tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post116420616299619607..comments2023-10-16T06:10:24.969-04:00Comments on Julie Unplugged: Colin Cowherd, Dan Patrick: Cutting Edge Social CommentaryAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00088119765077193302noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post-1164239533732502932006-11-22T18:52:00.000-05:002006-11-22T18:52:00.000-05:00Ha! We keep talking.Twould be easier over coffee a...Ha! We keep talking.Twould be easier over coffee and chocolate cake.<BR/><BR/>When we meet a white male we don't like, we don't judge all white males by the bad example. That's what I was saying. We tend to see white males individually. Minority populations are often evaluated as a group.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00088119765077193302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post-1164236515633391822006-11-22T18:01:00.000-05:002006-11-22T18:01:00.000-05:00Got you "A" point.B. Is it possible to have the ri...Got you "A" point.<BR/><BR/>B. Is it possible to have the rights of the majority without having to look like the majority?<BR/><BR/>For instance, white men come in a variety of personalities - lazy, hard-working, well-dressed, slobs, preoccupied with hobbies, obssessed with money, faithful to their spouses, unfaithful, partiers, highly educated and so on. We don't generalize for men. We take them as individuals, for the most part.<BR/><BR/>Women, as they've sought rights, have had the challenge of becoming equally respected to men but at times are disrespected for not being like the "best" of men (in business or other more traditionally male-centric fields). What is it to be your own female person in what has been a man's world?<BR/><BR/>Gays and blacks are always facing this very dilemma. When can they be individuals rather than a group? Do I think when I see a whitemale who is a drunk that he reflects badly on all white males? No. But somehow, black ganstas reflect badly on blacks as a whole, or gay pride overly sexual men reflect badly on all gay men. See what I mean?<BR/><BR/>I agree that seeing individuals is probably the best antidote in our individual lives - really knowing people one by one and letting that change us. Secondly, reading the writings of those who want rights and opportunities for their communities is the best way to become informed about what the issues are for the collective perceptions of those communities. It's a both/and I think.<BR/><BR/>JulieAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00088119765077193302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post-1164233241236263892006-11-22T17:07:00.000-05:002006-11-22T17:07:00.000-05:00Tia, I should have clarified. When I said "irratio...Tia, I should have clarified. When I said "irrational" I was meaning if they lumped you in with a stereotype of women as irrational.<BR/><BR/>I am not trying to say that all the problems blacks have are the result of whites. I am saying that whites tend to underappreciate how they continue to assume that their way of living is the norm to which blacks ought to aspire. Did you ever see Tupac: Resurrection? I recommend it for a different view on what gansta represents to blacks.<BR/><BR/>I got what you said about gays and I understood it was from the point of view of gay men. What I was trying to share was a different perspective fromm within the gay community.<BR/><BR/>Similar to blacks, there are those who want to be mainstream asdefined by the hetero community and there are those who feel that they are capitulating to have to conform. The debates within both gay and black communities often have to do with how to resolve their particular identities as minority populations in a world governed by hetero or white populations.<BR/><BR/>My only point was that I think we forget that when we make blanket statements, we are speaking from an assumption that says how we see the world ought to be the normative way to exist in it and we will accept those different from us the more they resemble us.<BR/><BR/>JulieAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00088119765077193302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post-1164226986734741182006-11-22T15:23:00.000-05:002006-11-22T15:23:00.000-05:00Btw, your comments about homosexuals fall into a s...Btw, your comments about homosexuals fall into a similar category. Many of the activists see their overt expressions of sexuality as a way to defy the norms set by heterosexuals as though those norms ought to apply to all, as though their norms are right for all.<BR/><BR/>I don't enjoy the thought of a gay pride parade (though I have never been to one), but I also don't like the way the larger group defines what it means to be "acceptable."Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00088119765077193302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post-1164224117225548192006-11-22T14:35:00.000-05:002006-11-22T14:35:00.000-05:00Tia, if men repeatedly said, "She's fairly rationa...Tia, if men repeatedly said, "She's fairly rational" as if that was a surprising occurance, wouldn't you feel that they were expecting you to not be, to be irrational as though their idea of rationality is the basis on which to judge you?<BR/><BR/>I heard Joe Namath the other day interviewed and I could hardly understand him. But I didn't assume that was because he's white. He just had a hard time articulating his words for whatever reason.<BR/><BR/>The danger in saying, "He's well-spoken" is that whites are putting themselves in the seat of evaluation and to what purpose? Why do we need to comment on it at all? It can become a subtle way of letting the black community know what we think it takes to be on par with us... as though we are the norm to aspire to.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00088119765077193302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post-1164221484709731312006-11-22T13:51:00.000-05:002006-11-22T13:51:00.000-05:00Ish, duh, thanks. Brain dead moment. :)Corrected o...Ish, duh, thanks. Brain dead moment. :)<BR/><BR/>Corrected on the blog with credit to you.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00088119765077193302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post-1164221206400577192006-11-22T13:46:00.000-05:002006-11-22T13:46:00.000-05:00Julie,Michael Irvin was a WR, not an RB. :-) I d...Julie,<BR/><BR/>Michael Irvin was a WR, not an RB. :-) <BR/><BR/>I didn't see anything else that I could contribute to the conversation as pretty much everyone is saying what I was thinking while reading.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post-1164215721991020722006-11-22T12:15:00.000-05:002006-11-22T12:15:00.000-05:00I think the nuance Colin emphasized was that no ap...I think the nuance Colin emphasized was that no apology takes those comments back. They are there regardless.<BR/><BR/>And like you, I don't know what makes that apology adequate since the reamrks weren't directed at me or my race.<BR/><BR/>Racism is not acceptable (as the example of Michael Irvin's remarks also show). But in comedy, I think Colin was trying to point out that black comedians are operating by a different standard asthey findways to cope with the memory of systematic oppression as opposed to Richards using dominance during a racist era as a way to discredit a heckler.<BR/><BR/>Bob, I like your idea of how the apology would have played as more sincere - a genuine apology to the offended ones, rather than a general one to a TV audience.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00088119765077193302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post-1164214757775100902006-11-22T11:59:00.000-05:002006-11-22T11:59:00.000-05:00It is not my place to comment on whether Michael R...It is not my place to comment on whether Michael Richards' apology was <I>adequate</I> or not. However, there are two notions with which I would disagree. The first notion is that there are things for which no expression of sorrow, no matter how heartfelt and sincere, can make up. I agree, once something is said it can never be taken back, but it can be repented for. Repentance, even when used in a non-religious context, implies an intention to correct the offensive behavior.<BR/>The second notion I would challenge is that racism in any form is acceptable, even if it is black people making racist comments about white people. Of course, what is considered racist in any given context is open to interpretation.Dcn Scott Dodgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09994604395739905637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9684236.post-1164211513755479092006-11-22T11:05:00.000-05:002006-11-22T11:05:00.000-05:00This ..."That level of racism cannot be tolerated,...This ...<BR/><BR/>"That level of racism cannot be tolerated, nor can it be taken back through an apology."<BR/><BR/>... is especially true when we are talking about a generic apology. Possibly if Richards went to the individuals (I saw two of them on the Today Show) involved, and confessed his "sin" to them, the apology might come across a bit more authentic? A very difficult thing to do but it could be life-changing for Richards and others involved.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com