DescentBB

You're right about the fact that the standard needs to apply to everyone.

However...

Will Robinson wrote:'knappy headed ho' is no more racist than 'fat slut' or 'tall thief' or 'freckle faced kleptomaniac'

Historically and culturally, are the terms "fat", "slut", "tall", "thief", "freckle-faced", or "kleptomaniac" racially-inflammatory? ...No.

Historically and culturally, are the terms "nappy-headed" and "ho" racially-inflammatory? ...Yes.

There is a big difference between an insult and a racial insult. Imus' comments were the latter.

You may not see it that way, but it's pretty clear that many people (especially in the african-american community) do.

[BTW, I do agree that the national media coverage has been way over-the-top, but I also think it's a good chance for people to talk about racial dialogue. It sparked a pretty active thread here, after all.]

Foil wrote:Historically and culturally, are the terms "nappy-headed" and "ho" racially-inflammatory? ...Yes.

I'd like to know just how far back that "history" goes because for me, a 48 year old resident of South Carolina, I've never heard of either term used as a racial epithet.

Basically, if you aren't suggesting one race is superior over another or that someones flawed because of their race then you haven't made a racist comment.

Go call some white girl a prostitute and then ask her if she slapped you because your comment was racist.

Would removing the letters W _ _ R E make it racially motivated?
Try it with an accent, does that do it?
How about have a black guy talk white when he calls a white girl a "prostitute" or "hooker"...does that make it racially motivated?
How about if he says "Ho" instead of prostitute would that change her perception of his motives? Did he go from issuing an insult to making a racist comment by switching to "Ho"?

Nope, but talking black while being white immediately, that qualifies you as being a racist.

So when Imus tried to use the ghetto speak he wasn't trying to be funny, affecting the speech of one who would use the terminology, someone of the same race as the target of his insults, no, he was doing it because he didn't just want to insult those rough looking girls he wanted to disparage the african american race.
That is the conclusion you have to draw from his words to prop up the hysteria surrounding this debacle and yet you can't draw the same conclusion from exactly the same comments if they are coming from blacks about whites can you?
Why is that?
Are blacks not capable of being racist?
Or has the media supported the Sharpton/Jackson double standard tactic so long now that people have just accepted it?
What a wonderful contribution those two pimps have made toward race relations in america! Ooops! Can an old Peckerwood like me still say "pimp"? I hope so, I'm too old to do time for a hate crime.

Will Robinson wrote:...if you aren't suggesting one race is superior over another or that someones flawed because of their race then you haven't made a racist comment.

"Nappy-headed" and "ho" do exactly that, by association with commonly-held negative stereotypes about african-americans.

Will Robinson wrote:How about if he says "Ho" instead of prostitute would that change her perception of his motives? Did he go from issuing an insult to making a racist comment by switching to "Ho"?

When addressing a black woman, yes.

Will Robinson wrote:So when Imus tried to use the ghetto speak he wasn't trying to be funny, affecting the speech of one who would use the terminology, someone of the same race as the target of his insults, no, he was doing it because he didn't just want to insult those rough looking girls he wanted to disparage the african american race.

I know he was just trying to be funny, and he may actually think well of the student-atheletes he was talking about. However, we are talking about the language he chose to use, which at best was racially-inflammatory.

Will Robinson wrote:...you can't draw the same conclusion from exactly the same comments if they are coming from blacks about whites can you?
Why is that?
Are blacks not capable of being racist?

Of course they are. I never said they weren't.

I don't care whether it was Don Imus or Stephen A. Smith, it's the comments that are racist.


You've made it clear that the major issue for you is the double-standard in the media. So... what do you think the networks should do about it? Let their on-air personalities do/say anything without consequences?

True, it may be a double-standard until there is similar public outcry against other broadcasters... but as far as I'm concerned, this is a start.

I'm sorry, but this is retarded. Is it racist to call someone a knappy headed hoe? Absolutely not. You can claim history as your grounds for claiming it is, but thats very shaky ground for that basis.

For example, if I picked someone out of a crowd and called them \"negro\", is that racist? Nevermind that I called them black in a different language, the word was commonly used in the past to identify someone as having darker skin. Only during the era of the civil rights movement was is used in a negative light. (ie: \"Negros only\" signs, etc) However, to my knowlege, the word \"negro\" itself was never used as a racial insult, and quite frankly is no more racial than calling a white person caucasian.

Now, what does knappy headed mean? Last I checked it was an insult against someone's lack of hygiene. Is it insulting in nature? Sure is. Is it racial/bigoted in nature? No. I see nothing here specifying a culture or skin color here.

Now, what does a hoe mean? Its nothing more than a shortcut version of calling someone a prostitute. Is that an insult? Of course. Is it racial in nature? Absolutely not. Last I checked, those with darker skin don't have a corner on the adult industry.

I fail to see how being called a \"knappy headed hoe\" is racial insult. An insult it is, but there is absolutely ZERO evidence here that it is a racial insult.

That being said, he was well out of line for saying what he said, and I completely agree with his dismissal. Its one thing to say things like this in private, but the second he steps on the air things change.

They are just words

Foil wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:...if you aren't suggesting one race is superior over another or that someones flawed because of their race then you haven't made a racist comment.

"Nappy-headed" and "ho" do exactly that, by association with commonly-held negative stereotypes about african-americans.

How the heck does "nappy headed" or "ho" suggest that a particular race is superior or suggest that someone is flawed because of their race?

As to what I want to happen, I already said let the company fire their shock jock if they suddenly no longer (after decades of profiting from him ) can take the heat of having that kind of employee.

But it bugs the hell out of me that the Sharpton/Jackson scam tactic has been accepted by the media as a legitimate argument. You yourself are exhibiting signs of buying into it without really giving any logical rationale for it other than you perceive there are some african americans who support it!
You've basically made the argument that you can't make note of anyones race or even any distinguishing feature that might be associated with their race when talking about them because it's a racial attack on them if you do.

ccb056 wrote:They are just words

If Lofton is alive then the wrong guy died....

MD-2389 wrote:I'm sorry, but this is retarded. Is it racist to call someone a knappy headed hoe? Absolutely not.
...
I fail to see how being called a "knappy headed hoe" is racial insult. An insult it is, but there is absolutely ZERO evidence here that it is a racial insult.

ccb056 wrote:They are just words

Will Robinson wrote:How the heck does "nappy headed" or "ho" suggest that a particular race is superior or suggest that someone is flawed because of their race?

It appears this forum is in need of some education regarding the specific racial history of these words. They imply much more than their dictionary definitions.

"Nappy" is a term that has been used to malign the texture of african-american hair since before the civil war... and "ho" (as opposed to the more general "whore") has almost exclusively been associated with a denegrating view of female african-american morality.

They're racist. They're offensive. Period.

Don't agree? Then why is there so much uproar? If the effect of those words is just equivalent to "clumsy ugly players", why is this a national racial issue?

It doesn't matter if you think they're racist... it doesn't matter if Imus intended them as racist... what matters is how the people who are being addressed view the remarks.

You all remember the "golden rule" about how to treat others, right?

Anyway, allow me to link to just a couple of nationally-distributed articles regarding exactly why those terms are, in fact, racially-inflammatory:

From the Chicago Tribune
From MSNBC

Are you suggesting we adopt this level of sensitivity to all races and all the words that have ever been used to put them down?
Are you really ready for that? Or are you on board for the african american race as the only one that needs to be so coddled?

Will Robinson wrote:...are you on board for the african american race as the only one that needs to be so coddled?

Of course not.

I object to words that malign Asians, Hispanics, etc. (you know which words I'm talking about, I don't need to repeat them) just as strongly as I object to the ones used to malign black people.

(And, yes, I object just as strongly to words used to malign caucasians.)

Foil wrote:It appears this forum is in need of some education regarding the specific racial history of these words. They imply much more than their dictionary definitions.

"Nappy" is a term that has been used to malign the texture of african-american hair since before the civil war... and "ho" (as opposed to the more general "whore") has almost exclusively been associated with a denegrating view of female african-american morality.

They're racist. They're offensive. Period.

Nice if you to completely ignore what I just said. Again, where is the racial insult here? I just flat out told you what they meant individually, and even when put together there is no racial identifying content. Did you miss my negro example? I don't give two shits what a paper says. He called them whores with poor hair hygiene. BIG DEAL! That is NOT racist. At the very most its an insult their looks, and last I checked that team isn't all one color. Where is your evidence that this phrase is meant exclusively for bigotry? Don't give me this "it was used way back when..." crap. Show me that it has always been used as a racial insult and NOTHING BUT a racial insult. What you're saying is that just because one person calls another person (of a different racial descent) an ass, that from that point on it must be considered a racial insult. Thats flat out ridiculous and quite frankly fallacious in nature.

Don't agree? Then why is there so much uproar? If the effect of those words is just equivalent to "clumsy ugly players", why is this a national racial issue?

It doesn't matter if you think they're racist... it doesn't matter if Imus intended them as racist... what matters is how the people who are being addressed view the remarks.

You all remember the "golden rule" about how to treat others, right?

Anyway, allow me to link to just a couple of nationally-distributed articles regarding exactly why those terms are, in fact, racially-inflammatory:

From the Chicago Tribune
From MSNBC[/quote]

Will Robinson wrote:You've basically made the argument that you can't make note of anyones race or even any distinguishing feature that might be associated with their race when talking about them because it's a racial attack on them if you do.

No, not at all.

Using terms like "dark-skinned" or "curly-haired" to distinguish someone's features is completely different than using a historically and culturally denegrating term like "nappy-headed".

The point is that we must be aware of the way our words are perceived. Granted, white folk (including myself) sometimes don't fully understand other cultures, but that's no excuse for using words we know are inflammatory, just because we don't personally take them that way.

Foil wrote:It doesn't matter if you think they're racist... it doesn't matter if Imus intended them as racist... what matters is how the people who are being addressed view the remarks.

So if my girlfriend asks for a soda, and I rape her, I can say that I took her language for meaning "Rape me"?

(Note: I will NEVER rape my sweetheart, or anyone else.)

From someone who actually knows todays slang, ho is a prostitute. They use ho, because in Black Hip-Hop Culture, it means you are owned by the gangster or pimp. Note the fact that white guys call white girls hos, my girlfriend called me a ho (WTF?), and I saw a black girl calling a white guy a ho. It has barley anything to do with race.

Its the same as calling someone a whore. History can eat itself, you never say "Let me get some fags to throw in the fire so it lasts longer" or "I am so gay because I got a kiss from my crush" due to the fact they now mean something else.

MD-2389 wrote:Nice if you to completely ignore what I just said. Again, where is the racial insult here? I just flat out told you what they meant individually, and even when put together there is no racial identifying content. Did you miss my negro example? I don't give two ***** what a paper says. He called them whores with poor hair hygiene. BIG DEAL! That is NOT racist. At the very most its an insult their looks, and last I checked that team isn't all one color. Where is your evidence that this phrase is meant exclusively for bigotry? Don't give me this "it was used way back when..." crap. Show me that it has always been used as a racial insult and NOTHING BUT a racial insult. What you're saying is that just because one person calls another person (of a different racial descent) an ass, that from that point on it must be considered a racial insult. Thats flat out ridiculous and quite frankly fallacious in nature.

I've explained it more than enough times, MD. I'm sorry you don't understand.

As I suggested before, if you still don't see why it's inflammatory, ask someone african-american about it - they'll probably be able to explain it better than I have, and from a personal viewpoint.

Foil wrote:It appears this forum is in need of some education regarding the specific racial history of these words. They imply much more than their dictionary definitions.

"Nappy" is a term that has been used to malign the texture of african-american hair since before the civil war... and "ho" (as opposed to the more general "whore") has almost exclusively been associated with a denegrating view of female african-american morality.

They're racist. They're offensive. Period.

Your absolutely correct on the definition of those words and I'm surprised not everyone agrees. However, what happened to forgiveness? Isn't that a big part of theism?

I commend Imus for apologizing to the girls even after being fired and from what I hear, it was an emotional event for both Imus and the girls and he was humbled by it. I also commend Imus's wife for telling the viewers to stop supporting him by sending hate mail to the girls. They were not the cause, nor did they ask for Imus to be fired. She asked the viewers to send the hate mail to her instead.

I do NOT commend Mr. Sharpton for using this as a power grab and saying nothing of the gangsta rap music that promotes this kind of trash talk.

I think Imus learned a lesson and I hope he gets his job back.

Bettina

Foil wrote:

MD-2389 wrote:Nice if you to completely ignore what I just said. Again, where is the racial insult here? I just flat out told you what they meant individually, and even when put together there is no racial identifying content. Did you miss my negro example? I don't give two ***** what a paper says. He called them whores with poor hair hygiene. BIG DEAL! That is NOT racist. At the very most its an insult their looks, and last I checked that team isn't all one color. Where is your evidence that this phrase is meant exclusively for bigotry? Don't give me this "it was used way back when..." crap. Show me that it has always been used as a racial insult and NOTHING BUT a racial insult. What you're saying is that just because one person calls another person (of a different racial descent) an ass, that from that point on it must be considered a racial insult. Thats flat out ridiculous and quite frankly fallacious in nature.

I've explained it more than enough times, MD. I'm sorry you don't understand.

As I suggested before, if you still don't see why it's inflammatory, ask someone african-american about it - they'll probably be able to explain it better than I have, and from a personal viewpoint.

No you haven't, you've done nothing but cry "yes it is!" and used history as a crutch. You have yet to provide ONE SHRED of evidence that "knappy headed ho" is ONLY and USED SPECIFICALLY as a racial insult.

I'm waiting.

Dakatsu wrote:

Foil wrote:It doesn't matter if you think they're racist... it doesn't matter if Imus intended them as racist... what matters is how the people who are being addressed view the remarks.

So if my girlfriend asks for a soda, and I rape her, I can say that I took her language for meaning "Rape me"?

(Note: I will NEVER rape my sweetheart, or anyone else.)

Oh-kayyyyy. Well, using your psycho analogy, if your girlfriend was even remotely aware that the phrase "would you get me a soda?" would set you off, should she still use that phrase? No!

But it's a poor analogy anyway. You have no reason to think that "would you get me a soda" equals "attack me", whereas there is vast historical and cultural reasons for african-americans to see Imus' words as hurtful.

MD-2389 wrote:You have yet to provide ONE SHRED of evidence that "knappy headed ho" is ONLY and USED SPECIFICALLY as a racial insult.

I'm waiting.

As to being used specifically as a racial insult, see the links above.

As to the other... it doesn't matter if it's "only" used as a racial insult. All it takes is enough instances that it implies a common meaning for the person at whom it's directed.

You could call me a "nappy-headed ho" as a compliment to my sense of style a million times, and it wouldn't affect the meaning of that phrase in black culture.

Foil wrote:

MD-2389 wrote:You have yet to provide ONE SHRED of evidence that "knappy headed ho" is ONLY and USED SPECIFICALLY as a racial insult.

I'm waiting.

As to being used specifically as a racial insult, see the links above (or go ask an african-american).

As to the other... it doesn't matter if it's "only" used as a racial insult. All it takes is enough instances that it implies a common meaning for the person at whom it's directed. You could call me a "nappy-headed ho" as a compliment to my sense of style a million times, and it wouldn't affect the way that phrase is perceived in black culture.

'Nappy-headed' means you don't look good. They used that word on slaves, like we don't have hair that's good enough," said Tina Branch, a hair stylist on the city's South Side. Her clients nodded in agreement.

- Your Chicago Tribune link

Again, how does this prove that this is a racial insult? Just because it was used on slaves, it should be labeled as such? Hell, using that logic you should consider George Carlin's favorite seven words as such as well as I'm sure they've been used countless times in the past as well.

All you've done here is shown that it is an INSULT to be called a "knappy headed ho", which is absolutely true and I agree with that assessment. However, I have yet to see a single shred of CONCRETE evidence that it is SOLELY meant as a racial insult, and has ONLY been used as a racial insult (see: The "N Bomb"). You made the assertion, now back it up.

As far as I can tell, Foil is the one being most racist in this!
Why? Because black people are not given a set culture! They become part of whatever culture they want to be, just like white people. There's no diference! Only a small minority of black people are 'ghetto', and that's not even a black-only culture! What you're basing 'the opinions of black people' is just a stereotype!

MD-2389 wrote:Again, how does this prove that this is a racial insult? Just because it was used on slaves, it should be labeled as such?

No, it's a racial insult because it's primarily directed at a particular race.

Oh, and I'm not only talking about the past, I'm talking about now as well. Phrases like that are *still* being used today, and it's probably a lot more common than many people realize. Heck, I've heard members of my own extended family use racist terms like that.

MD-2389 wrote:However, I have yet to see a single shred of CONCRETE evidence that it is SOLELY meant as a racial insult, and has ONLY been used as a racial insult (see: The "N Bomb"). You made the assertion, now back it up.

I just finished explaining this.

"Nappy-headed ho" don't have to be solely/only used as a racial insult to be commonly understood as such.

It doesn't make any sense to continue insisting that someone prove that it's "always" a racial insult. It's racially-inflammatory in "most" cases, and that's enough.

TIGERassault wrote:...black people are not given a set culture! They become part of whatever culture they want to be, just like white people. There's no diference! ... What you're basing 'the opinions of black people' is just a stereotype!

(I was wondering how long it would be before I was accused of being racist, myself, heh.)

Tiger, you misunderstand me.

Of course I don't think all african-american people are the same or that there's some 'univeral' black culture. It would be ridiculous of me to believe so.

What I'm talking about is the meaning of racially-inflammatory phrases here in the United States, past and present. Those words have a fairly common history and their current meaning is pretty consistently racial - that's the commonality I'm referring to.

Here, look it up...

http://www.answers.com/topic/afro-textured-hair
http://www.answers.com/ho

Bee

If you are right, that most black people would agree with your understanding of the racial undertones hidden in the description \"nappy\" or the slang \"ho\" for prostitute then I'm offended and harmed by those black people who think I'm a racist peckerwood just for using those words!
How dare they stereotype all of us white folk as racist just because over a hundred years ago slave owners used the term nappy as a derogatory jab!
What other common English words are now off limits? Surely nappy wasn't the only word they heard from the slave owners! It's a ridiculous argument that we can't ever say it without being racist.

And as for \"ho\", sorry but it's just slang for whore and it means prostitute or as the rappers and gangsta's use it, a sub-class to the dominant male and it crosses all race lines therefore it isn't a racial epithet.
I and the rest of the english speaking world own the word \"ho\" as much as any black person does and I ain't giving up my ho!

So if any african americans think the term \"ho\" singles out black woman then that is just a reflection of their own view of black woman and to assign that kind of racial prejudice to me just because I'm white is racist and I demand they be fired if they ever make that hateful assertion. My people have suffered long enough and now I too have a dream! (Sorry Dr. King, I had to do it)

Oh yea, I want gangsta back too! We white guys were the original gangsters and we knew how to spell and pronounce it too! I'm taking that word back as well before some greedy pimp posing as a civil rights activist tries to turn it into a racial buzzword!

I'll get back to you on ★■◆●' 'player' and 'dog', if they can use them without conscripting them into this new victims-only lexicon I guess we can leave them out there for all to use...for now.
Word!

Hey! that's another one they can't take. Word. We cracker types were using it centuries before they were, yea that's right, I said 'they' as in \"those people\", if I'm talking about a certain group of people and whoever those people happen to be are established as the subject of my comments then I may subsequently refer to that group as 'those people\" or \"you people\".
I'm not giving up a perfectly good phrase that gets right to the meaning without having to dance around on eggshells!

If you want to know if I'm a racist you'll have to just pay a little more attention. From now on Sharpton/Jackson sound bites do not define me and if you try to stereotype me with one I'll have you fired!

Oh, one last thing, Don King. He's now cut off from speaking english all together. I know, I know, some of you think he doesn't speak english to begin with but actually he does it that way just because he's a racist bastard who mocks us Honky's with his every utterance. So he's fired too!

Oh yea, another thing. I'm starting a class action lawsuit against Maybelline and Clairol and MaxFactor...all those make up manufacturers because they have been supplying black women with this white frosty stuff they smear on their eyelids and we all know it's just another black person wearing white face to poke fun at us, the melanin challenged race.
And who do I have to sue to get the White Entertainment Television network on cable? Come on my fellow rednecks you know you want to watch Pamela Anderson on WET!

While your at it, let's get 'brother' back too. and 'sister', since I have two of each...

Society is full of hypocrites.

We let this kind of stuff go every day and then Imus says something and the entire black community goes nuts, with good reason I suppose. It was a stupid thing to say, but I don't know why people go nuts over this. Maybe because Imus is white? Hypocrites.

Racist? No. I don't think his comments were racist. Sexist, I suppose, but not any more sexist than anything else in mainstream media. Sexism is a stupid idea anyway - these women's rights groups condemn models and dancers for \"exploiting themselves for men.\" It just sounds to me like people trying to control other people's lives. If a girl wants to swing around a pole to pay tuition then leave her alone.

Personally, I think Imus should get hired by XM radio and try and match up against Stern on Sirius. I say this time and again, freedom is the most important quality this nation possesses. IF you don't like what Don Imus says, don't listen to him you nappy-headed hoes.

Beowulf wrote:We let this kind of stuff go every day and then Imus says something and the entire black community goes nuts, with good reason I suppose. It was a stupid thing to say, but I don't know why people go nuts over this. Maybe because Imus is white? Hypocrites.

Actually, I think it's only the white community that has gone nuts over this!
...which is even more hypocritical!

Nappy-headed just means you have bad hair. And hoe just means you're a slut. I know plenty of nappy-headed white hoes. Trust me, theres a lot of them at the University of Denver, and ironically most of them belong to the same sorority

I always thought nappy referred to a particular type of bad hair, most common to blacks. (Though that may be because I learned the word from a black friend of mine.)

Some of you have tried to argue that \"nappy\" isn't racist, and \"ho\" isn't racist, so therefore there's no racism involved. Would you accept the same argument if I said \"uncle\" refers to a relative and isn't racist, and \"tom\" is just a name?

Calling someone a \"nappy headed ho\" is normally a racist insult. Maybe Imus didn't mean it that way, but I think he and most others recognize that it was taken that way because that's how it's commonly used. Once he apologized and the players accepted it, though, the whole thing should be over. There should never have been that much news coverage.

Problem is, Sharpton is a race-baiting jerk, and people still listen to him. I don't know why, but they do. And that might be the real story -- Sharpton, whose career is based on stirring up racial tension, can take something that should've been between Imus and those girls and should've been resolved the next morning, and turn it into a 2-week-long front page firestorm. And we as a society haven't matured enough to be able to brush off Sharpton and his ilk.

Lothar wrote:Some of you have tried to argue that "nappy" isn't racist, and "ho" isn't racist, so therefore there's no racism involved. Would you accept the same argument if I said "uncle" refers to a relative and isn't racist, and "tom" is just a name?

Honestly, yes I would. Granted, it would depend on the context in which you used "Uncle Tom". Theres a vast difference between an uncle named Tom and the other usage. Just like there is a vast difference between cracker (the food item) and the slang. (Funny, this sounds damn near close to what I said about the word "negro".)

Calling someone a "nappy headed ho" is normally a racist insult. Maybe Imus didn't mean it that way, but I think he and most others recognize that it was taken that way because that's how it's commonly used.

And that is the crux of the problem. The context in which it was used, which is my entire point. By definition, he called the ENTIRE TEAM whores that have poor hair hygiene. That by itself has no racial implications. Now if he was just referring to the black members of the team (which he gave no indication of to my knowlege. If there is a part of the broadcast I missed that he did, say so.) then this would be a completely different story. "Those are some knappy headed hoes!" That was an off the cuff remark attacking the ENTIRE team, and last I checked they aren't all one color.

Now, I'm not saying that they shouldn't be offended by being called that. (I've repeatedly stated that they SHOULD have, and AGREED that he should have been fired for saying what he did like he did.) I'm just saying that the CONTEXT in which it was used is NOT racially motivated.

As for Al Sharpton, he's become the one thing he claims to hate. A racist.

Lothar wrote:Some of you have tried to argue that "nappy" isn't racist, and "ho" isn't racist, so therefore there's no racism involved. Would you accept the same argument if I said "uncle" refers to a relative and isn't racist, and "tom" is just a name?

Yea, I would. Calling someone an uncle tom doesn't suggest that 1) they are inferior because of their race nor 2) their race is inferior.
Without one of those elements it isn't racist.

The reason I think the distinction is important is because I think real racism is a serious matter and letting garden variety insults ascend to racist status just because enough people are served by that level of alarmism in a particular instance is also a bad thing.
What we have today is, at the very least the perception, if not the reality, that african americans are so hyper sensitive to any insult that could in any way be construed as a racist attack that we have social crisis at the drop of hat.
That hypersensitivity is feed and harvested by pimps like Sharpton for their own personal gain and the process could and should easily be put into perspective by an objective media machine that is apparently no longer in existence because todays media machine would rather sell headlines than report reality!

I fully understand that coming from a relatively recent period of time that includes slavery and then Jim Crow and a civil rights struggle that is still underway that a certain level of sensitivity is to be expected and warranted but the Sharpton/Jackson factor is being allowed to bring to boil a tempest in a teapot.

Am I the only one that thinks the majority of the major hustle over this is coming from white people?
Or is it just because there aren't a lot of black journalists...

This reminds me of Randal trying to \"take back\" \"porch monkey\" in Clerks II

It really amazes me that so many people can't see the racial overtones in that phrase (I'm going to quit repeating it).

Will Robinson wrote:1) they are inferior because of their race [or] 2) their race is inferior.
Without one of those elements it isn't racist.

As I said before, the term does imply a racial inferiority, simply because it plays on two negative stereotypes about african-americans:

"nappy" - comes from (and is still used as) a negative comment about the beauty of african-american hair

"ho" - comes from (and is still used as) a negative comment about the morality of female african-americans

Thus, by the definition, it's racist. I don't think it was intended that way, but it is. You may disagree and say it's just a generic jocular term, but I can tell you from experience (as a teacher in a 99%-black school) that a phrase like that is much more serious.

Beowulf wrote:...IF you don't like what Don Imus says, don't listen to him you nappy-headed hoes.

...I know plenty of nappy-headed white hoes. Trust me, theres a lot of them at the University of Denver, and ironically most of them belong to the same sorority

Nice. I think your attitude is just serving to make my point.

Bet51987 wrote:Your absolutely correct on the definition of those words and I'm surprised not everyone agrees. However, what happened to forgiveness? Isn't that a big part of theism?
...
I think Imus learned a lesson and I hope he gets his job back.

You know... you're right.

Racism is one of my "soap-box" issues. I've witnessed a lot of it and a lot of dumb excuses for it, so I tend to get a bit too upset about it. I still support the networks' actions, but forgiveness is needed here. Thank you.

TIGERassault wrote:Am I the only one that thinks the majority of the major hustle over this is coming from white people?
Or is it just because there aren't a lot of black journalists...

No, your not the only one. As a matter of fact, with the exception of a few prominently known blacks in the black community, the majority of all of this drama and debate has came from Whites.

Now was the comment racist? Maybe to a degree, but more along the lines of racially insensitive. I noticed the arguments of the two words used. About how "nappy" and "ho" aren't racist, and therefore the phrase isn't. Let me give an example for some of you that just "don't get it".

Let's say I was referring to a group of women. Now if I just said ho's, I would be referring to the group. But let's say that I said "dog eating, slanted eye hoes" or "border hopping hoes". Or perhaps to hit closer to home for some of you, "Pasty wonderbread hoes". At this point, you can see that I'm using both a negative racial trait term AND singling out a particular race in each case.

Do I think he should have been fired? Absolutely not! Should have been an apology and just that. No picketing, no media front page blowout, etc... The reason being is that this only serves to further widen the gap between whites and blacks. The biggest thing that will come from this is just more anti-Black feelings due to certain members of our community overreacting. It's the media equivalent of the hanging of blacks just for looking at a white woman.

If you haven't read the article by Jason Whitlock that he wrote for the Kansas City Star, I highly suggest you read it. And here's a recent blog entry that I had written about it.

http://korrupted.net/cs/blogs/rants/arc ... d-guy.aspx

A lot of you guys "just don't get it" and I don't think you ever will. And for the love of ★■◆●ing god, Jesse Jackson is not our god damn emperor/president/dictator/king! The majority of us really don't give much of a crap about this Imus bit. But everyone looks at this media blowout and just assumes that this is the reasoning/thinking of all Black people in the U.S. And THEN we get irritated because we're constantly asked about what we think or our coworkers and associates are afraid to even dialogue with us for fear of accidently offending and getting fired haha.

Admiral Thrawn wrote:...A lot of you guys "just don't get it" and I don't think you ever will. And for the love of **** god, Jesse Jackson is not our god damn emperor/president/dictator/king! The majority of us really don't give much of a crap about this Imus bit. But everyone looks at this media blowout and just assumes that this is the reasoning/thinking of all Black people in the U.S. And THEN we get irritated because we're constantly asked about what we think or our coworkers and associates are afraid to even dialogue with us for fear of accidently offending and getting fired haha.

Fear not I get it in spite of my arguing so strongly against the blowout. You see it's the blowout, not the offense taken, that has me pissed off. You said it yourself, he could be a racist but really what he did was insensitive. It's a fine line he was dancing on so we need to look at the context of why and how the words were delivered.

I can think of numerous examples of how someone could say the very same words and I'd say it was racism but in this case I don't believe it was.
And in spite of what my rantings might lead one to believe I know better than to think all black people are so hypersensitive. The perception that they all are is a product of this whole we-must-protect-the-victim-class political correctness that is completely unwarranted.

A week ago I was in line at DisneyWorld waiting for a ride on a rollercoaster. In front of my family was a young black mother and her 8 year old son. He was having a great time goofing off, talking to me etc. I was showing him magic tricks and at one point he asked me my favorite food and then started to list his. He got to fried chicken and stopped and said real loud and proud, "I love fried chicken the best!" His mother turned and watched me as well as a few other people within earshot....
I had to measure my response just in case it might sound like I was finding humor in the stereotype that all black people love fried chicken.
I'm sick and tired of that whole walking on eggshells routine.
I told him "Yea, me too." But you know you couldn't have paid me to tell him how much I love watermelon after that....

I just realized something. Maybe the real reason I'm pissed of is I know calling someone a nappy headed ho' should just be considered an insult but thanks to our collective piss poor handling of the whole race relations thing it is racist just to say those words no matter what the context and I'm tired of having to play my part in such a pathetic dysfunctional culture. I want my balls back and everyone else to get with the program!

Hi Admiral!

Long time no hear...

I agree with you except for the slap on the hand part. I think Imus should have kept his job, got a warning, then a fine of say.... two million to be given to the girls team.

Imus was hurt emotionally by this and there is no doubt he was humbled by his meeting with those girls. Thats got to mean something... Its not a job he lost, it was his entire career and dignity, and thats too big a price to pay for making a stupid mistake like this.

Bee

Admiral Thrawn wrote:
Now was the comment racist? Maybe to a degree, but more along the lines of racially insensitive. I noticed the arguments of the two words used. About how "nappy" and "ho" aren't racist, and therefore the phrase isn't. Let me give an example for some of you that just "don't get it".

Let's say I was referring to a group of women. Now if I just said ho's, I would be referring to the group. But let's say that I said "dog eating, slanted eye hoes" or "border hopping hoes". Or perhaps to hit closer to home for some of you, "Pasty wonderbread hoes". At this point, you can see that I'm using both a negative racial trait term AND singling out a particular race in each case.

Theres just a slight difference in what he said, and the words you're twisting here. I could think of a hundred different ways to revise what the man said and make it sound like the most racist remark on the planet. If Imus said some of the things you mentioned, I would completely understand the anger, and quite frankly I'd be miffed as well.

However, there are some here that I think are completely ignoring the CONTEXT of what Imus said and are only focusing on the WORDS. Maybe I'm going to forever be one of those that "just don't get it", but I'm not so anal retentive to cry racist at the drop of a hat just because someone said something that COULD be worded as racist if the words were twisted just right. Honestly, I think if Martin Luther King were still around, he would look at this debacle and just shake his head in shame due to the media frenzy that has blown this way out of proportion.

MD-2389 wrote:...Honestly, I think if Martin Luther King were still around, he would look at this debacle and just shake his head in shame due to the media frenzy that has blown this way out of proportion.

I like to think if Dr. King were still here he would have lost his ability to refrain from violence and kicked the ★■◆● out of Jesse Jackson a long time ago...Al Sharpton would have been afraid to do what he did with the Tawana_Brawley affair for fear Dr. King might find give him some of what Jackson got and so the whole chain of events that brought us to this mess today would have been broken so it never would have happened the way it has.

The wrong man took the bullet on that balcony in 1968....

Bet51987 wrote:Hi Admiral!

Long time no hear...

I agree with you except for the slap on the hand part. I think Imus should have kept his job, got a warning, then a fine of say.... two million to be given to the girls team.

Heh, your solution is harsher than mine. I just said an apology, but fines? No! That would just set the expectation that when the next person says something wrong, someone somewhere is supposed to be getting some money. I would have to disagree on that. Like I said, it went too far.

Md-2389 wrote: Theres just a slight difference in what he said, and the words you're twisting here. I could think of a hundred different ways to revise what the man said and make it sound like the most racist remark on the planet. If Imus said some of the things you mentioned, I would completely understand the anger, and quite frankly I'd be miffed as well.

MD, your not black, so therefore I didn't expect you to intimately know about how blacks feel about the word nappy. To you, it's just a word representing the unkept hair of a black man or woman. But it goes deeper than that. Do I expect you to understand that? Absolutely not, and that's why I gave different examples. I'm not Asian, or Latino, but I bet someone of those origins could give a better example of that which may be subtle to us, but mean a LOT more to them.

Even though America is a melting pot of lots of races, we are still VERY ignorant of each other's cultures, and therefore, would not realize that something we say or do would offend others. For an excellent example, buy a clock and give it to one of your chinese friends as a gift. And I'm not talking about Chinese-American. Find one of your friends who actually came from China. Just have them explain what it means. I had to find that out the hard way. Ooops!!

Will Robinson wrote: I want my balls back and everyone else to get with the program!

Then don't give them up! Part of the problem is that people AREN'T standing up and that's why Imus got fired and treated the way he did. I mean heck, someone that Imus attacked in the past, a black man at that, came to defend Imus, but it was not enough. More prominent people need to stand up and quit taking this crap. Stand up for what's right and quit letting these FAKE black leaders and media punk you guys. My site is still down (screwed up while updating community server) so here's a link to my friends blog where it was originally brought out to me.

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-.8qzP.sz ... SxG?p=1555