I'm not arguing about Imus' actions, persay, so my knowlege of his history is completely irrelevant. What I'm saying is this: When you say that whenever a black person uses the phrase 'nappy headed hos' they can ONLY be joking, and whenever a white person says the same phrase they can ONLY be derogatory. Who's the racist, again?
Let me disabuse you of the idea that "nappy headed hos" would be said jokingly amongst black people. It wouldn't, ever. It's an insult, plain and simple.
You are trying to tell me that a white person could NEVER say "What's up, my n*****?" with the same exact intent as when a black person says it? You're automatically assuming that the white person is saying "What's up, my slave" when in reality he's just trying to say "What's up my friend" in the same way that black people do.
No, I'm not saying that at all. What I am saying is that the white person's intent is outweighed by how everyone will perceive what they said. More so because it is pretty much a social taboo for white people to say such things. In my opinion, there's almost never a good reason for a white person to make use of the N word, and there's certainly never a good reason to use it to refer to a black person. When I hear such things, my first thought is "here's someone who must be racist, because only a racist would ignore the social taboo". When it's coming from a black person, the context and intent play far more into it.
The context is important, that's what you should be taking away from what I'm saying. Also, you should stop assuming that, because some black people are cool with saying the N word amongst themselves, all black people are.
Man if only I had the right to use "n*****" and "nappy-headed ho's" without people thinking I'm a racist cockbite. I'm tired of living in the shadow of oppression! I'm taking it to the streets to stick it to the (black) man!
I think you're reading a little too much into what "privileges" I am talking about. But if it makes you feel better, go for it, the level of discourse in this thread is relatively poor regardless.
Actually, you didn't need that last modifier. Black people tend to get more freedom with words. When was the last time a black person said something racially insensative towards anyone and it started a shit storm from "activists" and media.
fix'd
Jesse Jackson catches a lot of shit when he goes off about "hymietown" and the like. And there's no real shortage of bitter white guys who whine about "reverse racism" and the like.
Yeah, Jesse Jackson getting a little bad press for a few days is totally the same thing as the railroading Imus just got in large part to Al Sharpton and...oh yeah...Jesse Jackson. I guess that hymietown comment really hurt his standings in the community.
See that's the point. People don't go in to shitstorm mode over Jesse Jackson's ramblings because he's black. It's the social climate we're in. He gets slack a white guy would never see because of the way the history of our country has played out.
What about Jesse Jackson's Hymietown slip-up already mentioned.
And i'm sure Celery remembers Professor Griff's "The Jews are wicked" comment.
A white guy made a racist comment on a nationally syndicated radio show, and has a history of racist remarks, and I would prefer he not broadcast any more.
If you can explain the relevance of Jesse Jackson's hymietown comment of Professor Griff's comment to the statement above, I'd like to hear it.
The context is important, that's what you should be taking away from what I'm saying. Also, you should stop assuming that, because some black people are cool with saying the N word amongst themselves, all black people are.
And that's basically the exact same thing all of us people defending Imus have been saying since this whole thing happened. Context is everything. But apparently the only context alot of people care about is the color of the skin of the person making the comment.
Here's what I'm trying to say regarding the 'history' of the words. I hate the n-word because of it's history. I've never said it, and I've denounced people I know who've said it in a derrogatory way. I wish NO ONE would say this word. But, if black people can say the word in a friendly manner ala "What's up my n-word", wouldn't it be racist to automatically say that if a white person says it, it HAS to be derrogatory?
It applies to this situation as well. If Dave Chappell (and I know you guys hate this, but he's the most relevant black comedian I can think of. And yes, Don Imus is considered a 'comedian') had commented that the rutgers team looked like nappy headed hos (this is something I could picture him saying, as well), no one would've cared. They were female atheletes, they were a bit ragged from a long tournament, it would simply be a joke about their appearance. Imus says it, and automatically he's trying to degrade an entire group of people.
Also, for the semantics lovers out there: Social Taboo =/= Racism. Just because a white person generally shouldn't use a word, the use of it doesn't make him a card carrying member of the KKK.
EDIT (again): And as for the history of our country giving black people the right to do whatever they want (I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE CASE), it's bullshit. I totally understand that our countries history is bad, and everyone should be treated equally. I do get a bit upset, though, when something someone else's great-grandfather did (may family was never a slave-owning family) affects the way I'm treated today. Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because white people treated black people like that back then, doesn't mean that black people can treat white people like shit now.
He's forced to issue apologies and all of that. The fact that he can't really be fired by anyone gives him a little more latitude than an employee of a radio station.
He's forced to issue apologies and all of that. The fact that he can't really be fired by anyone gives him a little more latitude than an employee of a radio station.
Wasn't forced out of his Ministry.
Jesse Jackson doesn't have advertisers to appeal to, and Griff was fired.
What about Jesse Jackson's Hymietown slip-up already mentioned.
And i'm sure Celery remembers Professor Griff's "The Jews are wicked" comment.
A white guy made a racist comment on a nationally syndicated radio show, and has a history of racist remarks, and I would prefer he not broadcast any more.
If you can explain the relevance of Jesse Jackson's hymietown comment of Professor Griff's comment to the statement above, I'd like to hear it.
The relevance lies in the resulting public reaction.
1) Jesse Jackson makes a highly racially insensitive comment.
2) He denies he made the comment.
3) He blames the Jews in the media of conspiring against him.
4) He apologizes.
5) Basically nothing else happens.
1) Don Imus makes a racially insensitive joke.
2) Shit storm.
3) He apologizes profusely to anyone that will listen.
4) He is labeled a racist piece of shit and loses his job.
The context is important, that's what you should be taking away from what I'm saying. Also, you should stop assuming that, because some black people are cool with saying the N word amongst themselves, all black people are.
And that's basically the exact same thing all of us people defending Imus have been saying since this whole thing happened. Context is everything. But apparently the only context alot of people care about is the color of the skin of the person making the comment.
The problem is that your argument falls short by the very same explanation I gave.
Here's what I'm trying to say regarding the 'history' of the words. I hate the n-word because of it's history. I've never said it, and I've denounced people I know who've said it in a derrogatory way. I wish NO ONE would say this word. But, if black people can say the word in a friendly manner ala "What's up my n-word", wouldn't it be racist to automatically say that if a white person says it, it HAS to be derrogatory?
Sure, it would be racist if you ignore the history of the N word. Since we're not going to do that, we accept the fact that white people who say the N word (in most cases) are perceived as being racist because, historically, that was the case.
It applies to this situation as well. If Dave Chappell (and I know you guys hate this, but he's the most relevant black comedian I can think of. And yes, Don Imus is considered a 'comedian') had commented that the rutgers team looked like nappy headed hos (this is something I could picture him saying, as well), no one would've cared. They were female atheletes, they were a bit ragged from a long tournament, it would simply be a joke about their appearance. Imus says it, and automatically he's trying to degrade an entire group of people.
You know what, though? That's what's fucking stupid -- Dave Chappelle emphatically wouldn't call a group of hard-working, positive, intelligent, successful, upwardly mobile black women achieving one of the greatest feats they can achieve in their personal field of competition as "nappy-headed hoes," because not only can he instantly recognize the deep hurtfulness of that comment, but also because his humor is much more nuanced doesn't function on the purely "shock" level. For you to suggest that is just fucking ridiculous, self-serving, and diversionary.
The Green Eyed Monster on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
The context is important, that's what you should be taking away from what I'm saying. Also, you should stop assuming that, because some black people are cool with saying the N word amongst themselves, all black people are.
And that's basically the exact same thing all of us people defending Imus have been saying since this whole thing happened. Context is everything. But apparently the only context alot of people care about is the color of the skin of the person making the comment.
Look, the context of the comment was to disparage the team and one-up his co-host is saying something offensive. He started by calling them "rough", and escalated to "nappy-headed hos".
Imus knew exactly what he was doing. He just thought he'd get away with it.
You know what, though? That's what's fucking stupid -- Dave Chappelle emphatically wouldn't call a group of hard-working, positive, intelligent, successful, upwardly mobile black women achieving one of the greatest feats they can achieve in their personal field of competition as "nappy-headed hoes," because not only can he instantly recognize the deep hurtfulness of that comment, but also because his humor is much more nuanced doesn't function on the purely "shock" level. For you to suggest that is just fucking ridiculous, self-serving, and diversionary.
Where do you get this stuff? He said Puffy had dolphin-teeth. He makes Tiger Woods out to be some sort of geek. He definitely harps on successful blacks.
Imus knew exactly what he was doing. He just thought he'd get away with it.
This reasoning keeps getting repeated and it drives me nuts.
"He should have known better." "He thought he could get away with it." And so on. We recognize that he lost his job because of what he said. Repeating that fact is not an argument for why this is right or wrong.
Yar on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
1) Jesse Jackson makes a highly racially insensitive comment.
2) He denies he made the comment.
3) He blames the Jews in the media of conspiring against him.
4) He apologizes.
5) Basically nothing else happens.
1) Don Imus makes a racially insensitive joke.
2) Shit storm.
3) He apologizes profusely to anyone that will listen.
4) He is labeled a racist piece of shit and loses his job.
WHO'S GOING TO FIRE JESSE JACKSON? AND FROM WHAT? His various comments and attitudes throughout the years have offended a lot of people, who now think little of him. But they can't fire him!
Are you asking that liberals be incensed with Jesse Jackson? Because a lot of us don't think much of him.
It applies to this situation as well. If Dave Chappell (and I know you guys hate this, but he's the most relevant black comedian I can think of. And yes, Don Imus is considered a 'comedian') had commented that the rutgers team looked like nappy headed hos (this is something I could picture him saying, as well), no one would've cared. They were female atheletes, they were a bit ragged from a long tournament, it would simply be a joke about their appearance. Imus says it, and automatically he's trying to degrade an entire group of people.
You know what, though? That's what's fucking stupid -- Dave Chappelle emphatically wouldn't call a group of hard-working, positive, intelligent, successful, upwardly mobile black women achieving one of the greatest feats they can achieve in their personal field of competition as "nappy-headed hoes," because not only can he instantly recognize the deep hurtfulness of that comment, but also because his humor is much more nuanced doesn't function on the purely "shock" level. For you to suggest that is just fucking ridiculous, self-serving, and diversionary.
Saying that he wouldn't is pretty fucking stupid. A joke is a joke, and I've heard him say worse about people who've acheived more. Who's putting forth a self serving argument?
Sure, it would be racist if you ignore the history of the N word. Since we're not going to do that, we accept the fact that white people who say the N word (in most cases) are perceived as being racist because, historically, that was the case.
That's what I'm trying to say though, black people who use the n-word ARE ignoring the history of it. Say what you will about 'taking it back' or whatever, if the history of the word is so bad, NO ONE should use it.
Saying that he wouldn't is pretty fucking stupid. A joke is a joke, and I've heard him say worse about people who've acheived more. Who's putting forth a self serving argument?
You know what, though? That's what's fucking stupid -- Dave Chappelle emphatically wouldn't call a group of hard-working, positive, intelligent, successful, upwardly mobile black women achieving one of the greatest feats they can achieve in their personal field of competition as "nappy-headed hoes," because not only can he instantly recognize the deep hurtfulness of that comment, but also because his humor is much more nuanced doesn't function on the purely "shock" level. For you to suggest that is just fucking ridiculous, self-serving, and diversionary.
Where do you get this stuff? He said Puffy had dolphin-teeth. He makes Tiger Woods out to be some sort of geek. He definitely harps on successful blacks.
Not to a greater extent than all celebrities are parodied, and never for their race.
And teenage college students are obviously a separate group.
I don't get why people are upset. Imus had the right to say what he said, and he had the right to be fired for it. I can't go around my office calling people "nappy-headed ho's" and not expect there to be repercussions. Imus is in the same position. You can't get mad at the American public for what they decide to get offended by.
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
If you can explain the relevance of Jesse Jackson's hymietown comment of Professor Griff's comment to the statement above, I'd like to hear it.
There was no call for the ends of their careers. Why not?
There were criticism of his remark, only they weren't enough to topple his public career because his apologies and history managed to deflect them.
Sooo ... what's your point again?
Also this idea that black racism is just as damaging as white racism is just daft. Power relations, etc., I don't feel like really outlining that now, but white people have social power, have had social power, whereas black people have not, and that makes a difference. Sorry white people, hopefully the privilege extended to you in nearly every facet of your life will make up for it.
What argument? He said something racist. His employers found such behavior unacceptable, so he got fired. WHERE'S THE ISSUE?
The issue is in the political machinery that allows certain individuals to prey on ignorance and a lack of reason to further their own power, attack free exchange of ideas, and promote a culture of feigned victimization. I really don't care that Imus got fired in and of itself. I've never seen or heard anything he does.
You know what, though? That's what's fucking stupid -- Dave Chappelle emphatically wouldn't call a group of hard-working, positive, intelligent, successful, upwardly mobile black women achieving one of the greatest feats they can achieve in their personal field of competition as "nappy-headed hoes," because not only can he instantly recognize the deep hurtfulness of that comment, but also because his humor is much more nuanced doesn't function on the purely "shock" level. For you to suggest that is just fucking ridiculous, self-serving, and diversionary.
Where do you get this stuff? He said Puffy had dolphin-teeth. He makes Tiger Woods out to be some sort of geek. He definitely harps on successful blacks.
Dolphin teeth is not an insult borne out of and strongly associated with Puffy's skin color, it's about his teeth. Tiger Woods geekiness is not an insult borne out of and strongly associated with his skin color, it's about his social demeanor. Goddamn you're a moron, Yar.
Not to a greater extent than all celebrities are parodied, and never for their race.
And teenage college students are obviously a separate group.
Yeah, it wasn't nice to make fun of teenage sport stars. Imus does it all the time, as I understand.
And they weren't parodied for their race.
Directing a racially charged comment (with humor predicated solely on how offensive the comment is) goes beyond merely making fun, and clearly has to do with race.
If his earlier comments about sports stars were as offensive, even if they didn't take race into account, then I think something should have been done about him earlier.
The context is important, that's what you should be taking away from what I'm saying. Also, you should stop assuming that, because some black people are cool with saying the N word amongst themselves, all black people are.
And that's basically the exact same thing all of us people defending Imus have been saying since this whole thing happened. Context is everything. But apparently the only context alot of people care about is the color of the skin of the person making the comment.
Look, the context of the comment was to disparage the team and one-up his co-host is saying something offensive. He started by calling them "rough", and escalated to "nappy-headed hos".
Imus knew exactly what he was doing. He just thought he'd get away with it.
That's because he should have. It was a joke. The joke was an old white guy using an urban colloquialism. Old white guys trying to act "hip" by using commonly used phrases in the black community is funny (not particularly to me, but in a general sense it is).
This is from a transcript from Hannity & Colmes with Patrice O'Niel (a black comedian, and a pretty damn funny one too):
COLMES: Was it funny what Imus said? Was it funny?
O'NEAL: To say "nappy-headed ho" is hilarious.
(CROSSTALK)
O'NEAL: But in context of a comic, you should be able to explore any words you want to say. He messed up.
COLMES: Would it be different if a black person said it?
O'NEAL: Of course. I can say nappy-headed ho all day. But I want to be able to call white girls straight-headed hos any time I feel like it. Anytime.
COLMES: Would you?
O'NEAL: Of course!
COLMES: And should you be punished for it?
O'NEAL: Of course not.
Why in the fuck is it so hard for people to understand the difference between a racist and a person who makes a racial joke. RACIAL =/= RACIST
If you can explain the relevance of Jesse Jackson's hymietown comment of Professor Griff's comment to the statement above, I'd like to hear it.
There was no call for the ends of their careers. Why not?
There were criticism of his remark, only they weren't enough to topple his public career because his apologies and history managed to deflect them.
Sooo ... what's your point again?
Also this idea that black racism is just as damaging as white racism is just daft. Power relations, etc., I don't feel like really outlining that now, but white people have social power, have had social power, whereas black people have not, and that makes a difference. Sorry white people, hopefully the privilege extended to you in nearly every facet of your life will make up for it.
I'm not one for declaring reverse-racism or anything, but if you're stating that white people have more 'social power' than black people, well, you haven't been paying enough attention to pop culture, or the world around you. Sure, there's still alot of old white people in positions of 'real' power (not social), but the paradigm is shifiting pretty rapidly already, as newer generations take over. Whatever great priviledges you perceive that white people get....I don't know, I've been white all my life, and I've NEVER had anything handed to me. I've had to work hard for everything, and I don't think the color of my skin has any relevance to it. If you're holding the fact that there are tons of old white senators against me, well, who's being racist now?
EDIT: I had to bold the last sentence of your quote, because it's one of the most racist things I've heard on this thread. Isn't judging an entire race based on the actions of a few a bit too far?
What argument? He said something racist. His employers found such behavior unacceptable, so he got fired. WHERE'S THE ISSUE?
The issue is in the political machinery that allows certain individuals to prey on ignorance and a lack of reason to further their own power, attack free exchange of ideas, and promote a culture of feigned victimization. I really don't care that Imus got fired in and of itself. I've never seen or heard anything he does.
It's not political machinery; it's social machinery. The fact that Sharpton and Jackson criticized Imus has no bearing on whether or not his behavior was acceptable, and the fact that Sharpton and Jackson have become famous for championing issues surrounding racism is totally irrelevant to all of this.
Directing a racially charged comment (with humor predicated solely on how offensive the comment is) goes beyond merely making fun, and clearly has to do with race.
If his earlier comments about sports stars were as offensive, even if they didn't take race into account, then I think something should have been done about him earlier.
Like I said, I realize that one can dissect his comment and find racial aspects to it. So what? Why do we do that? Why do we take a comment that we intuitively know was just meant as a mean joke, and break it down until we can find racial aspects that were rather insignificant to the overall intended meaning of the statement, and then promote that as being the sole relevant factor in what someone says? It isn't "racism" and everyone here seems to have all but acknowledged that.
Despite repeated requests, no one will explain why this is racist. The only thing anyone has been able to show is that some dictionaries define "nappy" as specifically related to kinky hair such as African hair. That's the problem I have with all this. It's like some semantic game, whereby you take anything negative and dissect until you find something that isn't entirely devoid of racial context, and then suddenly the entire ball of wax equates to "racism." It's fucking shit.
It's not political machinery; it's social machinery. The fact that Sharpton and Jackson criticized Imus has no bearing on whether or not his behavior was acceptable, and the fact that Sharpton and Jackson have become famous for championing issues surrounding racism is totally irrelevant to all of this.
They are politicians, at the highest level no less, who deal in political power and use largely political issues as their weapons. And they weren't just loud-mouthing, they were given a seat at the table in negotiating this issue with the networks. Because of their political clout and political capital.
Directing a racially charged comment (with humor predicated solely on how offensive the comment is) goes beyond merely making fun, and clearly has to do with race.
If his earlier comments about sports stars were as offensive, even if they didn't take race into account, then I think something should have been done about him earlier.
Like I said, I realize that one can dissect his comment and find racial aspects to it. So what? Why do we do that? Why do we take a comment that we intuitively know was just meant as a mean joke, and break it down until we can find racial aspects that were rather insignificant to the overall intended meaning of the statement, and then promote that as being the sole relevant factor in what someone says? It isn't "racism" and everyone here seems to have all but acknowledged that.
Really, any disparaging comment directed at another person can be passed off as a mean joke.
I'm not one for declaring reverse-racism or anything, but if you're stating that white people have more 'social power' than black people, well, you haven't been paying enough attention to pop culture, or the world around you. Sure, there's still alot of old white people in positions of 'real' power (not social), but the paradigm is shifiting pretty rapidly already, as newer generations take over. Whatever great priviledges you perceive that white people get....I don't know, I've been white all my life, and I've NEVER had anything handed to me. I've had to work hard for everything, and I don't think the color of my skin has any relevance to it. If you're holding the fact that there are tons of old white senators against me, well, who's being racist now?
EDIT: I had to bold the last sentence of your quote, because it's one of the most racist things I've heard on this thread. Isn't judging an entire race based on the actions of a few a bit too far?
Just google white privilege, I'm sick of this bullshit, or hell just visit whiteprivilege.com. We all have to work to get ahead, it's true, but there are still privileges extended to white people because of the color of their skin. Just assume my default position is whatever you can find in your white privilege search, and if you want to keep talking about it, respond to that shit.
Perhaps looking at his past history would give some indication of why some people are not inclined to let this slide. I mean, Stephen Colbert on his show a few months ago said that we should put Barak Obama in slavery to up his street cred. There is a reason why people didn't get up in arms over this statement. The main reason is that it is clear from Colbert's past that he was joking. Imus does not have that luxury. In fact, if you look at the history of comments Elkamil posted above, one could infer that he was NOT joking when he said that. Or that his jokes are so bad he should be fired anyway.
Edit: I do also love people who claim white privlidge doesn't exist because that had to work that one summer at the Wendy's drive through...
Sentry on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
wrote:
When I was a little kid, I always pretended I was the hero,' Skip said.
'Fuck yeah, me too. What little kid ever pretended to be part of the lynch-mob?'
Directing a racially charged comment (with humor predicated solely on how offensive the comment is) goes beyond merely making fun, and clearly has to do with race.
If his earlier comments about sports stars were as offensive, even if they didn't take race into account, then I think something should have been done about him earlier.
Like I said, I realize that one can dissect his comment and find racial aspects to it. So what? Why do we do that? Why do we take a comment that we intuitively know was just meant as a mean joke, and break it down until we can find racial aspects that were rather insignificant to the overall intended meaning of the statement, and then promote that as being the sole relevant factor in what someone says? It isn't "racism" and everyone here seems to have all but acknowledged that.
Really, any disparaging comment directed at another person can be passed off as a mean joke.
Not if it's one race making a disparaging comment about another race, using that race's vernacular. Then it's racism. Didn't you know Imus thinks slavery should be re-instated, because he thought a girls basketball team looked a little ragged?
Please, I would appreciate if people would stop bringing up how 'priveledged' all white people are. My life has been pretty shitty, and black guys have bigger penises. Oh, shit, I'm a racist.
'EDIT: I AM TYPING THIS IN ALL CAPS, SO PEOPLE WILL READ IT. JUST BECAUSE OLD WHITE SENATORS CONTROL THE COUNTRY, DOES NOT MEAN THAT ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE PRIVELIDGED. I'VE BEEN HOMELESS, I HAVE NO FAMILY TO SPEAK OF, AND NO ONE HAS EVER GIVEN ME A JOB OR A GOOD GRADE SIMPLY BECAUSE I AM WHITE. ASSUMING THAT ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE PRIVELEDGED BECAUSE OF THE FEW IS RACISM.
I'm not one for declaring reverse-racism or anything, but if you're stating that white people have more 'social power' than black people, well, you haven't been paying enough attention to pop culture, or the world around you. Sure, there's still alot of old white people in positions of 'real' power (not social), but the paradigm is shifiting pretty rapidly already, as newer generations take over. Whatever great priviledges you perceive that white people get....I don't know, I've been white all my life, and I've NEVER had anything handed to me. I've had to work hard for everything, and I don't think the color of my skin has any relevance to it. If you're holding the fact that there are tons of old white senators against me, well, who's being racist now?
I don't think you're aware of how the world (or at least America) really works.
Posts
Larry Summers was fired.
That's gender though.
Let me disabuse you of the idea that "nappy headed hos" would be said jokingly amongst black people. It wouldn't, ever. It's an insult, plain and simple.
No, I'm not saying that at all. What I am saying is that the white person's intent is outweighed by how everyone will perceive what they said. More so because it is pretty much a social taboo for white people to say such things. In my opinion, there's almost never a good reason for a white person to make use of the N word, and there's certainly never a good reason to use it to refer to a black person. When I hear such things, my first thought is "here's someone who must be racist, because only a racist would ignore the social taboo". When it's coming from a black person, the context and intent play far more into it.
The context is important, that's what you should be taking away from what I'm saying. Also, you should stop assuming that, because some black people are cool with saying the N word amongst themselves, all black people are.
See that's the point. People don't go in to shitstorm mode over Jesse Jackson's ramblings because he's black. It's the social climate we're in. He gets slack a white guy would never see because of the way the history of our country has played out.
If you can explain the relevance of Jesse Jackson's hymietown comment of Professor Griff's comment to the statement above, I'd like to hear it.
And that's basically the exact same thing all of us people defending Imus have been saying since this whole thing happened. Context is everything. But apparently the only context alot of people care about is the color of the skin of the person making the comment.
It applies to this situation as well. If Dave Chappell (and I know you guys hate this, but he's the most relevant black comedian I can think of. And yes, Don Imus is considered a 'comedian') had commented that the rutgers team looked like nappy headed hos (this is something I could picture him saying, as well), no one would've cared. They were female atheletes, they were a bit ragged from a long tournament, it would simply be a joke about their appearance. Imus says it, and automatically he's trying to degrade an entire group of people.
Also, for the semantics lovers out there: Social Taboo =/= Racism. Just because a white person generally shouldn't use a word, the use of it doesn't make him a card carrying member of the KKK.
EDIT (again): And as for the history of our country giving black people the right to do whatever they want (I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE CASE), it's bullshit. I totally understand that our countries history is bad, and everyone should be treated equally. I do get a bit upset, though, when something someone else's great-grandfather did (may family was never a slave-owning family) affects the way I'm treated today. Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because white people treated black people like that back then, doesn't mean that black people can treat white people like shit now.
Wasn't forced out of his Ministry.
Jesse Jackson doesn't have advertisers to appeal to, and Griff was fired.
How do you force someone out of their ministry?
The relevance lies in the resulting public reaction.
1) Jesse Jackson makes a highly racially insensitive comment.
2) He denies he made the comment.
3) He blames the Jews in the media of conspiring against him.
4) He apologizes.
5) Basically nothing else happens.
1) Don Imus makes a racially insensitive joke.
2) Shit storm.
3) He apologizes profusely to anyone that will listen.
4) He is labeled a racist piece of shit and loses his job.
The problem is that your argument falls short by the very same explanation I gave.
Sure, it would be racist if you ignore the history of the N word. Since we're not going to do that, we accept the fact that white people who say the N word (in most cases) are perceived as being racist because, historically, that was the case.
Imus knew exactly what he was doing. He just thought he'd get away with it.
This reasoning keeps getting repeated and it drives me nuts.
"He should have known better." "He thought he could get away with it." And so on. We recognize that he lost his job because of what he said. Repeating that fact is not an argument for why this is right or wrong.
WHO'S GOING TO FIRE JESSE JACKSON? AND FROM WHAT? His various comments and attitudes throughout the years have offended a lot of people, who now think little of him. But they can't fire him!
Are you asking that liberals be incensed with Jesse Jackson? Because a lot of us don't think much of him.
Saying that he wouldn't is pretty fucking stupid. A joke is a joke, and I've heard him say worse about people who've acheived more. Who's putting forth a self serving argument?
That's what I'm trying to say though, black people who use the n-word ARE ignoring the history of it. Say what you will about 'taking it back' or whatever, if the history of the word is so bad, NO ONE should use it.
Yeah, but Chappelle knows how to be funny.
Not to a greater extent than all celebrities are parodied, and never for their race.
And teenage college students are obviously a separate group.
Yeah, it wasn't nice to make fun of teenage sport stars. Imus does it all the time, as I understand.
And they weren't parodied for their race.
What argument? He said something racist. His employers found such behavior unacceptable, so he got fired. WHERE'S THE ISSUE?
Sooo ... what's your point again?
Also this idea that black racism is just as damaging as white racism is just daft. Power relations, etc., I don't feel like really outlining that now, but white people have social power, have had social power, whereas black people have not, and that makes a difference. Sorry white people, hopefully the privilege extended to you in nearly every facet of your life will make up for it.
My argument is that the double standard is completely understandable and acceptable.
Furthermore, it doesn't matter. Imus' employers can fire him whyever and whenever they wish.
Directing a racially charged comment (with humor predicated solely on how offensive the comment is) goes beyond merely making fun, and clearly has to do with race.
If his earlier comments about sports stars were as offensive, even if they didn't take race into account, then I think something should have been done about him earlier.
That's because he should have. It was a joke. The joke was an old white guy using an urban colloquialism. Old white guys trying to act "hip" by using commonly used phrases in the black community is funny (not particularly to me, but in a general sense it is).
This is from a transcript from Hannity & Colmes with Patrice O'Niel (a black comedian, and a pretty damn funny one too):
COLMES: Was it funny what Imus said? Was it funny?
O'NEAL: To say "nappy-headed ho" is hilarious.
(CROSSTALK)
O'NEAL: But in context of a comic, you should be able to explore any words you want to say. He messed up.
COLMES: Would it be different if a black person said it?
O'NEAL: Of course. I can say nappy-headed ho all day. But I want to be able to call white girls straight-headed hos any time I feel like it. Anytime.
COLMES: Would you?
O'NEAL: Of course!
COLMES: And should you be punished for it?
O'NEAL: Of course not.
Why in the fuck is it so hard for people to understand the difference between a racist and a person who makes a racial joke. RACIAL =/= RACIST
I'm not one for declaring reverse-racism or anything, but if you're stating that white people have more 'social power' than black people, well, you haven't been paying enough attention to pop culture, or the world around you. Sure, there's still alot of old white people in positions of 'real' power (not social), but the paradigm is shifiting pretty rapidly already, as newer generations take over. Whatever great priviledges you perceive that white people get....I don't know, I've been white all my life, and I've NEVER had anything handed to me. I've had to work hard for everything, and I don't think the color of my skin has any relevance to it. If you're holding the fact that there are tons of old white senators against me, well, who's being racist now?
EDIT: I had to bold the last sentence of your quote, because it's one of the most racist things I've heard on this thread. Isn't judging an entire race based on the actions of a few a bit too far?
It isn't. Is it difficult for you to stop mischaracterizing our arguments?
Despite repeated requests, no one will explain why this is racist. The only thing anyone has been able to show is that some dictionaries define "nappy" as specifically related to kinky hair such as African hair. That's the problem I have with all this. It's like some semantic game, whereby you take anything negative and dissect until you find something that isn't entirely devoid of racial context, and then suddenly the entire ball of wax equates to "racism." It's fucking shit.
They are politicians, at the highest level no less, who deal in political power and use largely political issues as their weapons. And they weren't just loud-mouthing, they were given a seat at the table in negotiating this issue with the networks. Because of their political clout and political capital.
Really, any disparaging comment directed at another person can be passed off as a mean joke.
Edit: I do also love people who claim white privlidge doesn't exist because that had to work that one summer at the Wendy's drive through...
Not if it's one race making a disparaging comment about another race, using that race's vernacular. Then it's racism. Didn't you know Imus thinks slavery should be re-instated, because he thought a girls basketball team looked a little ragged?
Please, I would appreciate if people would stop bringing up how 'priveledged' all white people are. My life has been pretty shitty, and black guys have bigger penises.
'EDIT: I AM TYPING THIS IN ALL CAPS, SO PEOPLE WILL READ IT. JUST BECAUSE OLD WHITE SENATORS CONTROL THE COUNTRY, DOES NOT MEAN THAT ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE PRIVELIDGED. I'VE BEEN HOMELESS, I HAVE NO FAMILY TO SPEAK OF, AND NO ONE HAS EVER GIVEN ME A JOB OR A GOOD GRADE SIMPLY BECAUSE I AM WHITE. ASSUMING THAT ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE PRIVELEDGED BECAUSE OF THE FEW IS RACISM.
I don't think you're aware of how the world (or at least America) really works.