CelticsStrong
Around the League => Around the NBA => Topic started by: bdm860 on April 13, 2018, 02:38:53 PM
-
So Thunder play-by-play announcer Brian Davis made a comment about Westbrook in their final game, basically in awe of Westbrook's performance:
https://streamable.com/2kkiy
Thunder have suspended him 1 game for that comment.
https://www.si.com/nba/2018/04/13/thunder-russell-westbrook-brian-davis-announcer-comment
"We think obviously the use of that term is offensive and inappropriate, and I expressed that to Brian [Wednesday] night," Mahoney told Katz. "Brian assures me it was not meant in any derogatory way, and he apologizes. But again, we feel strongly that it's inappropriate and offensive."
And Davis has since released this statement:
It is with great remorse and humility that I accept this suspension for the insensitive words I used during Wednesday's broadcast. While unintentional, I understand and acknowledge the gravity of the situation. I offer my sincere apology and realize that, while I committed a lapse in judgment, such mistakes come with consequences. This is an appropriate consequence for my actions.
The reaction I've seen from most people is that they thought this was a common phrase that they didn't consider racist, but now that they think about they can see how it seems racist. I'm with them. And really a one game suspension is a slap on the wrist here, no big deal.
But anyway, I seemed to be on the opposite side of most here on the opinion of the Patty Mills incident. Interested in what people here think about this whole situation.
Inexcusable? Obviously racist? Not racist? Should be fired? Overreaction? Too PC? Etc.
-
It's racist and something you really can't get away with saying in today's world but I don't think Davis' intent was malicious at all.
More just a slip of the tongue than anything.
-
Not the best choice of words but people forget it's live TV. There are no edits or do overs when you're live and to expect someone to be 'on' all the time for however many broadcasts they do is just a little unreasonable. How many times does OKC (or most NBA teams) mail in a game and play like crap? Are announcers not allowed to have a mulligan or two?
You have on your game for 2 to 3 hours a night, probably 90+ times a year - to people who jump all over the guy for one slip up I'd say be real.
I'm sure those lobbing the grenades have never had an off day at work ever. On the other hand if there's a history of this stuff, that's different - but otherwise people are just too hypersensitive.
-
Nooooo...just an old saying..has nothing to do with race geez
-
Not the best choice of words but people forget it's live TV. There are no edits or do overs when you're live and to expect someone to be 'on' all the time for however many broadcasts they do is just a little unreasonable. How many times does OKC (or most NBA teams) mail in a game and play like crap? Are announcers not allowed to have a mulligan or two?
You have on your game for 2 to 3 hours a night, probably 90+ times a year - to people who jump all over the guy for one slip up I'd say be real.
I'm sure those lobbing the grenades have never had an off day at work ever. On the other hand if there's a history of this stuff, that's different - but otherwise people are just too hypersensitive.
This is how I feel. If this guy was really racist and there was malicious intent, it would have come out earlier spending thousands of hours doing live play by play for a sport that majority african american players.
-
Definitely come a long way from Cedric Maxwell telling Violet Palmer to get back in the kitchen.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022802150.html
No punishment when he said that back in '07, don't think he'd come out of that with his job intact today. And for the record, that was DEFINITELY inappropriate, no argument from me there. I'm just surprised how times have changed so much since then.
-
I always thought of it as an old saying used as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
-
I always thought of it as an old sayingaused as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
this is kinda where im at. Ive heard the phrase a ton of times over the years whether it be someone saying it or hearing it on tv. Its one of those things you just never think of the meaning behind it, its just a saying people have said
-
Really? I mean really?
-
Definitely come a long way from Cedric Maxwell telling Violet Palmer to get back in the kitchen.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022802150.html
No punishment when he said that back in '07, don't think he'd come out of that with his job intact today. And for the record, that was DEFINITELY inappropriate, no argument from me there. I'm just surprised how times have changed so much since then.
I had forgotten about that! Crazy indeed
-
I always thought of it as an old sayingaused as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
this is kinda where im at. Ive heard the phrase a ton of times over the years whether it be someone saying it or hearing it on tv. Its one of those things you just never think of the meaning behind it, its just a saying people have said
Yeah, I am pretty sure the first time I heard it was on television, like a Bugs Bunny cartoon or an old western movie or something like that.
-
Sounds pretty bad to me.
And I am usually not over sensitive for racist type stuff.
-
Sounds pretty bad to me.
And I am usually not over sensitive for racist type stuff.
I feel the same way. TP.
-
It certainly sounds insensitive, but not racist. Like I'm not offended and I know probably 99% of people wouldn't be offended until they were told to be.
I think we still say a lot of things that sound bad and no one even takes note. Like calling people "black" is totally ok today. It feels weird to me and I'd put some money down that it will sound offensive in some future generations.
-
Nooooo...just an old saying..has nothing to do with race geez
hmmm....actually in response to your post, yes it is old. no, it is very much connected to race. it was an old term when i was growing up, but it clearly was connected to the cotton fields and slavery.
it is not appropriate nowadays. but it was also not intended, i think, to be a ill-intended remark.
-
I always thought of it as an old saying used as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
it might to people whose ancestors were slaves just over 150 years ago.
-
I always thought of it as an old saying used as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
it might to people whose ancestors were slaves just over 150 years ago.
Did some research. Apparently the saying "No can do" was a way to mock Asians in America during the mid 1800s. Does that saying really mean what it was started as? What about "Sold down the river"? which nowadays has a completely different meaning than that first used?
I am a pretty liberal guy and think highly of being politically correct. But is this going too far when meanings of sayings completely change their meaning hundreds of years later? I think maybe so.
-
"Cotton-picking" is a (mostly southern) colloquialism commonly used as a substitute for MFing - an exclamation used for emphasis. Davis's usage of the term was clearly in line with this definition.
I'm honestly a bit uncomfortable with the suspension. I've yet to talk to anybody that was actually offended by what he said. A few people raised eyebrows if they hadn't heard the term before, but were fine with it when informed of the meaning. It feels like the Thunder overreacted to anticipated backlash that didn't actually happen.
-
It is not a racist phrase but I don't see why an OKC announcer would use it in regards to Westbrook. Disappointed that the OKC organization would succumb to the PC police distortions.
Out of your cotton-picking mind
A condition where you are not thinking properly. Not in your normal state, not working with your normal faculties. Out of your gourd, feeling crazy enough to do something you would never normally do. Generally considered to be related to the odd behavior of heat stroke victims or victims of exhaustion, conditions that people who would pick cotton for a living in very hot or very stressful conditions might end up suffering.
-
What a dumb thing to say. It's not inherently racist, and I can see both sides of the argument, but what a terrible choice of words. There are thousands of ways to describe the way Westbrook was playing, and he chose a way that is controversial at the very least. And it's not like there was any context or play on words. All he had done was just get an assist. It doesn't help that the announcer is white and Westbrook is black.
-
I find the suspension and criticism absurd. It is not meant as a slight to anyone, black or white, whoever picked cotton.
Plenty of white people picked cotton both before and after slavery.
If you are not familiar with the usage of the expression, and have to look up its origin on Wikipedia to determine its intent, wow, you may too much free time on your hands.
-
If these rules applied to the Celtics commentators, Tommy would have rivaled Sheed's technical foul record with the suspensions he would have racked up.
-
So a phrase that is meant to imply someone must be delirious based on their actions, as people who picked cotton tended to become delirious from heat stroke, is somehow racist?
I am continually astounded by how people can make something about race when race has nothing to do with it.
-
There was no racist intent. I’ve got no idea about the origins; blacks aren’t the only ones who picked cotton.
-
I always thought of it as an old saying used as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
it might to people whose ancestors were slaves just over 150 years ago.
Did some research. Apparently the saying "No can do" was a way to mock Asians in America during the mid 1800s. Does that saying really mean what it was started as? What about "Sold down the river"? which nowadays has a completely different meaning than that first used?
I am a pretty liberal guy and think highly of being politically correct. But is this going too far when meanings of sayings completely change their meaning hundreds of years later? I think maybe so.
Are you onboard with the expression “tar baby”?
But more to the point,who gets to declare the acceptability of such phrases that emerge from a time of rancid racism?
-
So a phrase that is meant to imply someone must be delirious based on their actions, as people who picked cotton tended to become delirious from heat stroke, is somehow racist?
I am continually astounded by how people can make something about race when race has nothing to do with it.
Please provide us with the source for this interpretation. Thank you.
-
There was no racist intent. I’ve got no idea about the origins; blacks aren’t the only ones who picked cotton.
nm
-
There was no racist intent. I’ve got no idea about the origins; blacks aren’t the only ones who picked cotton.
my white ancestors pulled tobacco and plowed fields all day in poor conditions . Alot of folks lead hard lives 100 years ago. Life was ruff . Somehow ....my grandfather graduated college when maybe one in 1000 poor southerners even went for higher education.
-
I always thought of it as an old saying used as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
it might to people whose ancestors were slaves just over 150 years ago.
Did some research. Apparently the saying "No can do" was a way to mock Asians in America during the mid 1800s. Does that saying really mean what it was started as? What about "Sold down the river"? which nowadays has a completely different meaning than that first used?
I am a pretty liberal guy and think highly of being politically correct. But is this going too far when meanings of sayings completely change their meaning hundreds of years later? I think maybe so.
Are you onboard with the expression “tar baby”?
But more to the point,who gets to declare the acceptability of such phrases that emerge from a time of rancid racism?
If you call somebody a tar baby, you’re racist.
If you refer to a situation as a tar baby, you were probably read Br’er Rabbit as a kid.
-
I always thought of it as an old saying used as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
it might to people whose ancestors were slaves just over 150 years ago.
Did some research. Apparently the saying "No can do" was a way to mock Asians in America during the mid 1800s. Does that saying really mean what it was started as? What about "Sold down the river"? which nowadays has a completely different meaning than that first used?
I am a pretty liberal guy and think highly of being politically correct. But is this going too far when meanings of sayings completely change their meaning hundreds of years later? I think maybe so.
Are you onboard with the expression “tar baby”?
But more to the point,who gets to declare the acceptability of such phrases that emerge from a time of rancid racism?
And who gets to declare that hundreds of years later when the saying means something completely different that they are still racist?
So if someone asks me if I can do something if I tell them I can't by saying "No can do" I am saying something racist simply because the saying, when first started, was meant to mock Asians but now is just commonplace vernacular?
If someone betrays me or states I did something wrong and I say they "sold me down the river" I am saying something racist because the saying first came about by people describing slaves being sold farther down the Ohio River even though the phrase has totally changed meaning since?
Sorry, I think people are really stretching things by turning this into something like the guy said something racist. He didn't.
-
So a phrase that is meant to imply someone must be delirious based on their actions, as people who picked cotton tended to become delirious from heat stroke, is somehow racist?
I am continually astounded by how people can make something about race when race has nothing to do with it.
Welcome to 21st-century America, where nearly every situation has an Al Sharpton type waiting to play the race card.
-
I always thought of it as an old sayingaused as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
this is kinda where im at. Ive heard the phrase a ton of times over the years whether it be someone saying it or hearing it on tv. Its one of those things you just never think of the meaning behind it, its just a saying people have said
Yeah, I am pretty sure the first time I heard it was on television, like a Bugs Bunny cartoon or an old western movie or something like that.
Yeah, TP - totally Bugs Bunny. I was coming on here to write exactly the same thing.
This is the type of situation that makes conservatives hate liberals even more. I get being PC, but this seems like the stretchiest of stretches.
-
So a phrase that is meant to imply someone must be delirious based on their actions, as people who picked cotton tended to become delirious from heat stroke, is somehow racist?
I am continually astounded by how people can make something about race when race has nothing to do with it.
Please provide us with the source for this interpretation. Thank you.
https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/cotton-picking.html
The phrase "out of you cotton-picking mind" is directly related to the mental condition one is susceptible to due to the harsh conditions of picking cotton. It's a phrase that predates slavery. It has no racist beginnings. It has never been used solely in reference to any particular race.
The phrase "keep your cotton-picking hands off me" most certainly is intended to be racist, as it's meant to imply the cotton-picking black slaves were degenerates who couldn't be trusted.
Other uses of cotton-picking are generally meant as substitutes for various swear words meant to convey a point of emphasis.
-
So a phrase that is meant to imply someone must be delirious based on their actions, as people who picked cotton tended to become delirious from heat stroke, is somehow racist?
I am continually astounded by how people can make something about race when race has nothing to do with it.
Welcome to 21st-century America, where nearly every situation has an Al Sharpton type waiting to play the race card.
Absolutely agree, very sad.
No wonder why this Countries number one export is hate.
-
Sticks and stones can break my bones but words will never hurt me.
-
In our country’s historical memory, who used to pick cotton? Was it primarily slaves that were forcibly removed from their families, physically beaten and intimidated, brutalized psychologically and largely not given the opportunity to receive an education?
Oh, it was?
But yeah, “cotton picking” just is talking about picking cotton! No racial undertones or connotations! Just some cotton picking. And because slavery was outlawed over a century ago, it doesn’t matter whether the phrase harkens back to a historical moment in which human beings were treated as less than human.
Seriously though, sometimes I really think the “Boston is intolerant” narrative is overblown and then I read the comments on this forum. Just because you aren’t personally offended doesn’t mean it somehow meets the standards of acceptability.
-
In our country’s historical memory, who used to pick cotton? Was it primarily slaves that were forcibly removed from their families, physically beaten and intimidated, brutalized psychologically and largely not given the opportunity to receive an education?
Oh, it was?
But yeah, “cotton picking” just is talking about picking cotton! No racial undertones or connotations! Just some cotton picking. And because slavery was outlawed over a century ago, it doesn’t matter whether the phrase harkens back to a historical moment in which human beings were treated as less than human.
Seriously though, sometimes I really think the “Boston is intolerant” narrative is overblown and then I read the comments on this forum. Just because you aren’t personally offended doesn’t mean it somehow meets the standards of acceptability.
Except that the phrase has nothing to do with any of that as has been mentioned in a number of posts already.
-
In our country’s historical memory, who used to pick cotton? Was it primarily slaves that were forcibly removed from their families, physically beaten and intimidated, brutalized psychologically and largely not given the opportunity to receive an education?
Oh, it was?
But yeah, “cotton picking” just is talking about picking cotton! No racial undertones or connotations! Just some cotton picking. And because slavery was outlawed over a century ago, it doesn’t matter whether the phrase harkens back to a historical moment in which human beings were treated as less than human.
Seriously though, sometimes I really think the “Boston is intolerant” narrative is overblown and then I read the comments on this forum. Just because you aren’t personally offended doesn’t mean it somehow meets the standards of acceptability.
Tommy point!
Cotton was predominantly picked by slaves, seen as a slave function and the common sense derivation of out of your cotton picking mind or get your cotton picking hands off references biases and attitudes towards slaves and blacks.
Whether people associated the phrase with the racist intent, due to it's common usage I think is a legitimate debate. But we now should think about it and instead of coming up with absurd interpretations admit that we were wrong and have now been enlightened.
-
In our country’s historical memory, who used to pick cotton? Was it primarily slaves that were forcibly removed from their families, physically beaten and intimidated, brutalized psychologically and largely not given the opportunity to receive an education?
Oh, it was?
But yeah, “cotton picking” just is talking about picking cotton! No racial undertones or connotations! Just some cotton picking. And because slavery was outlawed over a century ago, it doesn’t matter whether the phrase harkens back to a historical moment in which human beings were treated as less than human.
Seriously though, sometimes I really think the “Boston is intolerant” narrative is overblown and then I read the comments on this forum. Just because you aren’t personally offended doesn’t mean it somehow meets the standards of acceptability.
Except that the phrase has nothing to do with any of that as has been mentioned in a number of posts already.
I read those other supposed interpretations and say Hooey!
-
In our country’s historical memory, who used to pick cotton? Was it primarily slaves that were forcibly removed from their families, physically beaten and intimidated, brutalized psychologically and largely not given the opportunity to receive an education?
Oh, it was?
But yeah, “cotton picking” just is talking about picking cotton! No racial undertones or connotations! Just some cotton picking. And because slavery was outlawed over a century ago, it doesn’t matter whether the phrase harkens back to a historical moment in which human beings were treated as less than human.
Seriously though, sometimes I really think the “Boston is intolerant” narrative is overblown and then I read the comments on this forum. Just because you aren’t personally offended doesn’t mean it somehow meets the standards of acceptability.
Except that the phrase has nothing to do with any of that as has been mentioned in a number of posts already.
I read those other supposed interpretations and say Hooey!
Nothing interpretive about it. Its about actual usage versus PC delusion.
-
In our country’s historical memory, who used to pick cotton? Was it primarily slaves that were forcibly removed from their families, physically beaten and intimidated, brutalized psychologically and largely not given the opportunity to receive an education?
Oh, it was?
But yeah, “cotton picking” just is talking about picking cotton! No racial undertones or connotations! Just some cotton picking. And because slavery was outlawed over a century ago, it doesn’t matter whether the phrase harkens back to a historical moment in which human beings were treated as less than human.
Seriously though, sometimes I really think the “Boston is intolerant” narrative is overblown and then I read the comments on this forum. Just because you aren’t personally offended doesn’t mean it somehow meets the standards of acceptability.
Except that the phrase has nothing to do with any of that as has been mentioned in a number of posts already.
I read those other supposed interpretations and say Hooey!
The idea that locating the origin of a phrase means interpretation is static is simply incorrect. Look at the word “gay” for instance. Language and culture are dynamic, and therefore the origin of a phrase sometimes doesn’t tell the whole story.
If you asked a common American, “what do you think when you hear ‘cotton picking’?” the vast majority would answer slavery. Obstinately ignoring this, and maintaining that personally not taking issue means no one should take issue with the phrase just shows a lack of empathy IMO.
-
In our country’s historical memory, who used to pick cotton? Was it primarily slaves that were forcibly removed from their families, physically beaten and intimidated, brutalized psychologically and largely not given the opportunity to receive an education?
Oh, it was?
But yeah, “cotton picking” just is talking about picking cotton! No racial undertones or connotations! Just some cotton picking. And because slavery was outlawed over a century ago, it doesn’t matter whether the phrase harkens back to a historical moment in which human beings were treated as less than human.
Seriously though, sometimes I really think the “Boston is intolerant” narrative is overblown and then I read the comments on this forum. Just because you aren’t personally offended doesn’t mean it somehow meets the standards of acceptability.
Except that the phrase has nothing to do with any of that as has been mentioned in a number of posts already.
I read those other supposed interpretations and say Hooey!
Nothing interpretive about it. Its about actual usage versus PC delusion.
Baseless Hooey!
Read what you are talking about of course cotton picking means to pick cotton but it morphed into a racist derogatory reference.
"It can come as as little surprise that the term 'cotton-picking' originated in the southern states of the USA, where it is usually pronounced cotton-pickin'. It began life in the late 1700s and differs from the 19th century Dixie term, 'cottonpicker', in that the latter was derogatory and racist, whereas 'cotton-picking' referred directly to the difficulty and harshness of gathering the crop. This didn't extend to the specific expression 'keep your cotton-picking hands off of me'. This no doubt alludes to the horny, calloused (and usually black) hands that picked cotton. "
https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/cotton-picking.html
-
Not a good thing to say, especially on TV. It can be interpreted a couple of ways. One interpretation is that he has been playing out of his mind without any negative bias or prejudice. The other side is that it sounds pretty racist. You can choose which way you want to view it. The issue is that the reward of being able to make such a comment isn't worth the risk that a bunch of people now think you're a dink.
-
I always thought of it as an old saying used as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
it might to people whose ancestors were slaves just over 150 years ago.
Did some research. Apparently the saying "No can do" was a way to mock Asians in America during the mid 1800s. Does that saying really mean what it was started as? What about "Sold down the river"? which nowadays has a completely different meaning than that first used?
I am a pretty liberal guy and think highly of being politically correct. But is this going too far when meanings of sayings completely change their meaning hundreds of years later? I think maybe so.
Are you onboard with the expression “tar baby”?
But more to the point,who gets to declare the acceptability of such phrases that emerge from a time of rancid racism?
If you call somebody a tar baby, you’re racist.
If you refer to a situation as a tar baby, you were probably read Br’er Rabbit as a kid.
C'mon guys. A little sensitivity for our other users, please?! (just kidding) :)
-
I always thought of it as an old saying used as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
it might to people whose ancestors were slaves just over 150 years ago.
Did some research. Apparently the saying "No can do" was a way to mock Asians in America during the mid 1800s. Does that saying really mean what it was started as? What about "Sold down the river"? which nowadays has a completely different meaning than that first used?
I am a pretty liberal guy and think highly of being politically correct. But is this going too far when meanings of sayings completely change their meaning hundreds of years later? I think maybe so.
Are you onboard with the expression “tar baby”?
But more to the point,who gets to declare the acceptability of such phrases that emerge from a time of rancid racism?
If you call somebody a tar baby, you’re racist.
If you refer to a situation as a tar baby, you were probably read Br’er Rabbit as a kid.
C'mon guys. A little sensitivity for our other users, please?! (just kidding) :)
I’ve gotta say, I have no idea what a Tar Heel is.
-
I always thought of it as an old sayingaused as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
this is kinda where im at. Ive heard the phrase a ton of times over the years whether it be someone saying it or hearing it on tv. Its one of those things you just never think of the meaning behind it, its just a saying people have said
Yeah, I am pretty sure the first time I heard it was on television, like a Bugs Bunny cartoon or an old western movie or something like that.
Yeah, TP - totally Bugs Bunny. I was coming on here to write exactly the same thing.
This is the type of situation that makes conservatives hate liberals even more. I get being PC, but this seems like the stretchiest of stretches.
Lol this isn't liberal vs conservative...
-
I always thought of it as an old saying used as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
it might to people whose ancestors were slaves just over 150 years ago.
Did some research. Apparently the saying "No can do" was a way to mock Asians in America during the mid 1800s. Does that saying really mean what it was started as? What about "Sold down the river"? which nowadays has a completely different meaning than that first used?
I am a pretty liberal guy and think highly of being politically correct. But is this going too far when meanings of sayings completely change their meaning hundreds of years later? I think maybe so.
Are you onboard with the expression “tar baby”?
But more to the point,who gets to declare the acceptability of such phrases that emerge from a time of rancid racism?
If you call somebody a tar baby, you’re racist.
If you refer to a situation as a tar baby, you were probably read Br’er Rabbit as a kid.
C'mon guys. A little sensitivity for our other users, please?! (just kidding) :)
I’ve gotta say, I have no idea what a Tar Heel is.
It's a term given to terrible basketball players....j/k
It's mainly because tar was one of NC's earliest and most lucrative exports, and well, lots of people were barefoot back then. During the Civil War people from the north used it as derogatory term to describe North Carolinian Confederate soldiers, but later on North Carolinians took it on as a term of pride.
I guess somehow that must make it racist. Slaves once lived in NC, and worked in the tar industry, so.....
Also, while we're at it, no more calling potatoes 'red skin'. That's racist too.
-
I always thought of it as an old sayingaused as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
this is kinda where im at. Ive heard the phrase a ton of times over the years whether it be someone saying it or hearing it on tv. Its one of those things you just never think of the meaning behind it, its just a saying people have said
Yeah, I am pretty sure the first time I heard it was on television, like a Bugs Bunny cartoon or an old western movie or something like that.
Yeah, TP - totally Bugs Bunny. I was coming on here to write exactly the same thing.
This is the type of situation that makes conservatives hate liberals even more. I get being PC, but this seems like the stretchiest of stretches.
Lol this isn't liberal vs conservative...
Very true, as I might be one of the longtime, most liberal voices on this site and even I consider this over the top political correctness.
-
I always thought of it as an old saying used as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
it might to people whose ancestors were slaves just over 150 years ago.
Did some research. Apparently the saying "No can do" was a way to mock Asians in America during the mid 1800s. Does that saying really mean what it was started as? What about "Sold down the river"? which nowadays has a completely different meaning than that first used?
I am a pretty liberal guy and think highly of being politically correct. But is this going too far when meanings of sayings completely change their meaning hundreds of years later? I think maybe so.
Are you onboard with the expression “tar baby”?
But more to the point,who gets to declare the acceptability of such phrases that emerge from a time of rancid racism?
If you call somebody a tar baby, you’re racist.
If you refer to a situation as a tar baby, you were probably read Br’er Rabbit as a kid.
C'mon guys. A little sensitivity for our other users, please?! (just kidding) :)
I’ve gotta say, I have no idea what a Tar Heel is.
It's a term given to terrible basketball players....j/k
It's mainly because tar was one of NC's earliest and most lucrative exports, and well, lots of people were barefoot back then. During the Civil War people from the north used it as derogatory term to describe North Carolinian Confederate soldiers, but later on North Carolinians took it on as a term of pride.
I guess somehow that must make it racist. Slaves once lived in NC, and worked in the tar industry, so.....
Also, while we're at it, no more calling potatoes 'red skin'. That's racist too.
That's about it. Originally a derogatory term based on the type of manual labor, though I think UNC adopted it because North Carolinians used it in a prideful way during the Civil War.
From there, the term has developed an extremely positive connotation and generally refers to the best collegiate athletes and human beings in the country. Particularly along Tobacco Road. :)
-
Let's be 100% honest here....is anyone REALLY shocked that someone turned this into an issue with the over-the-top PC culture we live in? If certain people (extreme Liberals) can't find something to be offended about they don't really have a purpose in life. People this easily offended should be ashamed of themselves.
-
Let's be 100% honest here....is anyone REALLY shocked that someone turned this into an issue with the over-the-top PC culture we live in? If certain people (extreme Liberals) can't find something to be offended about they don't really have a purpose in life. People this easily offended should be ashamed of themselves.
I am extremely liberal and find this wrong. Let's not label all people as being the same. Its actually quite against site rules.
-
Let's be 100% honest here....is anyone REALLY shocked that someone turned this into an issue with the over-the-top PC culture we live in? If certain people (extreme Liberals) can't find something to be offended about they don't really have a purpose in life. People this easily offended should be ashamed of themselves.
I am extremely liberal and find this wrong. Let's not label all people as being the same. Its actually quite against site rules.
Either this was a really funny joke to validate my point (and if it was then touche) or you missed where I specifically said EXTREME Liberals. I'm Liberal on certain issues myself but this was absolutely ridiculous.
-
To me it sounded like he was just cracking corn. I don't care.
-
Let's be 100% honest here....is anyone REALLY shocked that someone turned this into an issue with the over-the-top PC culture we live in? If certain people (extreme Liberals) can't find something to be offended about they don't really have a purpose in life. People this easily offended should be ashamed of themselves.
I am extremely liberal and find this wrong. Let's not label all people as being the same. Its actually quite against site rules.
Either this was a really funny joke to validate my point (and if it was then touche) or you missed where I specifically said EXTREME Liberals. I'm Liberal on certain issues myself but this was absolutely ridiculous.
You labeled extreme liberals as the type of people that would be extremely offended by this because otherwise they don't have a reason in life. Your words, not mine. I am here as an extreme liberal to say that statement is not true and that your statement is against the rule as labeling people whether that be as pink hat fans, fair weather fans, white people, minority people, extreme liberals or extreme conservatives. Its wrong and against site rules. Simply state your opinion, back it up and leave labeling of people and their opinions out of it.
Further discussion can be had via sending me a personal message.
-
Let's be 100% honest here....is anyone REALLY shocked that someone turned this into an issue with the over-the-top PC culture we live in? If certain people (extreme Liberals) can't find something to be offended about they don't really have a purpose in life. People this easily offended should be ashamed of themselves.
I am extremely liberal and find this wrong. Let's not label all people as being the same. Its actually quite against site rules.
Either this was a really funny joke to validate my point (and if it was then touche) or you missed where I specifically said EXTREME Liberals. I'm Liberal on certain issues myself but this was absolutely ridiculous.
You labeled extreme liberals as the type of people that would be extremely offended by this because otherwise they don't have a reason in life. Your words, not mine. I am here as an extreme liberal to say that statement is not true and that your statement is against the rule as labeling people whether that be as pink hat fans, fair weather fans, white people, minority people, extreme liberals or extreme conservatives. Its wrong and against site rules. Simply state your opinion, back it up and leave labeling of people and their opinions out of it.
Further discussion can be had via sending me a personal message.
Nah we're good. Ironically I guess my point was both missed and made. I'll let it go.
-
Wew sounds a bit like the Qing dynasty where officials would intentionally read every last bit of literature written to find out words that are "offensive to the government" and proceed to put the writer on trial. Also sounds a bit like China during the Cultural Revolution. Just a random Celtics fan in China giving his meagre opinion on this, I hope this doesn't stir a frenzy.
-
Wew sounds a bit like the Qing dynasty where officials would intentionally read every last bit of literature written to find out words that are "offensive to the government" and proceed to put the writer on trial. Also sounds a bit like China during the Cultural Revolution. Just a random Celtics fan in China giving his meagre opinion on this, I hope this doesn't stir a frenzy.
So I think I am a pretty average American and so know little to nothing regarding Chinese history. Seriously, the American educational system does everything it can to cover up American government atrocities when it comes to history, it does absolutely nothing to teach South East Asian/Chinese history.
So how does thus compare to China during the eras you discussed? Was there massive government praganda during those eras that would have twisted the spoken word to make it more confrontational?
-
Wew sounds a bit like the Qing dynasty where officials would intentionally read every last bit of literature written to find out words that are "offensive to the government" and proceed to put the writer on trial. Also sounds a bit like China during the Cultural Revolution. Just a random Celtics fan in China giving his meagre opinion on this, I hope this doesn't stir a frenzy.
So I think I am a pretty average American and so know little to nothing regarding Chinese history. Seriously, the American educational system does everything it can to cover up American government atrocities when it comes to history, it does absolutely nothing to teach South East Asian/Chinese history.
So how does thus compare to China during the eras you discussed? Was there massive government praganda during those eras that would have twisted the spoken word to make it more confrontational?
Oh no, it was people nitpicking at every term, word or sentence possible to try and harm others by accusing them of being "offensive to the government" (there was quite some propaganda encouraging people to do so though, especially the latter case of PRC China). Obviously not the same case here but I think the nitpicking is possibly quite similar. Also in HK I only studied a little bit about WW1, WW2 and the Cold War, I'm basically as clueless as you on Chinese history if I was asked about Western history.
Here's a link about what I was talking about: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literary_Inquisition
-
Wew sounds a bit like the Qing dynasty where officials would intentionally read every last bit of literature written to find out words that are "offensive to the government" and proceed to put the writer on trial. Also sounds a bit like China during the Cultural Revolution. Just a random Celtics fan in China giving his meagre opinion on this, I hope this doesn't stir a frenzy.
So I think I am a pretty average American and so know little to nothing regarding Chinese history. Seriously, the American educational system does everything it can to cover up American government atrocities when it comes to history, it does absolutely nothing to teach South East Asian/Chinese history.
So how does thus compare to China during the eras you discussed? Was there massive government praganda during those eras that would have twisted the spoken word to make it more confrontational?
Oh no, it was people nitpicking at every term, word or sentence possible to try and harm others by accusing them of being "offensive to the government" (there was quite some propaganda encouraging people to do so though, especially the latter case of PRC China). Obviously not the same case here but I think the nitpicking is possibly quite similar. Also in HK I only studied a little bit about WW1, WW2 and the Cold War, I'm basically as clueless as you on Chinese history if I was asked about Western history.
Here's a link about what I was talking about: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literary_Inquisition
TP, thanks. Some real eye opening stuff there as compared to how non-contemporary ideas were handled in the US. Makes me glad I am American.
-
Wew sounds a bit like the Qing dynasty where officials would intentionally read every last bit of literature written to find out words that are "offensive to the government" and proceed to put the writer on trial. Also sounds a bit like China during the Cultural Revolution. Just a random Celtics fan in China giving his meagre opinion on this, I hope this doesn't stir a frenzy.
So I think I am a pretty average American and so know little to nothing regarding Chinese history. Seriously, the American educational system does everything it can to cover up American government atrocities when it comes to history, it does absolutely nothing to teach South East Asian/Chinese history.
So how does thus compare to China during the eras you discussed? Was there massive government praganda during those eras that would have twisted the spoken word to make it more confrontational?
Oh no, it was people nitpicking at every term, word or sentence possible to try and harm others by accusing them of being "offensive to the government" (there was quite some propaganda encouraging people to do so though, especially the latter case of PRC China). Obviously not the same case here but I think the nitpicking is possibly quite similar. Also in HK I only studied a little bit about WW1, WW2 and the Cold War, I'm basically as clueless as you on Chinese history if I was asked about Western history.
Here's a link about what I was talking about: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literary_Inquisition
TP, thanks. Some real eye opening stuff there as compared to how non-contemporary ideas were handled in the US. Makes me glad I am American.
Haha yeah. Just trying to say that this is eerily similar to the start of such things in China, and I hope that America doesn't follow the same road with a completely opposite original intent that was hoping to make the US a better society
-
Regardless of the origin of the term, regardless of how the term is used to day, there are definitely tones of racism in a saying like that. A slave that wanted to escape the plantation was said to have a mental illness called "drapetomania" (which has since been debunked of course). That slave was essentially out of his/her "cotton-picking mind".
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
-
I always thought of it as an old sayingaused as a substitute for swearing and never considered it racist. I guess it must be of southern origin and probably started as a slight to slaves. Still, over 300 years later, does it really mean the same thing?
this is kinda where im at. Ive heard the phrase a ton of times over the years whether it be someone saying it or hearing it on tv. Its one of those things you just never think of the meaning behind it, its just a saying people have said
Yeah, I am pretty sure the first time I heard it was on television, like a Bugs Bunny cartoon or an old western movie or something like that.
Yeah, TP - totally Bugs Bunny. I was coming on here to write exactly the same thing.
This is the type of situation that makes conservatives hate liberals even more. I get being PC, but this seems like the stretchiest of stretches.
Lol this isn't liberal vs conservative...
Of course it is, but all I was saying is that most liberals aren't offended by this at all, but a large portion of conservatives will assume they were. They will roll their eyes and talk to each other about how sensitive liberals are to everything in this overly-PC culture and then continue on about how liberals want to give welfare to all illegals, etc.
-
Nothing offensive about it...methinks some people are just too [dang] thin-skinned and search for stupid reasons to be offended
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Exactly, that was what I was referring to in my Cultural Revolution PRC/Qing dynasty comparison.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
What do you mean without fault? There are 5 pages of posts here where people are arguing back and forth about said fault. I understand if you are not offended. I am not offended. That doesn't mean that I don't think people (namely black people) have the right to be offended by it. The guy has the right to make such a statement, then the "mob" has the right to judge him on it.
I don't care about suspensions or anything like that. I just care that broadcasters aren't saying stupid things on the broadcast. Regardless of the intent, it was a dumb move to make that comment, considering that it brought a whole lot more attention to "slavery" and "cotton" than the actual basketball game being played.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
What do you mean without fault? There are 5 pages of posts here where people are arguing back and forth about said fault. I understand if you are not offended. I am not offended. That doesn't mean that I don't think people (namely black people) have the right to be offended by it. The guy has the right to make such a statement, then the "mob" has the right to judge him on it.
I don't care about suspensions or anything like that. I just care that broadcasters aren't saying stupid things on the broadcast. Regardless of the intent, it was a dumb move to make that comment, considering that it brought a whole lot more attention to "slavery" and "cotton" than the actual basketball game being played.
The person I responded to noted “Clearly the announcer didn’t mean anything offensive”. That’s pretty self-explanatory.
And people who claim “offense” when no offense was meant are people who should be disregarded, not validated.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Well this isn't a government/constitutional issue. All of the outcries of protest stem from the same freedom of speech privileges that granted the announcer the right to say what he said. The NBA gets to choose how they handle situations that cause public outrage.
I don't see what's so scary about that. We've never lived in a world where you can say whatever you wanted with absolutely no pushback whatsoever.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
What do you mean without fault? There are 5 pages of posts here where people are arguing back and forth about said fault. I understand if you are not offended. I am not offended. That doesn't mean that I don't think people (namely black people) have the right to be offended by it. The guy has the right to make such a statement, then the "mob" has the right to judge him on it.
I don't care about suspensions or anything like that. I just care that broadcasters aren't saying stupid things on the broadcast. Regardless of the intent, it was a dumb move to make that comment, considering that it brought a whole lot more attention to "slavery" and "cotton" than the actual basketball game being played.
The person I responded to noted “Clearly the announcer didn’t mean anything offensive”. That’s pretty self-explanatory.
And people who claim “offense” when no offense was meant are people who should be disregarded, not validated.
Agree- I think it is obvious as well. If the "intent defense" covered me every time I open my stupid mouth, I probably would never have to sleep on the couch....
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Well this isn't a government/constitutional issue. All of the outcries of protest stem from the same freedom of speech privileges that granted the announcer the right to say what he said. The NBA gets to choose how they handle situations that cause public outrage.
I don't see what's so scary about that. We've never lived in a world where you can say whatever you wanted with absolutely no pushback whatsoever.
So I assume that you're fine with the Colin Kaepernick situation then.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Well this isn't a government/constitutional issue. All of the outcries of protest stem from the same freedom of speech privileges that granted the announcer the right to say what he said. The NBA gets to choose how they handle situations that cause public outrage.
I don't see what's so scary about that. We've never lived in a world where you can say whatever you wanted with absolutely no pushback whatsoever.
So I assume that you're fine with the Colin Kaepernick situation then.
I'm fine with Kaep. He voiced his concerns, and is paying the price. While I happen to think it is silly that people are more focused on kneeling than *children* getting shot, I think NFL teams have the right not to sign him. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think that he will win a blackballing case against the league.
Kaep will write a book or two, make some money, and in due time, he will be old enough to not validate a contract. While I do believe he is as good as mostly every backup QB, I'm not going to come out and say that he should definitely have a job. He's just not that good....
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Well this isn't a government/constitutional issue. All of the outcries of protest stem from the same freedom of speech privileges that granted the announcer the right to say what he said. The NBA gets to choose how they handle situations that cause public outrage.
I don't see what's so scary about that. We've never lived in a world where you can say whatever you wanted with absolutely no pushback whatsoever.
I didn’t say it was a Constitutional issue. I said that our Constitution aims to prevent things like this, which it does. Due Process, habeas corpus, no ex post facto laws, freedoms reserved to the people: they’re all about fundamental fairness. We have inherent rights to life, liberty and property.
The Framers were never okay with somebody who enjoyed Constitutional Protection being deprived of a paycheck without a fair process and notice. They just never figured America would turn into a society where money was taken out of somebody’s pockets despite no wrongdoing.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Well this isn't a government/constitutional issue. All of the outcries of protest stem from the same freedom of speech privileges that granted the announcer the right to say what he said. The NBA gets to choose how they handle situations that cause public outrage.
I don't see what's so scary about that. We've never lived in a world where you can say whatever you wanted with absolutely no pushback whatsoever.
So I assume that you're fine with the Colin Kaepernick situation then.
If the NFL owners feel that his kneeling will be a detriment to their team then they have every right to do what they feel is best for their franchise. So looking at the situation objectively I think it's fine.
Personally, I feel like his message was being deliberately misconstrued and taken out of context so people could ignore the real issues he was trying to bring attention to, but we can't all have it our way.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Well this isn't a government/constitutional issue. All of the outcries of protest stem from the same freedom of speech privileges that granted the announcer the right to say what he said. The NBA gets to choose how they handle situations that cause public outrage.
I don't see what's so scary about that. We've never lived in a world where you can say whatever you wanted with absolutely no pushback whatsoever.
I didn’t say it was a Constitutional issue. I said that our Constitution aims to prevent things like this, which it does. Due Process, habeas corpus, no ex post facto laws, freedoms reserved to the people: they’re all about fundamental fairness. We have inherent rights to life, liberty and property.
The Framers were never okay with somebody who enjoyed Constitutional Protection being deprived of a paycheck without a fair process and notice. They just never figured America would turn into a society where money was taken out of somebody’s pockets despite no wrongdoing.
"No wrongdoing". I think this is the point where we disagree. I'm not saying that it was blatantly racist. I'm saying that the broadcaster said something that was both dumb and tone-deaf. I'm not sure if that qualifies for a suspension or not.
I find it interesting that some of us know of the framers' intentions. I can blatantly say that I have no idea what they were thinking about. I've read historical accounts of the Philadelphia Convention, but I won't use similar texts as gospel.
I hear this line of thinking often, especially regarding the 2nd Amendment. How can we emphatically say that we know what these people were thinking about? As time goes on, we are able to see that our written history has shown inconsistencies.
-
Personally, I feel like his message was being deliberately misconstrued and taken out of context so people could [claim offense and act like petulant children]
That pretty much describes the entirety of the SJW game plan.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Well this isn't a government/constitutional issue. All of the outcries of protest stem from the same freedom of speech privileges that granted the announcer the right to say what he said. The NBA gets to choose how they handle situations that cause public outrage.
I don't see what's so scary about that. We've never lived in a world where you can say whatever you wanted with absolutely no pushback whatsoever.
I didn’t say it was a Constitutional issue. I said that our Constitution aims to prevent things like this, which it does. Due Process, habeas corpus, no ex post facto laws, freedoms reserved to the people: they’re all about fundamental fairness. We have inherent rights to life, liberty and property.
The Framers were never okay with somebody who enjoyed Constitutional Protection being deprived of a paycheck without a fair process and notice. They just never figured America would turn into a society where money was taken out of somebody’s pockets despite no wrongdoing.
Those are usually placed in contracts these days no? My current employer has the right to fire me for absolutely no reason without giving any advanced notice. Perhaps that announcer is subjected to similar rules where he may face suspension for saying anything that may be deemed offensive to listeners?
Who knows, but like I said I think it was an appropriate disciplinary action.Had he been fired then that would've been extreme.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Well this isn't a government/constitutional issue. All of the outcries of protest stem from the same freedom of speech privileges that granted the announcer the right to say what he said. The NBA gets to choose how they handle situations that cause public outrage.
I don't see what's so scary about that. We've never lived in a world where you can say whatever you wanted with absolutely no pushback whatsoever.
I didn’t say it was a Constitutional issue. I said that our Constitution aims to prevent things like this, which it does. Due Process, habeas corpus, no ex post facto laws, freedoms reserved to the people: they’re all about fundamental fairness. We have inherent rights to life, liberty and property.
The Framers were never okay with somebody who enjoyed Constitutional Protection being deprived of a paycheck without a fair process and notice. They just never figured America would turn into a society where money was taken out of somebody’s pockets despite no wrongdoing.
"No wrongdoing". I think this is the point where we disagree. I'm not saying that it was blatantly racist. I'm saying that the broadcaster said something that was both dumb and tone-deaf. I'm not sure if that qualifies for a suspension or not.
I find it interesting that some of us know of the framers' intentions. I can blatantly say that I have no idea what they were thinking about. I've read historical accounts of the Philadelphia Convention, but I won't use similar texts as gospel.
I hear this line of thinking often, especially regarding the 2nd Amendment. How can we emphatically say that we know what these people were thinking about? As time goes on, we are able to see that our written history has shown inconsistencies.
Read the writings of the Framers, the Federalist papers, the laws that were in place at the time, the leading political philosophers of the time.
And no, saying a common phrase that has no specific racist history behind it, without racist intent, is never wrong doing.
-
Let’s do a thought experiment for those completely okay with the suspension.
If the CelticsBlog staff banned you, without notice, for using the term “trading block”, would you think it was fair?
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Well this isn't a government/constitutional issue. All of the outcries of protest stem from the same freedom of speech privileges that granted the announcer the right to say what he said. The NBA gets to choose how they handle situations that cause public outrage.
I don't see what's so scary about that. We've never lived in a world where you can say whatever you wanted with absolutely no pushback whatsoever.
I didn’t say it was a Constitutional issue. I said that our Constitution aims to prevent things like this, which it does. Due Process, habeas corpus, no ex post facto laws, freedoms reserved to the people: they’re all about fundamental fairness. We have inherent rights to life, liberty and property.
The Framers were never okay with somebody who enjoyed Constitutional Protection being deprived of a paycheck without a fair process and notice. They just never figured America would turn into a society where money was taken out of somebody’s pockets despite no wrongdoing.
Freedom to say what you want with the limit being advocating for the overthrow of the US government. Slowly our society is eroding this. As in business, the limits of free speech should be up to the market to decide. Someone's offensive, ignore them or don't consume their product. But saying you can't say that you lose a paycheck - that's gone way too far.
Big brother is not the government as a past generation believed, it has become our hyper-sensitive way too PC portion of the populace.
-
In this social climate a 1 game suspension is appropriate. Clearly the announcer didn't mean anything offensive, but sayings like that in general shouldn't be said in a basketball setting.
This thought process (shared by tens of millions) scares me.
Being punished without fault because of mob outcry is exactly what our Constitution aims to prevent. The guy “only” loses his paycheck due to the media / social media lynch mob.
Well this isn't a government/constitutional issue. All of the outcries of protest stem from the same freedom of speech privileges that granted the announcer the right to say what he said. The NBA gets to choose how they handle situations that cause public outrage.
I don't see what's so scary about that. We've never lived in a world where you can say whatever you wanted with absolutely no pushback whatsoever.
I didn’t say it was a Constitutional issue. I said that our Constitution aims to prevent things like this, which it does. Due Process, habeas corpus, no ex post facto laws, freedoms reserved to the people: they’re all about fundamental fairness. We have inherent rights to life, liberty and property.
The Framers were never okay with somebody who enjoyed Constitutional Protection being deprived of a paycheck without a fair process and notice. They just never figured America would turn into a society where money was taken out of somebody’s pockets despite no wrongdoing.
"No wrongdoing". I think this is the point where we disagree. I'm not saying that it was blatantly racist. I'm saying that the broadcaster said something that was both dumb and tone-deaf. I'm not sure if that qualifies for a suspension or not.
I find it interesting that some of us know of the framers' intentions. I can blatantly say that I have no idea what they were thinking about. I've read historical accounts of the Philadelphia Convention, but I won't use similar texts as gospel.
I hear this line of thinking often, especially regarding the 2nd Amendment. How can we emphatically say that we know what these people were thinking about? As time goes on, we are able to see that our written history has shown inconsistencies.
Read the writings of the Framers, the Federalist papers, the laws that were in place at the time, the leading political philosophers of the time.
And no, saying a common phrase that has no specific racist history behind it, without racist intent, is never wrong doing.
I didn't spend too much time finding the origin of the cotton-picking comment, but I did see this:
https://www.bustle.com/articles/118386-5-racist-english-phrases-with-a-seriously-awful-history
Obviously not a scholarly report. The author mentions 5 statements as being offensive:
1) Sold down a river
2) No can do
3) Getting gyped
4) Off the reservation
5) Out of your cotton picking mind
I think it is our right to figure out what is/ isn't offensive. We can disagree with all of the statements as being offensive.
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I would choose the former option.
-
Let’s do a thought experiment for those completely okay with the suspension.
If the CelticsBlog staff banned you, without notice, for using the term “trading block”, would you think it was fair?
Lol, TP
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
-
Let’s do a thought experiment for those completely okay with the suspension.
If the CelticsBlog staff banned you, without notice, for using the term “trading block”, would you think it was fair?
I'll answer no just to be simple and objective (although I could be nit picky with your scenario).
I'm just curious to see how you'll run parallels between this announcer's suspension, and your experiment.
-
Let’s do a thought experiment for those completely okay with the suspension.
If the CelticsBlog staff banned you, without notice, for using the term “trading block”, would you think it was fair?
I never even thought about it. And you're right- I'm sure there are slavery origins.
If one person close to me acted legitimately offended, I wouldn't use that term. Game. Set. Match.
I don't care enough to "be right" over taking other people's feelings into consideration.
I think it all depends on who you are talking to. I would prob get laughs at a Klan rally over this topic, while people sitting at brunch in the city might think I'm a jerk.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
-
Let’s do a thought experiment for those completely okay with the suspension.
If the CelticsBlog staff banned you, without notice, for using the term “trading block”, would you think it was fair?
I'll answer no just to be simple and objective (although I could be nit picky with your scenario).
I'm just curious to see how you'll run parallels between this announcer's suspension, and your experiment.
The announcer lost compensation (property) without notice or intent.
The poster would lose recreation (happiness) without notice or intent.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I'm 44 and used to hear it all the time. It was in all the cartoons I watched as a kid. Yosemite Sam and others that I can't think of now.
-
53 here and I heard and used it a lot as a way to call people crazy, nuts, etc. Used it in front of African American people, none of whom ever told me it offended them. The saying's origins may have been racial, but their conotation nowadays simply is not.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
-
53 here and I heard and used it a lot as a way to call people crazy, nuts, etc. Used it in front of African American people, none of whom ever told me it offended them. The saying's origins may have been racial, but their conotation nowadays simply is not.
But this particular phrase doesn't have any racial origins. A different phrase with the term cotton-picking did, but that doesn't make this phrase also racist.
I mean, I would love for someone to actually try to explain how the phrase, "wait just a cotton-picking minute" could actually be racist.
It's not a term I can recall really ever using myself, but I've heard it used plenty by people older than I.
As for the topic of the thread, and the OKC announcer being suspended, I mean there's not much I can do about it, unfortunately. The people in our society that feel aggrieved by every little thing (even when there is no legitimate reason to be offended) are just much louder, more obnoxious, and more persistent than the reasonable minded people of our society that see through this outlandish behavior. I'm just not sure how to fight back against these people that should be pushed out of our society when so many people just seem to be indifferent to it all.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am in my late 60's and old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Hooray for misinformation!
I reject everything you've said here. You are unequivocally wrong. The facts prove it so.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Hooray for misinformation!
I reject everything you've said here. You are unequivocally wrong. The facts prove it so.
If you are referring to https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/cotton-picking.html you should actually read it.
"It can come as as little surprise that the term 'cotton-picking' originated in the southern states of the USA, where it is usually pronounced cotton-pickin'. It began life in the late 1700s and differs from the 19th century Dixie term, 'cottonpicker', in that the latter was derogatory and racist, whereas 'cotton-picking' referred directly to the difficulty and harshness of gathering the crop. This didn't extend to the specific expression 'keep your cotton-picking hands off of me'. This no doubt alludes to the horny, calloused (and usually black) hands that picked cotton. "
or wait a cotton picking minute or you are out of your cotton picking mind! Phrase is used in the same way in those expressions as it is used in the end of the paragraph.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am in my late 60's and old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Since you think it is a racist phrase and you admit to using it, I think you should apologize to every black person you encounter for the next week.
Edit: Of course if you do so, they'll probably think that you're out of your cotton-picking mind. ;D
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Hooray for misinformation!
I reject everything you've said here. You are unequivocally wrong. The facts prove it so.
If you are referring to https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/cotton-picking.html you should actually read it.
"It can come as as little surprise that the term 'cotton-picking' originated in the southern states of the USA, where it is usually pronounced cotton-pickin'. It began life in the late 1700s and differs from the 19th century Dixie term, 'cottonpicker', in that the latter was derogatory and racist, whereas 'cotton-picking' referred directly to the difficulty and harshness of gathering the crop. This didn't extend to the specific expression 'keep your cotton-picking hands off of me'. This no doubt alludes to the horny, calloused (and usually black) hands that picked cotton. "
or wait a cotton picking minute or you are out of your cotton picking mind! Phrase is used in the same way in those expressions as it is used in the end of the paragraph.
I know what the link says, I'm the one that originally referenced it in this thread.
Well, actually, what it said yesterday is a bit different from what it says today, as it's been updated since last night to include the now ignorant position that a previously non-racist phrase is now racist due to the uproar of a mob of ignorant fools.
Looks like the ignorant fools are winning. Good for them, I'm not impressed.
-
Let's stop labeling some people as ignorant or fools and others as reasonable minded. Everyone is entitled to an opinion without being called names
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am in my late 60's and old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Since you think it is a racist phrase and you admit to using it, I think you should apologize to every black person you encounter for the next week.
Edit: Of course if you do so, they'll probably think that you're out of your cotton-picking mind. ;D
Do you realize how childish/silly you sound? This was something I probably used when it was a more common phrase when I was a child. Why can't you just think about it, open your eyes like the Oklahoma Thunder and the announcer who said it and realize it is an antiquated phrase that was meant to demean people and has a racist Jim Crow derivation.
-
Yes, let's also stop labeling people as racists, sexists, homophobes.....
Everyone is entitled to an opinion without being called names.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am in my late 60's and old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Since you think it is a racist phrase and you admit to using it, I think you should apologize to every black person you encounter for the next week.
Edit: Of course if you do so, they'll probably think that you're out of your cotton-picking mind. ;D
Do you realize how childish/silly you sound? This was something I probably used when it was a more common phrase when I was a child. Why can't you just think about it, open your eyes like the Oklahoma Thunder and the announcer who said it and realize it is an antiquated phrase that was meant to demean people and has a racist Jim Crow derivation.
It’s not really any of those things, though. It’s a replacement for “da—“.
The phrase “cotton picking” arose in the southern U.S. states sometime during the 1700s and was used to describe something that was unpleasant or troublesome. Back then, cotton was a garden crop tended by white as well as black Southerners and the cotton was turned into cloth for home use in much the same that flax was turned into cloth for home use in the North.
“Cotton-picking” became part of the vernacular in the U.S. and in time, it was the phrase swapped in for unacceptable comments such as “God-[dang]” or “[dang]” when in polite society or if women were present.
The verdict: Cotton pickin’ minute is not a racial slur but calling someone a cotton picker could be considered an insult.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/idiomation.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/cotton-pickin-minute/amp/
Definition of cotton-picking
1 : [dang]ed —used as a generalized expression of disapproval a cotton-picking hypocrite
2 : [dang]ed —used as an intensive
out of his cotton-picking mind —Irving Kristol
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cotton-picking
Every neutral site I look at suggests that it’s basically an expression of contempt / cuss word related not to race, but rather to the fact that cotton picking is grueling, painful work.
-
Yes, let's also stop labeling people as racists, sexists, homophobes.....
Everyone is entitled to an opinion without being called names.
That's not happening in this thread. I would suggest you desist with the kickback.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am in my late 60's and old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Since you think it is a racist phrase and you admit to using it, I think you should apologize to every black person you encounter for the next week.
Edit: Of course if you do so, they'll probably think that you're out of your cotton-picking mind. ;D
Do you realize how childish/silly you sound? This was something I probably used when it was a more common phrase when I was a child. Why can't you just think about it, open your eyes like the Oklahoma Thunder and the announcer who said it and realize it is an antiquated phrase that was meant to demean people and has a racist Jim Crow derivation.
It’s not really any of those things, though. It’s a replacement for “da—“.
The phrase “cotton picking” arose in the southern U.S. states sometime during the 1700s and was used to describe something that was unpleasant or troublesome. Back then, cotton was a garden crop tended by white as well as black Southerners and the cotton was turned into cloth for home use in much the same that flax was turned into cloth for home use in the North.
“Cotton-picking” became part of the vernacular in the U.S. and in time, it was the phrase swapped in for unacceptable comments such as “God-[dang]” or “[dang]” when in polite society or if women were present.
The verdict: Cotton pickin’ minute is not a racial slur but calling someone a cotton picker could be considered an insult.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/idiomation.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/cotton-pickin-minute/amp/
Definition of cotton-picking
1 : [dang]ed —used as a generalized expression of disapproval a cotton-picking hypocrite
2 : [dang]ed —used as an intensive
out of his cotton-picking mind —Irving Kristol
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cotton-picking
Every neutral site I look at suggests that it’s basically an expression of contempt / cuss word related not to race, but rather to the fact that cotton picking is grueling, painful work.
The origin of the phrase is up for debate, but with the history of slavery in America the comment has been construed by people as racist. Thunder Vice President of Broadcasting Dan Mahoney told The Norman Transcript Davis' comments were "offensive and inappropriate."
The Thunder and Brian Davis (he apologized) disagree that it is not racist. Cotton picking is and has been identified as a slave function. Cotton Picking may be the primary purpose for slavery in the South. On reflection I see it as likely having a racist derivation and undertone in it's use. None of the explanations here have been definitive. I am the first to admit that I have been wrong before.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am in my late 60's and old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Since you think it is a racist phrase and you admit to using it, I think you should apologize to every black person you encounter for the next week.
Edit: Of course if you do so, they'll probably think that you're out of your cotton-picking mind. ;D
Do you realize how childish/silly you sound? This was something I probably used when it was a more common phrase when I was a child. Why can't you just think about it, open your eyes like the Oklahoma Thunder and the announcer who said it and realize it is an antiquated phrase that was meant to demean people and has a racist Jim Crow derivation.
It’s not really any of those things, though. It’s a replacement for “da—“.
The phrase “cotton picking” arose in the southern U.S. states sometime during the 1700s and was used to describe something that was unpleasant or troublesome. Back then, cotton was a garden crop tended by white as well as black Southerners and the cotton was turned into cloth for home use in much the same that flax was turned into cloth for home use in the North.
“Cotton-picking” became part of the vernacular in the U.S. and in time, it was the phrase swapped in for unacceptable comments such as “God-[dang]” or “[dang]” when in polite society or if women were present.
The verdict: Cotton pickin’ minute is not a racial slur but calling someone a cotton picker could be considered an insult.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/idiomation.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/cotton-pickin-minute/amp/
Definition of cotton-picking
1 : [dang]ed —used as a generalized expression of disapproval a cotton-picking hypocrite
2 : [dang]ed —used as an intensive
out of his cotton-picking mind —Irving Kristol
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cotton-picking
Every neutral site I look at suggests that it’s basically an expression of contempt / cuss word related not to race, but rather to the fact that cotton picking is grueling, painful work.
The origin of the phrase is up for debate, but with the history of slavery in America the comment has been construed by people as racist. Thunder Vice President of Broadcasting Dan Mahoney told The Norman Transcript Davis' comments were "offensive and inappropriate."
The Thunder and Brian Davis (he apologized) disagree that it is not racist. Cotton picking is and has been identified as a slave function. Cotton Picking may be the primary purpose for slavery in the South. On reflection I see it as likely having a racist derivation and undertone in it's use. None of the explanations here have been definitive. I am the first to admit that I have been wrong before.
if 5% of the population think something is racist and pipe up about it and 95% don't and keep quiet who's to be the judge? The Thunder probably wanted to head this off at the pass before it blew up - like things tend to do in the social media age.
If Davis was a racist, he sure wouldn't be making his living calling NBA games. Again you talk off the cuff with no editing for 2 to 3 hours a night on live TV many times year (90 if he does home and away) and he's lasted 8 years. I think he's allowed a slip up or two.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am in my late 60's and old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Since you think it is a racist phrase and you admit to using it, I think you should apologize to every black person you encounter for the next week.
Edit: Of course if you do so, they'll probably think that you're out of your cotton-picking mind. ;D
Do you realize how childish/silly you sound? This was something I probably used when it was a more common phrase when I was a child. Why can't you just think about it, open your eyes like the Oklahoma Thunder and the announcer who said it and realize it is an antiquated phrase that was meant to demean people and has a racist Jim Crow derivation.
It’s not really any of those things, though. It’s a replacement for “da—“.
The phrase “cotton picking” arose in the southern U.S. states sometime during the 1700s and was used to describe something that was unpleasant or troublesome. Back then, cotton was a garden crop tended by white as well as black Southerners and the cotton was turned into cloth for home use in much the same that flax was turned into cloth for home use in the North.
“Cotton-picking” became part of the vernacular in the U.S. and in time, it was the phrase swapped in for unacceptable comments such as “God-[dang]” or “[dang]” when in polite society or if women were present.
The verdict: Cotton pickin’ minute is not a racial slur but calling someone a cotton picker could be considered an insult.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/idiomation.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/cotton-pickin-minute/amp/
Definition of cotton-picking
1 : [dang]ed —used as a generalized expression of disapproval a cotton-picking hypocrite
2 : [dang]ed —used as an intensive
out of his cotton-picking mind —Irving Kristol
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cotton-picking
Every neutral site I look at suggests that it’s basically an expression of contempt / cuss word related not to race, but rather to the fact that cotton picking is grueling, painful work.
The origin of the phrase is up for debate, but with the history of slavery in America the comment has been construed by people as racist. Thunder Vice President of Broadcasting Dan Mahoney told The Norman Transcript Davis' comments were "offensive and inappropriate."
The Thunder and Brian Davis (he apologized) disagree that it is not racist. Cotton picking is and has been identified as a slave function. Cotton Picking may be the primary purpose for slavery in the South. On reflection I see it as likely having a racist derivation and undertone in it's use. None of the explanations here have been definitive. I am the first to admit that I have been wrong before.
So Brian Davis thought it was racist, but used it anyway? Odd that he was able to keep his job.
As for the Thunder, it’s easier to punish somebody without fault than it is to stand up to the SJW’s constantly claiming “offense”. As a rule of thumb, it’s easier to say “no can do” and sell your employees down the river than it is to tell the peanut gallery of SJWs that they’re out of their cotton-pickin’ minds.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am in my late 60's and old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Since you think it is a racist phrase and you admit to using it, I think you should apologize to every black person you encounter for the next week.
Edit: Of course if you do so, they'll probably think that you're out of your cotton-picking mind. ;D
Do you realize how childish/silly you sound? This was something I probably used when it was a more common phrase when I was a child. Why can't you just think about it, open your eyes like the Oklahoma Thunder and the announcer who said it and realize it is an antiquated phrase that was meant to demean people and has a racist Jim Crow derivation.
It’s not really any of those things, though. It’s a replacement for “da—“.
The phrase “cotton picking” arose in the southern U.S. states sometime during the 1700s and was used to describe something that was unpleasant or troublesome. Back then, cotton was a garden crop tended by white as well as black Southerners and the cotton was turned into cloth for home use in much the same that flax was turned into cloth for home use in the North.
“Cotton-picking” became part of the vernacular in the U.S. and in time, it was the phrase swapped in for unacceptable comments such as “God-[dang]” or “[dang]” when in polite society or if women were present.
The verdict: Cotton pickin’ minute is not a racial slur but calling someone a cotton picker could be considered an insult.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/idiomation.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/cotton-pickin-minute/amp/
Definition of cotton-picking
1 : [dang]ed —used as a generalized expression of disapproval a cotton-picking hypocrite
2 : [dang]ed —used as an intensive
out of his cotton-picking mind —Irving Kristol
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cotton-picking
Every neutral site I look at suggests that it’s basically an expression of contempt / cuss word related not to race, but rather to the fact that cotton picking is grueling, painful work.
The origin of the phrase is up for debate, but with the history of slavery in America the comment has been construed by people as racist. Thunder Vice President of Broadcasting Dan Mahoney told The Norman Transcript Davis' comments were "offensive and inappropriate."
The Thunder and Brian Davis (he apologized) disagree that it is not racist. Cotton picking is and has been identified as a slave function. Cotton Picking may be the primary purpose for slavery in the South. On reflection I see it as likely having a racist derivation and undertone in it's use. None of the explanations here have been definitive. I am the first to admit that I have been wrong before.
So Brian Davis thought it was racist, but used it anyway? Odd that he was able to keep his job.
As for the Thunder, it’s easier to punish somebody without fault than it is to stand up to the SJW’s constantly claiming “offense”. As a rule of thumb, it’s easier to say “no can do” and sell your employees down the river than it is to tell the peanut gallery of SJWs that they’re out of their cotton-pickin’ minds.
Or maybe like me he never had thought about it and when he reflected on what it likely meant he realized he should not have said it in regard to a black man?
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am in my late 60's and old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Since you think it is a racist phrase and you admit to using it, I think you should apologize to every black person you encounter for the next week.
Edit: Of course if you do so, they'll probably think that you're out of your cotton-picking mind. ;D
Do you realize how childish/silly you sound? This was something I probably used when it was a more common phrase when I was a child. Why can't you just think about it, open your eyes like the Oklahoma Thunder and the announcer who said it and realize it is an antiquated phrase that was meant to demean people and has a racist Jim Crow derivation.
It’s not really any of those things, though. It’s a replacement for “da—“.
The phrase “cotton picking” arose in the southern U.S. states sometime during the 1700s and was used to describe something that was unpleasant or troublesome. Back then, cotton was a garden crop tended by white as well as black Southerners and the cotton was turned into cloth for home use in much the same that flax was turned into cloth for home use in the North.
“Cotton-picking” became part of the vernacular in the U.S. and in time, it was the phrase swapped in for unacceptable comments such as “God-[dang]” or “[dang]” when in polite society or if women were present.
The verdict: Cotton pickin’ minute is not a racial slur but calling someone a cotton picker could be considered an insult.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/idiomation.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/cotton-pickin-minute/amp/
Definition of cotton-picking
1 : [dang]ed —used as a generalized expression of disapproval a cotton-picking hypocrite
2 : [dang]ed —used as an intensive
out of his cotton-picking mind —Irving Kristol
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cotton-picking
Every neutral site I look at suggests that it’s basically an expression of contempt / cuss word related not to race, but rather to the fact that cotton picking is grueling, painful work.
The origin of the phrase is up for debate, but with the history of slavery in America the comment has been construed by people as racist. Thunder Vice President of Broadcasting Dan Mahoney told The Norman Transcript Davis' comments were "offensive and inappropriate."
The Thunder and Brian Davis (he apologized) disagree that it is not racist. Cotton picking is and has been identified as a slave function. Cotton Picking may be the primary purpose for slavery in the South. On reflection I see it as likely having a racist derivation and undertone in it's use. None of the explanations here have been definitive. I am the first to admit that I have been wrong before.
So Brian Davis thought it was racist, but used it anyway? Odd that he was able to keep his job.
As for the Thunder, it’s easier to punish somebody without fault than it is to stand up to the SJW’s constantly claiming “offense”. As a rule of thumb, it’s easier to say “no can do” and sell your employees down the river than it is to tell the peanut gallery of SJWs that they’re out of their cotton-pickin’ minds.
Or maybe like me he never had thought about it and when he reflected on what it likely meant he realized he should not have said it in regard to a black man?
I’ll defer to Occam’s Razor, and just assume that he wanted to keep his job.
Would it be better if he’d used it in regard to a non-black man? An Asian? A Hispanic? What about a “white Hispanic”, like George Zimmerman? A Pacific Islander? A Caucasian? What about if it was a native African who had never picked cotton? Or a white laborer who had?
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I’ve def heard it, just haven’t used it. I also didn’t need to do a Google search to realize that it is a statement that a young white man should not be making.
That’s because our education system has let you down, leaving you with the impression that “cotton picking” automatically refers to blacks.
Nothing to do with our education system the obvious historic fact that predominantly slaves picked cotton and slaves are predominantly associated with picking cotton is all that is needed for it to automatically refer to blacks. Seems ridiculous, to me, to give it any other meaning. Read the full context of the earlier referenced phrase research.
I am in my late 60's and old enough to have heard and used the phrase. I had never thought about the origin but when I think about how and when the phrase is used it has a racial undertone and I have been enlightened.
Since you think it is a racist phrase and you admit to using it, I think you should apologize to every black person you encounter for the next week.
Edit: Of course if you do so, they'll probably think that you're out of your cotton-picking mind. ;D
Do you realize how childish/silly you sound? This was something I probably used when it was a more common phrase when I was a child. Why can't you just think about it, open your eyes like the Oklahoma Thunder and the announcer who said it and realize it is an antiquated phrase that was meant to demean people and has a racist Jim Crow derivation.
It’s not really any of those things, though. It’s a replacement for “da—“.
The phrase “cotton picking” arose in the southern U.S. states sometime during the 1700s and was used to describe something that was unpleasant or troublesome. Back then, cotton was a garden crop tended by white as well as black Southerners and the cotton was turned into cloth for home use in much the same that flax was turned into cloth for home use in the North.
“Cotton-picking” became part of the vernacular in the U.S. and in time, it was the phrase swapped in for unacceptable comments such as “God-[dang]” or “[dang]” when in polite society or if women were present.
The verdict: Cotton pickin’ minute is not a racial slur but calling someone a cotton picker could be considered an insult.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/idiomation.wordpress.com/2011/03/14/cotton-pickin-minute/amp/
Definition of cotton-picking
1 : [dang]ed —used as a generalized expression of disapproval a cotton-picking hypocrite
2 : [dang]ed —used as an intensive
out of his cotton-picking mind —Irving Kristol
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cotton-picking
Every neutral site I look at suggests that it’s basically an expression of contempt / cuss word related not to race, but rather to the fact that cotton picking is grueling, painful work.
The origin of the phrase is up for debate, but with the history of slavery in America the comment has been construed by people as racist. Thunder Vice President of Broadcasting Dan Mahoney told The Norman Transcript Davis' comments were "offensive and inappropriate."
The Thunder and Brian Davis (he apologized) disagree that it is not racist. Cotton picking is and has been identified as a slave function. Cotton Picking may be the primary purpose for slavery in the South. On reflection I see it as likely having a racist derivation and undertone in it's use. None of the explanations here have been definitive. I am the first to admit that I have been wrong before.
So Brian Davis thought it was racist, but used it anyway? Odd that he was able to keep his job.
As for the Thunder, it’s easier to punish somebody without fault than it is to stand up to the SJW’s constantly claiming “offense”. As a rule of thumb, it’s easier to say “no can do” and sell your employees down the river than it is to tell the peanut gallery of SJWs that they’re out of their cotton-pickin’ minds.
Or maybe like me he never had thought about it and when he reflected on what it likely meant he realized he should not have said it in regard to a black man?
I’ll defer to Occam’s Razor, and just assume that he wanted to keep his job.
Would it be better if he’d used it in regard to a non-black man? An Asian? A Hispanic? What about a “white Hispanic”, like George Zimmerman? A Pacific Islander? A Caucasian? What about if it was a native African who had never picked cotton? Or a white laborer who had?
You are probably right on wanting to keep his job. Your other question makes my head hurt!
-
if 5% of the population think something is racist and pipe up about it and 95% don't and keep quiet who's to be the judge? The Thunder probably wanted to head this off at the pass before it blew up - like things tend to do in the social media age.
As for the Thunder, it’s easier to punish somebody without fault than it is to stand up to the SJW’s constantly claiming “offense”.
Both of these comments seem to very much be what has happened here. But my question is how do combat this? Should the rest of us just roll over willingly? What do you do when you correct someone on the actual meaning of something but they choose to ignore you?
It seems like the loudest among us, no matter how wrong they may or may not be, ultimately end up dictating things.
-
if 5% of the population think something is racist and pipe up about it and 95% don't and keep quiet who's to be the judge? The Thunder probably wanted to head this off at the pass before it blew up - like things tend to do in the social media age.
As for the Thunder, it’s easier to punish somebody without fault than it is to stand up to the SJW’s constantly claiming “offense”.
Both of these comments seem to very much be what has happened here. But my question is how do combat this? Should the rest of us just roll over willingly? What do you do when you correct someone on the actual meaning of something but they choose to ignore you?
It seems like the loudest among us, no matter how wrong they may or may not be, ultimately end up dictating things.
No idea, other than voting and debating.
The idiot we have in office (and the last two governors I’ve lived under, Chris Christie and Paul LePage) are the result of a backlash against this. Nixon’s “silent majority” still cares.
What we need are good politicians that don’t fold as easily as the Thunder or Laura Ingram’s advertisers. We need candidates of conviction who aren’t pompous bullies.
-
if 5% of the population think something is racist and pipe up about it and 95% don't and keep quiet who's to be the judge? The Thunder probably wanted to head this off at the pass before it blew up - like things tend to do in the social media age.
As for the Thunder, it’s easier to punish somebody without fault than it is to stand up to the SJW’s constantly claiming “offense”.
Both of these comments seem to very much be what has happened here. But my question is how do combat this? Should the rest of us just roll over willingly? What do you do when you correct someone on the actual meaning of something but they choose to ignore you?
It seems like the loudest among us, no matter how wrong they may or may not be, ultimately end up dictating things.
The squeakiest wheel does get the grease.
I am torn between the sides of being politically correct and then going overboard with it. Obviously, I think people who view this as offensive or racist in nature are probably much more politically correct than those that don't see it as offensive or racist. Of course, there is also the group that just don't think its offensive or racist because they believe the saying has nothing to do with race and never did. There's been ample evidence provided that this could be the case.
I can see where the term "cotton pickin" was originally used as a derogative against slaves. But I also think it evolved and certain phrases where "cotton pickin" is used is just not used as a racist remark. "Cotton pickin minute" and "Cotton pickin mind" seem to be in this group.
Who's to say what is racist and what isn't? I don't have an answer for that. There are definitely a group of people who are going to be very vocal on both sides. Only time will tell whether terms like this will be seen as racist or not and time will probably cause the term to stop being used if it is found as offensive.
-
It sounds like the term "cotton-picking" and its racial connotations has become a topic of debate here. This baffles me. I thought we had collectively moved past what is a decent thing to say, and what is not. It is clear to me that some things are not what I thought they were.
I didn't know much about this statement until I started googling around its multiple meanings. Some were benign, and a couple of interpretations were really ugly. This is one of these terms that I've decided is a third rail for myself. There are a bunch of others that I would get in trouble for using here in this forum.
I find it strange that people feel passionately about defending the right to say something. I love the first amendment, but not if it creates pain for others. While I'm not offended by much of anything, I don't feel the need to get defensive when others say something doesn't sound right to them. Race related jokes or comments in the public forum are held to a higher standard. I can't tell a black person how they should feel about something said on TV, and vice-versa. So again, I'm not offended, but I could see how people (including Westbrook) would be offended.
I heard the clip. It sounded awkward at best and racist at worst. I am assuming that it was just a dated attempt at humor that fell flat. The perception is different than the intent. The intent should be considered, but what was said can't be unsaid. Yes, it sucks that the guy is getting suspended. It is likely an overreaction by a company that is sensitive to race relations. All things being equal, a quick apology from him would have been best.
I don't understand people that are trying to defend the use of the term "cotton-picking" as a metaphor. Such a conversation crosses a line of decency.
-
I find it strange that people feel passionately about defending the right to say something
I feel passionate about not punishing people for things that aren’t intended to be offensive.
For instance:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/student-dressed-in-a-bacon-outfit-slammed-by-cnn-commentator-for-being-anti-semitic
What percentage of people being offended does it take to suppress speech? Is one ignorant moron enough? 10? Give me a number at which point the average person should change their ways to accommodate the most radical and/or thin-skinned among us?
I don't understand people that are trying to defend the use of the term "cotton-picking" as a metaphor. Such a conversation crosses a line of decency.
Lol. Really? Are you going to censor terms like [d—n], For God’s Sake, Holy Cow, and “Jesus Christ” because they’re offensive to Christians? Is talking about their place in our language such an affront that it crosses a line of decency?
“Cotton picking” as a cuss word / adjective started because picking cotton was a really crappy activity, quite literally talking about the actual picking of cotton.
-
I don't believe you can tell anyone else what they can and can't be offended by. If someone is offended by something that you're not, it doesn't make the offended party wrong, it means that we all have different sensibilities.
I'm personally surprised that this phrase is found to be offensive. I understand why someone might take offense but I also wonder if anyone here was personally offended by the phrase or just worried about its possible offense to others?
I do want to push back on this idea that liberals are more oversensitive or more prone to overreaction than conservatives. Many liberals are certainly oversensitive but not anymore than the types of conservatives who want to boycott Starbucks for changing Merry Christmas to Happy Holidays on their paper cups, who post videos of themselves on youtube destroying keurigs as some weird solidarity with Sean Hannity, or who decry the NFL kneeling (a harmless expression that was initially suggested by a navy seal and yet many conservatives want people to lose their jobs over it).
Oversensitivity and overreaction is, unfortunately, a non partisan hobby.
-
I find it strange that people feel passionately about defending the right to say something.
I don't think it's strange. As long as it's not something like yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, people should be able to speak their mind.
I love the first amendment, but not if it creates pain for others.
Depends on how you define "pain." I certainly don't think "disagreement" can be straight-up equated with "pain."
I don't understand people that are trying to defend the use of the term "cotton-picking" as a metaphor. Such a conversation crosses a line of decency.
I don't think it's indecent to have this discussion. I think this type of discussion can be healthy and productive.
Are you going to censor terms like [d—n], For God’s Sake, Holy Cow, and “Jesus Christ” because they’re offensive to Christians? Is talking about their place in our language such an affront that it crosses a line of decency?
As a Christian, I certainly wish no one would use "Jesus Christ" as a pejorative, but I don't think having a discussion about it crosses a line of decency. Such discussions would probably increase understanding across various subgroups.
-
I don't understand people that are trying to defend the use of the term "cotton-picking" as a metaphor. Such a conversation crosses a line of decency.
Lol. Really? Are you going to censor terms like [d—n], For God’s Sake, Holy Cow, and “Jesus Christ” because they’re offensive to Christians? Is talking about their place in our language such an affront that it crosses a line of decency?
This forum does, so...
-
I don't believe you can tell anyone else what they can and can't be offended by. If someone is offended by something that you're not, it doesn't make the offended party wrong, it means that we all have different sensibilities.
Well, obviously you can't stop someone from feeling however they do, but you certainly can try to explain to them why they might be wrong for feeling the way they do. If someone feels offended based on a misunderstanding of the intent or meaning of something, the hope would be that after explaining this they might see they were wrong. Of course, the opposite could be true as well, and the person who feels offended was correct in their understanding of what was said.
As it pertains to the topic being discussed here, I'm just not sure how anyone could not see that there is no racial basis behind the phrase in question. It's strictly about a mental condition (delirium) caused by the onset of heat stroke while picking cotton (something that is most certainly not exclusive to slaves). That really isn't debatable, it is a fact that this is where the phrase came from and that it predates slavery. Yes, different phrases that use the term "cotton picking" have been used in a racially derogatory manner, specifically towards black slaves, but the various phrases aren't the same and should not preclude the use of a specific term that doesn't inherently imply racial bias.
-
I still hear people saying “taken behind the woodshed”, which I guess is racist too.
-
I still hear people saying “taken behind the woodshed”, which I guess is racist too.
I know of white men who were taken behind the woodshed for punishment when they were young, so I don't see this saying as racist.
-
I think that announcers should stop screaming whatever comes into their head to hype up a play to get the fans excited.
He should have said "Westbrook gets the rebound".
That announcer should follow Mike Gorman around for a while.
Stay away from Tommy though.
-
I don't believe you can tell anyone else what they can and can't be offended by. If someone is offended by something that you're not, it doesn't make the offended party wrong, it means that we all have different sensibilities.
Well, obviously you can't stop someone from feeling however they do, but you certainly can try to explain to them why they might be wrong for feeling the way they do. If someone feels offended based on a misunderstanding of the intent or meaning of something, the hope would be that after explaining this they might see they were wrong. Of course, the opposite could be true as well, and the person who feels offended was correct in their understanding of what was said.
As it pertains to the topic being discussed here, I'm just not sure how anyone could not see that there is no racial basis behind the phrase in question. It's strictly about a mental condition (delirium) caused by the onset of heat stroke while picking cotton (something that is most certainly not exclusive to slaves). That really isn't debatable, it is a fact that this is where the phrase came from and that it predates slavery. Yes, different phrases that use the term "cotton picking" have been used in a racially derogatory manner, specifically towards black slaves, but the various phrases aren't the same and should not preclude the use of a specific term that doesn't inherently imply racial bias.
I think that having a conversation about intent and meaning can do a lot to bridge a gap between two people but outside of straight-up misunderstanding what was said or what happened it's hard for me to imagine someone being "wrong" for being offended.
People live different lives, have different experiences, and develop different feelings about our world. Something that offends someone else might not offend me. That doesn't make either of us wrong, it means we are different people. There are lots of words that don't offend me in the slightest but I know others take offense to so, out of politeness, I don't use those words.
As for the phrase in question: As I said, I was surprised that people were taking offense to this but I can also see how one might. If it's something that might offend someone I have no problem excising it from my vocabulary (it's not like I was using it anyway). That said, I'd still be curious to hear from someone that was actually, personally offended by its use.
-
I don't believe you can tell anyone else what they can and can't be offended by. If someone is offended by something that you're not, it doesn't make the offended party wrong, it means that we all have different sensibilities.
Well, obviously you can't stop someone from feeling however they do, but you certainly can try to explain to them why they might be wrong for feeling the way they do. If someone feels offended based on a misunderstanding of the intent or meaning of something, the hope would be that after explaining this they might see they were wrong. Of course, the opposite could be true as well, and the person who feels offended was correct in their understanding of what was said.
As it pertains to the topic being discussed here, I'm just not sure how anyone could not see that there is no racial basis behind the phrase in question. It's strictly about a mental condition (delirium) caused by the onset of heat stroke while picking cotton (something that is most certainly not exclusive to slaves). That really isn't debatable, it is a fact that this is where the phrase came from and that it predates slavery. Yes, different phrases that use the term "cotton picking" have been used in a racially derogatory manner, specifically towards black slaves, but the various phrases aren't the same and should not preclude the use of a specific term that doesn't inherently imply racial bias.
I think that having a conversation about intent and meaning can do a lot to bridge a gap between two people but outside of straight-up misunderstanding what was said or what happened it's hard for me to imagine someone being "wrong" for being offended.
People live different lives, have different experiences, and develop different feelings about our world. Something that offends someone else might not offend me. That doesn't make either of us wrong, it means we are different people. There are lots of words that don't offend me in the slightest but I know others take offense to so, out of politeness, I don't use those words.
As for the phrase in question: As I said, I was surprised that people were taking offense to this but I can also see how one might. If it's something that might offend someone I have no problem excising it from my vocabulary (it's not like I was using it anyway). That said, I'd still be curious to hear from someone that was actually, personally offended by its use.
If you're going to change your vocabulary every time someone takes offense, you won't have much of a vocabulary left. We're in an era where making mountains out of mole hills (or nothing at all) is the norm. I'd say it was because people are too thin-skinned but I think a lot of it is people pushing their agendas.
-
That being said, if someone calls it to our attention that maybe a particular statement is not very tactful, should we say ok and not use that term around them, or should we dig in and bring up the Constitution and other reasons why there's no negative intent, etc. etc. etc.
I don’t think anybody objects to being politely educated about an offensive phrase.
Taking away somebody’s paycheck for using a phrase in common usage is another thing entirely.
Common usage for which type of people?
I'm in my 30's and have never used this term. I get your point if you're talking to an 80 year old. We should let things slide for older people, in my opinion.
I don’t know what the age cut off is, but is there anybody who grew up in the 80s or before who hasn’t heard the phrase?
I gree up in the 80s, have definitely heard the phrase, and probably even used it. I wouldn’t use it anymore, though, and I can completely see where it can be found offensive and in poor taste.
The phrase is old fashioned, tinged with racism, and on it’s way out of our vernacular. I say; good riddance.
-
I don't believe you can tell anyone else what they can and can't be offended by. If someone is offended by something that you're not, it doesn't make the offended party wrong, it means that we all have different sensibilities.
Well, obviously you can't stop someone from feeling however they do, but you certainly can try to explain to them why they might be wrong for feeling the way they do. If someone feels offended based on a misunderstanding of the intent or meaning of something, the hope would be that after explaining this they might see they were wrong. Of course, the opposite could be true as well, and the person who feels offended was correct in their understanding of what was said.
As it pertains to the topic being discussed here, I'm just not sure how anyone could not see that there is no racial basis behind the phrase in question. It's strictly about a mental condition (delirium) caused by the onset of heat stroke while picking cotton (something that is most certainly not exclusive to slaves). That really isn't debatable, it is a fact that this is where the phrase came from and that it predates slavery. Yes, different phrases that use the term "cotton picking" have been used in a racially derogatory manner, specifically towards black slaves, but the various phrases aren't the same and should not preclude the use of a specific term that doesn't inherently imply racial bias.
I think that having a conversation about intent and meaning can do a lot to bridge a gap between two people but outside of straight-up misunderstanding what was said or what happened it's hard for me to imagine someone being "wrong" for being offended.
People live different lives, have different experiences, and develop different feelings about our world. Something that offends someone else might not offend me. That doesn't make either of us wrong, it means we are different people. There are lots of words that don't offend me in the slightest but I know others take offense to so, out of politeness, I don't use those words.
As for the phrase in question: As I said, I was surprised that people were taking offense to this but I can also see how one might. If it's something that might offend someone I have no problem excising it from my vocabulary (it's not like I was using it anyway). That said, I'd still be curious to hear from someone that was actually, personally offended by its use.
If you're going to change your vocabulary every time someone takes offense, you won't have much of a vocabulary left. We're in an era where making mountains out of mole hills (or nothing at all) is the norm. I'd say it was because people are too thin-skinned but I think a lot of it is people pushing their agendas.
No, I have not found that to be the case at all.
-
I don't believe you can tell anyone else what they can and can't be offended by. If someone is offended by something that you're not, it doesn't make the offended party wrong, it means that we all have different sensibilities.
Well, obviously you can't stop someone from feeling however they do, but you certainly can try to explain to them why they might be wrong for feeling the way they do. If someone feels offended based on a misunderstanding of the intent or meaning of something, the hope would be that after explaining this they might see they were wrong. Of course, the opposite could be true as well, and the person who feels offended was correct in their understanding of what was said.
As it pertains to the topic being discussed here, I'm just not sure how anyone could not see that there is no racial basis behind the phrase in question. It's strictly about a mental condition (delirium) caused by the onset of heat stroke while picking cotton (something that is most certainly not exclusive to slaves). That really isn't debatable, it is a fact that this is where the phrase came from and that it predates slavery. Yes, different phrases that use the term "cotton picking" have been used in a racially derogatory manner, specifically towards black slaves, but the various phrases aren't the same and should not preclude the use of a specific term that doesn't inherently imply racial bias.
I think that having a conversation about intent and meaning can do a lot to bridge a gap between two people but outside of straight-up misunderstanding what was said or what happened it's hard for me to imagine someone being "wrong" for being offended.
People live different lives, have different experiences, and develop different feelings about our world. Something that offends someone else might not offend me. That doesn't make either of us wrong, it means we are different people. There are lots of words that don't offend me in the slightest but I know others take offense to so, out of politeness, I don't use those words.
As for the phrase in question: As I said, I was surprised that people were taking offense to this but I can also see how one might. If it's something that might offend someone I have no problem excising it from my vocabulary (it's not like I was using it anyway). That said, I'd still be curious to hear from someone that was actually, personally offended by its use.
My favorite example of the Perpetual Outrage Machine:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/student-dressed-in-a-bacon-outfit-slammed-by-cnn-commentator-for-being-anti-semitic
Should this guy get a new suit to avoid offense to Jews, Muslims and vegetarians?
-
I don't understand people that are trying to defend the use of the term "cotton-picking" as a metaphor. Such a conversation crosses a line of decency.
Lol. Really? Are you going to censor terms like [d—n], For God’s Sake, Holy Cow, and “Jesus Christ” because they’re offensive to Christians? Is talking about their place in our language such an affront that it crosses a line of decency?
This forum does, so...
No one responded to this one. It's ok for the forum to have harsh language rules, but not the NBA?
-
I don't understand people that are trying to defend the use of the term "cotton-picking" as a metaphor. Such a conversation crosses a line of decency.
Lol. Really? Are you going to censor terms like [d—n], For God’s Sake, Holy Cow, and “Jesus Christ” because they’re offensive to Christians? Is talking about their place in our language such an affront that it crosses a line of decency?
This forum does, so...
No one responded to this one. It's ok for the forum to have harsh language rules, but not the NBA?
Profanity, by its nature, is meant to be - at least in many instances - offensive. Also, our rules are clearly laid out, so there’s notice.
Prohibitions on non-profane, non-racist language which lead to financial penalties without notice are different in kind.
-
I don't understand people that are trying to defend the use of the term "cotton-picking" as a metaphor. Such a conversation crosses a line of decency.
Lol. Really? Are you going to censor terms like [d—n], For God’s Sake, Holy Cow, and “Jesus Christ” because they’re offensive to Christians? Is talking about their place in our language such an affront that it crosses a line of decency?
This forum does, so...
No one responded to this one. It's ok for the forum to have harsh language rules, but not the NBA?
Profanity, by its nature, is meant to be - at least in many instances - offensive. Also, our rules are clearly laid out, so there’s notice.
Prohibitions on non-profane, non-racist language which lead to financial penalties without notice are different in kind.
Is it your opinion that the word "D-A-M-N" is more offensive than "cotton-picking"?
-
Westbrook: "Brian's been here for a while, I know him personally, but obviously what he said wasn't OK," Westbrook told reporters in Oklahoma City. "We all understand that."
Brian Davis: "It is with great remorse and humility that I accept this suspension for the insensitive words I used during Wednesday's broadcast," Davis said in a statement. "While unintentional, I understand and acknowledge the gravity of the situation. I offer my sincere apology and realize that, while I committed a lapse in judgment, such mistakes come with consequences. This is an appropriate consequence for my actions."
This is my take as well. Westbrook acknowledges that in 2018, it's not appropriate for a white announcer to state that a black athlete has lost his cotton-picking mind. Davis acknowledges that his words were insensitive.
I see no issues with how any of this has gone down. I'd be shocked if Brian Davis pushes further on the suspension. The optics would be worse than they are now.
-
Westbrook: "Brian's been here for a while, I know him personally, but obviously what he said wasn't OK," Westbrook told reporters in Oklahoma City. "We all understand that."
Brian Davis: "It is with great remorse and humility that I accept this suspension for the insensitive words I used during Wednesday's broadcast," Davis said in a statement. "While unintentional, I understand and acknowledge the gravity of the situation. I offer my sincere apology and realize that, while I committed a lapse in judgment, such mistakes come with consequences. This is an appropriate consequence for my actions."
This is my take as well. Westbrook acknowledges that in 2018, it's not appropriate for a white announcer to state that a black athlete has lost his cotton-picking mind. Davis acknowledges that his words were insensitive.
I see no issues with how any of this has gone down. I'd be shocked if Brian Davis pushes further on the suspension. The optics would be worse than they are now.
just curious, have you ever heard of the Irish slave trade? I just fail to see how slavery is a racial issue since it affected both races
-
I don't understand people that are trying to defend the use of the term "cotton-picking" as a metaphor. Such a conversation crosses a line of decency.
Lol. Really? Are you going to censor terms like [d—n], For God’s Sake, Holy Cow, and “Jesus Christ” because they’re offensive to Christians? Is talking about their place in our language such an affront that it crosses a line of decency?
This forum does, so...
No one responded to this one. It's ok for the forum to have harsh language rules, but not the NBA?
Profanity, by its nature, is meant to be - at least in many instances - offensive. Also, our rules are clearly laid out, so there’s notice.
Prohibitions on non-profane, non-racist language which lead to financial penalties without notice are different in kind.
Is it your opinion that the word "D-A-M-N" is more offensive than "cotton-picking"?
Of course it is.
-
Westbrook: "Brian's been here for a while, I know him personally, but obviously what he said wasn't OK," Westbrook told reporters in Oklahoma City. "We all understand that."
Brian Davis: "It is with great remorse and humility that I accept this suspension for the insensitive words I used during Wednesday's broadcast," Davis said in a statement. "While unintentional, I understand and acknowledge the gravity of the situation. I offer my sincere apology and realize that, while I committed a lapse in judgment, such mistakes come with consequences. This is an appropriate consequence for my actions."
This is my take as well. Westbrook acknowledges that in 2018, it's not appropriate for a white announcer to state that a black athlete has lost his cotton-picking mind. Davis acknowledges that his words were insensitive.
I see no issues with how any of this has gone down. I'd be shocked if Brian Davis pushes further on the suspension. The optics would be worse than they are now.
just curious, have you ever heard of the Irish slave trade? I just fail to see how slavery is a racial issue since it affected both races
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/us/irish-slaves-myth.html
-
I doubt his intention was to offend/be racist
but regardless... what does "out of his cotton picking mind" have to do with that play? doesn't even sound cool
He should be suspended an extra game for saying something that has nothing to with anything
-
Westbrook: "Brian's been here for a while, I know him personally, but obviously what he said wasn't OK," Westbrook told reporters in Oklahoma City. "We all understand that."
Brian Davis: "It is with great remorse and humility that I accept this suspension for the insensitive words I used during Wednesday's broadcast," Davis said in a statement. "While unintentional, I understand and acknowledge the gravity of the situation. I offer my sincere apology and realize that, while I committed a lapse in judgment, such mistakes come with consequences. This is an appropriate consequence for my actions."
This is my take as well. Westbrook acknowledges that in 2018, it's not appropriate for a white announcer to state that a black athlete has lost his cotton-picking mind. Davis acknowledges that his words were insensitive.
I see no issues with how any of this has gone down. I'd be shocked if Brian Davis pushes further on the suspension. The optics would be worse than they are now.
just curious, have you ever heard of the Irish slave trade? I just fail to see how slavery is a racial issue since it affected both races
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/us/irish-slaves-myth.html
come on... Using fake news new york times as a source? The entire article is attempting to rewrite history and calls slaves "indentured servants" in an attempt to act a if the Irish slave trade is a myth. It isn't... they didn't even deny the Irish were slaves. Guessing you used biased Google right here ? Since its the first thing that Google comes up with.
-
I don't understand people that are trying to defend the use of the term "cotton-picking" as a metaphor. Such a conversation crosses a line of decency.
Lol. Really? Are you going to censor terms like [d—n], For God’s Sake, Holy Cow, and “Jesus Christ” because they’re offensive to Christians? Is talking about their place in our language such an affront that it crosses a line of decency?
This forum does, so...
No one responded to this one. It's ok for the forum to have harsh language rules, but not the NBA?
Profanity, by its nature, is meant to be - at least in many instances - offensive. Also, our rules are clearly laid out, so there’s notice.
Prohibitions on non-profane, non-racist language which lead to financial penalties without notice are different in kind.
Is it your opinion that the word "D-A-M-N" is more offensive than "cotton-picking"?
Of course it is.
I guess we will agree to disagree on this topic.
-
Westbrook: "Brian's been here for a while, I know him personally, but obviously what he said wasn't OK," Westbrook told reporters in Oklahoma City. "We all understand that."
Brian Davis: "It is with great remorse and humility that I accept this suspension for the insensitive words I used during Wednesday's broadcast," Davis said in a statement. "While unintentional, I understand and acknowledge the gravity of the situation. I offer my sincere apology and realize that, while I committed a lapse in judgment, such mistakes come with consequences. This is an appropriate consequence for my actions."
This is my take as well. Westbrook acknowledges that in 2018, it's not appropriate for a white announcer to state that a black athlete has lost his cotton-picking mind. Davis acknowledges that his words were insensitive.
I see no issues with how any of this has gone down. I'd be shocked if Brian Davis pushes further on the suspension. The optics would be worse than they are now.
just curious, have you ever heard of the Irish slave trade? I just fail to see how slavery is a racial issue since it affected both races
Ding ding ding. We've got a winner folks.
-
Westbrook: "Brian's been here for a while, I know him personally, but obviously what he said wasn't OK," Westbrook told reporters in Oklahoma City. "We all understand that."
Brian Davis: "It is with great remorse and humility that I accept this suspension for the insensitive words I used during Wednesday's broadcast," Davis said in a statement. "While unintentional, I understand and acknowledge the gravity of the situation. I offer my sincere apology and realize that, while I committed a lapse in judgment, such mistakes come with consequences. This is an appropriate consequence for my actions."
This is my take as well. Westbrook acknowledges that in 2018, it's not appropriate for a white announcer to state that a black athlete has lost his cotton-picking mind. Davis acknowledges that his words were insensitive.
I see no issues with how any of this has gone down. I'd be shocked if Brian Davis pushes further on the suspension. The optics would be worse than they are now.
just curious, have you ever heard of the Irish slave trade? I just fail to see how slavery is a racial issue since it affected both races
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/17/us/irish-slaves-myth.html
come on... Using fake news new york times as a source? The entire article is attempting to rewrite history and calls slaves "indentured servants" in an attempt to act a if the Irish slave trade is a myth. It isn't... they didn't even deny the Irish were slaves. Guessing you used biased Google right here ? Since its the first thing that Google comes up with.
Would you post your sources on the subject?
-
Westbrook: "Brian's been here for a while, I know him personally, but obviously what he said wasn't OK," Westbrook told reporters in Oklahoma City. "We all understand that."
Brian Davis: "It is with great remorse and humility that I accept this suspension for the insensitive words I used during Wednesday's broadcast," Davis said in a statement. "While unintentional, I understand and acknowledge the gravity of the situation. I offer my sincere apology and realize that, while I committed a lapse in judgment, such mistakes come with consequences. This is an appropriate consequence for my actions."
This is my take as well. Westbrook acknowledges that in 2018, it's not appropriate for a white announcer to state that a black athlete has lost his cotton-picking mind. Davis acknowledges that his words were insensitive.
I see no issues with how any of this has gone down. I'd be shocked if Brian Davis pushes further on the suspension. The optics would be worse than they are now.
just curious, have you ever heard of the Irish slave trade? I just fail to see how slavery is a racial issue since it affected both races
You seriously fail to see slavery as a racial issue? Which Klan chapter did you say you belonged to again?
-
Westbrook: "Brian's been here for a while, I know him personally, but obviously what he said wasn't OK," Westbrook told reporters in Oklahoma City. "We all understand that."
Brian Davis: "It is with great remorse and humility that I accept this suspension for the insensitive words I used during Wednesday's broadcast," Davis said in a statement. "While unintentional, I understand and acknowledge the gravity of the situation. I offer my sincere apology and realize that, while I committed a lapse in judgment, such mistakes come with consequences. This is an appropriate consequence for my actions."
This is my take as well. Westbrook acknowledges that in 2018, it's not appropriate for a white announcer to state that a black athlete has lost his cotton-picking mind. Davis acknowledges that his words were insensitive.
I see no issues with how any of this has gone down. I'd be shocked if Brian Davis pushes further on the suspension. The optics would be worse than they are now.
just curious, have you ever heard of the Irish slave trade? I just fail to see how slavery is a racial issue since it affected both races
You seriously fail to see slavery as a racial issue? Which Klan chapter did you say you belonged to again?
I feel like this should be in green font: It's offensive to call someone a Klan member, but it's not offensive to refer to a young black man as "out of their cotton picking mind", and its not offensive to say that slavery isn't a racial issue since it affected both races.
-
I just wish more people looked up the history of irish people being slaves and involved in a slave trade. It happened. Its ironic because the basketball team is the Celtics and a lot of people in new England are Irish descendants, yet they're not aware their people may have been slaves
-
Westbrook: "Brian's been here for a while, I know him personally, but obviously what he said wasn't OK," Westbrook told reporters in Oklahoma City. "We all understand that."
Brian Davis: "It is with great remorse and humility that I accept this suspension for the insensitive words I used during Wednesday's broadcast," Davis said in a statement. "While unintentional, I understand and acknowledge the gravity of the situation. I offer my sincere apology and realize that, while I committed a lapse in judgment, such mistakes come with consequences. This is an appropriate consequence for my actions."
This is my take as well. Westbrook acknowledges that in 2018, it's not appropriate for a white announcer to state that a black athlete has lost his cotton-picking mind. Davis acknowledges that his words were insensitive.
I see no issues with how any of this has gone down. I'd be shocked if Brian Davis pushes further on the suspension. The optics would be worse than they are now.
just curious, have you ever heard of the Irish slave trade? I just fail to see how slavery is a racial issue since it affected both races
You seriously fail to see slavery as a racial issue? Which Klan chapter did you say you belonged to again?
I feel like this should be in green font: It's offensive to call someone a Klan member, but it's not offensive to refer to a young black man as "out of their cotton picking mind", and its not offensive to say that slavery isn't a racial issue since it affected both races.
It should be offensive to call someone a member of the Klan. Hopefully calling someone a member of the Klan is offensive to all but for someone so ignorant that they say slavery is not a racial issue, I am not sure.
-
I just wish more people looked up the history of irish people being slaves and involved in a slave trade. It happened. Its ironic because the basketball team is the Celtics and a lot of people in new England are Irish descendants, yet they're not aware their people may have been slaves
You are completely clouding the issue. There is no denying the historical reality of legitimate oppression and mistreatment of the Irish. It is even reasonable to posit that the indentured servitude under which the Irish suffered was, indeed, a form of slavery.
It is, however, not reasonable to equate it with the system of African chattel slavery which officially deemed black people from Africa as non-humans and used the free labor of these people to build the country’s economy. The legacy of the racism involved in chattel slavery and it’s aftermath is still felt in the US today.