Imus Calls Rutgers Women's Basketball Team "Nappy Headed Hos"

[AEON]

If I said such a thing in the work place or in the National Guard, I would be reprimanded or even fired.

As a society, we have agreed this sort of talk "crosses the line" of decency and appropriateness.

If he worked for me, he would probably be fired. Maybe I would give him one more chance, but since he is such a “visible” employee – I would probably have to let him go. MSNBC is free to do what they need/want to.

In Northern California, I work at a place that has a great mix of different races and backgrounds. However, in order for us to all work together, we must agree to obey certain ground rules. And one of those ground rules is not making racially insensitive comments. Perhaps it is unfair, but if you allow it – then escalation becomes an issue.

In general, when I witness borderline comments – I will take the engineer aside and calmly counsel them about why such talk is not only ethically wrong, it is also damaging to the team spirit.

My “intolerance” works both ways.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Well the politicians will continue to go on his show, but

Baseball star Cal Ripken Jr., who was to appear on Imus' show later this week to promote a book, has canceled his appearance, according to the Washington Times.

With his two week suspension it won't matter, but at least he took a stand. I'm not surprised, he is and always has been a class act.

Don Imus has a consistent pattern of these types of comments. Yes he's supposed to be a "shock jock" and they get away with such comments-until they cross a certain line and get called on it. It requires intelligence to come up with better "humor" than that, but that type is easy and obviously they get an audience. I'm sure he has other content that's informative and fun to listen to, so why does he have to sink to that level?

I saw William Cohen on CNN last night and he mentioned how much Imus' comments about his interracial marriage hurt him and his wife (he made comments about "jungle fever" and some other awful comments about his wife). And yet they were willing to go on his show and talk about their new book about their marriage-which is in part about the racism and racist comments they have faced.

Something tells me that if Don Imus met with those young women from Rutgers, they would outclass him by miles in how they treated him and forgave him for what he said. He didn't put their interests above himself by making those comments, or by making any of his other numerous offensive comments over the years. Yeah Gwen Ifill is a real "cleaning woman", how could anyone defend that? Is Imus jealous of her accomplishments or something? Why would he say something like that? When someone has a consistent pattern of these types of comments, regardless of being a "shock jock", it has to come from somewhere.

I think Rabbi Gellman summed it up well, he's a very wise man. Imus should listen to him.

 

[Justin24]

Well Al Sharpton is a piece of shit anyways. A man of God judging and demanding blood instead of doing what his Master (God) asks for and that's forgiveness. I don't agree with what Imus said, but it's a free country and he can say what he wants and he knows by saying words like that can lead to him being called Racist. So in the end screw Sharpton and Imus.

 

[Irvine511]

and i just walked by the TV in the lobby and the entire basketball team was holding a news conference.

this whole thing has been blown way, way out of proportion.

he should have just called them "faggots" and then no one would have actually cared.

 

[BVS]

this whole thing has been blown way, way out of proportion.

he should have just called them "faggots" and then no one would have actually cared.

I agree with both these statements.

 

[Justin24]

I agree with both these statements.

I agree, and Al Sharpton was the one who blew it out proportions and the media.

 

[ntalwar]

and i just walked by the TV in the lobby and the entire basketball team was holding a news conference.

They need to show people their faces and personalities in order to dispel Imus' characterization.

 

[yolland]

^ I tend to agree that's a good idea, although it would've been better if they'd done it sooner, IMO.

I'm still surprised he was suspended, really didn't see that coming.

Gellman's article is the best thing I've seen come out of all this so far, and it applies to lots more than just Don Imus and his show, I think. Unfortunately that sort of thoughtful reflection on how these kinds of things matter (and how they don't) tends to get drowned out by all the spectacle-mongering.

On the other hand, I'm sure some would say that's just karma biting Don Imus in the ass.

 

[Irvine511]

They need to show people their faces and personalities in order to dispel Imus' characterization.

did anyone, anywhere, even for a second, believe his characterization, including Imus?

or was this just a piss-poor attempt at a joke?

 

[ntalwar]

did anyone, anywhere, even for a second, believe his characterization, including Imus?

or was this just a piss-poor attempt at a joke?

I'm sure some of his listeners believed it. Imus has given his side of the story ad nauseam, and it's only fair that the players give their side.

 

[Irvine511]

I'm sure some of his listeners believed it. Imus has given his side of the story ad nauseam, and it's only fair that the players give their side.

and i think you underestimate ... well, everyone.

people might believe Imus's version of why he said what he said, but no one believes that national champion basketball players are "nappy headed ho's."

what's happened is that a conflict has been created where there needn't be one. these women shouldn't legitimize the bad joke by responding as if it were a serious accusation.

saying, "well, guess what, i'm not a nappy-headed ho," isn't terribly dignified, in my opinion. of course they're not. of course John Edwards isn't a "faggot." a simple statement about how the comments might be hurtful in a larger context -- perpetuating stereotypes about black women, for example -- might be helpful, but this whole standing up to say, "i'm not a ho" makes my stomach turn.

as if John Edwards should have to say, "i'm not a faggot."

 

[ntalwar]

and i think you underestimate ... well, everyone.

people might believe Imus's version of why he said what he said, but no one believes that national champion basketball players are "nappy headed ho's."

what's happened is that a conflict has been created where there needn't be one. these women shouldn't legitimize the bad joke by responding as if it were a serious accusation.

I said some, just like some people believe Iraq was behind 9/11. So I am not underestimating people.

Imus also said other comments that people may be more likely to believe:
“That’s some rough girls from Rutgers,” Imus said. “Man, they got tattoos ...”.

They were right to hold the news conference in order to show that they are not faceless people and to express their hurt over the incident.

 

[Irvine511]

i guess i have more faith than you do. and if someone believes it, so what? maybe some people think John Edwards is gay because he has good hair and probably uses good products. the point is still that we're making a bigger deal out of this than need be, and we're legitimizing the comments that weren't meant to be accusations, simply a bad joke told from a racist viewpoint.

my goodness, what would happen if every time someone, somewhere said something about gay people had to apologize? would we get an apology from, say, the Texas State Legislature who didn't want "those people" to be able to adopt?

people say stupid things all the time. people are right to turn off Imus. MSNBC is right to suspend him. Imus is right to explain himself. what's pushed me over the edge is this "i'm not a ho" news conference.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

They need to show people their faces and personalities in order to dispel Imus' characterization.

I agree-and in order for them to be able to state how much it hurt them as well. I'm sure they could have turned down that opportunity if they chose. If having that press conference allowed them to say that one of them plays four musical instruments, that they are accomplished students, that they love their teammates and just show them for the beautiful girls that they are then I say bravo-it's their right. How they feel about that being said about them can never be blown out of proportion and has nothing to do with Don Imus or Al Sharpton or anyone else. Don Imus has been all over the media talking about his feelings about the whole thing, so this was their chance. Their meeting with him will be private.

I think there are people in this country who believe that national champion ballplayers are nappy headed hos-they may or may not say so publicly, and they don't have the public airwaves that Imus does.

 

[Irvine511]

If having that press conference allowed them to say that one of them plays four musical instruments, that they are accomplished students, that they love their teammates and just show them for the beautiful girls that they are then I say bravo-it's their right.

of course it's their right, but that doesn't mean that it's doing anything to help the situation. if all this is true, which it is, why, then, the need to say, "but i'm not a ho."

and i still think this has all been completely blown out of proportion. i see no reason on earth as to why this is more important than the fact that iraq is crumbling before our eyes and Iran just whipped the West in a PR game and exposed, yet again, how things like Gitmo have destroyed the credibility of the United States.

 

[diamond]

i think the basketball team should invite Imus to get tattos with them.

Al Sharpton is a bigger racist than Imus.

dbs

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

It wasn't at all saying "I am not a ho", and I was impressed by those girls and their coach. I know that if I was Don Imus I'd be shaking in my shoes right now at the thought of meeting with them, considering how you could see how they were hurting yet they were so dignified and humble. I'd hate to be him facing how much I had hurt them and having to explain myself.

I think everyone is well aware that we have all these important issues going on, no one is saying Don Imus is the most important. But racism certainly is, and if this prompts discussion about it then it's important.

Not that I think it's any sort of "contest" between gay people and blacks, but it appears that MSNBC has been more harsh on someone who made anti-gay comments

tmz.com

Don Imus, Michael Savage
Don Imus received a two-week suspension yesterday from both CBS Radio and MSNBC (which simulcasts his radio show) after he referred to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos." But four years ago, Michael Savage, who had a weekend show on MSNBC at the time, referred to a caller as a "sodomite" and said he should "get AIDS and die." Savage was fired in what was referred to at the time as any "easy decision" by MSNBC spokespeople.

Imus and his crew have a long history of making comments that might be considered inappropriate; they once called the New York Knicks a group of "chest-thumping pimps."

As part of his suspension yesterday, an MSNBC statement said, "Our future relationship with Imus is contingent on his ability to live up to his word."

tmz.com

Don Imus isn't ready to be the next Michael Richards.

The radio host was on "Today" this morning where Matt Lauer -- who Imus mistakenly called "Mark" -- grilled him about the similarities between calling the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy-headed hos" and the racial tirades of Mel Gibson and Michael Richards.

"There's a world of difference between what Mel Gibson did, Michael Richards and the guy from "Grey's Anatomy" [Isaiah Washington]," said Imus, "we have to understand that I have a record of a relationship with the African American community whether Reverend Sharpton likes it or not."

He also said he runs a "comedy show," making the comments OK in his mind, and wants to get a black co-host for the show to "add some perspective."

The Rutgers women's basketball team is currently holding a press conference where the school's president called Imus' words "despicable" and "offensive," adding "racism and sexism have no place in our society ... they [the team] did nothing to invite the words Don Imus used."

 

[ntalwar]

Maybe the news conference doesn't help the overall situation, but perhaps they needed to hold it as a part of their personal healing process. Unlike John Edwards, they are private figures and Imus' comments are borderline slander. If one of us were insulted publicly by a broadcaster, we might want to give our side of the story as well.

Al Sharpton is a bigger racist than Imus.

Sharpton is a 3rd party in this incident.

 

[diamond]

Regardless, accusing somebody of something that you already are is hypocrtical.

dbs

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

This is the transcript-are they going to suspend the other guys too?

From the April 4 edition of MSNBC's Imus in the Morning:

IMUS: So, I watched the basketball game last night between -- a little bit of Rutgers and Tennessee, the women's final.

ROSENBERG: Yeah, Tennessee won last night -- seventh championship for [Tennessee coach] Pat Summitt, I-Man. They beat Rutgers by 13 points.

IMUS: That's some rough girls from Rutgers. Man, they got tattoos and --

McGUIRK: Some hard-core hos.

IMUS: That's some nappy-headed hos there. I'm gonna tell you that now, man, that's some -- woo. And the girls from Tennessee, they all look cute, you know, so, like -- kinda like -- I don't know.

McGUIRK: A Spike Lee thing.

IMUS: Yeah.

McGUIRK: The Jigaboos vs. the Wannabes -- that movie that he had.

IMUS: Yeah, it was a tough --

McCORD: Do The Right Thing.

McGUIRK: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

IMUS: I don't know if I'd have wanted to beat Rutgers or not, but they did, right?

ROSENBERG: It was a tough watch. The more I look at Rutgers, they look exactly like the Toronto Raptors.

IMUS: Well, I guess, yeah.

RUFFINO: Only tougher.

McGUIRK: The [Memphis] Grizzlies would be more appropriate.

Sophomore forward Heather Zurich, said her pride at going so far in the tournament was undercut by the radio host's on-air insults.

"We were stripped of this moment by a degrading comment by Mr. Imus," she said.

She added that she believed she and her teammates "present ourselves well both on and off the court, though Mr. Imus doesn't agree. Then again, he knows not one of us."

Junior forward Essence Carson, who said she felt "great hurt, anger and disgust" over the remarks, explained that she wanted to meet with Imus to understand why he said what he said.

"We just hope to come to some understanding of what the remarks really entailed," said Carson.

She also said the team was optimistic that the meeting with Imus could be productive.

"We all agreed the meeting with Mr. Imus will help," Carson said. "We do hope to get something accomplished during this meeting."

Carson added that the incident served to show that underneath the media's apparent embrace of diversity and equality, bigotry can still rear its head.

"Somehow, some way, the door has been left open to attack the leaders of tomorrow," she said.

 

[Irvine511]

. I'd hate to be him facing how much I had hurt them and having to explain myself.

do you really think these women were paralyzed with hurt? do you really think they cried themselves to sleep at night? do you really think they looked at themselves in the mirror the next day and thought, "gosh, maybe i really am a ho"? do you really think they looke at themsleves in the mirror the next day and thought, "oh no, America thinks i'm a ho."

because i don't.

i'm not excusing the comments. i'm just saying that the comments themselves probably made little or no difference in the lives of these women, but the reaction to the comments certainly has.



[q]Don Imus received a two-week suspension yesterday from both CBS Radio and MSNBC (which simulcasts his radio show) after he referred to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos." But four years ago, Michael Savage, who had a weekend show on MSNBC at the time, referred to a caller as a "sodomite" and said he should "get AIDS and die." Savage was fired in what was referred to at the time as any "easy decision" by MSNBC spokespeople.[/q]

i personally see a difference between "nappy headed ho's" and wishing death on someone because they're gay?

i also see the Michael Richards comments, and especially Mel Gibson's drunken tirade, as far more offensive than Imus.


[q]Imus and his crew have a long history of making comments that might be considered inappropriate; they once called the New York Knicks a group of "chest-thumping pimps."[/q]

so where's the talk of the "hurt" he caused the Knicks? where was their "but i'm not a pimp" press conference?

i think some of this ties into the whole infantilization of women that i've talked about in other threads. that we think these poor dears had their feelings hurt, but big strong NBA players aren't bothered by mean words.

 

[ntalwar]

so where's the talk of the "hurt" he caused the Knicks? where was their "but i'm not a pimp" press conference?

i think some of this ties into the whole infantilization of women that i've talked about in other threads. that we think these poor dears had their feelings hurt, but big strong NBA players aren't bothered by mean words.

The Knicks are wealthy public figures. The Rutgers team is the opposite. E.g. for slander cases, there are different legal standards for public figures and private figures. We hear about multimillion dollar slander cases being filed for remarks less harsh than what Imus said, so people are hurt by such public reputation-damaging comments.

 

[Irvine511]

The Knicks are wealthy public figures. The Rutgers team is the opposite. E.g. for slander cases, there are different legal standards for public figures and private figures. We hear about multimillion dollar slander cases being filed for remarks less harsh than what Imus said, so people are hurt by such public reputation-damaging comments.

so it seems here that the Knicks should have sued Imus for slander?

do you know what slander is?

 

[ntalwar]

so it seems here that the Knicks should have sued Imus for slander?

No - the Knicks probably did not have a case because public figures - politicians, celebrities, etc. have a much higher standard of proof for it (from a business law class I took). Slander in a nutshell is defamatory speech.

And if you read the details of the news conference, it's not about "I'm not a 'ho" or whatever. E.g. a quote from it is "We'd just like to express our great hurt, the sadness that he has brought to us..."

 

[LyricalDrug]

so it seems here that the Knicks should have sued Imus for slander?

do you know what slander is?

Sweet, a legal discussion!

Been a while since I studied it in law school, but slander is a false, defamatory statement expressed in a transitory form (i.e., not printed), especially speech. Unlike libel (i.e., printed) damages from slander are not automatically presumed and therefore have to be proven by the plaintiff (UNLESS the defamation falls under the category of "slander per se," which applies to especially offensive statements).

So, you've got to figure out whether slander per se is present here. With slander per se, damages do not need to be proven, because they are automatically presumed. To be classified as slander per se, a statement must relate to:

1) a crime involving moral turpitude,
2) a loathsome disease (such as an STD),
3) conduct that could adversely affect someone's business or profession, or
4) the unchastity (especially of a woman).

Given that it's a women's team, and their chastity is being called into question (being called ho's), I think it's fair to bring up the issue of slander per se.

 

[Irvine511]

No - the Knicks probably did not have a case because public figures - politicians, celebrities, etc. have a much higher standard of proof for it (from a business law class I took). Slander in a nutshell is defamatory speech.

so why bring up slander? slander is something very specific.

And if you read the details of the news conference, it's not about "I'm not a 'ho" or whatever. E.g. a quote from it is "We'd just like to express our great hurt, the sadness that he has brought to us..."

not sure i agree -- the continuous back-patting and lauding of teammates accomplishments seemed to be a very direct rebuttal to the "ho" comment.

this doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

here's my point: people say stupid things all the time, and sometimes people live to regret their words, as Imus will. he will be hurt professionally, and he should be. but the circus that has popped up today around these stupid comments has degraded all of us is a colossal it's a waste of time and completely out of proportion to what was said. the rightousness feels good, i know, but it also infantalizes a bunch of very competent women who probalby have better things to do than waste time respond to such ridiculous comments. it's this all-hands-on-deck media outrage that's driving me crazy when there are a million more important things to be thinking about.

 

[BVS]

I don't agree at all that these girls needed to or should have held a news conference. It's there right and if they felt like doing so more power to them, but to suggest that they should have to, in order to clear their reputation is ridiculous.

 

[Irvine511]

Sweet, a legal discussion!

Been a while since I studied it in law school, but slander is a false, defamatory statement expressed in a transitory form (i.e., not printed), especially speech. Unlike libel (i.e., printed) damages from slander are not automatically presumed and therefore have to be proven by the plaintiff (UNLESS the defamation falls under the category of "slander per se," which applies to especially offensive statements).

So, you've got to figure out whether slander per se is present here. With slander per se, damages do not need to be proven, because they are automatically presumed. To be classified as slander per se, a statement must relate to:

1) a crime involving moral turpitude,
2) a loathsome disease (such as an STD),
3) conduct that could adversely affect someone's business or profession, or
4) the unchastity (especially of a woman).

Given that it's a women's team, and their chastity is being called into question (being called ho's), I think it's fair to bring up the issue of slander per se.

and does the context of the speech have anything to do with it?

 

[Irvine511]

t to suggest that they should have to, in order to clear their reputation is ridiculous.

precisely.

 

[LyricalDrug]

and does the context of the speech have anything to do with it?

I believe so, yes -- these are generally fact-sensitive inquiries, as I understand it. I'm an intellectual property lawyer, so I haven't studied this much and am a little bit far afield, though.