Seriously, though. Girls whose good fundamentals make up for an inability to dunk do little to advance our society. I'm not familiar with Gwen Ifill's work and I think Maya Angelou's poems border on silly, but I'm sure that both women have more to offer the world than ladies who can spin an orange ball on their fingers.
LET’S say a word about the girls. The young women with the musical names. Kia and Epiphanny and Matee and Essence. Katie and Dee Dee and Rashidat and Myia and Brittany and Heather.
The Scarlet Knights of Rutgers University had an improbable season, dropping four of their first seven games, yet ending up in the N.C.A.A. women’s basketball championship game. None of them were seniors. Five were freshmen.
In the end, they were stopped only by Tennessee’s Lady Vols, who clinched their seventh national championship by ending Rutgers’ Cinderella run last week, 59-46. That’s the kind of story we love, right? A bunch of teenagers from Newark, Cincinnati, Brooklyn and, yes, Ogden, Utah, defying expectations. It’s what explodes so many March Madness office pools.
But not, apparently, for the girls. For all their grit, hard work and courage, the Rutgers girls got branded “nappy-headed ho’s†— a shockingly concise sexual and racial insult, tossed out in a volley of male camaraderie by a group of amused, middle-aged white men. The “joke†— as delivered and later recanted — by the radio and television personality Don Imus failed one big test: it was not funny.
The serial apologies of Mr. Imus, who was suspended yesterday by both NBC News and CBS Radio for his remarks, have failed another test. The sincerity seems forced and suspect because he’s done some version of this several times before.
I know, because he apparently did it to me.
I was covering the White House for this newspaper in 1993, when Mr. Imus’s producer began calling to invite me on his radio program. I didn’t return his calls. I had my hands plenty full covering Bill Clinton.
Soon enough, the phone calls stopped. Then quizzical colleagues began asking me why Don Imus seemed to have a problem with me. I had no idea what they were talking about because I never listened to the program.
It was not until five years later, when Mr. Imus and I were both working under the NBC News umbrella — his show was being simulcast on MSNBC; I was a Capitol Hill correspondent for the network — that I discovered why people were asking those questions. It took Lars-Erik Nelson, a columnist for The New York Daily News, to finally explain what no one else had wanted to repeat.
“Isn’t The Times wonderful,†Mr. Nelson quoted Mr. Imus as saying on the radio. “It lets the cleaning lady cover the White House.â€
I was taken aback but not outraged. I’d certainly been called worse and indeed jumped at the chance to use the old insult to explain to my NBC bosses why I did not want to appear on the Imus show.
I haven’t talked about this much. I’m a big girl. I have a platform. I have a voice. I’ve been working in journalism long enough that there is little danger that a radio D.J.’s juvenile slap will define or scar me. Yesterday, he began telling people he never actually called me a cleaning lady. Whatever. This is not about me.
It is about the Rutgers Scarlet Knights. That game had to be the biggest moment of their lives, and the outcome the biggest disappointment. They are not old enough, or established enough, to have built up the sort of carapace many women I know — black women in particular — develop to guard themselves against casual insult.
Why do my journalistic colleagues appear on Mr. Imus’s program? That’s for them to defend, and others to argue about. I certainly don’t know any black journalists who will. To his credit, Mr. Imus told the Rev. Al Sharpton yesterday he realizes that, this time, he went way too far.
Yes, he did. Every time a young black girl shyly approaches me for an autograph or writes or calls or stops me on the street to ask how she can become a journalist, I feel an enormous responsibility. It’s more than simply being a role model. I know I have to be a voice for them as well.
So here’s what this voice has to say for people who cannot grasp the notion of picking on people their own size: This country will only flourish once we consistently learn to applaud and encourage the young people who have to work harder just to achieve balance on the unequal playing field.
Let’s see if we can manage to build them up and reward them, rather than opting for the cheapest, easiest, most despicable shots.
I just think saying that all white people automatically have it better than anyone of another race is a bit racist itself, no?
No-one said that.
I'm saying that assuming nothing has changed is ignorant.
No-one said that.
No, it isn't a direct quote. It's called paraphrasing. You can't say that those things weren't at least implied.
to Cat: I'd argue that as time passes, white people aren't going to be in the 'dominant' position anymore. I know we're not there yet, but that list of points of white privilege is extremely out-dated.
Nickle? Follow me over to camera 3 for a second.
Lined up? Good.
When you 'paraphrase,' you are actually addressing some imaginary argument that you may think is wonderfully engaging but, unfortunately, has no relevance to the topic because it is a wholly hypothetical instance that you created in order to address yourself and has no bearing on the thread whatsoever. It's pointless.
To take it in the direction I assume it was originally intended-
By lending our ears, by creating a HUGE UPROAR we give credence to what was said and, in a way, lend ourselves to the cause of ignorance. The team, and others, claim that there moment was "stolen from them." Let's be very clear on this point; by holding press conference after press conference and falling back on racism time and time again you steal the moment from yourself and give it to Imus.
If an opposing high school won the big football team and I, as they walked off, claimed that they were all stupid East-siders, I would probably be shoved out of the way and flipped off. If I got on the loudspeaker and said it, the loudspeaker would be taken from me and I would be disciplined. If I got on TV and said it, most people would (and should) write me off as a huge jerk. I didn't take their moment from them; they won. Whatever I say will only lessen what was accomplished if people let it.
Make no mistake, Imus is a complete idiot who did indeed go way too far. His remarks were insensitive and not in any way funny. But that's all. The team still won, it still accomplished everything it meant to. If one ignorant jerk says something inappropriate my moment is not stolen, nor is it tarnished. The only thing that has happened is that it proves there are still extremely stupid people in positions to say extremely stupid things.
The man should've been fired immediately, and that it took so long was embarassing, yes. Someone whos job relies on communication communicating that poorly needs to be off the payroll.
As for white priveledge:
1. Wrong post.
2. Get off your high horse, everyone. You're ignoring the misses and counting the hits. White priveledge? What about all other kinds of priveledge, everywhere, in anything. What about black priveledge, asian priveledge, jewish priveledge? White people are in general better off? Pull your head out of your ass. There are poor, ignorant, stepped-on, uneducated white people ALL OVER THE PLACE. White people are in no way generally better off. Any "priveledge" a white person may or may not be part of racism; this same white person will not get priveledge elsewhere or by and through other people. Look at all the poor black people, we may say. Look at all the damn poor white people, too. Look at all the hardworking folks who came from latin america and raise the median average income. Everyone has a priveledge. We can whine about it and chalk it up to racism, or we can shut our mouths and do the best we can.
To take it in the direction I assume it was originally intended-
As for white priveledge:
1. Wrong post.
2. Get off your high horse, everyone. You're ignoring the misses and counting the hits. White priveledge? What about all other kinds of priveledge, everywhere, in anything. What about black priveledge, asian priveledge, jewish priveledge? White people are in general better off? Pull your head out of your ass. There are poor, ignorant, stepped-on, uneducated white people ALL OVER THE PLACE. White people are in no way generally better off. Any "priveledge" a white person may or may not be part of racism; this same white person will not get priveledge elsewhere or by and through other people. Look at all the poor black people, we may say. Look at all the damn poor white people, too. Look at all the hardworking folks who came from latin america and raise the median average income. Everyone has a priveledge. We can whine about it and chalk it up to racism, or we can shut our mouths and do the best we can.
Yes, all other sorts of privileges (there's no 'd') exist. But (see The Cat's post above) not all have the same weight as 'white' privilege. It's the privilege of being the dominant race in this country. And, like it or not, the majority of our culture is Caucasian culture. You can point to all the rappers you want to, it doesn't change the fact that whites are still in the cultural majority (and I'm too lazy to look up stats on the actual majority, though I would bet white still wins that one, too.)
But, on to my point.
White privilege doesn't necessarily mean that all white people have it made. It doesn't mean that any given white person has a better life than all people who aren't white. What it means is that white applicants are more likely to get jobs, college acceptance, good performance reviews, etc. It means that white men are culturally allowed to be 'badass', 'nerdy', 'hip', or any of a number of things, while Asian men are (generally) culturally 'nerdy' or the martial arts guy, while black men are 'thugs' or 'gangstas', while Mexicans are 'poor' or 'steal shit.' It means that if two people have identical resumes the one who has a whiter sounding name will most likely get the job.
So, yes, white people do get privileges, they're just so culturally ingrained that you aren't seeing them.
ZeeBeeKay on
0
Options
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
White priveledge? What about all other kinds of priveledge, everywhere, in anything. What about black priveledge, asian priveledge, jewish priveledge? White people are in general better off? Pull your head out of your ass
It's important that white privilege doesn't imply that all whites are empowered, or that all non-whites are disempowered. It's just one vector for empowerment among many: the poor, people with alternate sexual and religious identities, the ugly and fat, and innumerable groups are subject to institutional and cultural forces that opress them. These forces vary from group to group (gay people are victims of random attacks, the poor are denied respectability by their inability to dress sharp), and the groups can overlap (poor, black, and gay: ouch!). The racial case is simple more widely acknowledged, and usually one of the more powerful angles of empowerment/disempowerment.
It sounds like you've had a rough lot of it. That doesn't mean that there's no such thing as white privilege, however.
I have an idea to all those who think this should just be ignored. Why don't you shut the fuck up and ignore us who aren't ignoring this? Because we'll simply disappear if you ignore us. You seem to be fond of the idea, so why not practice it a little? I'm sure it'll work, because you keep saying it would.
Elki on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
White people are in no way generally better off. Any "priveledge" a white person may or may not be part of racism; this same white person will not get priveledge elsewhere or by and through other people. Look at all the poor black people, we may say. Look at all the damn poor white people, too. Look at all the hardworking folks who came from latin america and raise the median average income. Everyone has a priveledge. We can whine about it and chalk it up to racism, or we can shut our mouths and do the best we can.
Look; I can post some findings from the census to confuse and prove my point as well:
"Black households had the lowest median income in 2004 ($30,134) among race groups. Asian households had the highest median income ($57,518). The median income for non-Hispanic white households was $48,977. Median income for Hispanic households was $34,241."
Is there an Asian privelege that is somehow greater than white privelege? They've managed to do okay.
"In 2004, the poverty rate declined for Asians (9.8 percent in 2004, down from 11.8 percent in 2003), remained unchanged for Hispanics (21.9 percent) and blacks (24.7 percent) and rose for non-Hispanic whites (8.6 percent in 2004, up from 8.2 percent in 2003). "
Is the white privelege so effective that the poverty rate for whites has increased? In America, there are more "white people" (a stupid term used to define so many disparate peoples I am loathe to use it) than any other single people, about 80% of the country. 8.2% of those 80% of the people in the country, living in poverty. The privelege is so effective that the most "priveleged" race has about 20 million people leaving in poverty. That number represents more than half of the entire black population and about half of the latino popluation.
Perhaps someone should tell this group of people which represents more poverty than any other group that they are the most priveleged.
Is the white privelege so effective that the poverty rate for whites has increased? In America, there are more "white people" (a stupid term used to define so many disparate peoples I am loathe to use it) than any other single people, about 80% of the country. 8.2% of those 80% of the people in the country, living in poverty. The privelege is so effective that the most "priveleged" race has about 20 million people leaving in poverty. That number represents more than half of the entire black population and about half of the latino popluation.
Perhaps someone should tell this group of people which represents more poverty than any other group that they are the most priveleged.
Hey wow. My stupid-detector is going off the charts.
Did you miss the part where, while whites may have a larger number of people in poverty, blacks have three fucking times the rate of poverty? That whites have a lower rate of poverty than any other group, including Asians?
Hello again, thread. Ok, I feel the need to a little back story to explain to you why I feel the way I do. Please bear with me, this does have a point, and I'll try to make it quick.
My parents were divorced shortly after I was born, and I don't really remember much about my 'real father'. From what I understant, he was in and out of prison until he passed away when I was 10. From this point on, the term 'father' will be used exclusively to refer to (technically) my step-father.
My mother remarried when I was two, to the man I consider my father. A black man (shock & awe). Her parents (my grandparents) were none too happy about this, and rarely came around, all but stopping entirely when my mother passed away when I was 6. My father remarried when I was 9, to (more shock & awe) a black woman. We never really saw eye-to-eye, but that was my fault. I was so young and loyal to my mother for all she had done for me. That's neither here nor there, though. In any case, they subsequently produced my brother and two sisters. So, we come to the point. I am the white boy who grew up in a black household, in a black neighborhood.
Surprisingly (?), I don't have too many 'horror stories' from my childhood. To be certain, I caught my fair share of shit, and the occasional schoolyard beating, but for the most part (as strange as it may sound, my childhood wasn't that abnormal. My father would be the first to say 'I'm no genius, I work for a living', but in reality he's one of the most intelligent people I've ever met, and probably the main reason I turned out as well as I did, considering. I don't have time to go through everything I learned from him. I never felt like I was less important to him than his 'real children', and we were raised in a pretty open household.
We had a falling out when I was 16 for reasons that have no relevance here, and I had to 'relocate'. After I graduated high school, I went kind of 'nomadic', until I finally settled down again in my home state a few years ago. Here's the kicker, for the past few years I've been renting a house in the middle of white suburbia, a dozen miles from where I grew up. So there's that.
So, maybe it can be understood why this topic is a bit close to my heart. Maybe it can be understood that I don't need to read the same articles you guys are reading, because I lived it. Speaking of the topic, let's get to it, shall we.
1. Why I don't think Imus' comments were racist:
Growing up, I was quick to learn about racism. I learned quickly to seperate true racism from 'words' and taunts. Real racism is my granparents abandoning their daughter and grandson because she married a black man, and to a lesser extent, my father's parents as well. Real racism is being beaten up at school, simply because you're 'not dark enough'. Real racism is my father having to work two jobs, and still barely being able to support his family. Words can put forth a racist ideal, but they are not racist in and of themselves. Though I will admit that the n-word was not allowed in our house, at all (not just me). My father hated that word, and the history that came with it, and I've still never said it to this day. He always told me that if kids wanted to call me names, the only way to stop it wasn't to fight back tooth and nail. It was to ignore their ignorant comments, move on with my life, and prove them wrong.
The words that Imus said, while hurtful to the team, are not a real threat to race relations. The reaction, however, was. I'll explain that now.
2. Why I think the reaction of certain black leaders is doing more harm than good.
As you might imagine, I have a pretty diverse group of friends. Regardless of the fact that I can be used as a catalyst, rarely do my white friends mix with my black friends (Like I said, my group of friends is diverse, but I will stick to black/white, as it's most relevant to the situation). The reason is that my white friends are scared to be around black people, and a little bit (though not much at all, really) vice-versa. Now, back in the day, white people were scared of blacks because they thought of them as radically different. The whole, old ladies clutching their purses bit, etc. Now, and I'm sure my white friends don't really have a racist bone in their body, they are scared because of the very real possiblity of being labeled a racist. The races are segrated today, not because of racism, but because of the FEAR of racism.
White people are no longer uncomfortable around blacks soley because they are different. The image of black people that sensationalists like Jackson and Sharpton protray is one that will get extremely angry at the slightest slip of the tongue. White people are afraid that if they say one wrong word, or do something the way they shouldn't, that they will be attacked. I know from personal experience that this is not the truth, but this is the image that black public figures put across, especially in this case. While they may be trying to put a stop to racism (and in a way, you could say they do, at times), they are driving racial relations backwards. Like was said earlier, I would like to see these people marginalized, (Imus, Jackson, and Sharpton), instead of celebritized (is that a word?). We will never be equal, or able to celebrate our differences, with people like these dictating our behavior.
3. Why I dismissed 'white privilege'
First off, I'll quickly say that, from what I understand about white privilege (and yes, I did some reading) is that it was a very valid term when the term was coined (1989, from what I can tell). Having lived on both sides, myself, I can say without a shadow of a doubt, that this 'white privilege' is diminishing every day. I am not saying that it's gone, but I am saying that it has diminished more than what some sensationalists (and some people on this thread) refuse to acknowledge. I have seen such progress just in the past two decades of my life, and I refuse to think that somehow I live in some magical bubble, where things have improved, while at the same time the rest of the world has remained stagnant. Sure, some of the leaders of the community, and many instances in the media will tell people to think otherwise, but in reality, in day-to-day life, things have changed very much for the better. Besides, are we really saying we should let the media dictate how we think, really? But, of course, were the sensationalists like Jackson and Sharpton to admit this, they'd be out of a job. I just find it infuriating sometimes that all of the progress that has been made will be quickly thrown out the window in favor of a headline-grabbing story.
Now, I won't argue that old white men still control the country, and it's a problem. Here's a surprise for you, though. White people are just as upset about this as black people. Luckily for us, they're old, and so is their way of thinking, and both are near death. I'll tell you why 'white privilege' especially isn't an important topic (for me, specifically). My father taught me a long time ago, that given our circumstances, I would be in the position of seeing other white children living better than we were. He told me to never dare to be jealous, and that our lives would be richer as a result of our struggles. He said to me 'If we are going to get hung up based on the fact that they may or not have it better off than us, then there is no chance that we'll ever accept them as friends'. You have to realize that paradigms have been shifting, no matter what 'black leader' tells you that they aren't. Like my counter point to that list on wiki, alot of those terms defining 'white privilege' have diminished greatly, or are pretty non-existant in real, everyday life. Plus, you have to factor in other racial 'privileges', like the afore mentioned 'black people don't have to watch every word they say' issue. As long as we persist to perceive differences that aren't really there, or actually have no effect on the 'beneficiary', we'll never be able to accept one another. We have enough differences, which should be celebrated, and we don't need to 'make up' differences to add to the pile.
Well, in any case, I gotta take my kids to Chuck-E-Cheese now, so I gotta go. Even if you still disagree with me, and that's your right, please take the time to consider that things aren't always so black and white (pun totally intended). I will admit that I am completely unwilling to bend in my views, as this is the life I've lead, and I've learned nothing of what I said by reading an article. I learned it from my family and friends, I learned it from being who I am. So, on that note, I really have nothing more to say to this thread.
Is the white privelege so effective that the poverty rate for whites has increased? In America, there are more "white people" (a stupid term used to define so many disparate peoples I am loathe to use it) than any other single people, about 80% of the country. 8.2% of those 80% of the people in the country, living in poverty. The privelege is so effective that the most "priveleged" race has about 20 million people leaving in poverty. That number represents more than half of the entire black population and about half of the latino popluation.
Perhaps someone should tell this group of people which represents more poverty than any other group that they are the most priveleged.
Hey wow. My stupid-detector is going off the charts.
Did you miss the part where, while whites may have a larger number of people in poverty, blacks have three fucking times the rate of poverty? That whites have a lower rate of poverty than any other group, including Asians?
Simple fucking math tells us this, though.
If you take 1 million white people, and put half of them in poverty, OH SHIT 500,000 POOR WHITE FOLK.
Now take 1000 black people and put 3/4s in poverty. Damn, 750 poor black people.
Seriously, how do you pass high school and not get ratios as simple as "Small number means smaller sample"?
Wait, what the fuck is that even supposed to mean?
Black people have a lower poverty rate.
Like, of all the black people (not just 1000 randomly picked ones) a higher number are below the poverty rate.
So, for your example to actually make sense, you would have to take 1000 white people and 1000 black people. Of the whites, approximately 90 of them would be below the poverty line. Of the blacks, approximately 300 would be below the poverty line. Keeping in mind I'm working with old statistics, that's still a three fold increase in the poverty rates from the white number to the black number.
Also, I'm comparing the percent of the given population (just blacks or whites) who are below the poverty line. Not just straight up numbers. You can make the numbers say anything you damn well please, the percents actually mean something.
Yeah, the sponsors no longer wanted to be associated with Don Imus' show for political reasons, and how it would reflect on them. They pulled out; it isn't really a free speech issue. It had nothing to do with the government, it was a market-based decision.
I can see how the termination may be seen as unfair (and yes the comment was racist, but everyone carries their own prejudices with them) but that is a completely another issue; CBS was completely within their rights to terminate him.
On another note, TV in the U.S. fucking blows. I just got back from a school-trip to Washington and the Don Imus controversy seemed to be the main thing on the news for three fucking days. Doesn't anything else happen in your country? Doesn't anything happen anywhere else in the world as far as the United States is concerned? Goddamn, in Canada we have more exciting local news.
I was in Greece when this happened but, Don Imus shouldn't be fired for this. I love the his radio show and I listen to it every morning, or used too. He shouldn't be fired for this. Its halfway a comedy show for God sakes.
Next time some black comedian so much as begins to makes a white joke I am going to get his ass fired and black-listed. What it basically comes down to is a double-standard. He apologized, for something he shouldn't have had to apologize for but thats not the point. This is Politically Correct, uptight bullshit. Thats my two cents.
And that TIME journalist was right, "nappy-headed-hos" is a brilliant insult.
I was in Greece when this happened but, Don Imus shouldn't be fired for this. I love the his radio show and I listen to it every morning, or used too. He shouldn't be fired for this. Its halfway a comedy show for God sakes.
Next time some black comedian so much as begins to makes a white joke I am going to get his ass fired and black-listed. What it basically comes down to is a double-standard. He apologized, for something he shouldn't have had to apologize for but thats not the point. This is Politically Correct, uptight bullshit. Thats my two cents.
And that TIME journalist was right, "nappy-headed-hos" is a brilliant insult.
The world is full of double standards. Congratulations, you found another one. Now, why again is it that it pisses you off that you can't say the n-word without being labeled a racist?
Well, its a horrible word that should be gotten rid of completely, but that impossible. If Ludacris is allowed to make a chart-topping song called "Move Bitch" where during one of the verses I can't count how many times nigger is used on two hands, anyone else should be allowed to use that word regardless. Equality is what its all about and Al Sharpton should be freaking out on say, Lil Jon or Ludacris (to use him again) instead of Don Imus.
Well, its a horrible word that should be gotten rid of completely, but that impossible. If Ludacris is allowed to make a chart-topping song called "Move Bitch" where during one of the verses I can't count how many times nigger is used on two hands, anyone else should be allowed to use that word regardless. Equality is what its all about and Al Sharpton should be freaking out on say, Lil Jon or Ludacris (to use him again) instead of Don Imus.
This "LOOK AT THE RAPPERS" thing is really more of an excuse than an actual argument. Like trying to dangle car keys to distract a baby.
Look, Imus said some fucked up shit, he can do that, but noone promised he could on the radio without being criticized. Other people used their right to free speech and expressed their distaste so much that his sponsers pulled out. Everyone was well within their rights. Case closed.
This rappers argument is bullshit because people like to imagine that these rappers or even the black community are choosing what is put on the radio. Who owns the radio stations and why do they choose to only play a small selection of materialistic and mysogynistic hip-hop?
Well there's is a double standard when it comes to racism. "White privilege" does still exist to a degree but that's not an excuse. By invoking that term as a reason for the double standard you're basically saying that's white people have a duty to be ashamed of themselves because the predecessors were jerks to lots of people. Not only is that racist it's simply not 100 percent true.
Comparing Asians vs. Blacks in pure economic terms is pretty retarded.
That's a great article, thanks for that.
@ deadonthestreet -- Mark Cuban is a moron, whose notoriety is due in no small part to riding the coattails of possibly the most physically gifted Aryan in the world (that's a joke, by the way). But seriously, I don't care what he has to say, he's a loud-mouthed moron who obviously gets a thrill out of being a prick in public.
Also -- everyone says it's Imus' critics fault for making something out of nothing, when really this whole story wouldn't be half the issue that it is except for the fact that, upon complaints being lodged, (white) people started lining up around the block saying Imus' critics had no right or reason to complain. That's easily the most infuriating part. Imus says a racially charged, hurtful thing, and when people complain about it, they're basically told to get over themselves. That's where this story got its legs, in the white denial of a legitimate complaint, and why this thread has spun ~25 pages on what should otherwise be a relatively minor issue.
White people are complaining Imus' critics of complaining too much, while seemingly completely failing to see that they, in fact, are probably the biggest whiners in the whole situation. "Why can't we say n****?" "Why are rappers talking about hoes?" "Why isn't Dave Chappelle in trouble?" "Free speech is under fire!" "This is why we have race problems!" etc. all of which are infinitely more hysterical and ridiculous than saying "I find it offensive when a white man (with a history of racially insensitive remarks) calls a group of successful, young black women 'nappy-headed hoes.'" I mean really, who exactly is doing the whining or making unreasonable complaints here?
I think most of the people here got annoyed when it became a capital case. When Al Sharpton started screaming for his firing and crying young college students talking about their lives being ruined. People refusing to accept an apology given several times.
I never said I thought it was a nice thing to say or one that shouldn't have carried some punishment but people really did go after the guy like the Spanish Inquisition. Let's be honest it was a stupid joke. From how people reacted you'd think he was burning crosses in front yards or something.
White people are complaining Imus' critics of complaining too much, while seemingly completely failing to see that they, in fact, are probably the biggest whiners in the whole situation. "Why can't we say n****?" "Why are rappers talking about hoes?" "Why isn't Dave Chappelle in trouble?" "Free speech is under fire!" "This is why we have race problems!" etc. all of which are infinitely more hysterical and ridiculous than saying "I find it offensive when a white man (with a history of racially insensitive remarks) calls a group of successful, young black women 'nappy-headed hoes.'" I mean really, who exactly is doing the whining or making unreasonable complaints here?
Their whole argument rests on the hope that everyone is too stupid to notice that they're a bunch of whiners, who can't take their own advice about just ignoring what you find offensive.
I think most of the people here got annoyed when it became a capital case. When Al Sharpton started screaming for his firing and crying young college students talking about their lives being ruined. People refusing to accept an apology given several times.
Having heard what Imus considers to be an apology, I'm not surprised. Also, accepting his apology doesn't somebody can't also want him fired.
In the long run I think taking the high road would have been better for the girls. By driving him out for his statements it's pretty much admitting racist comments have an effect on you. I think racists should be ignored for the most part. When they realize their statements aren't even given any attention maybe they'll shut up.
You can't argue that you don't want him fired, and then expect us to take you seriously when you say that everyone is talking too much about this. You either don't care (and in which case you'd probably shut your pie hole), or you do care, and want to defend the guy. But if you do defend him, don't start talking about the whole conversation like you're not a part of it.
In the long run I think taking the high road would have been better for the girls. By driving him out for his statements it's pretty much admitting racist comments have an effect on you. I think racists should be ignored for the most part. When they realize their statements aren't even given any attention maybe they'll shut up.
Except Imus's statements already were given attention before...positive attention. I think his show's primary demographic was a combination of "people who are racist but don't want to admit it," and "old people who still wish being racist was acceptable." No, this wasn't the entirety of his audience...but I'd bet it was a sizable chunk.
I'm not shedding any tears at the idea of somebody no longer being paid for being racist.
Well there's is a double standard when it comes to racism. "White privilege" does still exist to a degree but that's not an excuse. By invoking that term as a reason for the double standard you're basically saying that's white people have a duty to be ashamed of themselves because the predecessors were jerks to lots of people. Not only is that racist it's simply not 100 percent true.
You're mischaracterizing it -- white people don't have "a duty to be ashamed of themselves," but yes, they do have a duty to be a little sensitive and respectful of the history of racism in our country and everyone's part in it. That's how it is. White people are basically saying, "why should we have to consider our language and behavior when interacting with non-white people?" Because you do, you always do, just like non-white people probably modify the language and behavior they use at home in order to interact with you. It's an idiotic and hollow complaint which basically boils down to, "why can't I say racist shit and not worry about it?"
In the long run I think taking the high road would have been better for the girls. By driving him out for his statements it's pretty much admitting racist comments have an effect on you. I think racists should be ignored for the most part. When they realize their statements aren't even given any attention maybe they'll shut up.
So basically you're advocating people not pay attention to racism? Turn the other cheek and such? Yeah, that strategy is a proven goddamn winner in repairing racial injustice in the United States. Your argument there is basically "stop being so uppity" which is pretty fucking ridiculous, and frankly a little offensive.
In the long run I think taking the high road would have been better for the girls. By driving him out for his statements it's pretty much admitting racist comments have an effect on you. I think racists should be ignored for the most part. When they realize their statements aren't even given any attention maybe they'll shut up.
So basically you're advocating people not pay attention to racism? Turn the other cheek and such? Yeah, that strategy is a proven goddamn winner in repairing racial injustice in the United States. Your argument there is basically "stop being so uppity" which is pretty fucking ridiculous, and frankly a little offensive.
My argument is "stop being uppity" about little shit and really deal with big shit instead. I know the two are not mutually exclusive but right now we only deal with the little stuff. there's bigger fish out there so let's stop turning minnows into whales.
nexuscrawler on
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
My argument is "stop being uppity" about little shit and really deal with big shit instead. I know the two are not mutually exclusive but right now we only deal with the little stuff. there's bigger fish out there so let's stop turning minnows into whales.
Part of dealing with the big stuff is dealing with the "little stuff". Recognition that racism is socially unacceptable is not entirely minor.
In the long run I think taking the high road would have been better for the girls. By driving him out for his statements it's pretty much admitting racist comments have an effect on you. I think racists should be ignored for the most part. When they realize their statements aren't even given any attention maybe they'll shut up.
They did take the high road. The apology was accepted a long time ago. Now it's just the media riding it until people see another shiny object and forget about it.
My argument is "stop being uppity" about little shit and really deal with big shit instead. I know the two are not mutually exclusive but right now we only deal with the little stuff. there's bigger fish out there so let's stop turning minnows into whales.
Part of dealing with the big stuff is dealing with the "little stuff". Recognition that racism is socially unacceptable is not entirely minor.
And when even minor complaints are met with a barrage of denial and belittlement and demands to stop being so uppity, I don't really know how "minor" you can really call it any more.
In the long run I think taking the high road would have been better for the girls. By driving him out for his statements it's pretty much admitting racist comments have an effect on you. I think racists should be ignored for the most part. When they realize their statements aren't even given any attention maybe they'll shut up.
They did take the high road. The apology was accepted a long time ago. Now it's just the media riding it until people see another shiny object and forget about it.
When it comes to blowing things way or out proportion the media is almost always the cause. lets face it the media loooooovveeess stories about celebrities doing stupid shit. Especially since people are tired of hearing about how Iraq is going to hell and our president is a slack jawed idiot.
My argument is "stop being uppity" about little shit and really deal with big shit instead. I know the two are not mutually exclusive but right now we only deal with the little stuff. there's bigger fish out there so let's stop turning minnows into whales.
Part of dealing with the big stuff is dealing with the "little stuff". Recognition that racism is socially unacceptable is not entirely minor.
And when even minor complaints are met with a barrage of denial and belittlement and demands to stop being so uppity, I don't really know how "minor" you can really call it any more.
I think he meant the issue is minor, not the reaction.
Posts
Here, familiarize yourself with Gwen's writing.
Nickle? Follow me over to camera 3 for a second.
Lined up? Good.
When you 'paraphrase,' you are actually addressing some imaginary argument that you may think is wonderfully engaging but, unfortunately, has no relevance to the topic because it is a wholly hypothetical instance that you created in order to address yourself and has no bearing on the thread whatsoever. It's pointless.
By lending our ears, by creating a HUGE UPROAR we give credence to what was said and, in a way, lend ourselves to the cause of ignorance. The team, and others, claim that there moment was "stolen from them." Let's be very clear on this point; by holding press conference after press conference and falling back on racism time and time again you steal the moment from yourself and give it to Imus.
If an opposing high school won the big football team and I, as they walked off, claimed that they were all stupid East-siders, I would probably be shoved out of the way and flipped off. If I got on the loudspeaker and said it, the loudspeaker would be taken from me and I would be disciplined. If I got on TV and said it, most people would (and should) write me off as a huge jerk. I didn't take their moment from them; they won. Whatever I say will only lessen what was accomplished if people let it.
Make no mistake, Imus is a complete idiot who did indeed go way too far. His remarks were insensitive and not in any way funny. But that's all. The team still won, it still accomplished everything it meant to. If one ignorant jerk says something inappropriate my moment is not stolen, nor is it tarnished. The only thing that has happened is that it proves there are still extremely stupid people in positions to say extremely stupid things.
The man should've been fired immediately, and that it took so long was embarassing, yes. Someone whos job relies on communication communicating that poorly needs to be off the payroll.
As for white priveledge:
1. Wrong post.
2. Get off your high horse, everyone. You're ignoring the misses and counting the hits. White priveledge? What about all other kinds of priveledge, everywhere, in anything. What about black priveledge, asian priveledge, jewish priveledge? White people are in general better off? Pull your head out of your ass. There are poor, ignorant, stepped-on, uneducated white people ALL OVER THE PLACE. White people are in no way generally better off. Any "priveledge" a white person may or may not be part of racism; this same white person will not get priveledge elsewhere or by and through other people. Look at all the poor black people, we may say. Look at all the damn poor white people, too. Look at all the hardworking folks who came from latin america and raise the median average income. Everyone has a priveledge. We can whine about it and chalk it up to racism, or we can shut our mouths and do the best we can.
-skjaybesk
Yes, all other sorts of privileges (there's no 'd') exist. But (see The Cat's post above) not all have the same weight as 'white' privilege. It's the privilege of being the dominant race in this country. And, like it or not, the majority of our culture is Caucasian culture. You can point to all the rappers you want to, it doesn't change the fact that whites are still in the cultural majority (and I'm too lazy to look up stats on the actual majority, though I would bet white still wins that one, too.)
But, on to my point.
White privilege doesn't necessarily mean that all white people have it made. It doesn't mean that any given white person has a better life than all people who aren't white. What it means is that white applicants are more likely to get jobs, college acceptance, good performance reviews, etc. It means that white men are culturally allowed to be 'badass', 'nerdy', 'hip', or any of a number of things, while Asian men are (generally) culturally 'nerdy' or the martial arts guy, while black men are 'thugs' or 'gangstas', while Mexicans are 'poor' or 'steal shit.' It means that if two people have identical resumes the one who has a whiter sounding name will most likely get the job.
So, yes, white people do get privileges, they're just so culturally ingrained that you aren't seeing them.
"Black households had the lowest median income in 2004 ($30,134) among race groups. Asian households had the highest median income ($57,518). The median income for non-Hispanic white households was $48,977. Median income for Hispanic households was $34,241."
Is there an Asian privelege that is somehow greater than white privelege? They've managed to do okay.
"In 2004, the poverty rate declined for Asians (9.8 percent in 2004, down from 11.8 percent in 2003), remained unchanged for Hispanics (21.9 percent) and blacks (24.7 percent) and rose for non-Hispanic whites (8.6 percent in 2004, up from 8.2 percent in 2003). "
Is the white privelege so effective that the poverty rate for whites has increased? In America, there are more "white people" (a stupid term used to define so many disparate peoples I am loathe to use it) than any other single people, about 80% of the country. 8.2% of those 80% of the people in the country, living in poverty. The privelege is so effective that the most "priveleged" race has about 20 million people leaving in poverty. That number represents more than half of the entire black population and about half of the latino popluation.
Perhaps someone should tell this group of people which represents more poverty than any other group that they are the most priveleged.
-skjaybesk
Cite: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762156.html, census.gov
Hey wow. My stupid-detector is going off the charts.
Did you miss the part where, while whites may have a larger number of people in poverty, blacks have three fucking times the rate of poverty? That whites have a lower rate of poverty than any other group, including Asians?
My parents were divorced shortly after I was born, and I don't really remember much about my 'real father'. From what I understant, he was in and out of prison until he passed away when I was 10. From this point on, the term 'father' will be used exclusively to refer to (technically) my step-father.
My mother remarried when I was two, to the man I consider my father. A black man (shock & awe). Her parents (my grandparents) were none too happy about this, and rarely came around, all but stopping entirely when my mother passed away when I was 6. My father remarried when I was 9, to (more shock & awe) a black woman. We never really saw eye-to-eye, but that was my fault. I was so young and loyal to my mother for all she had done for me. That's neither here nor there, though. In any case, they subsequently produced my brother and two sisters. So, we come to the point. I am the white boy who grew up in a black household, in a black neighborhood.
Surprisingly (?), I don't have too many 'horror stories' from my childhood. To be certain, I caught my fair share of shit, and the occasional schoolyard beating, but for the most part (as strange as it may sound, my childhood wasn't that abnormal. My father would be the first to say 'I'm no genius, I work for a living', but in reality he's one of the most intelligent people I've ever met, and probably the main reason I turned out as well as I did, considering. I don't have time to go through everything I learned from him. I never felt like I was less important to him than his 'real children', and we were raised in a pretty open household.
We had a falling out when I was 16 for reasons that have no relevance here, and I had to 'relocate'. After I graduated high school, I went kind of 'nomadic', until I finally settled down again in my home state a few years ago. Here's the kicker, for the past few years I've been renting a house in the middle of white suburbia, a dozen miles from where I grew up. So there's that.
So, maybe it can be understood why this topic is a bit close to my heart. Maybe it can be understood that I don't need to read the same articles you guys are reading, because I lived it. Speaking of the topic, let's get to it, shall we.
1. Why I don't think Imus' comments were racist:
Growing up, I was quick to learn about racism. I learned quickly to seperate true racism from 'words' and taunts. Real racism is my granparents abandoning their daughter and grandson because she married a black man, and to a lesser extent, my father's parents as well. Real racism is being beaten up at school, simply because you're 'not dark enough'. Real racism is my father having to work two jobs, and still barely being able to support his family. Words can put forth a racist ideal, but they are not racist in and of themselves. Though I will admit that the n-word was not allowed in our house, at all (not just me). My father hated that word, and the history that came with it, and I've still never said it to this day. He always told me that if kids wanted to call me names, the only way to stop it wasn't to fight back tooth and nail. It was to ignore their ignorant comments, move on with my life, and prove them wrong.
The words that Imus said, while hurtful to the team, are not a real threat to race relations. The reaction, however, was. I'll explain that now.
2. Why I think the reaction of certain black leaders is doing more harm than good.
As you might imagine, I have a pretty diverse group of friends. Regardless of the fact that I can be used as a catalyst, rarely do my white friends mix with my black friends (Like I said, my group of friends is diverse, but I will stick to black/white, as it's most relevant to the situation). The reason is that my white friends are scared to be around black people, and a little bit (though not much at all, really) vice-versa. Now, back in the day, white people were scared of blacks because they thought of them as radically different. The whole, old ladies clutching their purses bit, etc. Now, and I'm sure my white friends don't really have a racist bone in their body, they are scared because of the very real possiblity of being labeled a racist. The races are segrated today, not because of racism, but because of the FEAR of racism.
White people are no longer uncomfortable around blacks soley because they are different. The image of black people that sensationalists like Jackson and Sharpton protray is one that will get extremely angry at the slightest slip of the tongue. White people are afraid that if they say one wrong word, or do something the way they shouldn't, that they will be attacked. I know from personal experience that this is not the truth, but this is the image that black public figures put across, especially in this case. While they may be trying to put a stop to racism (and in a way, you could say they do, at times), they are driving racial relations backwards. Like was said earlier, I would like to see these people marginalized, (Imus, Jackson, and Sharpton), instead of celebritized (is that a word?). We will never be equal, or able to celebrate our differences, with people like these dictating our behavior.
3. Why I dismissed 'white privilege'
First off, I'll quickly say that, from what I understand about white privilege (and yes, I did some reading) is that it was a very valid term when the term was coined (1989, from what I can tell). Having lived on both sides, myself, I can say without a shadow of a doubt, that this 'white privilege' is diminishing every day. I am not saying that it's gone, but I am saying that it has diminished more than what some sensationalists (and some people on this thread) refuse to acknowledge. I have seen such progress just in the past two decades of my life, and I refuse to think that somehow I live in some magical bubble, where things have improved, while at the same time the rest of the world has remained stagnant. Sure, some of the leaders of the community, and many instances in the media will tell people to think otherwise, but in reality, in day-to-day life, things have changed very much for the better. Besides, are we really saying we should let the media dictate how we think, really? But, of course, were the sensationalists like Jackson and Sharpton to admit this, they'd be out of a job. I just find it infuriating sometimes that all of the progress that has been made will be quickly thrown out the window in favor of a headline-grabbing story.
Now, I won't argue that old white men still control the country, and it's a problem. Here's a surprise for you, though. White people are just as upset about this as black people. Luckily for us, they're old, and so is their way of thinking, and both are near death. I'll tell you why 'white privilege' especially isn't an important topic (for me, specifically). My father taught me a long time ago, that given our circumstances, I would be in the position of seeing other white children living better than we were. He told me to never dare to be jealous, and that our lives would be richer as a result of our struggles. He said to me 'If we are going to get hung up based on the fact that they may or not have it better off than us, then there is no chance that we'll ever accept them as friends'. You have to realize that paradigms have been shifting, no matter what 'black leader' tells you that they aren't. Like my counter point to that list on wiki, alot of those terms defining 'white privilege' have diminished greatly, or are pretty non-existant in real, everyday life. Plus, you have to factor in other racial 'privileges', like the afore mentioned 'black people don't have to watch every word they say' issue. As long as we persist to perceive differences that aren't really there, or actually have no effect on the 'beneficiary', we'll never be able to accept one another. We have enough differences, which should be celebrated, and we don't need to 'make up' differences to add to the pile.
Well, in any case, I gotta take my kids to Chuck-E-Cheese now, so I gotta go. Even if you still disagree with me, and that's your right, please take the time to consider that things aren't always so black and white (pun totally intended). I will admit that I am completely unwilling to bend in my views, as this is the life I've lead, and I've learned nothing of what I said by reading an article. I learned it from my family and friends, I learned it from being who I am. So, on that note, I really have nothing more to say to this thread.
See you all around.
Simple fucking math tells us this, though.
If you take 1 million white people, and put half of them in poverty, OH SHIT 500,000 POOR WHITE FOLK.
Now take 1000 black people and put 3/4s in poverty. Damn, 750 poor black people.
Seriously, how do you pass high school and not get ratios as simple as "Small number means smaller sample"?
Black people have a lower poverty rate.
Like, of all the black people (not just 1000 randomly picked ones) a higher number are below the poverty rate.
So, for your example to actually make sense, you would have to take 1000 white people and 1000 black people. Of the whites, approximately 90 of them would be below the poverty line. Of the blacks, approximately 300 would be below the poverty line. Keeping in mind I'm working with old statistics, that's still a three fold increase in the poverty rates from the white number to the black number.
Also, I'm comparing the percent of the given population (just blacks or whites) who are below the poverty line. Not just straight up numbers. You can make the numbers say anything you damn well please, the percents actually mean something.
I can see how the termination may be seen as unfair (and yes the comment was racist, but everyone carries their own prejudices with them) but that is a completely another issue; CBS was completely within their rights to terminate him.
On another note, TV in the U.S. fucking blows. I just got back from a school-trip to Washington and the Don Imus controversy seemed to be the main thing on the news for three fucking days. Doesn't anything else happen in your country? Doesn't anything happen anywhere else in the world as far as the United States is concerned? Goddamn, in Canada we have more exciting local news.
Next time some black comedian so much as begins to makes a white joke I am going to get his ass fired and black-listed. What it basically comes down to is a double-standard. He apologized, for something he shouldn't have had to apologize for but thats not the point. This is Politically Correct, uptight bullshit. Thats my two cents.
And that TIME journalist was right, "nappy-headed-hos" is a brilliant insult.
The world is full of double standards. Congratulations, you found another one. Now, why again is it that it pisses you off that you can't say the n-word without being labeled a racist?
Yeah, just like "cleaning lady."
Not enough alliteration.
Whatever.
This "LOOK AT THE RAPPERS" thing is really more of an excuse than an actual argument. Like trying to dangle car keys to distract a baby.
Look, Imus said some fucked up shit, he can do that, but noone promised he could on the radio without being criticized. Other people used their right to free speech and expressed their distaste so much that his sponsers pulled out. Everyone was well within their rights. Case closed.
This rappers argument is bullshit because people like to imagine that these rappers or even the black community are choosing what is put on the radio. Who owns the radio stations and why do they choose to only play a small selection of materialistic and mysogynistic hip-hop?
Oh, I forgot that is all the rap there is lol
@ deadonthestreet -- Mark Cuban is a moron, whose notoriety is due in no small part to riding the coattails of possibly the most physically gifted Aryan in the world (that's a joke, by the way). But seriously, I don't care what he has to say, he's a loud-mouthed moron who obviously gets a thrill out of being a prick in public.
Also -- everyone says it's Imus' critics fault for making something out of nothing, when really this whole story wouldn't be half the issue that it is except for the fact that, upon complaints being lodged, (white) people started lining up around the block saying Imus' critics had no right or reason to complain. That's easily the most infuriating part. Imus says a racially charged, hurtful thing, and when people complain about it, they're basically told to get over themselves. That's where this story got its legs, in the white denial of a legitimate complaint, and why this thread has spun ~25 pages on what should otherwise be a relatively minor issue.
White people are complaining Imus' critics of complaining too much, while seemingly completely failing to see that they, in fact, are probably the biggest whiners in the whole situation. "Why can't we say n****?" "Why are rappers talking about hoes?" "Why isn't Dave Chappelle in trouble?" "Free speech is under fire!" "This is why we have race problems!" etc. all of which are infinitely more hysterical and ridiculous than saying "I find it offensive when a white man (with a history of racially insensitive remarks) calls a group of successful, young black women 'nappy-headed hoes.'" I mean really, who exactly is doing the whining or making unreasonable complaints here?
I never said I thought it was a nice thing to say or one that shouldn't have carried some punishment but people really did go after the guy like the Spanish Inquisition. Let's be honest it was a stupid joke. From how people reacted you'd think he was burning crosses in front yards or something.
Their whole argument rests on the hope that everyone is too stupid to notice that they're a bunch of whiners, who can't take their own advice about just ignoring what you find offensive.
Having heard what Imus considers to be an apology, I'm not surprised. Also, accepting his apology doesn't somebody can't also want him fired.
Except Imus's statements already were given attention before...positive attention. I think his show's primary demographic was a combination of "people who are racist but don't want to admit it," and "old people who still wish being racist was acceptable." No, this wasn't the entirety of his audience...but I'd bet it was a sizable chunk.
I'm not shedding any tears at the idea of somebody no longer being paid for being racist.
Agreed. Dude had some great insults.
My argument is "stop being uppity" about little shit and really deal with big shit instead. I know the two are not mutually exclusive but right now we only deal with the little stuff. there's bigger fish out there so let's stop turning minnows into whales.
They did take the high road. The apology was accepted a long time ago. Now it's just the media riding it until people see another shiny object and forget about it.
When it comes to blowing things way or out proportion the media is almost always the cause. lets face it the media loooooovveeess stories about celebrities doing stupid shit. Especially since people are tired of hearing about how Iraq is going to hell and our president is a slack jawed idiot.
I think he meant the issue is minor, not the reaction.