I don’t think it is necessary to post a link. Just turn on TV. Talk about the politics of victimization! When I listen to the aggrieved describe their terrible wounds, it sounds like their bus went over a cliff. I think we should use the powerful IMUS in the war on terror. We could just point him at Al Quaida and let him rip. Oh wait, that’s right; Al Quaida does not practice the political correctness of being easily offended.
I don't think the Rutger's women's basketball team overreacted at all. NO woman likes to be described as a "ho", black or white, and they certainly didn't deserve to be picked on.
In case you haven't heard, Imus has been fired, which should have happened a long time ago in my opinion. His so-called humor has always consisted of a series of mean-spirited remarks against just about everybody.
I guess it was just a matter of time before he self-destructed by simultaneously offending blacks AND women in the same sentence.
EUCLID said this in post #1 : I don’t think it is necessary to post a link. Just turn on TV. Talk about the politics of victimization! When I listen to the aggrieved describe their terrible wounds, it sounds like their bus went over a cliff. I think we should use the powerful IMUS in the war on terror. We could just point him at Al Quaida and let him rip. Oh wait, that’s right; Al Quaida does not practice the political correctness of being easily offended.
It’s always those whom are least offended that will blow this off as miniscule. No offense I hope (pun not intended) but I probably could describe you by these comments alone Euclid which are once again insensitive to those most offended.
I know that many would rather believe that racism and sexism is a thing of the past or that such words should have little effect and maybe it should, but this isn’t the case. Imus has a history of making derogatory comments about women and minorities. Given recent statements made by Richards, Tim Hardaway and now this clown it’s about time for some accountability.
When you’re in the public eye and have a public forum, you’re held to a higher standard. His words were inappropriate and anyone who wants to defend or dismiss it is sorely wrong.
Governor Bush on Kosovo war exit strategy in 99 ” Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
President Bush on Iraq war exit strategy in 2007. “ “
It’s always those whom are least offended that will blow this off as miniscule. No offense I hope (pun not intended) but I probably could describe you by these comments alone Euclid which are once again insensitive to those most offended.
I know that many would rather believe that racism and sexism is a thing of the past or that such words should have little effect and maybe it should, but this isn’t the case. Imus has a history of making derogatory comments about women and minorities. Given recent statements made by Richards, Tim Hardaway and now this clown it’s about time for some accountability.
When you’re in the public eye and have a public forum, you’re held to a higher standard. His words were inappropriate and anyone who wants to defend or dismiss it is sorely wrong.
I think you misunderstand me.
It might seem like I am defending Imus, but I am not. I listen to talk radio every day, but I have never once heard Imus. I have always heard of him. I know that he is a shock-joc, but I have no interest in that venue. And I know nothing of the basketball team, other than their reaction to Imus. I feel sorry for them, but not for being subjected to the insult of Imus. I feel sorry for them for being used by the politics of victimization.
People are always going to insult you. You cannot rid the world of them. All you can control is the power their insult has on you. Why grant somebody that power? Why make yourself sick by granting them the power to hurt you with words? Why hold on to your hurt rather than accept an apology? The so-called sensitivity and sympathy that merely feeds into the sorrow of the offended only serves to increase the damage.
The only remedy to stopping the insulters is to limit by law, what people can say, and by extension, think. I would much rather live in a world where I have the freedom to turn off the radio if I don't like what I am hearing, as opposed to having everything on the radio subject to a legal litmus test created by Jackson and Sharpton.
I heard that Imus met with the basketball team last night. What I did not hear and what I want to know is this: Did they accept Imus’s apology last night?
And then there is the incredible hypocrisy of this case. Certainly CBS and NBC are free to fire anybody they choose. But both companies have business arms in the rap music industry that publish and distribute Imus-like lyrics and much worse, by the boatload. How can the words of Imus be damaging to young women while the same words from the rappers, are not damaging to young women? I can only conclude that it is not the words that do the damage, but rather, the race of the person saying the words. That strikes me as being its own kind of racism.
I believe I understand your position Euclid, maybe a bit more clearly now. I still happen to disagree with 80% of it.
First, I do not believe the reciprocation by those young women was a device of political means. By some, maybe but by in large I do not. The statements Imus made were both racist and sexist in nature. It was offensive and should not have been spewed over such a venue.
Secondly, I don’t believe Jesse or Al created anything. This situation was created by Imus Al & Jesse are powerful voices in their community. What did they do that some can point blame at them and not solely where it belongs? When things like that occur, it reminds me of the 60’s and MLK. All the things he was call, trouble maker, glory seeker, to name a couple are now attributed to Al & Jesse but that’s another forum.
I do happen to agree with your assessment of rap music. It is hypocrisy to call Imus to the mat for his remarks while simultaneously ignoring many of the lyrics of rap. However, it almost sounds as if it is being used to justify Imus’ statements and quite frankly, it’s besides the point. I don’t believe any radio or TV personality anywhere in this nation can get away will calling women “hos” over the airwaves and not experience social and political backlash.
Lastly, Imus used a public forum to denigrate those women. How is it that they are pawns for using the same forum to express their outrage? How is it wrong for those to express how such words are hurtful to the core of their being?
The problem with such a position Euclid is this. Who knows what these young women had to endure to survive and get where they are today? You see this as an isolated incident while they probably see this as another constant reminder that some people will never see them as equals simply because of their race and/or gender.
Governor Bush on Kosovo war exit strategy in 99 ” Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
President Bush on Iraq war exit strategy in 2007. “ “
oneofpeace said this in post #5 : I believe I understand your position Euclid, maybe a bit more clearly now. I still happen to disagree with 80% of it.
First, I do not believe the reciprocation by those young women was a device of political means. By some, maybe but by in large I do not. The statements Imus made were both racist and sexist in nature. It was offensive and should not have been spewed over such a venue.
Secondly, I don’t believe Jesse or Al created anything. This situation was created by Imus Al & Jesse are powerful voices in their community. What did they do that some can point blame at them and not solely where it belongs? When things like that occur, it reminds me of the 60’s and MLK. All the things he was call, trouble maker, glory seeker, to name a couple are now attributed to Al & Jesse but that’s another forum.
I do happen to agree with your assessment of rap music. It is hypocrisy to call Imus to the mat for his remarks while simultaneously ignoring many of the lyrics of rap. However, it almost sounds as if it is being used to justify Imus’ statements and quite frankly, it’s besides the point. I don’t believe any radio or TV personality anywhere in this nation can get away will calling women “hos” over the airwaves and not experience social and political backlash.
Lastly, Imus used a public forum to denigrate those women. How is it that they are pawns for using the same forum to express their outrage? How is it wrong for those to express how such words are hurtful to the core of their being?
The problem with such a position Euclid is this. Who knows what these young women had to endure to survive and get where they are today? You see this as an isolated incident while they probably see this as another constant reminder that some people will never see them as equals simply because of their race and/or gender.
We probably mainly disagree about Sharpton and Jackson. I don’t see them as in any way equivalent to MLK and his quest to end racism. On the contrary, I think Sharpton and Jackson feed on racial strife, and seek to foment it for their own selfish advancement. But in this assessment, I look beyond this particular flap, and to their past as well as to the future that they are implying when they say this is only the first step, now that they have this movement in motion. I believe that future includes an endeavor by them and others to control political speech under the same general pretext as the preventing of offensiveness. Their efforts could easily mesh with the political left’s desire to revive the Fairness Doctrine to silence the expression of the political right on talk radio. There have already been news reports that Imus is a conservative. The reason for that deception could not be more obvious.
There is power to be gained by claiming to be offended, especially when you are a member of a group that can be collectively offended. And there is great power to be achieved by leading such a group. When you are offended you can claim damages and demand redress. You can demand new government programs to protect you from being offended, and reward you for it. Being offended can put food on the table. That is what I mean by “the politics of victimization.” And I think that it could not be more clearly demonstrated than the way Sharpton and Jackson have manipulated this event.
Regarding Imus versus rap music, I think the main point is the hypocrisy represented by the outrage over what Imus said, and the complete silence over what rap says. I have carefully watched Sharpton squirm when confronted with this obvious inconsistency. You can tell that it kind of snuck up on him and threatened to let the air out of his tires. He tried to draw a distinction by saying that Imus is on the public airwaves where he reaches a lot of people, whereas the rappers are merely making art. But their art also ends up on the public airwaves and reaches a lot of people. I have heard others trying to make a distinction with equally week arguments. I’ll even offer another example of a week distinction that could be attempted, but I have not heard so far: You could say that rappers do not direct their venom at anybody personally, but Imus did.
Perhaps as you say, some of the focus on rap has been used to justify what Imus said. I almost see Imus himself not so much using rap to justify what he said, but rather, emulating the cultural extreme hip-ness of rap and its casual use of raunchy language. After all, that is what shock jocs do. So do some standup comics such as Richards. They want to be edgy too. They see that it is perfectly OK for blacks to insult each other by using the racial slurs that whites use on them, as well as other made up insults. I can see how people like Richards and Imus could want to join in on the fun, loose control, and forget that they are white.
In comparing Al & Jesse to MLK, I was merely comparing the similarities. Everything you say Euclid about Jesse and Al has been said about MLK and more. The evil word of those times (60) was “communist” and MLK was even labeled with that.
What’s wrong with Al & Jesse wanting to extend their platform to help the less fortunate? Racism is systemic in many forms in our country against minorities of all types. Minority communities often seek to speak with one voice as any other institution. Effectual leaders are needed to achieve agendas. It doesn’t mean that their leaders are without flaw however being a leader isn’t without its sufferings. When Al Sharpton took a knife in the chest, I saw someone from that Bensonhurst neighborhood say Al deserved it because he’s nothing but a trouble maker. Sound familiar?
The glory hound, power seeking labels has always been dealt out throughout history to those leaders of minority communities. However there’s a price to pay for such “glory” that not too many people are willing to pay. I believe Al (though at times needed better diplomacy in his rhetoric) and Jesse are earnest in their desire to help their communities. Throughout all the derogatory claims made against them both it is usually those who’s power structure they present the most danger to who are the loudest critics.
Imus was wrong. Those of you who only see his offense as merely “words” should maybe think for a moment. Has anyone said anything about you that has every made you hurt or angry? If you’re honest you’d say yes. Contrary to the popular belief, words can and do hurt people.
An apology should stand alone on its own merit without any appending phrases beginning with “but”. People within their own ethnic groups often refer to themselves in phrases that are considered offensive by those outside their group. This doesn’t start nor end with the black community. Because this is the case, it doesn’t mean it’s ok for those outside those groups to do the same.
Some seek to compare Imus to rapper’s derogatory lyrics. And though I believe those lyrics are no less disrespectful, the platform is different. Anyone with such a platform as Imus will find themselves in the same predicament regardless of who ever else may be “using the phrase”.
Governor Bush on Kosovo war exit strategy in 99 ” Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
President Bush on Iraq war exit strategy in 2007. “ “
I wrote this on another forum, but I'll post it here:
I said this in the last topic on Don Imus and I'll say it again in this topic. People need to stop focusing on the word being used and start focusing on the delivery and the meaning behind the word. Have you seen Lenny Bruce or George Carlin? There is always this jump to go after black comedians to make it appear as if they're the only ones that use racial slurs. George Carlin and Lenny Bruce also use racial slurs, and no one has a problem with it. Why? Because they way in which they use words is different and important.
quote:
George Carlin:There's a different group to get pissed off at you in this country for everything your not supposed to say. Can't say [expletive deleted], Boogie, Jig, Jigaboo, Skinhead, Moolimoolinyon, Schvatzit, Junglebunny. Greaser, Greaseball, Dago, Guinea, Whop, Ginzo, Kike, Zebe, Heed, Yid, Mocky, Himie, Mick, Donkey, Turkey, Limey, Frog. Zip, Zipperhead, Squarehead, Crout, Hiney, Jerry, Hun, Slope, Slopehead, Chink, [expletive deleted]. There is absolutely nothing wrong with any of those words in and of themselves. Their only words. It's the context that counts. It's the user. It's the intention behind the words that makes them good or bad. The words are completely neutral. The words are innocent. I get tired of people talking about bad words and bad language. [expletive deleted]! It's the context that makes them good or bad. The context. That makes them good or bad. For instance, you take the word "[expletive deleted]." There is absolutely nothing wrong with the word "[expletive deleted]" in and of itself. It's the racist [expletive deleted] who's using it that you ought to be concerned about. We don't mind when Richard Pryer or Eddie Murphy say it. Why? Because we know their not racist. They're [expletive deleted]! Context. Context. We don't mind their context because we know their black. Hey, I know I'm whitey, the blue-eyed devil, paddy-o, fay gray boy, honkey, [expletive deleted] myself. Don't bother my ass. Their only words. You can't be afraid of words that speak the truth, even if it's an unpleasant truth, like the fact that there's a bigot and a racist in every living room on every street corner in this country.
That's George Carlin, he won't get attacked. Why did Michael Richards get attacked? Because his comments were racist. As Carlin puts it, it's the user. Imus wasn't making a social commentary and he wasn't illustrating any sort of point, he was making a comment that was racist and sexist
As for comedy acts, the "white people do this/black people do this" acts are old and gone (the mid-90's). Dave Chappelle did a skit on "Chappelle's Show" where he did a parody of "Def Comedy Jam" with poetry. He was beating drums and said, "White people do this, black people do this! When white people's lights go out, they panic. When black people's lights go out, they plan it!" It's poking fun at how comedy used to be, and even taking most of that into consideration it was an attempt to illustrate differences and made fun of black people more. There was nothing racist in the comedy. The only problem with comedy like that is that it's stereotype comedy, which isn't as popular these days.
People like Carlos Mencia are trying to channel Dave Chappelle where they use stereotypes and racism to illustrate how stupid it is, like the Blind Black Klan Leader on "Chappelle's Show." Now I don't think Carlos Mencia is effective or funny, but it's not racist. It's all about intent, it's all about the user, it's all about the delivery. Compare Don Imus (or Michael Ricards for that matter) to Chris Rock, Larry David, Dave Chappelle, George Carlin, Lenny Bruce, there is stark difference in their use and delivery of language. Seriously, listen to Carlin talk about feminists. The reason Carlin is not hated is because his comedy is about commentary, not just making slurs against people. For anyone to just make slurs against a person or group, no matter what color you are, you will not be seen as funny.
Whenever I see topics like this, it seems people want to make it look as if there is a dividing line between white and black, and there isn't. The reason why people like Imus and Michael Richards are attacked is because they were being racist. Michael Richards was being heckled, he's a comedian, and when you're heckled, you better learn how to handle the crowd. Calling them a racial slur is not funny and it exhibits a poor stand up comic. This makes sense as Richards really is a physical comedian, so he should never do stand up. I saw Dave Chappelle live and he handled hecklers effortlessly. There was a guy in the crowd shouting, "Smoke weed! Yeah get that cocaine, do crack!" This guy was just loud and standing up while Dave was trying to do his act. So Chappelle turns to him and says, "Do crack? You know, <he makes a reference to having a sexual relation with a crackhead>, and that was the last time I saw your mother." The entire crowd went, "Ooohhh," and that guy just sat down. Chappelle's response, "He wanted to be in the show, now he's in the show." That was an audience with people of all colors, faiths, ethnicities, etc. It was funny. When Michael Richards snapped, it wasn't funny and people of all colors, faiths, ethnicities, etc. didn't think it was funny. They left. It had nothing to do with double standards. Richards intention was racist, it wasn't a joke. Stop treating this as if there are two sides, one black and one white.
We can get into rappers, but I'd rather not because it is more complex than people think. There a lot of black people that dislike the language and music made by rappers. But people also bring up rap knowing nothing about it. If you were to play rap music of the last few years, you won't hear everyone talking about drugs, at least no more than you hear about drug use in other genres. The most drug use you'll see is use of marijuana and alcohol. I don't think that's any different from other genres, but the other side is the sexism in rap videos, and there's a lot of that. Many rap videos of recent have people showing off their money and material goods, which is really a snapshot of America: materialim is good. And then they throw in scantily clad women. This isn't all rap, but it's the pop rap. And when you talk about pop rap, you're not just dealing with black people, you're dealing with consumers, which means you're talking about people of all colors and stripes. This is exactly why I didn't want to get into this, it's a market-driven culture of materialism, hedonism, and sexism. When I think about those three things, that brushes all of America and it makes sense why pop rap is pop.
Anyone can use the words, they're harmless and neutral, it's all about the user. George Carlin is a genius.
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.
- Bill Cosby
The guy who takes a chance, who walks the line between the known and unknown, who is unafraid of failure, will succeed.
- Gordon Parks
ICB,
I hear your argument, but I would like to see specific examples of people using the same words Imus used, but not being racist. I know what Imus said and I agree that it was racist; the words, the object of the words, and the context. But I cannot picture how somebody else could do the same thing and not be racist. Carlin may insist that it is possible, but I need to see an example.
I ran into this article: Thought you all might be interested in what this guy said....
April 11, 2007
One (Black) Man's Opinion re: Don Imus's Comments
Don Imus is an old man. Maybe back in the day he was funny, but he hasn't been funny for as long as I've been aware of him.
But he does live in America, and here we have the freedom of speech. Now that Right doesn't mean that people cant call you out on what you say, but it should mean that you shouldn't have to get fired or jailed or killed for saying things that are racist, sexist, and unfunny.
What Imus said was racist and sexist, but guess what - we all say racist and sexist and unfunny things all the time. Some people like Imus don't think that black women are beautiful, he should be allowed that opinion without fear of losing his job. And yes it always makes me wince when old white men try to appear cool by using terminology that they know nothing about, but again, free speech.
Personally I think what's more dangerous in America isn't racist and sexist speech, it's people trying to get others fired for using their speech. Some of my favorite comedians - Chris Rock, George Carlin, Richard Pryor, Howard Stern, South Park, use racist and sexist speech while at work, and they should be allowed to the same way Imus should.
The difference is those comedians are funny and Imus is not. If you're going to go after him, criticize him for being dull.
What I am far more concerned with regarding the plight of African Americans is not what some over-the-hill has-been thinks about black college athletes, it's what an actual college thinks about black students.
Last week UCLA accepted 11,837 new students, but only 392 were black. This is in the wake of last year's disgrace of only accepting 249 black freshmen with just 100 actually enrolling. To me that is way more troubling than a cheesy DJ trying to have some sort of edge, because it shows a major university in a large city faced with an obvious problem but still can't find more than a handful of blacks to offer a higher education.
Either it means that blacks, particularly those in LA, are not getting proper high school educations that would make them eligible to attend their local UCs, or UCLA doesn't really give a ****. Those are issues that I'd rather the press be focused on right now instead of Al Sharpton and Don Imus posturing and tapdancing.
Of course thats just my opinion....I could be wrong. (Dennis Miller)
"You might be the toughest little whacker. . .but in my world, you're about as worrisome as a cloudy day." (Dutch Dooley)
EUCLID said this in post #10 : ICB,
I hear your argument, but I would like to see specific examples of people using the same words Imus used, but not being racist. I know what Imus said and I agree that it was racist; the words, the object of the words, and the context. But I cannot picture how somebody else could do the same thing and not be racist. Carlin may insist that it is possible, but I need to see an example.
Actually, Imus was being racist and sexist, he wasn't funny. That's the point George Carlin was making. There is no way that Imus was funny. The point I was making is that the user and the way the word is used is important. At the same time, I don't think "nappy-headed ho" would be used by any comedian, it's not funny.
Nappy-headed by itself is meaningless, ho is actually quite harsh, especially since a ho carries sexual connotation. Imus was trying to say the women were tall and intimidating, and ended up making a racial and sexist slur that wasn't funny. I think mystic posted a great article. The language is fine if what you say is funny and makes sense. Imus was not funny and it just showed how ignorant he is. He paid the price (not that I care), but there are much worse on right-wing radio unfortunately.
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.
- Bill Cosby
The guy who takes a chance, who walks the line between the known and unknown, who is unafraid of failure, will succeed.
- Gordon Parks
Inner City Blues said this in post #12 :
Actually, Imus was being racist and sexist, he wasn't funny. That's the point George Carlin was making. There is no way that Imus was funny. The point I was making is that the user and the way the word is used is important. At the same time, I don't think "nappy-headed ho" would be used by any comedian, it's not funny.
Nappy-headed by itself is meaningless, ho is actually quite harsh, especially since a ho carries sexual connotation. Imus was trying to say the women were tall and intimidating, and ended up making a racial and sexist slur that wasn't funny. I think mystic posted a great article. The language is fine if what you say is funny and makes sense. Imus was not funny and it just showed how ignorant he is. He paid the price (not that I care), but there are much worse on right-wing radio unfortunately.
So it is OK to utter the words of a racial slur if you are funny? I agree that Imus was not funny. Personally, I don't think shock radio is funny, but a lot of people do.
It seems to me that if the determination of whether a racially derogatory comment is racist depends on whether or not it is funny, there would need to be a clear test of what is, and is not funny. How do you determine what is funny? Funny is in the eye of the beholder. I have seen one person make an obviously mean-spirited, racist joke to another, and both laugh like crazy. If the listener thinks it is funny, is it funny?
You say Imus's comment was not funny. I am sure some people thought it was funny. So how to you apply a "funny" test?
If "nappy-headed" is meaningless, and "ho" only has a sexual connotation as you say, just where is the racial component of the comment?
If one directs a non-racial insult to someone of another race, is that a racist comment just because it is directed at someone of a different race?
Inner City Blues said this in post #12 : The language is fine if what you say is funny and makes sense. Imus was not funny and it just showed how ignorant he is. He paid the price (not that I care), but there are much worse on right-wing radio unfortunately.
But those right-wingers don't lose their jobs.
Has anyone ever watched Def-Comedy Jam? I occasionally would watch those comedians on that show and obviously if any of you ever watched the show, you would know that the comedians are black. Anyhow, I cannot even tell you how many times I heard them talk about other black people and use the "N" word....yet no one was having a fit about that. I heard them say "honky" when referring to white people...yet no one says anything, and the people in the audience were laughing. I didn't think it was overly funny but I was not screaming and yelling about these people never performing again. These people are still performing, and some of them are making it huge in the movie industry.
Where exactly is the line drawn?
It's like the black man in the article stated...."What Imus said was racist and sexist, but guess what - we all say racist and sexist and unfunny things all the time."
Does freedom of speech only apply to a select group of people.
I hate racism...but I don't listen, and I teach my kid not to listen. I won't fight freedom of speech, which is a right of all of ours, but I do exercise my freedom of choice, which is to turn it off.
Turning it off hurts them more than having a fit about it....why give someone that much power??
Of course thats just my opinion....I could be wrong. (Dennis Miller)
"You might be the toughest little whacker. . .but in my world, you're about as worrisome as a cloudy day." (Dutch Dooley)
White Catholics are allowed to get made fun of without limit until the year 2094. It's an unwritten sociological rule.
I think that since Imus is in more of a political arena and has a tendency to piss off necon's as of late he's been on the radar for several groups who want to railroad him off the air, which is exactly what happened.
04-11-2007 04:16 PM
