly sided with the artist in a rather unique dispute. The motivation there is obvious. Nothing the photographer was doing as part of her job was an issue. The issue was one party hired by the venue didn't want another party engaged by the venue to stand where they were standing simply because of skin color.

The artist can express whatever. But they don't control the seating. It defies reason to say they do. The venue charges/allows for admittance. There's reserved seating and there's general admission. Why you think the artist can drive people out of legally purchased access is beyond me. You're the lawyer. What do you know that I don't?

Does "sex, drugs, & rock & roll" mean when a band says "show us your tits" all the chicks in the audience need to pull up their shirts?

 

[octopus]

The highlighted part in green isn't true. All it means is that the venue publicly sided with the artist in a rather unique dispute. The motivation there is obvious. Nothing the photographer was doing as part of her job was an issue. The issue was one party hired by the venue didn't want another party engaged by the venue to stand where they were standing simply because of skin color.

The artist can express whatever. But they don't control the seating. It defies reason to say they do. The venue charges/allows for admittance. There's reserved seating and there's generalDoes "sex, drugs, & rock & roll" mean when a band says "show us your tits" all the chicks in the audience need to pull up their shirts?

What would happen if the photographer in question refused to move and was beaten by the crowd?

*now that I'm reading it, kinda dumb question. Pretty sure you could just say, then the people who assaulted him/her would be charged. I was trying to draw a line to inciting a riot but I'm not sure if that's even a crime or if it would be applicable to this situation. Interested to hear mr. P's response but I'm kind of reaching and will show myself out. Good job with the lawyering btw *thumbs up*

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

@panamaican defended himself better than I expected.

How so? He seems to be leaning hard on the belief that the artist can order around event staff. Sure, sound and lighting are there to service the artists's needs. People like concessions and security have their own marching orders. It's not customary that artists position photographers. It's certianly not customary for artists to segregate by race. I guess I will give Pan credit for shifting the argument onto a worthless point when the real problem is the artist created a hostile environment for white people and deprived many (via mob pressure) of what they were legally entitled to when they purchased their ticket.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

What would happen if the photographer in question refused to move and was beaten by the crowd?

The security provided by the venue would come under scrutiny and be deemed insufficient based on the premise a beating took place. Photographer, having no fucking legal obligation whatsoever to take orders from some other venue-sub-contracted-party, would likely make tons of money. Unless Canada is that radically different than America. But if anything, I'd think there they'd hold businesses even more responsible than in the US.

 

[floivanus]

what a wilderbeast

I've got low enough standards that I would bang...

Had she not been such a leftist twat that is, no way now. It's my privilege to not give her the D.... but I post on Sherdog, so I don't ever get the chance to give the D

 

[JSN]

As someone who wears flannel, I am disappointed by how cucked out Canada has become. Y'all need to take yo' country back, players.

 

[Bald1]

@panamaican defended himself better than I expected.

I don't see how?

He's trying to hand waive this into something which it was not. And that was a demand based on skin color alone. Excuse making is all I see.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I don't see how?

He's trying to hand waive this into something which it was not. And that was a demand based on skin color alone. Excuse making is all I see.

Artistic expression bro. Like if you open an art gallery you can keep black people out under the guise of it being one big ongoing performance.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

@panamaican defended himself better than I expected.

Not really...he's just doubling down on what he said earlier and attempting to obfuscate the matter using circumlocution.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

I don't see how?

He's trying to hand waive this into something which it was not. And that was a demand based on skin color alone. Excuse making is all I see.

That's exactly how I interpreted it as well...

An attempt to justify racism, or a racist act...

@Kafir-kun , do you find the actions by the performer in the article to be racist?

 

[Bald1]

Artistic expression bro. Like if you open an art gallery you can keep black people out under the guise of it being one big ongoing performance.

Artistic expression sounds like a trap. Can It try to keep women out instead?

I like Pan, but he's not coming out of this one smelling like roses.

 

[Greoric]

Not really...he's just doubling down on what he said earlier and attempting to obfuscate the matter using circumlocution.

In other words his MO.

 

[Greoric]

Artistic expression sounds like a trap. Can It try to keep women out instead?

I like Pan, but he's not coming out of this one smelling like roses.

Get in more debates with him. This tactic is nothing new if he's outclassed on the facts of the matter.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Artistic expression sounds like a trap. Can It try to keep women out instead?

I like Pan, but he's not coming out of this one smelling like roses.

Precisely...he is doubling down on this lunacy...

And again, he deems something to have been resolved by simply stating that it was...without offering any proof, simply his opinion.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

How so? He seems to be leaning hard on the belief that the artist can order around event staff. Sure, sound and lighting are there to service the artists's needs. People like concessions and security have their own marching orders. It's not customary that artists position photographers. It's certianly not customary for artists to segregate by race. I guess I will give Pan credit for shifting the argument onto a worthless point when the real problem is the artist created a hostile environment for white people and deprived many (via mob pressure) of what they were legally entitled to when they purchased their ticket.

Bingo...

How the fuck are people defending this?

No wonder the mods dumped this thread initially. Lol

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Artistic expression sounds like a trap. Can It try to keep women out instead?

I like Pan, but he's not coming out of this one smelling like roses.

I'd keep men out. But that's because I like fucking women.

Pride and ego or closet racist?

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Bingo...

How the fuck are people defending this?

No wonder the mods dumped this thread initially. Lol

Looking forward to any future condemnations of racism on his part in any threads in the future. Should be a hoot.