Michael Richards loses it

[Nathans_Dad]

If blacks using the term "nigga" is some sort of reclamation of the term borne from years of oppression, why is it that none of the generation of blacks who actually lived through that oppression don't use the term?

The only blacks that I see walking around calling each other nigga are all 35 or less, my generation. I was born in the 1970s and grew up in the 80s. I never saw a segregated bus, school, bathroom, nothing. This is the generation of affirmative action, yet they are trying to act like they are the generation of slavery.

When will we finally move beyond this?

Oh, by the way, for those of you who think it is unenlightened and ignorant to say that all racial slurs should not be used no matter what your race is I say....BS.

[speeder]

I can't stop thinking about MR, and just what a sick, hateful man he must be to have that stuff right below the surface waiting to come bubbling out. He wasn't even drunk, for chrisakes!

He just seems deeply, deeply disturbed. I actually pity him, he is one tortured individual. Just like Mel Gibson and the Jews, I would bet that blacks never did anything to this guy to explain his bigotry. He is just nucking futs. Unhinged.

[Moneyguy1]

If this idea has been brought up before on this thread (I skipped a couple of pages, sorry....) I would think that most of us have something just under the surface that can erupt, given the right conditions.

Civilization is a thin veneer.

[notfarnow]

True, I have an awful hate on for spaniards & ninjas

[bt1211]

I HATE mimes and musical theater people

[lendaddy]

Does use of the word make you a racist? I mean if you just were so upset with someone (as in this case) that your goal was to insult/belittle them as much as possible as revenge or as an outgrowth of your rage with their actions.......would you not use the most powerful words at your disposal? Even if the words mean nothing to you beyond the effect they have on the person you targeted?

It could be a simple matter of rage not racism.

[tabs]

I find it offensive for anybody to address myself as anything but "your Worship."

[speeder]

Originally posted by lendaddy
Does use of the word make you a racist? I mean if you just were so upset with someone (as in this case) that your goal was to insult/belittle them as much as possible as revenge or as an outgrowth of your rage with their actions.......would you not use the most powerful words at your disposal? Even if the words mean nothing to you beyond the effect they have on the person you targeted?

It could be a simple matter of rage not racism.

I am going to agree w/ this up to a point, people definitely say things they don't really mean in anger. Also, none of us are perfect people and there is a little (or a lot) of bigotry and racism under the surface of most people if you scratched the surface hard enough. Like someone said above, we are civilised people which means that we keep that beast in the cage. Until it gets out. There are white people, for instance, that would never use the N word under normal circumstances but if they just got car-jacked by a black criminal, it would come out. (The word). I'll give a better example; you just lost your GF who you are totally whipped over to a black guy. Oh yeah. Mr. hippy-dippy sensitive vegan PITA guy all the sudden sounds like Tarantino when that happens. But no matter what ethnicity the guy who stole your girl is, you are going to say horrible things about him, whatever fits. If this example does not ring true, use your imagination for some outrage.

The problem w/ M. Richards was that the guy was merely heckling him, and after Richards started it. (The black guys were talking during his stand-up routine). It was so unproportional to whatever imagined offense occurred, just insane. To pull out the most hateful word in the english language when used directly by a white person against a black one, and scream it repeatedly w/ some lynching references thrown in, lets face it, there is no rational explanation or excuse for it. And he did not just hurt the guy(s) he was arguing with, there was a whole room full of black people there!! Un-*******-believable. (I'm assuming here, but the Laugh Factory usually has a pretty black crowd).

So under different circumstances I could understand, (if not condone), his using that word, this would not fall under that heading for me. Unless of course he was insane, in which case it all makes kooky sense.

[nostatic]

I guess one can call 'bs' on anything but imho unenlightened is unenlightened, narrow minded is narrow minded, and lack of empathy is lack of empathy. doesn't surprise me a bit that people can't see it. you can't see what you don't have or don't understand.

ymmv. apply only to affected area. for external use only.

some people see their own issues and can begin to address them. others think they don't have any issues...

[Nathans_Dad]

I'm happy with my blinders on Nostatic. Leave me alone so I can be a closed minded neocon...

[Seahawk]

Originally posted by nostatic
I guess one can call 'bs' on anything but imho unenlightened is unenlightened, narrow minded is narrow minded, and lack of empathy is lack of empathy. doesn't surprise me a bit that people can't see it. you can't see what you don't have or don't understand.

ymmv. apply only to affected area. for external use only.

some people see their own issues and can begin to address them. others think they don't have any issues...

And I guess you have the definition of the unenlightened all to yourself...as well as narrow minded. Nice work if you can get it.

Dude, you so have got to get over your hubris...no kidding. Having an opinion at variance to yours is not unenlightened...and spare me your "you can't see or understand" gradu.

[K. Roman]

Seahawk. Knows what's up.

[nostatic]

Originally posted by Seahawk
And I guess you have the definition of the unenlightened all to yourself...as well as narrow minded. Nice work if you can get it.

Dude, you so have got to get over your hubris...no kidding. Having an opinion at variance to yours is not unenlightened...and spare me your "you can't see or understand" gradu.

Did I say I was enlightened? Nope. I'm pretty flawed. But at least I can admit it.

I said "imho". Not the truth, but the way I see it. And I call it like I see it. It is pretty obvious to me who thinks what around here, and what their background is, and what their biases are. I'm unenlightened in a number of areas but I'm working on it. I don't automatically assume variance=unelightened. But in this case I do. Sorry, but I think I have an understanding of the dynamics, and some here either choose to ignore them, or don't have exerperience with them or refuse to open themselves to the possibility.

Some people insist on having a very digital view of this, and insist on equivalence. For them to continue to do so even when people directly affected by this debate say otherwise is pretty telling. But ymmv.

Call me what you want. And I'll bow out because if you don't get it or don't want to get it then you won't. You can call it hubris. I call it reality. My reality. And you don't have to live in it. Just like I don't have to live in yours. But sadly I think that one of our realities perpetuates the problem and the other tries to understand it. Of course we disagree on which one's which

[nostatic]

Here is the bottom line, said to me by a minority friend of mine:

"Many people don't have any idea how much power and privilege their whiteness gives them."

I suppose that some of you don't think that is the case...

[lendaddy]

Originally posted by nostatic
Here is the bottom line, said to me by a minority friend of mine:

"Many people don't have any idea how much power and privilege their whiteness gives them."

I suppose that some of you don't think that is the case...

Did he used to be white?


That was kind of a joke, but not entirely.

[Seahawk]

Originally posted by nostatic
Did I say I was enlightened? Nope. I'm pretty flawed. But at least I can admit it.

I said "imho". Not the truth, but the way I see it. And I call it like I see it. It is pretty obvious to me who thinks what around here, and what their background is, and what their biases are. I'm unenlightened in a number of areas but I'm working on it. I don't automatically assume variance=unelightened. But in this case I do. Sorry, but I think I have an understanding of the dynamics, and some here either choose to ignore them, or don't have exerperience with them or refuse to open themselves to the possibility.

Some people insist on having a very digital view of this, and insist on equivalence. For them to continue to do so even when people directly affected by this debate say otherwise is pretty telling. But ymmv.

Call me what you want. And I'll bow out because if you don't get it or don't want to get it then you won't. You can call it hubris. I call it reality. My reality. And you don't have to live in it. Just like I don't have to live in yours. But sadly I think that one of our realities perpetuates the problem and the other tries to understand it. Of course we disagree on which one's which

I have found over the years there is little solice in pointing fingers. So I don't...no one, least of all me, called you a thing.

I was raised in an family that tried to see people as they are, regardless of color, you either get that or not. We are endeavoring to raise our children in the same manner.

My post had nothing to do with Richards, rather your innate inability to see the grey areas you so cherish in the thoughts of those who dissagree with you.

YMMV as well.

[dd74]

The truth is all of us are racists. As enlightened as we want to be, we simply cannot get beyond our tribal and/or protective instincts of our own.

Sure, you may be appalled by the thought of putting on a white hood and robe and participating in a lynching. But if your daughter brought home a gang banger/hip hop/rapper type that had as many rings, hooks, and barbs in his face as Denis Rodman, and a (perceived) bad attitude at that, racism might very well kick in. And who is to say one's at fault if it does?

Protection of loved ones vs. racial enlightenment? I don't know, that's a very hard call, IMO.

[VaSteve]

Originally posted by speeder
I am going to agree w/ this up to a point, people definitely say things they don't really mean in anger. Also, none of us are perfect people and there is a little (or a lot) of bigotry and racism under the surface of most people if you scratched the surface hard enough. Like someone said above, we are civilised people which means that we keep that beast in the cage. Until it gets out..................

The problem w/ M. Richards was that the guy was merely heckling him, and after Richards started it. (The black guys were talking during his stand-up routine). It was so unproportional to whatever imagined offense occurred, just insane. To pull out the most hateful word in the english language when used directly by a white person against a black one, and scream it repeatedly w/ some lynching references thrown in, lets face it, there is no rational explanation or excuse for it. And he did not just hurt the guy(s) he was arguing with, there was a whole room full of black people there!! Un-*******-believable. (I'm assuming here, but the Laugh Factory usually has a pretty black crowd).

So under different circumstances I could understand, (if not condone), his using that word, this would not fall under that heading for me. Unless of course he was insane, in which case it all makes kooky sense.

Ever seen anyone (or yourself) get pissed at someone, maybe your girl or whatever and just unleash? Say all kinds of **** you don't mean, just to "win" the arguement? Ever been embarassed? Someone ever some to your job and tell you in front of a whole bunch of other people that you're no good at it? Repeatedly? Might be just a little frustrating, might make you really mad. Combine the these two things and this it probably what you've got happening here.

It's not like you can go through life not knowing that word and what it means and it's not supposed to be used. I could see MR getting mad and not winning against this heckler. Something snaps and stuff like this comes out. When you release the flood gates you're in it to win it, taboo/inappropriate or not.

Based on my understanding I don't think this one is like the Mel Gibson thing at all...certainly that was unprovoked and clearly didn't make sense.

[nostatic]

Originally posted by Seahawk

My post had nothing to do with Richards, rather your innate inability to see the grey areas you so cherish in the thoughts of those who dissagree with you.

YMMV as well.

Actually I don't think that is the case (mmdv). I was responding directly to those that argue that racist remarks are all equivalent. I see plenty of gray. I understand the desire to have equivalent be the case. But it just isn't. White privilege exists. Whether you notice it or not. I'm sure you are doing a great job with your kids. I'm doing the same with mine. But I also recognize that I'm racist and have biases that I am passing on to my son.

Until you recognize it, you can't address it. Until you address it you can't fix it.

[the]

Originally posted by dd74
The truth is all of us are racists. As enlightened as we want to be, we simply cannot get beyond our tribal and/or protective instincts of our own.

Sure, you may be appalled by the thought of putting on a white hood and robe and participating in a lynching. But if your daughter brought home a gang banger/hip hop/rapper type that had as many rings, hooks, and barbs in his face as Denis Rodman, and a (perceived) bad attitude at that, racism might very well kick in. And who is to say one's at fault if it does?

Protection of loved ones vs. racial enlightenment? I don't know, that's a very hard call, IMO.

That's too mixed up.

If a nice white girl brought home a WHITE "gang banger/hip hop/rapper type that had as many rings, hooks, and barbs in his face as Denis Rodman, and a (perceived) bad attitude at that" the parents aren't going to be happy. Of course.

The more interesting question is, what would the parents think if the daughter brought home a clean cut, well-educated, well-spoken black man?

My guess is that most parent would *prefer* the girl brought home a clean cut, well-educated, well-spoken white man.

Is that racism? I don't know. Or is it the parents just wanting what's easist for their daughter, and a mixed race couple isn't the easiest thing in society. May not be right, and it's better than in the past, but still not the easist.

Also, this isn't only a black white thing. I can tell you for a fact, most current Korean parents would want their 25 year old daughter to bring home a nice Korean boy. Not black, white, Chinese, etc. Korean.

Is that racist?

My very smart roommate in college, who happened to be black, I know his parents preferred he meet a nice black girl. Would they try to forbid him to see gals of other races? No. But all things being equal, they would admit they preferred he stayed within his race. Racist?

It really does start to get complicated.