What do you think about the Imus situation?

Anyone?

I'd just like to see how ignorant people are. I'll explain myself later.

Typical Virgo .. set someone up intellilectually, just so they can fall beneath the superiority of your knowledge that is withheld on a certain topic.

Have fun laughing at the pee-ons ignorance under you.

🙂 you're cute Depthcharge 😉

You are what you own.

You find what you seek.

Subjectivity is a choice .. taking offense without considering the source, is victimization to yourself.

There'd be no difference than an Athiest telling a Christian that God doesn't exist ..
would a God-fearing person take that personally? No .. they would consider the source.

If the source stinks .. then don't own the statement .. freedom of choice .. it's that simple.


You find what you seek.

OK, now is later...

We see and hear things that can be considered "Racist" or "Sexist" all the time, When Chapelle or Mencia says it... It's A-Okay...

When a Imus says it... he get's burned at the stake.

So what's this freedom of speech thing if we can't use it? I mean we as in EVERYONE, not we as in white people... so what if my skin is white? Do I not have the right, or anyone else that shares my skin color, the right to speak whatever I want regardless if it offends? So call me a racist if you wish, I'll tell you I'm not and leave it at that, but I won't apologize for an opinion... I think that's where Imus went wrong.

Anyways, I don't mean to offend, but if I do... go call Al Sharpton on my ass...

But this thing is BS...


and P-A thanks for not being ignorant.

DC too funny...

Can we not find humor in this crap? It's sad, but if stuff like this Imus crap continues we might as well just throw the 1st amendment out the door.

Bran,

How can I consider myself racist when I personally do not like people in general?

It's not because of race that I do not like a person... it's usually a combination of many other factors (ignorance, annoyance, stupidity, etc.)...

I'll admit to being a cynic... but racist? nope.

So to the people I can tolerate, congrats.

To the people I like, they are few and far between, and I consider them very special.

My $ 0.02

-vpm

"and P-A thanks for not being ignorant."

And you can fuck off, for being so ignorant that you believe anothers view that doesn't coincide with you is deemed ignorant.


Message posted by: virgopmoon on 4/12/2007 7:11:08 AM ip: xxx.xxx.xxx.169
Anyone?

I'd just like to see how ignorant people are.

"so we can go on pretending we like each other, and talking about each other behind their backs."


You speak for yourself only .. if I don't like somebody, there will be no pretending, for I will tell you to your face, up close and personal.

P-A...

This is the Internet... if it gets personal, you've got problems.


You're awesome 😛

I DO *************NOT******************* CARE!!!

Imus isn't finished. He will be back via sattellite or something. Yes I agree with
the fact that he just said something off the cuff that can be heard in much harsher language in alot of music being aired freely. There doesn't seem to be anyone getting riled up over it. It's because he is white, and well known. A black person could have said it, would not have been hot news in the media. There is alot of "reverse descrimination" going on and has been for a long time. I think his comments were crass and uncalled for. But to be fired? NO.

The only people who were offended were the ones who willingly subjected themselves to it .. we all have opinions everyday of our lives .. so what?

I could call someone a skank .. does that make them one?

Only IF they acknowledge that it belongs to them .. we find what we seek.

From my perspective .. black people may very well be inhibiting the very message of MLK, himself, by owning within themselves that they are what some stupid person proclaims.

Would a woman drop her head and cower away IF a man at her place of employment said that she was ONLY a woman and therefore not capable? Hell no .. she wouldn't own that, she wouldn't let that belong to her. She wouldn't be offended, simply because some ass said so .. she would just ignore him and continue about her job .. stronger, wiser and more confident in her self-worth.

So .. wtf ——?

So what, what Imus, Peters, Gibson, or any other fool says .. do you not know who you are and your worth to yourself?

Fuck that .. if you own it .. then that's exactly WHAT you are.

I am human, with faults, flaws, talents & a set of my own morals .. just like everybody else .. just as I view them, no matter their age, race, gender, political or religious views .. as a human being.

Probably 80% of the people we talk to in here .. we don't KNOW who they are, and we don't care about physical attributes or origins .. we like them for who they are inside, or we dislike them for who they are inside, and nothing more. We banter about signs because that's our environment .. but, there isn't one person in here, where if we all got together, we wouldn't treat every person as just that .. people.

Fuck that .. I won't be held to such a demeaning position that I must discriminate against someone simply because they differ from me .. bullshit .. I refuse to own that.

Ok, rant done .. I'm out.

PA...I agree with you there. I just find it disgusting that they only claim to "own it" if it comes out of the wrong mouth. Otherwise, it's A.O.K. These double standards need to be stopped dead in their tracks. It's "do as I say, not as I do" and it sucks.

Yeah DC...kinda like those extremely violent videos, like the one where you get a prize for offing the president....should never have gotten so far. Now it's hard to correct if not impossible.

I meant "video games"

Today I call you 'dumb'
Tomorrow I call you 'incompetent'
Next week I say 'you're fucking useless'
Next month I push you
Three months later I hit you
Nine months later I beat you
A year later you are dead

Emotional abuse starts with one person saying something, seemingly innocuous. If it's not nipped in the bud, then it ALWAYS worsens.

----------

That is a matter of choice .. if a bully is in the schoolyard, he is only looking for a response. If one isn't given, he stops.

If a woman lives in an abusive relationship and "takes" what the man says to her about being useless, a whore, a bitch, or whatever else abuse he flings at her .. then that is exactly what she is, if she continues to stand there and accept his assessment. If she walks out and never lays eyes on him again .. then how can he continue to abuse her?

In all those examples you gave above, that's only applicable IF it is accepted by the person to whom those names were being called. The only aim is to get a rile.

If you turn and walk the other way and don't let it effect you .. then it stops, dead in it's tracks. Yes, if it's not nipped in it's bud, it will worsen. But, the way to nip it is NOT by accepting it, rather, denying it.

I maintain my position ..

If you stop one in the street and say 'you dirty fucking ho-bag!', you're likely to get a Gucci handbag wrapped around your head!



However, if every woman just ignored this person and kept walking .. then he would stop. His aim is to get a response .. he insults on PURPOSE. If he didn't get the response he was looking for .. to offend .. then it wouldn't hold any value to him.

To hit him with the handbag IS what he was aiming for .. so, the woman ACCEPTED that she was, "'you dirty fucking ho-bag'" .. because she owned the statement and responded, accordingly.

Alright, so children aren't a good example because they are just that.

We're talking about adults .. when someone says, nappy-head ho, or whatever it was that was said .. he won, he got his response .. you think he cares that he was fired?

He got recognition, he got head-line news .. that was his aim.
People responded, accordingly, accepting his claim .. and he won, BECAUSE he was looking for this type of response so he will feel like he has something over on another.

Had he been ignored, and had not gotten reconition .. he would have moved onto something that would have sparked a response.

You think a commedian is going to continue with the same routine if he isn't getting the response he's looking for?

You think a musician is going to play the same music if he isn't getting the response he's looking for?

Yes DC same reason most laws have been put into place. To ignore the crime is not to deter it.

I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound argumentitive .. my passion can be overwhelming.

Of course it happens .. that is only because it is accepted. Just like a relationship, whatever I believe is wrong with mine .. I have to own that myself because I stay here and own it .. just as you own whatever your girl does to you, if you stay and accept it.

Just like with rap music .. I love hip-hop, been listening to it for years. Am I a fucking whore now? No !! I've only slept with ONE person for 25 years.

Give me break .. if you don't like the music, then don't listen to it .. geeeeeez!
If you don't like the subject matter of a movie .. then don't watch it !!!!

You find what you seek .. freedom of choice .. it's that simple.

But, people refuse to do that .. they would rather listen to something they KNOW they don't like and then get pissed about it .. how fucking backwards is that?

Crime?

Since when did freedom of speech become a crime in the United States?

Well I still say that you can't expect the world to bow down to double standards. If you can be called a knappy ho' by your own race in public and not cringe, but laugh, then hey, laugh at Imus 2. ;P Did he mean anyhting "WORSE" by saying it because of his skin color? That's the problem. The prejudice is on the flip side of the coin.

I have to think too, that part of the problem is that it was directed towards a specific "group" of ladies. But even if he had used it in a general way in some other circumstance, he would have been shot down. Some people are still in a "fight for your rights" mode when they already have them. It's a mentalitity.

"then he is allowed to say anything he likes, whenever he likes .. because it's an individual's (his listeners) choice as to whether to 'accept' it or 'not accept it'."


That would be correct.

However, you're missing a crucial point here .. this man is in the entertainment industry .. a radio personality. Actors say the word, "Nigger" in movies all the time. Commedians cranked on people, of different races, or hanicaps, or sexual orientation, all the time. Music lyrics can be raunchy, to say the least .. the source HAS to be considered. That was on the first page of this thread.

If you take offense, without considering the source, then you've victimized yourself.

I've no clue .. I don't own words, unless I choose to .. I was taught as a child (older than most):

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me.

Nappy-headed means the hair isn't combed, I guess .. so how the hell can that be offensive unless you choose it to be so?

Mines that way right now .. fuck, who cares?

Hey !!! How Come Santas not in trouble! HO HO HO!!! 😛 (Boy he's popular TOO!)

EH...Consider the source?

Furthermore, I just won't subject myself to the whole argument of why it's approved of the black community to say such things, yet, not for "whites" .. for, everybody has the right to speak their view .. if I accept this as an "unfairness based off race" to myself, then I become the exact person that I am denying ..

It's up to each individual to accept what they want .. if I don't view a black person as "whatever" because of the color of their skin .. then I certainly can't do the same because "whatever" is spoken from their mouth .. there is no "them", or, "us" to me. There is only people.

To say you (meaning a person) are not racist because you don't discriminate, to me, is a lie, if you then turn around and say "they" shouldn't be allowed to have freedom of speech .. because people were just put into the "they" category.

Bullshit .. it's all just bullshit .. why can't we all just be people?

Damn, I can bitch now .. get me started on something and I'm relentless.

Want me to stop?

It's just more like you say PA it's a "no one" should. Not an I can but you can't. Regardless of any color.

Hey, I just realized it's Friday the 13th, lol

Yeah I was gonna comment on that too. I'm not supersticious though.

"You US people with your funny words! If you'd speak the Queen's English in the first place, we wouldn't even be having this discussion!"


What? Like Snog? What the hell kind of word is that?

A snowy fog .. a frog that couldn't spell?

wft? Queens Enlish .. like, "I'm feeling snarky"

Furthermore .. quotes that repeat another's words are this ("), NOT this (')
And second .. the word Was is the single possession and Were is in the plural.

So there .. 😉

I wish white folks would stop thinking that idiots like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson speak for black people. Most of us can't stand them. Who said they were our leaders? I've certainly never been consulted...neither of them has ever had a constituancy.....just a couple of opportunistic charlatans making a living off of controversy.

As far as the comments themselves...they were very offensive, but I feel that the situation has been a bit overblown....mostly by the media. He made the comment, then he lost his job not as a reaction to the comment but a reaction to his bosses losing millions in sponsorship money because they no longer wanted to be associated. Who WOULDN'T be fired for losing the boss millions---whatever the reason?

At any rate I don't think it was this huge deal. And I feel that the media made it the big deal it is. NOT the Rutgers team, NOT blacks.....most people would have barely known about it if the team had been able to just confront him and ask for their little apology without the media circus.

Well said cancerLA

"neither of them has ever had a constituancy.....just a couple of opportunistic charlatans making a living off of controversy."


Perhaps, but, they have enough power to get someone fired from their job .. whether anyone approves of thier position, or not, is irrelevant if they have the power to directly effect someone's life .. in fact, it makes them worse than Imus, himself, for his influence is indirect, if a person chooses to accept his words .. however, getting fired from a DIRECT result of the influence of a person, is NOT a choice.

Pity .. how stupid we can be sometimes. btw, the reason the media knew about it was BECAUSE of Sharpton & Jackson .. you have to own what is yours, and that is their to own for thier deeds, just as everybody else .. whether you like them or not. Just like we Bush .. we own him, like it or not.

If the media hadn't of found out, they wouldn't have lost sponsers .. but, the media did find out because there are two people out there who are "opportunistic charlatans" and use it whether the situation warrants it, or not.

A drunk slurring his words, trying to say eggnog, only it comes out, "ssnog"?

What? So, when this guy said nappy-head .. you were envisioning someone walking around with a diaper on their head?

lol .. this is the best angle, yet.

i've watched, and been entertained by imus for years. i watched the womens' basketball games too. the finals were great fun! all the girls from Rutgers and UT did not receive the national celebration they deserved because of the imess. sharpton and jessie are media hungry clowns, and ran the circus.

womens' baskerbell deserver better. hopefully something good will come out of all this.

*deserved*

Numerous studies have demonstrated the validity of the minimal group theory; which in so many words, means that humans are shown to be biased toward individuals belonging to their ingroup on some element of categorization. Henry Tajfel was the first psychologist to prove this. In a now famous experiment, he randomly seperated people into two groups based on whether they preferred the paintings of Klee or Kandinsky. And the result of the experiment was that, being placed in a minimal group such as that, was enough to foster a bias toward those in the same group. There are a lot of implications to these experiments, in terms of effective methods for reducing discrimination (cognitive and social), but it's 5 in the morning so maybe I'll write more on it tomorrow. But I will say that while we all discriminate in one form or another (such as based on taste in music, life aspirations, gender, ethnicity, etc., etc. ), studies also suggest that some people have a tendency to discriminate more than others. Though humans can't escape discriminating in one way or another because people necessarily use categories to process all of the stimuli surrounding them. Prejudice becomes an issue because everything people perceive is subjectively interpreted and thus, these categories are at some point given meaning from various sources; the media, music, family/friends, past experiences. Though we tend to be prejudiced only when a category is salient or important to us. For example, I may not be prejudiced in the most commonly referred to ways, but if a person's philosophy on life is important to me, then I may end up being prejudiced against individuals whose perspective on life differ greatly from mine. It all depends on what categories are salient to you). The interesting question I think, is what are the underlying, subconscious reasons why people feel compelled, almost instinctively, to prefer those in their ingroup (whatever it may be). I have my theories, but what do you all think?