Moif- You will notice- even the most liberal, "hey, it is just a joke, no big deal" black men, that are NOT "pc" get pretty irate at this one. Calling me racist has no impact on me whatsoever, you and 20 others can call me that, and I would simply be confused- it takes an action to be racist, the only poeple sensitive to that word ARE racists- it is the truth that hurts.

But we are talking an ETHNIC slur that has the power of "nigger" or "nappy headed hoes" or "jigaboos"- for white men- there simply isn't one- I know, I spent alot of time researching it for my racially tinged bits.

Black audiences I have performed in front of LIKE jokes about racist words and social moores- that is why I wrote the material- to speak of it in front of "mixed" audiences, primarily black and hispanic.

Black audiences, in my experiances, have been far, far more forgiving and "un-sensitive" than any other audience with primarily one ethnic group- white or hispanic- though there is some regional difference as well, that I noticed, when doing stand up on the road.

Every time you go to a comedy club, you are asked, in your contract, to promote that show on the radio.

When you go in to the station, I have ALWAYS been told, before going on air "no 7 letter words, if you are going to use a sexist or racist slur, make sure it has some background, don't get us fined unless we know it's coming before hand and then we will take our lumps together"

IN fact, my two friends that run the shock jock station here resigned after the Janet Jackson fiasco- because of the hyper-vigliance, it "wasn't fun any more, church lady censorship is rulling the day"- they left for 6 months.

The reason that so many black poeple are taking this nearly irrelevent talk show person to task, is because they can feel the overt racism in the speech.

Let's get away from Imus for a minute.

If it had been AL Franken that had uttered these words, even though he is screaming liberal- he would have been turned on in a heart beat- but Al franken is a FREAKIN' GENIUS when it comes to words- and he could approach this subject, and make it funny, and no one would be offended.

John Locke- the reason he ran to Al Sharpton is because he knows how badly he screwed up, and this could easily be career ending.

Oh, but some would want us to believe that so long as it is just a word, no damage is done. It's just a word... nobody was killed. To quote one of my favorite plays about Byron and Shelley, Bloody Poetry, "do you not know that words can maim... that words can kill?" Words have been known to start wars. There's the power of the word. To say that words can't kill is absurd.

I think we've forgotten the power of language, the power of the word. I quite agree with the blogger that nighttimer linked to. There has been a certain amount of enabling going on. What it's created is a vicious circle. Words used as weapons are "reclaimed" by those hoping to diffuse the power of the word which only creates the perception that such words are okay to be used as weapons.

This doesn't excuse Imus. But it should put everyone on notice regarding the power of words.

I believe the two topic questions proceed from the implied question:

0. Is what the Imus Four said racist?

I'd like to try to analyze what Imus and company said, exactly why each item is or isn't racist.

Not quite racist yet. Descriptive, superficial, and perhaps prejudicial, but so far, not racist. In context with future comments, however, it seems to me like there is unstated racist intent even this early in the dialog-- but by itself, this much isn't demostrably racist yet.

Extreme sexism, but not yet racist. "Hardcore" by itself can simply mean intensely dedicated when applied to athletes, but combined with the sexual term "ho", it implies elicit sexual behavior that no one can know by looking at basketball players-- it's outright prejudice. Some might consider the term "ho" to be inherently racist, but I believe it is too frequently used apart from any racial overtones to be considered inherently racist anymore, if it ever was. Again, though, in light of what he's about to say, McJerk is building up to remove all doubt about his racist intent...

Sexism. Racism. I'll dissect it for those who might disagree. A "nappy", short form of "napkin", is a diaper-- in some regions, you'll hear either nappy or diaper to the exclusion of the other. When used to describe a real diaper, "nappy" is not racist in the least. The apparently unrelated definition of "nappy-haired" describes natural tightly-curled hair. "Nappy" in reference to the hairstyle is not listed in Wikipedia, or many other sources, as an inherently derrogatory term; however, it is being used here to identify people of a particular race or heritage. If the IgnoreImus had simply said "the Rutgers team is wearing their hair naturally, and the Tennessee team is not," he'd have effectively described the contrast between how the teams look, if he really thought it was important (which I doubt). By attaching "nappy-headed" to "ho", an equivalent phrase would be "Afro-headed prostitute", which I doubt anyone would deny is both racist and sexist in this context.

Here, McGerk recognizes the phrase from a Spike Lee movie, and invokes another phrase from the movie that is also the title of a track on its soundtrack, "The Jigaboos vs. the Wannabes". I remembered both phrases being invoked in School Daze; that's probably the one McGerk recalled, too, even though he agrees here with McCord's mis-identification of Do The Right Thing.

The (highly unreliable) Urban Dictionary defines jiggaboo as:The film used such terminology to address the issue of colorism on campus, in a way that can be easily extrapolated to address broader issues of racism and prejudice in mixed-race communities. When I saw the movie a couple of decades ago, it struck me as a particularly powerful "literary" device, and a quintessential use of symbolism for addressing two issues at once. I could also understand how looking only at the surface of the movie without thinking it though could definitely send an opposite message to those inclined to believe stereotypes. From a 2005 ABC News feature on colorism:
Some have claimed that if the Imus Four dialog had been spoken by black men, perhaps Spike Lee himself, there would have been no controversy. We need look no further than Lee's own experience to prove that notion completely false. From the Wikipedia School Daze entry:So, Imus and McGerk are definitely not being singled out just because they're white for using terms like "nappy-haired ho", "Jiggaboo", and "Wannabe". They were callously throwing around racist, colorist, sexist terminology in the course of casual conversation; as CR has emphasized, it wasn't even done in the context of cathartic humor, which would still be a little too edgy for my taste.

Not necessarily racist by itself, but extrapolating from what they've already said, this statement implies that there might be "street retribution" (gang violence) against Tennessee for defeating Rutgers on the court, based on nothing more than their physical appearance, which they have previously described in racist terms. In this context, that connection of race to gang violence is definitely a racist stereotype.

Normally, comparing the athletic style of a college team to that of pro team is a compliment; but in this context, comparison of the physical appearance of a women's team to that of a men's team tends to imply the intent to demean. Although it might not have inherent racist or sexist overtones, in the context of this dialog, it's highly questionable whether Rosenberg meant anything complimentary by his comment.

So, I believe all four men were engaging in racist dialog. It's a free country, where they're allowed to be as sexist and racist as they want to be so long as they're not physically violent about it. However, their employers and sponsors are also free to decide they'd rather not be tarnished by this kind of sexism and racism, and react by firing or suspending the Imus Four.

I never listen to Imus anyway, so it would do no good for me to join in the "Ignore Imus" movement among his former fans, but I think dropping the show from MSNBC and any radio stations syndicating it would be justified. Lists of sponsors for a boycott and NBC exects to write are emerging here:From that list, looks like Imus is already struggling for sponsors.

Do you feel that way about college football teams?


Not to mention female servicemembers. Basketball players have nothing on them. But stereotypes devaluing women based on appearances aren't so bad because they're common. Is that why some posters don't have a serious problem with Imus? The toxicity of a racial and sexist slam depends on how commonplace it is, and common usage, in turn, changes words from being racist and sexist to non-racist and non-sexist?

I think Sharpton is a bore. I didn't know he had his own radio show, let alone tried getting the FCC to ban violent rap music: "Here you have actual bloodshed, and people are not even responding at federally regulated radio stations... Black kids are expected to shoot each other, and nobody cares? Well I care, and I think somebody should do something about it."

The story was helpfully provided by Stormfront, where one poster said: "They're nappy headed and I'm betting they're ho's—you know dem black womens."

How many black people need to sound the alarm on the self-destructive aspects of their own culture for white people to stop whining about racial double standards? If you want to reserve the right to whine stay in the sidelines when it's time to discuss the social ills of black culture. That way you don't come across as a jerk, and I don't come across like a social conservative. It's not my bag, and I wish people who like to sound off on the corrosive evils of economic assistance programs to black communities from the Democrat Party and the social perils of liberalization would show some goddamn support here.

Seamus and Amlord- since I am not black, I really can't take what Imus said as personal- I have no axe to grind with this guy, furthermore- I feel he is a poineer, with some distinction in his field, as a ground breaking humorist- of the 70s though

So- I would have no problem insulting those women either- but I would not have even thought about using racially tinged words to do it

"East German shot put team vs the girl next door"

"Neanderthal women on steroids vs the drug free work place"

I can get pretty harsh (it all goes downhill from there ) on that team without ever calling race into it- and so could Don Imus.

BTW Lesley- you may not be in the correct circles to hear it- but you would be suprised the backlash against misogynistic lyrics in rap that there is among blacks all over America.

You would be suprised how much rap is outright banned in black households in this nation, and how many preachers and community leaders call out this trend, and call it very, very bad.

Lots of back households in this nation that wil deal out punishments for the word "nigger" in thier house.

It is far, far , far more common than you think.

Am I wrong on this NT?

Discrimination against women based on age, weigth, looks, etc., still happens even if men are closed-lipped with their comments. It's still the beautiful women who succeed in greater numbers than the "others". That's not FAIR! Even you, Nighttimer, are guillty! I've seen Sade and other sexy women on the cover of your avatar. But why not Rosie O'Donnel? You could help disabuse your male counterparts of their deep-seated sexism by sporting equally valuable women who may not be conventionally attractive.

The point is this: We, as a society, have managed to curtail a large percentage of overt sexism, yet it still exists. The problem must go deeper than just WORDS!



Do you mean to say that if we stop people from using any language that could be deemed as racist then the actual existence of racism will disappear? Again, I would say that the most racist people mask it so well you'd never know how they really feel.. I guarantee you that for every Don Imus shouting racial slurs, there is a non-vocal racist doing damage in bigger ways. Forgive my skepticism, but I doubt we'll eradicate racism through censorship.

Actually DP- racial words are a symptom of racism, racism is the disease. When racism doesn't exist- racial slurs will have no meaning and they will fall out of usage.
Look at the word "pollack"- a racial slur pointed towards Poles. You really don't hear it outside my ma's generation anymore.

Beause there are not really any social frictions with polish immigrints anymore.

As you have already pointed out, censorship would not eradicate racism. Neither do hate crime laws, which is why I no longer support them. I also support the right of Holocaust deniers to scream Jewish conspiracies at the top of their lungs. But then I don't think censorship is the goal here, even though posters acutely aware of racist double standards will disagree with me.

Censorship is not allowing Imus to say what's on his mind from the getgo. Just like Holocaust deniers can be ostracized by society, consumers have the right to express disapproval and have a product removed (and their disapproval, in turn, can be criticized). Ultimately broadcasters can ignore the audience at their own peril, but I support the audience's right to demand Imus’s removal. Better for consumers to apply market pressure than the FCC.

nighttimer

I wonder how many civil rights campaigners have heard those words!? The irony is almost amusing. I suppose only black people can be victims of injustice in your world view though.


Nor should you. Just remember to keep it accurate. So far you've not done so. You've merely made an innacurate, blanket condemnation about my attitude towards Muslims.


It doesn't, though that seems to have escaped your notice. My reply was contextual to CR's point regarding racial slurs.


Well pardon me if I think there is more to racism than radio talk show hosts insulting black women.


Well, first off, I was replying to a specific point made by CR and not 'twisting the thread' away from the eight black women. I never claimed to be a victim (or martyr) either I merely pointed out how often I get called a racist by people like you who don't take the time to read or consider what I've written because you 'don't care'.

And second, This is a debate regarding racist language, not your personal fief and you don't get to decide how other people interpret all things pertaining to racism NT. If you have a problem with what I'm writing to CR, then take your own advice and get out of the way.





Cruising Ram

By that argument the only people sensitive to the words 'nappy headed ho's' would be nappy headed ho's. I put it to you CR that an accusation of racism hurts no matter what action has been carried out. The salt in the wound is the implication of guilt regardless of truth and that some one else is passing judgement upon you on the basis of your skin colour rather than anything you've done yourself.

For you, an accusation of racism is obviously of no account but try selling that line in Germany. You yourself mentioned context in an earlier post I believe and it must be pointed out that if an accusation of racism was levelled at you, you might not care, but how would the rest of the world react?

An awful lot of people find such an accusation to be very painful, such as in Germany. Even though they themselves have not committed any racist crimes, the assumption that they are still racists because they are German, or which ever other group of people you may care to consider, is the reason why it hurts so much.
Its being judged unfairly that hurts. Not the actual words themselves. Words are ambiguous.






entspeak

If I've understood you right, then I agree, whole heartedly. There is more to words than just insults. People have spoken of 'context' a lot in this thread, but few have taken the time to follow that line to its conclusion and asked what are the contexts about? An accusation of racism is not just a way of saying 'your a bad person'. It is an accustation that carries a lot of weight, and significant consequences, a lot more than simply being called a 'nappy headed ho' in an age where such words are two-a-penny and broadcast frequently with no more outrage than a ifted eye brow or a frown.

Being called a bad name can wound you deeply, but it does not carry the consequence and stigma of being called a racist, and certainly not when one is innocent of the charge.

Nappy headed is not a racial slur. Yes it does apply more to black people, because it describes how our hair get when not combed or brushed.

This is a hilarious, what black person on this board didn't have a mother or father, that told them to get in the house and comb/brush their nappy heads.

White people tend to have straighter hair, when unkept it is kinky
Black people tend to have tighter hair, when unkept it IS called nappy.

How many Black people refer to their hair as "Kinky"??? not saying it never happens, but nappy is the usual term I've heard my whole life.

Imus was making a comparison on looks between the two teams. Both of them were predominately Black, both of them had white players.

He referred to them has ho because they were women. He firsts says how they look rough; then how they have tattoos. Again, nothing to do with race. He then says they hard core.

Then he compares them to the other basketball team, who are also Black calls them pretty. So he is comparing one black team to another Black team. Calling one tore down and the other fine.


How many ways can we see the context in this instance is pointed towards appearance not race.

So unless someone wants to say "nappy" is a racially deragatory term.... which some Whites may be doing, because they do not know.

Let me clarify. "nappy" is not akin to the word "nigger" It is not racial slur in and of itself. It is just a word that pertains to blacks more than other races, because of our hair. Some people are trying to make it seem that to call a Black person "nappy-headed" is like saying a racial slur.... IT IS NOT. AS a kid you can say the word "nappy" and not one parent would tell you "that's a bad word."

Any one who tries to paint "nappy-headed" as a "Black-lingo" is misleading you all.

It is a little late in this thread to try to bring reason or sanity in. You should consider removing your sane post and replacing it with a hysterical rant about the state of racism in America and call for the death of Don Imus and his band of merry men.

Its one thing to complain when one has been wronged.

..but the hand-wringing over the perceived overuse of the term "racists" seems a melodramatic response in anticipation of being wronged.

Maybe we should just distribute a pamphlet to all white males who don't want to be called racists explaining the danger zones.

Tip one could be:

1. Don't refer to black women as nappy headed ho's, it's received poorly.

Honestly, how stupid does one have to be to think that would blow over?

I used to be right there with those who thought that racism would take a back seat to classism as the quintessential western divide.

...I mean after centuries of despicable behavior beyond description from Europeans and their heirs (they are far from the only ones, but in the west this is simply the common legacy)

you'd think at least the public figures could grow some frontal lobes.

Then we get Michael Richards, Pat Buchanan, Newt Gingrich and Don Imus.

You know why people are so quick to call someone a racist?

Because there are so darn many in the halls of power, because their apologists are constantly trying to smooth over the garbage they spew.

When people in power, white males in particular, stop acting in a racist manner, well then the term will not be employed so often.

Until then complaining about its use is pointless.

Why are people so quick to call Muslim leaders extremists?

For those who would excuse Imus for some “poorly chosen words”, consider that this is by far not the first time he has resorted to racist insults to describe a black person. This shows a pattern of hatred and bigotry, and it should not be excused.

His multiple mea culpas are just a pathetic attempt at saving his own ugly butt, not from any true sense of remorse. Insulting college women who have reached a level in their sport that very few do devalues and degrades women in general, and women of color in particular.

Imus’ opinion of women shouldn’t matter to anyone; this guy fell out of the ugly tree, hit every branch and twig on the way down, smacked his head on the ugly rocks, got mauled by the ugly bear, dragged through the ugly forest, tossed in the ugly river and floated out towards the ugly sea. Unfortunately, the cretin has a radio (and TV???? Gads, I didn’t know he actually was on TV ) program and an unfortunate audience, so he can broadcast his vile spew on the public. As such, he is responsible for it. I hope he loses his job.

turnea:

Since when is Don Imus in a position of "power". Everyone has power over him: change the channel. Nobody has to listen him.

A joke such as this has absolutely no power over anybody. "Sticks and stones", remember? Call me a dumb pollack and I might laugh at you. An inside joke for me (I'm half Polish descent).

For this to be a racist comment would require that Imus is projecting the superiority of white (or at least, non-blacks). Did that happen? Can anyone infer that he meant to assert his authority over blacks?

No, he was simply insulting a group of women who happen to be black. He used terms that, while certainly insensitive and offensive, conveyed his opinion about them and were (in his mind) descriptive.

The question really should be: who cares what Imus thinks?



This is utterly insensitive and I demand an apology on behalf of all the handsome-challenged men out there.

No one has to listen to any commentator, but plenty of people do anyway.

Any prominent media figure has enough power to be responsible for what they say and do in public.

I'm not afraid Imus will influence government policy, I just shake my head at the certainty that he reinforces the racial animosity that has always plagued this country.

That's power enough to worry about.

As for this closely cropped definition of racism, i actually agree and hope that the next time we discuss affirmative action it will be followed to the letter.

...but I think dredging up old stereotypes about black female sexual behavior by casually calling them ho's does plenty to denigrate the character of blacks and smacks of a racist view.

The n-word doesn't directly assert racial inferiority either but the connotation is crystal clear.

Oh, I'm sure "handsome-challenged" men don't need any apology from me (after all, look at Hugh Hefner ). On the off chance you were serious, and personally offended, I do apologize. The point I was trying to make is that Imus' ugliness goes deeper than just his physical appearance; he is ugly through and through.

(and the "ugly tree" thing is usually applied to women by men who don't think they measure up in the looks department - I kind of thought it fitting to turn the tables.)

True, but what part of what IMUS saying connotes racial inferiority??

Nappy Headed or Hoes??

Or is it a conjunction of the two??

I ask you this Turnea... if you don't comb your hair.... what does it get?? How did you grow up to refer to your hair when it is uncombed?? When I grew up it was called nappy.


As for hoes, it is a deragatory statement toward women. I won't contest to that. But a shock jock calling girls ho's... oh my I only hear it on just about every funny talk show on the radio.

People can make this a gender issue, and I would see there point, I could still care less, but at least I would see their point.

I'm still asking... "when did 'nappy-headed' become a racial slur to the Black community??" When?? Cruisingram, Turnea, Grendel, NT,.... when??

It was the use of the word "ho" that officially crossed the line in my view. The term tends to be racially specific so I don't think is just sexist its racist too.

Imus removed all doubt (in the Mark Twain sense of the phrase) with using it in conjunction with "nappy headed" just in case there was any question about whether he was making a racist joke.

In and of itself I agree that we could let nappy headed slide, but the quote must be taken in context.

Okay- those of you that think this is not a racial slur- do an experimenvt. Go to a predominantly black nieghborhood, walk up to a black man and his wife, and ask him if he would offended by that statement.

If he is polite and civilized person, with great self control-he may very well do with a curt "yes"- or, if he is a bit quick to temper- you might find your butt being kicked all of a sudden.

Them's fightin' words poeple-you have to be incredibly naive to think otherwise.

Moif- I am thinking this debate is not quite as visceral for you as an American- you touched it with your comment on insulting a german- calling a german in germany a racist or nazi will probably evoke the same response as a black person upon hearing what we are discusing here.

Using this kind of langauge is a quick way to get into a fist fight.

Talkin' smack ON the basketball court has all kinds of non-PC talk- usuall fights start right after words like that. I can be talkin' smack for two hours on the court, saying things about his mama, his athletic ability, and his choice of clothes- but if I go to "nappy headed hoe"- I will cross the line and have to be ready to box.

Racial slurs are the last thing to be said, right before fists fly.

To say this is not a racial slur of impact is either niave or dishonest- if you don't think so- a very difficult life lesson, a very painful one, may be coming your way if you have the guts (or are racist enough) to use it~!

Turnea and CruisingRam,

Your proving my point!!!


Cruisingram are you basically saying if I came to your neighborhood and called your wife a "Ho" it is going to be all good. What are you going to say??

"oh don't worry honey, Ho's are only Black women"

Turnea, When did "ho" start having racial undertones. Ho is a deragatory statement towards women... white, black chinese, indian, etc.



Exactly!!! So explain how both teams are predominately Black, one he calls cute, the other rough, become a racist context?? looking at the context of everything he says...ccomparing them to men, comparing them to Grizzlies, talking about tattoos... does the context tend to lean toward race or appearance?

If he is racist to one because they are Black then how do you explain him calling the other team cute.... who are also Black?? That the part I need to understand.

I ask this

Was it a racist comment when the producer referred to rutgers team as "hardcore hoes" Someone please respond.

A white person can use the n-word a thousand times a day he could be as virulent a racist as we've ever know.

...and they could still have a few esteemed "black friends".

We see it all the time, every racist knows a few good colored folks.

I say this to point out that a racist viewpoint need not be universal in order for a single statement to be racist.

If I refer to an Asian-American using the g-word, it doesn't matter what a say about the next guy I see.

That comment was racist.

Imus as an individual may or may not be.

..and generally "ho" is considered a term used and applied to blacks.

I don't here too many white people using the word.

Turnea, I agree with all you are saying.... by the way, what the heck is the "G-word"... nevermind...

Point is you are starting to shut down. Don't just say it is, because it is. I asked you some pretty specific questions, that i think deserves your attention. After all this is a debate board.


Why does your logic lean toward the comment was about race rather than about appearance???

I was referring to the word "gook", out of common usage except among some of the worst racists. The c- word is likely more common these days.

There are certain stereotypical aspects of an ethnicity's appearance which generally signal a racial comment.

Sure many Asians have narrow eyes, but calling somebody slant-eyed is not simply a visual comment it has racial undertones.

He could have been simply taking offense to unkempt hair, but I doubt it.

Its in the eye of the beholder I think. I still overall think the comments were racist in context or scope of the words around the particular phrase that has become all the rage, I still don’t however hope this to ever reach some government mandate on free speech, that would be the real travesty. At that point, I know Monty Python will be banned from existence, along with the kids in the hall, comedy in general and any abstract concept of free will.

Agreed, and as i said, "nappy headed" connotes race. Usually Blacks. However as you said lets look at context.

Had it been a white team vs. a Black team one could assume he was separating based on race.

But here we have 2 predominately Black teams.

Looking at his whole setup he is talking about their appearance. First rough... then hardcore... then tattoos then nappy-headed... then mens basketball team.... then Grizzlies (which are also a mens basketball team, but in this case was to suggest they looked like bears.)

Keep in mind that the other team who is also predominately Black is NOT called nappy-headed?? They are called cute. Why the separation if he is making a racist comment.... why weren't both teams nappy headed ho's??


Now lets take Black people out of the equation. let's throw in Asians as you did earlier.

Two Asian teams are playing, and Imus is trying to make fun how "ugly" one group is compared to the other. He makes all of the same comments , but instead of nappy-headed... he calls one group of Asians "Kinky-headed ho's"

Are we still calling Imus a racist. He is still talking about minorities and still talking about unkept hair.

Well, let's see if I can keep this all straight...



Three points to make here, ConservPat.

First, according to Clarence Page, the syndicated columnist and occasional guest on "Imus in the Morning," Bernard McGuirk was specifically brought on to play the Bad Cop to Imus' Good Cop. McGuirk will make the racially-charged remarks and allow Imus to "tut-tut-tut" with mild reproach. It's all part of the schtick. Plus, do you really think the star of the freakin' show has nothing to say about who is on the show and who gets air-time? It is called "Imus in the Morning," not "McGuirk in the Morning."

Second, how in the world do you think you can step to a Black woman, call her a "nappy-headed hoe" and it NOT be a racist insult? It sure as hell isn't a compliment!

Third, there are ten members of the Rutgers Women's Basketball Team. Eight are Black and two are White. If there is no racism involved here then why were Katie Adams and Heather Zurich left out of the mix? Is it because they're "split-ends hoes" or just because they're White?




Agh. You're just stuck on these silly hypotheticals, aren't you Amlord? The cold, hard and undeniable FACT is Imus and company were not talking about predominantly White, buck-toothed hillbilly skanks. So what possible relevance could this have to what they DID say besides you straining to make a spurious comparison that can't be made?



There you go, what??? How the hell does your personal dislike for Epipphanny Prince in any way, shape or form justify Don Imus calling her a "nappy headed hoe?" Because she ran up the score on a team that probably shouldn't have been on the same floor as her team? Because she got in some trouble in high school? That's your reason she should get taunted and insulted by a couple of elderly frat-boys? If that's all you've got Amlord you haven't got much.



This is an entirely different and unrelated subject, Lesly, but I can assure you that there are Black people whom are indeed sounding the alarm about the self-destructive aspects of Black culture. Exhibit A is of course, Bill Cosby who has taken considerable heat for his pointed criticisms of working class Blacks who do not supervise their children or give them the foundation necessary to become productive citizens. Cosby is lauded by some and ripped by others for saying out loud what many have said only thought and I applaud his courage.



Not to come off as the voice of authority, Cruising Ram, but you are on point here. There is no shortage of Black families where in their homes rap music is an unwelcome guest. The same goes for the casual use of the word, "nigger." That was a bad word in the house I grew up in and the same goes now as my wife and I attempt to raise two children.

My son has only had one serious problem during his time in high school and that came from a fight he got in with another boy who insisted on calling him, "My nigger." He informed him that he was nobody's nigger and when the other dude wouldn't back off, that was the spark that set the fire.



I do not claim to be a sexism-free man, Doomed_Planet and I have my preferences like most men. I prefer Latin women to White women and Black women to Latin women and brunettes over blondes. That's just how I roll. Nor do I apologize for preferring the looks of Sade, Monica Bellucci or Salma Hayek to Rosie O' Donnell or Kate Moss. That's why ice cream comes in more flavors than just vanilla or chocolate.

"Lookism" is part and parcel of a society where women are objectified and I get that. I agree that women that are not classically beautiful or conventionally attractive have their virtues. And here is just one example of a woman who meets that standard whom I find quite appealing.



You're parsing words here, droop224 and I'm taking Don Imus' insulting words in their totality.

To take answer your question, I don't present myself as the go-to guy for the pulse of the Black community. Black people are not monolithic and what I find insulting may not be to Turnea and obviously you. Cool. Not a problem. Not every Black person loves Martin Luther King Jr. and fried chicken either.

But if you don't see how absolutely Imus slapped Black women with the "nappy-headed hoes" crack, I don't think you're very much attuned to how difficult it is for sisters in this world who don't represent like Halle Berry. If it's hard out there for a Black man dealing with all the drama we have to go through, it's twice that for a Black woman in a society that tells them their hair is too kinky, their noses too broad, their lips too thick and their hips too wide.

Perhaps because you "could care less" about this being a gender issue explains why you don't see the insult here. Then again, when the gender issue was about the vague possibility of a gay man checking out your junk in the shower, you cared plenty about that.

I understand that, but that isn't to say that Imus can say, I don't like Bernard, fire him. The execs are loyal to cash and listeners. If people are listening to McGuirk and companies are paying for advertising time then of course they won't fire him regardless of what Imus says [short of saying fire him or I'm leaving].
That's easy to say out of context. When put in the context of looks it certainly is still racIAL but as AMlord said, not racIST.
Because they don't have nappy hair? I'm sure that's why Imus didn't call them "nappy headed"...If they were, I'm sure he would've called them nappy headed hos as well. I'm not justifying it and again it certainly happened to be racial because he WAS only talking about the black women, but it wasn't racist. He would have done the same thing with white girls he thought were ugly or ho-like.

CP

Actually, you have our roles reversed. If you looked at it in totality you would be able to explain why if BOTH teams were predominately Black why only ONE team got called "nappy headed hoes"



Well that's o.k. NT because i do have my finger on the pulse. And through all the outrage, Black mama's are still telling there kids to comb their nappy heads before they go to church. And by the way.... I love fried chicken, too!!!



No doubt some sister's took offense, doesn't make it a racist comment though... just insensitive. But hey don't blame Imus for their self-esteem issues.



Did Imus say all that... I better recant what I was saying.



Yeah I rember that debate... I was against showing them my "junk" and you were all for showing them yours... What is your point... to take the debate off track?? To tell me how insensitive I am?? O.K. NT a man with sensitivity... start a debate on it... Let's get back to the topic at hand Ralph Tresvant.

Perhaps. I'm not really certain. Race is not an issue I think much about. All I know is that you can be as good a person as you can be, you can be polite and courteous, try not to pass judgement and treat all people as equals. But, as Turnea says, you make one racist remark, no matter how trivial it seems to you, or funny, or just a joke, no matter what your true character is you will be branded a racist.

And whats worse, what annoys me about it, is that you might not even understand the word you use is racist, but it won't make any difference to people who expect you to be a racist simply because you fit their profile of what a racist is.

I'm not buying it. McGuirk is a producer and a hired talent on the show. If Viacom has to choose between Imus and McGuirk that's no choice at all. They wouldn't lose a dime by getting rid of some geek 99 percent of the listeners wouldn't know if he stood on their doorstep. That's like saying if David Letterman got sick of Paul Shaffer he couldn't have him replaced.



Amlord really isn't the best source to reference in this debate thus far. And once again, you're just spinning the word to try and make it mean something it doesn't.



Dude, you are reaching.

Daniels and Zurich don't have nappy hair? Go back and check out the link I posted of the eight Black players. They don't have nappy hair either. This "racial" versus "racist" crap you've latched on like a drowning man to a piece of wood is just plain desperate. There's really no other word for it.

Do you want to know why Imus didn't call the two White players (who were seated along with their Black colleagues today at their press conference where they agreed to meet with Imus), ConservPat? Do you really want to know? Or do you want to keep advancing this dismally intellectually dishonest argument that there was no racist component to Imus' remarks?

This is becoming a sad display of the lengths some people will go to sugarcoat the bitter truth.

What you're not buying is the principle of the market...The consumer gets what they want. Feel free not to buy it.
An idiot calls someone a nappy headed ho...I'm asked why he didn't say the same thing to two people with out nappy hair...Not exactly a reach. It's a fact that some of the girls on Rutgers had nappy hair, correct?
Hey, Nighttimer, quick question. If I'm just as convinced that I'm right as you are that you're right, why haven't I called your argument "desperate" and yet you've done just that to me...Mull that over.
I'm aware not every one of the black players had nappy hair, but some did right? He was making comments about the team's general looks, some of them had nappy hair, hence "nappy headed hoes." Do you really believe he wouldn't have made an equally offensive comment about white women...do you really? I'm being realistic in saying Imus is an equal opportunity idiot, you're saying he's a racist, I'm not giving him enough credit to think that he'd only make such a remark about black women.
So my argument is a "desperate" attempt to "sugarcoat the bitter truth"...Wow Nighttimer, good stuff.

On edit: And why in the HELL would I continue an intellectually dishonest argument in order to defend Dom freaking Imus, NT? What in God's name would I do that for. If I REALLY did believe the man was a racist what POSSIBLE motivation could I have in defending him. Jesus Christ, what do you think my motivation here is NT, tell me.

On edit again: So is anyone going to tell me that they believe that Don Imus would not have called what he saw as an ugly group of white women a terrible name...ANYONE? Because if not then that should be enough to prove that he isn't a racist...he's a sexist and an idiot, period. Just because he insulted ONE group of black people [before COMPLIMENTING another] it does not mean what he said was racist. As a minority, you CAN be insulted without the person insulting you being racist, it is possible, contrary to popular belief [apparently].

CP

Nighttimer,

You're probably right about that. Never the less, Don Imus is an old hack with a arbitron .3 share* which is nill in the industry. That means that literally, almost nobody listens to him. In the last week Imus has recieved more attention publicly, than all of his years in radio put together. He isn't going to be fired, but when he comes back to the radio after his two week suspension (or paid vacation, however you look at it), he will have many more listeners because of all of this. Prior to this mess the only press Imus got was Howard Stern ridiculing him for sucking at radio.

Yeah the remark was racist, that's why it was funny. But the best thing anyone can do in a situation like this where he hasn't broken any laws, is to tune out and ignore him. You know for a fact the worst thing in the radio industry isn't when millions of people are talking about you, it's when millions aren't talking about you.


* this is Imus' confirmed ratings share. I cannot provide a link as it is illegal to show proof of this information, per an arbitron agreement.

So if I call some people on Jerry Springer white trash would that mean im a racist? Or if I said wow you have some nappy hair, that would also make me a racist?

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=1912



If Al Sharpton was really concerned about racism, he'd be in his own backyard preaching. There's a huge double standard in the US. Black commentators can say pretty much anything about white people but once a white guy says anything referring to color... Pull out the RACIST card.

This link deals with the "nappy-headed" issue, which was misconstrued by parents when a teacher was using this critically-acclaimed children's book in her classroom in an effort to foster self-acceptance and tolerance: http://www.adversity.net/special/nappy_hair.htm

"Nappy-headed" is probably as offensive as "dishwater blonde" or ditzy blonde, or the like, depending on how the target of the comment takes it. It's not a compliment, just a slightly cutting description of hair that isn't smooth or shiny. Yes, there are nappy-headed people who are not African Americans. But it still isn't flattering.

"Ho" isn't a flattering description, either, obviously because it is a colloquialism for "whore". I cannot imagine any woman who would be pleased with that characterization. "Ho" is specific to speech used by people of the hip hop/gangsta genre of music and fashion.

The speech is misogynistic in this case, with an emphasis on the race of the women Imus was describing.

It has obviously been established in this thread that Don Imus is an un-funny old fogey who looks like an unkempt cowboy and doesn't have as much of a viewership/listenership as his younger, even more obnoxious colleague Howard Stern.

I personally think that a so-called entertainer or public figure who pulls stunts for which we common peons would be fired from our jobs should be held accountable for them. When I worked at Wal-Mart years ago or as a nurse even more years ago, I would have been canned for using that kind of language to describe a customer, patient or coworker.

Why do we issue passes for these overpaid, used-to-be-class-cutups?

And while I find the Reverend Al Sharpton entertaining, I do not think that he is necessarily the decision maker when it comes to whose racial slurs are unforgivable and whose aren't. I think Michael Richards' tirade was worse, and if there is sufficient mercy to redeem his sorry butt, there should be room for forgiveness for Don Imus, even though I do not like the man and do not listen to him. I disliked Imus the first time I heard of him, i.e., when he spoke at that dinner that President and Mrs. Clinton attended and he made a nasty speech that was supposed to be entertaining. (The difference between Imus and Stephen Colbert being that Colbert was actually FUNNY as he satirized President Bush Jr. during his National Press Club keynote speech!) Whatever. Imus has obviously gotten along fine since then without my approval.

Yes, there is a racist element to what Imus said. But then he's been a jerk when talking about all kinds of other people, too. Why don't we just suggest he be fired just for being such an unentertaining jerk?

And as far as the "Jiggaboo" and "wannabe" comment the other guys made, ditto. The reference to the wrong Spike Lee movie didn't justify their comments.

I can understand the idea of having the FCC fine Imus & Co., but I really feel the networks should step up to the plate and police themselves in these situations.

It's not on me to explain why Don Imus chose to malign the Rutgers players and not the Tennessee team. It's your theory---you explain it because it still doesn't mitigate Imus insulting the ladies from Rutgers.

I blame Imus if he thinks it's funny to call Black women "nappy headed hoes." If you think that's just a "self-esteem" problem of theirs, then I don't think you have your finger on the pulse of the Black community at all.

If you bothered to read and not just get your butt on your shoulders, droop224, please point out where I called you insensitive. I'm only pointing out you don't care very much about the gender issues of Black women as much as you do about the prospect of a gay man checking you out in the shower. Is that an inaccurate analysis of your previously stated fears?

Sorry, but the Ralph Tresvant reference/taunt is lost on me. I was always more of a BoyzIIMen fan.




Thank you. I don't. And I'm not the only one.

The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that Procter & Gamble has suspended its advertising commitment to the show. A company spokesperson said, “Any venue in which our ads appear that is offensive to our target audience is not acceptable to us.”

Bigelow Tea has pulled its ads from the radio broadcast, while Staples has done the same with ads that aired surrounding the MSNBC TV simulcast of the show.

“A handful of advertisers have asked to move their spots to other programs and we are accommodating them,” Jeremy Gaines, an MSNBC spokesman, told the Journal.

The Journal article reported that other advertisers, including Random House, are evaluating future advertising with the program. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17999196/

It starts with a few drizzling drops. It just might become a downpour. If that happens we shall see what comes of it.



Maybe because your argument is desperate and repeating it only makes it more so?



No. Wrong. Next?



Well, we agree Imus is an idiot. I choose to add a racist idiot. You don't, and that's where we part company.



I don't have the slightest' clue what your motivation is in defending Imus, ConservPat. Maybe he owes you money--I can't say. I do not possess the ability to look in your heart--or his. But just as one of the Rutgers players said today this isn't the first, not the second and not even the third time Imus has made or tolerated racist remarks on his program. All that jive about "being a good man who said a bad thing" is hard to believe when bigoted remarks flow freely and casually from Imus and his motley crew.

It's great that Imus raises money for charity and helps sick kids (including Black kids) with cancer, but does that give him a license to say horrible things about Black people? No.



Yawn. These "woulda/coulda/shoulda" scenarios are getting as old as Imus. It's not what he DIDN'T say that got his wrinkled butt in a sling. It's what he DID say that has people coming down on him like the wrath of God. When you have managed to tick off Al Roker---NOBODY'S idea of a Black militant---you have truly accomplished a monumental act of total racial boneheadedness.

I, for one, am really tired of the diatribes, the “humor” at others’ expense, the cruelty that passes for “funny”. Don Imus isn’t the only one doing this, but today he’s the one in the hot seat.

What he said was vile and disgusting. It denigrated an entire team and by extension, a community and its pride in a group that had excelled.

The “I’m a good person who said a bad thing” apology doesn’t cut it. At least he didn’t try to weasel out of this by hiding behind alcohol or drug abuse. Still, he said it and a two-week suspension doesn’t cut it. It is, at best, a slap on the wrist. A vacation. Nothing.

The general manager of Cartoon Network resigned after a publicity stunt went wrong and caused a panic in Boston. He did the right thing. Don Imus should do the right thing and resign. Not talk about taking a two-week suspension with dignity. I don’t think Don Imus gets it. link

Al Roker is right. Don Imus doesn't get it. But he's not the only one.



Actually, no. It wasn't funny. Not in the least.



Which you just did by referencing an article from former Marxist-turned-right-wing-whack job, David Horowitz's website. But since the figure you quote doesn't have anything to do with Don Imus or the Rutgers
women's basketball team, why don't you kick that can down the road and start a thread about it?

Should be good for at least one or two laughs.

I decided to think of this as a 'work test'. Meaning if I said what Mr. Imus said at work - what would happen? Because of the laws that are in place at work I know for an absolute fact that I would not be employed at that company the same day period.

My freedom of speech does not extend to work, I would be fired for making that comment. Now Mr. Imus was 'at work' and if I would be fired for making those comments, then so should he be treated.

Simple and to the point his comments would earn just about anybody a pink slip. If the shoe fits.

I must confess I'd never heard of Imus before reading this thread, but I was under the impression that he is an entertainer. Is that correct? If so, entertainers typically have much more leeway of expression than your typical 9 to 5 job. You might get fired for jumping on the table and dropping your trousers too, but it's fine (expected even) for an adult entertainer. You would likely get fired for spouting anything that Carlos Mencia or Eddied Murphy would utter "at work", too.

I have to say, although I found his comments to be a bit racist, they are much more blatantly sexist. Why is it okay to say 'ho' and not 'nappy headed ho'? But he'd be behind a LONG line of others if fired on that account. The entertainment industry (not to mention the sports industry) would run dry.

If making racist remarks were grounds for firing, then Jesse, Rev. Al, Louis, and the rest of the race-based carnival barkers on the left should submit their resignations immediately.

Were Imus's remarks racist? Probably? But so what. They were just words. They have no power unless people grant them that power. Unfortunately, many have.

Imus is being bitten by the liberal hand that fed him. Good. He thought that sucking up to the likes of Kerry, Chris Matthews, Maher and the rest of the liberal NBC/CBS media crowd could protect him. Well, he's finding out the hard way how the game works.

And don't tell me that Jackson and Sharpton give a flying football about those Rutger baskeball women. With those two clowns, and the rest in the racist huckster business, it's all about power. They love nothing more than stickin it to da man. If they can use this to bully CBS radio and MSNBC TV into firing Imus, then they'll be happy. These guys get their rocks off by making white people grovel and by exerting their power over them. I'm sure that tapes of Imus "apologizing" to Sharpton, a man who promoted a racist hoax involving the lying Tawana Brawley, incited a riot that killed people, and routinely makes racist remarks will be watched over-and-over-and-over by these people. I'm sure that it's extremely gratifying to them to see that old coot Imus call Sharpton "sir" and watch him nearly cry in his apology. All that could be better is for him to lay prostrate on the floor and let Rev. Al flog him. It was a despicable. And I'm sure that replays of it would excite Rev. Al and the master extortionist Jackson more than porn would.

I'll expand on those remarks to say that Sharpton and Jackson (and the rest of the so-called "leadership" of the black community) don't care about black people either. They only care about THEIR power. If they really cared, they'd be more worried about the REAL issues that are killing that community. They'd be working to stop the 75%+ out of wedlock birth rate. They'd be attacking the issue that black males commit homicide at a rate 40 times higher than any other group in the USA and that while blacks represent 12% of the general population, they represent the majority of felons currently imprisoned. They'd be addressing the low academic expectations, the high rates of drug use, and the negative influence by the popular culture that demean and degrade in exchange for money. Ah, but those things would be difficult to address. It's much easier, and WAY more fun, to just fight the power!

And the Rutgers basketball team? They failed two tests in one week. They first fell short when they couldn't beat Tennessee on the court. Their second test was what to do in response to Imus' words. They failed this exam too. Instead of acting with dignity and maturity, they fell into the tired old liberal pattern of "we are victims!". Well Boo Hoo. What do they want? Do they want reparations from Imus as a result of him being mean? Do they want him drawn and quartered or would mere crucifixtion (since we're in the Easter season) be sufficient?

Here is what the SHOULD have said. And they shouldn't have dignified this episode with a "press conference" where they all declare how badly "we've all been hurt! waaaaaaah!". They should have issued a statement from the coach that said....

"We recently became aware of the comments of radio personality Don Imus. We polled the team members and nobody had heard of him until these comments were brought to our attention. And based on the Arbitron ratings, we're not alone in that regard. Our team members are busy focusing on their academic and athletic careers and don't have time to waste on such trivia. We all respect the words of advice and encouragement offered by our close friends, family members, and trusted advisers. Unfortunately, Imus isn't one of those. Signed, The Rutger's Women's Basketball Team".

That's how it should have been handled.

[Note: this post has been heavily edited and re-edited]
On Edit:
As droop said: Watch the live action games on Youtube and you'll see where Imus got "nappy headed" from.
Well gee Nighttimer, maybe I'm defending him [if you can call it that] because I think he's being unfairly labled a racist. You're not the only one who sees his side of the argument as righteous.
You've dodged the question, and it wasn't done very subtly. I still have no reason to believe he wouldn't have made a similar comment about white women [and I'm equally certain it wouldn't have gotten media attention or a thread of its own here at AD], don't you? This is a key question and an answer would be peachy.

CP

CR – I’m having problems understanding exactly where you’re coming from. You claim it’s perfectly fine to insert racially sensitive language into your own routine, in fact you claim your predominantly hispanic and black audiences love it. Yet Imus, who before this incident was quoted as saying his show was more humor than politics, doesn’t get the same latitude with similar language? Why? Because he wasn’t physically on a stage with the Def Comedy Jam tour?

This "situational allowance" is just part of the problem.

My personal take on what Imus said. Until “nappy” makes it’s way into mainstream vernacular (the transition from slang to mainstream is another part of the problem) then yes his remarks were racist.


I don’t know if calling a lady a “ho” is necessarily sexist, it’s certainly demeaning and rude, I’ve heard men referred to as “ho’s”. The word “ho” has been sliding into mainstream for a few years, I’ve been registered on another site for 7 years and my handle there is GolfHo. Was his intent racist and sexist, only Imus knows for sure, I think it was just an old dude failing miserably at trying to be hip and funny.

But did he owe the reverend Sharpton an apology? Not unless Al is a member of the Rutgers women’s basketball team. That’s where Imus needs to seek his forgiveness. The good reverend acts like he’s Father Sharpton and runs an on air confessional booth. Is Imus now absolved of his “sin”? Not unless every member of the Lady Knights forgives him. If indeed he has hatred in his heart than confessing to Father Sharpton is nothing but a ruse to promote yet cheapen Sharpton’s own agenda.

Conservpat

I would suggest looking at the game and not just the glamour shots NT posted. Not that any of them are going to stand out on either team.

NT




I have can you at least find the flaw in what I am saying. The comments are not racist because they are not placing one race above another. It is not even about race. It is about appearance. I've said it like a bizillion times. Look at the context. Why did he call them rough, hardcore, compare them to men, compare them to bears, comment on their tattoos?? None of this has anything to do with race, all of it has to do with appearance... a.k.a. he was disparaging their image. I'm not even going toattempt to remove the racial underpinning of the comment "nappy-headed" but that gets us a comment you said earlier...



NT if we can't distinguish between a comment having racial connotations and being racist, what sense does that make?? That would make 99% of minority comedians, from dave chapelle, to George Lopez racist simply because they say something about white people. And what about the thousands of morning show from Tom Joyner to Crazy Howard Mcgee. I've heard plenty of racial comments on their shows... would I be desparate to not call their comments racist just because they are joking about another race.

Imus profession is an entertainer. He is not a news anchor, he is not a basketball coach. He is a shock jock.(even if he is a poor one)

It was said in jest... notices the l