Imus Calls Rutgers Women's Basketball Team "Nappy Headed Hos" - Page 21 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-12-2007, 12:54 PM   #301
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 04:14 AM
fair enough.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 12:57 PM   #302
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,655
Local Time: 03:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by joyfulgirl


And unless that kind of humor is used in a context of commenting about racism, then I can only assume that it reflects how the person really feels, even if they think they're "just joking." Many a truth is spoken in jest. I've seen this in myself as well--I'll make a comment, say I'm just kidding, and then feel really embarrassed by the realization that my subconscious just revealed itself. But when you make your living being that way with no self-analysis behind it, never questioning why you feel a need to always say mean things about others, you have some real problems.
Once again you nailed it, and stated it much better than I could have.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 12:59 PM   #303
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
this whole thing really is freedom of speech at it's finest.
No, it isn't.

I don't understand why so many people here completely miss what freedom of speech encompasses. His freedom of speech is not being infringed by any government action. He is free to speak and say whatever he wants; the fact the corporate world is no longer willing to financially compensate him for it is NOT an infringement of his freedom of speech.

How is this concept so misunderstood??
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 01:05 PM   #304
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 10:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i'm just concerned at the frenzied reaction and the full-throated bellows of condemnation that have been thrown at him, as if saying that we condemn these words somehow makes us, ourselves, less misogynist or racist.
Yeah, I already touched on this back on page 2, before the whole thing blew up to the level it's at now, although I didn't put it very well.
Quote:
If one is carelessly tossing around broad-stroke labels like racist or bigot...I agree, and that can actually be a way of falsely simplifying those issues by making them seem more containable than they really are.
But it almost came across to me like you were blaming the players themselves for the "frenzied reaction"; you kept focusing on their press conference as if they were hysterical overreaction personified, when they were the ones directly called out by the whole affair. The reason I thought they should've spoken out sooner if they were going to do it publically was precisely so that they wouldn't run the risk, once a full-scale media melee ensued, of seeming like they were offering themselves to lend a little added pathos to the drama.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 01:14 PM   #305
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,357
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


No, it isn't.

I don't understand why so many people here completely miss what freedom of speech encompasses. His freedom of speech is not being infringed by any government action. He is free to speak and say whatever he wants; the fact the corporate world is no longer willing to financially compensate him for it is NOT an infringement of his freedom of speech.

How is this concept so misunderstood??
they probably don't understand it for the same reason you don't understand my post...

Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
this whole thing really is freedom of speech at it's finest. the will of the people is speaking. they want to nail imus. so that's what will happen...msnbc went first, dumping the simulcast right before his radiothon for kids with cancer, a classy move by them... cbs will be next. i have no doubt he'll be fired. but that's how it goes... a group complains, the news media gets wind, the public gets in an outroar, sponsors start to bail... just a matter of time before the show is gone for good.

it's exactly what happened to laverne and shirley.
perhaps i'll clear it up here... freedom of speech is not without consequence. imus said something, and he has every right to say it... and thus then, the people have every right to like it, listen to it or not. they chose not. the people are executing their freedom to tune him out.

i never once said imus' freedom of speech is being expunged. much to the contrary. i'm saying that freedom of speech is being executed at it's finest... someone's allowed to say something, and then everyone else is allowed to react to that message however they please.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 01:25 PM   #306
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,272
Local Time: 04:14 AM
But still, the concept of freedom of speech (as protected by the constitution) is not as you are applying it here. It refers to something entirely different (government infringement). The fact that people are speaking out here and advertisers are pulling out isn't really an example of freedom of speech (as much as a response to market pressure) because again, there is no government action involved.

I just think maybe you are using this phrase in a colloquial context rather than its actual constitutional definition.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 01:30 PM   #307
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




but this was meant to be a comedic segment. the joke wasn't funny, but earnestness isn't funny either.

i hear stuff like this all the time from my mother who's a huge women's college basketball fan. UConn is her beloved team -- my parents have season tickets and they have to bring Kleenex when it's "Senior Night" because my mother cries when the senior girls introduce their parents -- but once in a while she'll say things like, "wow, would not want to come across her in a dark alley." it's a commentary on the toughness of the women and meant to be mildly humorous because, especially for a woman her age, a rough and tumble female athlete was not something she grew up with.

where Imus failed was invoking racist and misogynistic language to make what i think was essentially the same point. my mother would never in her life say "nappy-headed hos."
I don't think Imus was trying to make the same point as your Mom at all. He really had no intention of commenting on their athletic ability as expressed in toughness as your Mom described it. I don't think he cares about any of that or about making commentary about it, he cared about using them to make yet another racially charged and sexism charged comment-as-joke. Did he make any comment in the whole exchange that indicated he even cared one iota about their rough and tumble prowess?

The difference between Imus and your Mom is that she makes that comment because she didn't grow up with that sort of female athlete, he makes it in the context of all his other like minded remarks-and because he thinks it's humorous.

I bet your Mom is therefore impressed with them as a result of not growing up with that kind of female athlete. Your Mom doesn't have a consistent pattern of making racist and or sexist comments, so hers can realistically be seen to be what you said they are.

I just don't see how his comments can in any way be construed to mean that he is impressed by those girls. It's like joyfulgirl said-and the difference is that there's no relevant context in what your Mom said to believe she means anything else by it.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 01:38 PM   #308
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
But still, the concept of freedom of speech (as protected by the constitution) is not as you are applying it here. It refers to something entirely different (government infringement). The fact that people are speaking out here and advertisers are pulling out isn't really an example of freedom of speech (as much as a response to market pressure) because again, there is no government action involved.


"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
"
__________________
ntalwar is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 01:40 PM   #309
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 04:14 AM
[q]I just don't see how his comments can in any way be construed to mean that he is impressed by those girls. It's like joyfulgirl said-and the difference is that there's no relevant context in what your Mom said to believe she means anything else by it.[/q]

well, Imus is actually older than my mom, so rough-and-tumble female athletes are just as new to him, but other than that, i think you're projecting a whole lot onto a small set of words. i've found Imus offensive before (Rama-lama-ding-dong), and i found him offensive here, but i actually do think he and my mom are thining along the same lines here. the difference is that, in trying to be funny, he fell into outright racism and sexism. does this belie some deep-seated resentment towards black women? who knows? yes, quite probably, but i'm not qualified to do a psychoanalysis on this.

and why is this comment somehow "worse" than "Rama-lama-ding-dong?"
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 01:45 PM   #310
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by yolland

But it almost came across to me like you were blaming the players themselves for the "frenzied reaction"; you kept focusing on their press conference as if they were hysterical overreaction personified, when they were the ones directly called out by the whole affair. The reason I thought they should've spoken out sooner if they were going to do it publically was precisely so that they wouldn't run the risk, once a full-scale media melee ensued, of seeming like they were offering themselves to lend a little added pathos to the drama.

perhaps this was due to my poor wording, but i'm blaming more the reaction -- both in here and out there -- to the press conference as "frenzied" and "infantalizing." the attitude of "Don Imus destroyed their entire season" came not so much from them, but from others who seem to feel the need to swoop in and defend these women. are these women not able to defend themselves? and thus begging the question of what, exactly, do they have to defend themsleves from? the stupid comments of a radio broadcaster? just how delicate are they? just how much power does Imus have?

that's been my issue all along. i think these girls are much tougher than that. but now that this has been turned into such a circus, thinking about it, they really have no other option than to respond and present themselves as the accomplished women they are.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 01:49 PM   #311
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 04:14 AM
I'm seeing his comments in the context of his statement that Gwen Ifill looks like a cleaning woman, and his other comments. If that's projecting well so be it. Like it or not people are going to see the nhh comment in that context, not to mention in the context of the entire transcript of that particular day. Even out of that context, nappy headed hos just isn't the same to me as "I wouldn't want to meet them in a dark alley". I find that professor's explanation of why nappy is offensive to be interesting and relevant. And I have my own opinion about the word ho or whore and how and why it is used.

It is up to Imus to do the self analysis to determine where his comments come from, it's just a shame that it reached this point before he did it. I'm not all that convinced that he will anyway.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 01:49 PM   #312
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,357
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram
But still, the concept of freedom of speech (as protected by the constitution) is not as you are applying it here. It refers to something entirely different (government infringement). The fact that people are speaking out here and advertisers are pulling out isn't really an example of freedom of speech (as much as a response to market pressure) because again, there is no government action involved.

I just think maybe you are using this phrase in a colloquial context rather than its actual constitutional definition.
all i'm saying is that we, as americans, have a right to say whatever we choose. and everyone else has that same right to not listen and/or not agree, because that freedom to be able to speak without "government infringement" does not come without consequence, and that is on display here... call it what you want.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 02:01 PM   #313
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 01:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
all i'm saying is that we, as americans, have a right to say whatever we choose. and everyone else has that same right to not listen and/or not agree, because that freedom to be able to speak without "government infringement" does not come without consequence, and that is on display here... call it what you want.
I can get what you are saying, sort of

But please respond to this,

Let's say your mother was on the news,
receiving a "Humanitarian Award"

and you are channel surfing and land on msnbc and Chris Mathews, Keith Oberman, or Don Imus is chuckling and says
"Did you see that "SAGGY ASS WHORE" get that SUCKING award?
__________________
deep is online now  
Old 04-12-2007, 02:09 PM   #314
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 04:14 AM
"It's a completely different scenario. [Rappers] are not talking about no collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports. We're talking about ho's that's in the 'hood that ain't doing shit, that's trying to get a nigga for his money. These are two separate things. First of all, we ain't no old-ass white men that sit up on MSNBC going hard on black girls. We are rappers that have these songs coming from our minds and our souls that are relevant to what we feel. I will not let them muthafuckas say we in the same league as him," - Snoop Dogg, on the Imus affair.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 04-12-2007, 02:23 PM   #315
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
WildHoneyAlways's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: In a glass case of emotion
Posts: 8,158
Local Time: 03:14 AM
I'm so glad Snoop cleared all that up for us.
__________________

__________________
WildHoneyAlways is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com