Stop playing around with serious stuff like this
August 5, 2013 9:56 AM   Subscribe

Since the Riley Cooper story broke last week, writer Khalid Salaam has "had an angel on one shoulder and the devil on the other" about how to react.

The Eagles wide receiver is in trouble after using the word "Nigger" maliciously during an altercation at a Kenny Chesney concert, a video of which was then posted online. He very quickly apologized publicly but many (including Philly's mayor) are calling for the team to let him go.
posted by Potomac Avenue (267 comments total) 6 users marked this as a favorite
 
Note: video NSFW obviously due to words.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 9:57 AM on August 5, 2013


I can't imagine what it would be like to be in that locker room after this incident. Maybe let the guys vote or something, but I don't think this guy is worth the headache.
posted by Mister_A at 10:03 AM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Gotta say Mr. Salaam and I are in complete agreement here.
posted by Benny Andajetz at 10:05 AM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


I think because this was the first time something like this happened with him his excuse free apology and fine and sensitivity training are enough for now. This team gave a dog torturer another shot, they can give Cooper another shot. I can easily understand why the public and teammates might disagree though.

Anyway, the NFL looks like shit on racial issues because of that large elephant in the room in Washington. They should set a better example for their players and the kids they are marketing to.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:06 AM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


This team gave a dog torturer another shot, they can give Cooper another shot.

There's a difference between dogs and black people.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:07 AM on August 5, 2013 [32 favorites]


Anyway, the NFL looks like shit on racial issues because of that large elephant in the room in Washington.

Well, that and the institutional racism that led to the establishment of a formal rule mandating a token interview for any senior vacancy.
posted by Etrigan at 10:10 AM on August 5, 2013


that's a really good article by Khalid Salaam.

Black people can say it and that’s fine by my standards. I don’t care who that bothers. I’m not a hypocrite, I’m a black man and I’m taking control of this narrative.

Awesome.
posted by sweetkid at 10:10 AM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


There's a difference between dogs and black people.

That's true, if you look like you're mean to dogs an NFL team will drop you.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:11 AM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


This team gave a dog torturer another shot, they can give Cooper another shot.

Or perhaps both should have been immediately fireable offenses.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:12 AM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


There's a difference between dogs and black people.

And between physical torture and killing and racial slurs. And between doing something terrible once while drunk and doing it in an organized fashion over months. The point is, use of racial slurs and dog torture are things that are way, way outside of acceptability and the Eagles have established they believe in second chances even for such things.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:12 AM on August 5, 2013 [42 favorites]


Damn. He didn't just pronounce the -er, he put something extra on that -er too.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:13 AM on August 5, 2013


altercation at a Kenny Chesney concert

Yet another example of violence in white culture.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 10:13 AM on August 5, 2013 [33 favorites]


I must confess that when I heard the incident happened at the Kenny Chesney concert that clinched it for me.

On the other hand, as a Giants fan, having a knucklehead like this on the archrival team may not be all that bad.
posted by Mister_A at 10:16 AM on August 5, 2013


That was a great piece.

Anyone can say it. White, Latino, Asian, Native American, Scientologist, whatever. Go ahead and say it, but overstand something important. The black people you say it around may decide, rather arbitrarily and without hesitation, to the push the escalate button.

Exactly. You can say whatever you want, but you don't get to say it without consequences. Welcome to free speech.
posted by rtha at 10:16 AM on August 5, 2013 [31 favorites]


Data point: I have been to a Kenny Chesney concert, in RFK stadium, former home of the Washington [FOOTBALL TEAM] and there were lots of people of many different races there jamming out / drinking $8 Landshark out of buckets and so forth. Very chill environment. Don't blame Kenny I don't think, is all I'm saying, except in the "payback for banning GoGo venues from everywhere for 20 years" sense, which totally fair enough actually.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:17 AM on August 5, 2013


The guy next to him was all smiley, then like, woah, wha? I'm kinda gonna get in your face a bit.
posted by symbioid at 10:20 AM on August 5, 2013



Anyone can say it. White, Latino, Asian, Native American, Scientologist, whatever. Go ahead and say it, but overstand something important.


I'd never heard the word "overstand" before. Turns out it is used in rasta culture?

I still don't understand (haha) that usage in this context though.
posted by sweetkid at 10:20 AM on August 5, 2013


Sweetkid: It's a conscious hip hop term. Shorthand for "acquire a holistic knowledge of something"
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:26 AM on August 5, 2013 [11 favorites]


ah cool!
posted by sweetkid at 10:26 AM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


From: Tom Ley
To: [Redacted]

And it's clearly Riley Cooper? If the video quality is good, we'd definitely be interested in posting it. Are you looking for payment?
From: [Redacted]
To: Tom Ley

Ya we were seeing what people offer.

Sent from my iPhone
From: Tom Ley
To: [Redacted]

Got it. We would be willing to offer $23.17.


I'm mostly interested in Deadspin's incredibly precise hot tip pricing system. I can understand the $23 offer, but the 17 cents? Was it the cutoff flannel that did it?
posted by Think_Long at 10:29 AM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


I'd never heard the word "overstand" before. Turns out it is used in rasta culture?

From the very link you provided:

"when they absorb and correctly perceive an idea they “Overstand” it."

Seems pretty clear, no? "Go ahead and say it, but overstand something important" - "Go ahead and say it, but absorb and correctly perceive something important".
posted by VikingSword at 10:31 AM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


yea apparently Deadspin has a tradition of offering random non-round amounts of money.

$23 seems so cheap to me though for all the pageviews.
posted by sweetkid at 10:31 AM on August 5, 2013


Seems pretty clear, no? "Go ahead and say it, but overstand something important" - "Go ahead and say it, but absorb and correctly perceive something important".

I understand it now, thanks. I had the perception that it meant something more like "advocate this point of view" which didn't seem to be what the author was really meaning, but Potomac Avenue's second link made the meaning clear.

So no need to bang on about it, I misunderstood the explanation in the first link and am all clear now.
posted by sweetkid at 10:34 AM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


I'm sorry, I didn't see PA's post. I did not intend to "bang" on anything. So no need to get snippy over someone's attempt to clear up something you asked for an explanation for. Thanks anyway.
posted by VikingSword at 10:37 AM on August 5, 2013


Quit with the banging or I'll jump the fence and fight all of you regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:40 AM on August 5, 2013 [7 favorites]


Yes, the Eagles should immediately release this man, and work diligently to return the team to its moral high ground of old: cheering serious injuries to rival players, and throwing batteries at Santa Claus.
posted by Mayor West at 10:42 AM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


Looks like you bit off more than you can chew Im one of those fish robots.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 10:42 AM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


No Koalas. I don't fuck with Koalas.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:44 AM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Yes, snowballs at Santa in 1968 is clearly relevant to this event.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:46 AM on August 5, 2013


Exactly. You can say whatever you want, but you don't get to say it without consequences. Welcome to free speech.

Well, the problem with this as a principle is that it justifies too much. Just like the statement "if you can't do the time don't do the time" provides no guidance as to what "time" is appropriate for what "crime," the question here is what the appropriate consequences are--moral condemnation? Fine? Suspension? Termination?
posted by dsfan at 10:46 AM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Yes, the Eagles should immediately release this man, and work diligently to return the team to its moral high ground of old: cheering serious injuries to rival players, and throwing batteries at Santa Claus.

I hate to have to point this out but, there is a difference between fans and the actual organization, you know?

And the batteries were thrown at JD Drew by fans at a Phillies game. The Phillies play baseball.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:50 AM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


The Phillies play baseball.

Sure. That's what they want you to think....
posted by Floydd at 10:53 AM on August 5, 2013 [14 favorites]


I think I've lost my mind if we're living in a world where drunkenly dropping the N word and then apologizing profusely (and, sure, transparently) is worse than the systematic torture and abuse of animals (for profit).

Are we really in that world? People do all kinds of amazingly stupid shit while drunk and I don't think hanging this guy by a cross is really a responsible or proportionate response.
posted by xmutex at 10:54 AM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


I think I've lost my mind if we're living in a world where drunkenly dropping the N word and then apologizing profusely (and, sure, transparently) is worse than the systematic torture and abuse of animals (for profit).

We are not. Vick served time in prison. Cooper will not.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 10:58 AM on August 5, 2013 [27 favorites]


hanging this guy by a cross

really. ugh why do people keep thinking it is OK to make comments like this in threads about systemic racism against black people (see also Trayvon Martin/Zimmerman).

Think carefully when you talk about hanging.
posted by sweetkid at 11:01 AM on August 5, 2013 [18 favorites]


I think I've lost my mind if we're living in a world where drunkenly dropping the N word and then apologizing profusely (and, sure, transparently) is worse than the systematic torture and abuse of animals (for profit).

You don't just up and say something like that randomly because you're drunk, and certainly not if you're a full-grown person. It's informed by years of prejudice, to say nothing of the centuries of violence inherent in its use by a white guy. His general demeanor when saying it was pretty fucked up, too.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:02 AM on August 5, 2013 [15 favorites]


People do all kinds of amazingly stupid shit while drunk and I don't think hanging this guy by a cross is really a responsible or proportionate response.

People do amazingly stupid stuff, but I don't know if this is what is bothersome. What's bothersome is not that it's stupid to use racial slurs, but that it seems to reveal what kind of a person lurks underneath. In vino veritas. You have a multi-racial team, and here's a guy who has horrible ideas about his teammates. How is this going to affect the team spirit? I don't know what the response should be, but this is not just about a word.
posted by VikingSword at 11:02 AM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


really. ugh why do people keep thinking it is OK to make comments like this in threads about systemic racism against black people (see also Trayvon Martin/Zimmerman).


Oh for crying out loud, use of the term 'crucified' to describe extraordinary punishment has nothing to do with lynching.
posted by dsfan at 11:05 AM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


really. ugh why do people keep thinking it is OK to make comments like this in threads about systemic racism against black people (see also Trayvon Martin/Zimmerman).

Well, it'd be moreso nailing.
posted by xmutex at 11:05 AM on August 5, 2013


I have been drunk and I have been with a lot of drunk people and in none of those times did anybody say the n-word, let alone use it as a pejorative.

Also: Well, the problem with this as a principle is that it justifies too much.

I am not using it as justification. I am describing reality as I live in it, and I was also specifically referring to Salaam's description of what one might encounter should one be a non-black person using the word in the presence of black people. It's up to the NFL (in this case) to decide how heavy (or not) to come down on this guy.
posted by rtha at 11:06 AM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


And between physical torture and killing and racial slurs.

Speaking only for a myself, as black guy, the comparison is troubling because a lot of those actions were done to black people in America, for any imagined or real slight, over a several centuries That those physical abuses have mostly gone away doesn't mean all is well in race relations in America, which we can probably all agree on.

Using 'nigger' in the manner that Cooper did calls up all those previous brutal acts that were a way of life for blacks in America. Adding the comparison of Michael Vicks's tortured dogs just puts more fuel on an unnecessary fire.

And between doing something terrible once while drunk and doing it in an organized fashion over months. The point is, use of racial slurs and dog torture are things that are way, way outside of acceptability and the Eagles have established they believe in second chances even for such things.

Yes, Vick got a second chance, after a huge public outcry and jail time.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:07 AM on August 5, 2013 [10 favorites]


yea, I don't see how the two incidents are comparable at all.
posted by sweetkid at 11:09 AM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


I see where you are coming from BB, but Vick's presence on the team is an unavoidable part of this story. He is the team leader of Cooper's team and was one of the first people in front of the cameras when the story broke, noting his own mistakes in the past. (And his idiot brother is making himself a part of the story too which makes it even more difficult to avoid addressing Mike) But yes, I do understand what you are saying about why the comparison is troubling.

“I forgave him,” said Vick, according to USA Today.

“What if your son or daughter made a mistake of this factor? How would you want people to perceive it? I’ve been there before,” Vick said.

posted by Drinky Die at 11:14 AM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


You don't just up and say something like that randomly because you're drunk, and certainly not if you're a full-grown person. It's informed by years of prejudice, to say nothing of the centuries of violence inherent in its use by a white guy.

I think making him out to be a Secret Racist is maybe (maybe) a little over the top. Sometimes, when you're having a fight with someone and/or are drunk, you're just looking to hurt the other person, and using that word to an African-American is pretty damn hurtful even if you're in no way a racist. I'm not saying that Riley Cooper absolutely isn't a racist, but I don't think this proves that he is absolutely is one either.
posted by Etrigan at 11:17 AM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


I have been drunk and I have been with a lot of drunk people and in none of those times did anybody say the n-word, let alone use it as a pejorative.

Where'd you grow up? Chances are if you grew up in Oklahoma like Mr. Copper you might have at one time or another been in the presence of drunk racist hillbillies who may from some dark depths uttered some stupid shit they've had ingrained in them from like generations of racist hillbillies. It certainly doesn't make anything right but it provides some context around a situation in which bottled up nonsense (or, quite possibly, stuff you might have once believed no longer) can come popping out when such a person is, well, really drunk.

It's possible Mr. Cooper was once a racist and due to his time in college and the NFL and the general wider world came to realize these ideas he had were wrong. Then alcohol and testosterone combined and some shit slipped out. It's also possible that he's a defiant undercover racist. I have no idea.
posted by xmutex at 11:20 AM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


I don't think this proves that he is absolutely is one either.

Well Christ, what would it take, then?

Put me on the list of people for whom the fact that Cooper was drunk doesn't mean shit. And neither does the fact that he's from Oklahoma. I'm from Nebraska myself. I can't say that I've never heard people from here use that kind of language, but I can say straight up that the people who did were absolutely racist.
posted by Ipsifendus at 11:37 AM on August 5, 2013 [22 favorites]


I don't think this proves that he is absolutely is one either.

Well Christ, what would it take, then?


More than one drunken outburst.

Put me on the list of people for whom the fact that Cooper was drunk doesn't mean shit.

So noted. Some of the rest of us feel that it is at least a mitigating circumstance when judging the entire person.
posted by Etrigan at 11:46 AM on August 5, 2013


I grew up mostly in Boston, which has no shortage of people happy to use the n-word, and have lived with and been drunk with people from all over the U.S.
posted by rtha at 11:47 AM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


And between doing something terrible once while drunk and doing it in an organized fashion over months.

I'm normally not a huge fan of the whole "drunk words are sober thoughts" line of thinking, what with being a drunken asshole who has said and done some bizarre shit... But I think this is a PERFECT example of when that's true. This sounds exactly like something someone would think all the time, but know that they can only say around the right people when no one else is looking. Which leads me to...

I think making him out to be a Secret Racist is maybe (maybe) a little over the top. Sometimes, when you're having a fight with someone and/or are drunk, you're just looking to hurt the other person, and using that word to an African-American is pretty damn hurtful even if you're in no way a racist. I'm not saying that Riley Cooper absolutely isn't a racist, but I don't think this proves that he is absolutely is one either.

Etrigan, I normally really like you... But can you quit this apologist "maybe it isn't as bad as it seems" crap? I've seen this exact "well maybe he was just trying to say the most hurtful thing possible" argument used before in much more egregious situations, and its just like... No.

I don't think it's "over the top" to say that busting out the n bomb while angry is evidence of a true racist, because it communicates a lot when used that way. It's pretty much saying "and now you're acting like everything I hate, exactly like the fucked up image of you and everyone like you I have in my head". No non black, but especially white dude mindlessly uses that term in the modern day and age without know what it means. It's pretty much taught to you since a very young age that you don't say it just like you don't put your hand on the stove burner. That's taught to you before you even really know what it means.

The type of person who uses it this way was raised in the opposite direction, by racists. The kind of people who teach their kids "black people act like this, and that's why we call them the n word". His drunken mind did the same thing it always did, which is go "oh wow, look, another n word being an n word". This time he just actually said it.

To you it may seem like an over reaction or reaching to call him a racist. But I see it as tiresome apologia and reaching to think that he isn't. I just have a clippy-esque reaction to this where my brain goes "oh, it looks like you're a racist. How can I get away from you now that I've realized you're an awful person?" Automatically when I see them do something like this.

"Just because you said something racist doesn't mean you're racist" isn't a defense and doesn't actually parse. Doing or saying something racist is like, the definition of being a racist. Or at least a huge part of it.

Defending this dude here seems like an outreach of another gross thing too, which is almost a geek social fallacy thing but I see it all over in society. That accusing someone of being a racist or a sexist or something, and them having to deal with that great injustice because "oh god what if they're innocent and you just tarred them!" Is a greater concern than them actually having been a racist or a molester or whatever.

This dude entered the grey zone of "possibly, but really quite likely a racist" and deserves whatever he gets. Say something shitty, deal with the consequences.

This is like the verbal equivalent of a DUI. He ran someone over so to speak, and he deserves what he gets. It goes deeper than that though since this isn't just a shitty drunk slip up as far as I'm concerned, it really does point to something rotten much deeper IMO.
posted by emptythought at 11:47 AM on August 5, 2013 [19 favorites]


I think it kind of is what it seems.

I've never said that word - not sober, not falling-down drunk, not referring to someone else's use of the word. I have never even felt tempted to use that word. I have no frame of reference where it is just something that "naturally" bubbles to the surface.

At the same time, though, I do think that there is a strong piece of Khalid Salaam's article that does bother me. He says that people want to know if they can say the N-word. I don't think I've known anyone where that is the case. But I do know people of all races who think that the time for that word is done - that it has never been a good word, that it will never be a good word, and no amount of "reclamation" can make it a good word. That's the only "confused questioning" I have seen.
posted by corb at 11:54 AM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


The type of person who uses it this way was raised in the opposite direction, by racists. The kind of people who teach their kids "black people act like this, and that's why we call them the n word". His drunken mind did the same thing it always did, which is go "oh wow, look, another n word being an n word". This time he just actually said it.

I dunno, his family has expressed a ton of disappointment and "We didn't raise him this way." sentiments. Of course, very few racists will just come out and admit it but it may be a leap to blame the family here. Young male culture even outside of subgroups like jocks has all kinds of problems with this sort of racist or homophobic or sexist language and it often comes from peers rather than parents. Now, this is a grown ass man and not a kid on X-Box so there is no excuse there either way.

The Philadelphia Eagles wide receiver spoke with his grandmother Betty and was just as accountable as he was in his public comments this week. If he was looking for a shoulder to cry on, though, he didn’t find one in her.

“[Riley] brought it upon himself,” Betty told TMZ. “And he has to deal with the consequences.”

posted by Drinky Die at 11:55 AM on August 5, 2013


People here are ignoring the context. He didn't 'accidently' 'slip' and refer to a black guy as a 'nigger'. He didn't shake his black friend's hand and say 'my nigga!'. He didn't quote a rap lyric.

This guy was boasting that he was going to surmount a barrier and physically harm black people because they are black.

This guy said 'nigger' while threatening to physically attack black people.

This isn't a slip of the tounge, or him revealing his 'redneck' roots, its him using the worst racial slur in a threat. I don't know how one can construe that to not be racist.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:56 AM on August 5, 2013 [26 favorites]


I'm reminded of the Michael Richards thing, when someone asked Chris Rock if he thought Michael Richards is racist, he replied "Of COURSE he's racist! He got on stage at a club and said 'nigger' into a microphone, what does he have to do to be considered racist, shoot Medgar Evers?"

As a white person, I don't get the apologia for it; the biggest obstacle not being "allowed" to say "nigger" (or even "nigga", which is TOTALLY different guys, especially when white people say it!!1 /sarcasm) is it's awkward quoting rap lyrics.
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 11:57 AM on August 5, 2013 [20 favorites]


Only reason Riley Cooper wasn't cut immediately is that Jeremy Maclin just blew out his ACL and the Eagles are thin at receiver. If Maclin weren't injured, this racist would be cut like he deserves.
posted by nathancaswell at 11:57 AM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


So noted. Some of the rest of us feel that it is at least a mitigating circumstance when judging the entire person.

And you know, to expand on what I said above a bit... I think it can be but it isn't automatically or universally. This kind of stuff doesn't spring out of nowhere. And either does the normal but outlier drunk stuff like getting mad about something silly and punching a hole in the wall. That points to possibly greater anger issues that are simply kept in check while sober, and this can point to greater racism.

Our society has a serious problem with how we handle drunk behavior, because alcohol and being drunk are so deeply entrenched in it. Watch a show like mad men and look at how it glorifies everyone being like illegal to drive drunk constantly. I'm not going to launch in to huge derail of tiresome bong hit sociology of "imagine if they were showing that with some other drug and how outraged people would be maaaan" but yea, it's a great example of the fact that being drunk is just seen as a normal part of life. Hell, there's entire industries in which you can't really get a foot in the door or get ahead unless you go out and drink with other people in the industry.

And as such, there is a huge problem with the handling of drunk behavior, as I stated above. The fact that "beer goggles" is even a commonly joked about and accepted thing and not looked at as "wow you were really impaired wtf" speaks to that. As does this kind of "oh he said something racist, but he was drunk so it's different" stuff.

I'm just not buying that this came from nowhere this isn't something you say without some basic foundation to back it up. I've been trying my hardest to avoid getting hyperbolic and saying something like this, but people are doubling down on defending him. So how many people would be defending him if he got drunk and punched his wife? It's a very similar thing in process. He would have thought about it before, but stopped himself. He would have gotten drunk enough for that to break through.

Actions do not come from nowhere. In a lot of cases, alcohol just thins the barriers. It's not some hallucinogen that makes you have thoughts you'd otherwise never have, and its not like it somehow inserted that thought in to his head.

Excusing the action is dismissing the thoughts that created it.
posted by emptythought at 11:58 AM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


I don't think it's "over the top" to say that busting out the n bomb while angry is evidence of a true racist, because it communicates a lot when used that way.

Clearly we disagree, and I'm fine with that, but here's the one thing I take issue with -- I didn't say it wasn't evidence of Cooper being a true racist. I'm saying that it isn't proof. Is it evidence? Fucking absolutely it is. I don't blame anyone on the Eagles at all if they don't want to play with Cooper. But I don't believe that this one incident is proof that Cooper is a racist.

In a lot of cases, alcohol just thins the barriers.

And in some cases, those barriers aren't "I shouldn't use the N-word in public even though I totally think that blacks are lesser creatures," but they're "I shouldn't use the N-word because it's a horrible, hateful word for my fellow human beings whom I genuinely respect."

Excusing the action is dismissing the thoughts that created it.

Okay, now I'm not fine with it. I am in no way excusing the action. I said it was hurtful. I qualified my point -- the only point that I was making -- that this isn't absolute proof of his racism four times.
posted by Etrigan at 12:07 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


What bothers me further about the arguments as to why this isn't such a 'big deal', is that it's sounding eerily like "Well, MAYBE he did something wrong, but then again, men get falsely accused of rape all the time, so" arguments.

Saying "nigger" isn't like, this natural state of being white in America that can "accidentally" slip out. People talking about it like this guy did nothing more than accidentally fart at a fancy dinner party and is now being unjustly shunned for it are really distressing.
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 12:09 PM on August 5, 2013 [11 favorites]


Look, is it really that hard to understand that this is a word that white people just don't get to use at all, ever? That there is just no blameless time and place to use it? And that little restriction on behavior is not even the slightest payback for centuries of the most appalling violence and some of the nastiest behavior that humans have dished out?

And, also, that it's pretty much not possible to defend its use, either? And, heaven forbid, if you do decide to defend a white guy who tossed out that word, then you don't get to complain when people assume you are racist, because you are talking like a racist and giving cover to racists?
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:12 PM on August 5, 2013 [13 favorites]


I should amend that. As rtha quoted above, it's not that you don't get to say it, it's that you don't get to say it without risking getting called a racist, and that term may stick, and you may never get rid of it, so, I guess, if you really have to, say it all you like, but you have no one to blame but yourself for what happens when you do.

And if you are the kind of nice progressive person who would never use that word unless you were really drunk and pissed off? Dude, get help, seriously. That is not healthy.
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:15 PM on August 5, 2013 [5 favorites]


And, also, that it's pretty much not possible to defend its use, either?

Has anyone here tried to do so?
posted by dsfan at 12:15 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


From the desks of: Riley Cooper, Michael Vick, Tiger Woods, Marion Jones, Bill Romanowski, Lance Armstrong, Alex Rodriguez, Ryan Braun, Sergio Garcia, Brett Favre, Randy Moss, Fuzzy Zoeller, Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Floyd Landis, Tyler Hamilton, actually most professional cyclists, Ben Johnson, Tyson Gay, Fred Smoot, Pete Rose, Kobe Bryant
To: our adoring fans

I'm SO SORRY [that I got caught]. Racism/Infidelity/Cheating/Gambling is not a reflection of who I am [in terms of PR spin relating to my current and future endorsement deals], and I want to apologize from the bottom of my heart [so I can get back to doing whatever it is I don't want you to know about] to all of you [particularly those that sign my checks and have power over my place in sporting history].
posted by mcstayinskool at 12:17 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


And, also, that it's pretty much not possible to defend its use, either? And, heaven forbid, if you do decide to defend a white guy who tossed out that word, then you don't get to complain when people assume you are racist, because you are talking like a racist and giving cover to racists?

I don't defend its use - I absolutely do not defend this guy. But I do think that the slippery slope of racism as defined here has some serious issues.

Because if anyone that defends a racist is a racist, then there is no end to that shithole.

Guy A says something racist. He thus is a racist, making it impossible to defend him. But Guy B does so anyway, thus making him a racist too. Guy C defends Guy B, thus also becoming a racist, which means that Guy D shouldn't defend him, but yet does so anyway, meaning that when Guy E defends him, he is still beyond the pale and definitely a racist.

This is the More Anti-Racist Than Thou card, and it taints everyone who uses it. I think we can be more charitable towards people who have different opinions on whether or not this guy should be kicked off a sports team.
posted by corb at 12:17 PM on August 5, 2013 [7 favorites]


All we want to know is, what's the root cause of this maniacal obsession? Why do so many people want to say it? We don’t get it. Tell us why.

This is what I'm curious about, too. I don't get it, either. Even the glibertarians who use it for "free speech" reasons seem to see the word as just another button they can press to get a rise out of people (see also: that tiresome Ricky Gervais and his love of "mong"). Even then their intent behind "freedom of speech" seems to be more "freedom from consequences", and behaving like a contrarian twit, with loads of other words in their arsenal for the same purpose.

Personally, no, I don't think white people should be using that word. But let's say that people can get a possible pass based on intent. I don't buy it, but why not. Intent behind using words is important, sure, I get that. And the context provided sounds like pretty clear-cut racist intent.

So yes, firing him seems pretty proportional to me.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 12:18 PM on August 5, 2013 [7 favorites]


And in some cases, those barriers aren't "I shouldn't use the N-word in public even though I totally think that blacks are lesser creatures," but they're "I shouldn't use the N-word because it's a horrible, hateful word for my fellow human beings whom I genuinely respect."

The fact that it could be either of these should give you pause before assuming the second one. People who assume the first are acting on exactly the same evidence as the people who say it's not, but backed up by lots of experience with other people acting this way. The split between these situations is basically as if two people had walked in to a room with a gun on the table and closed the door. A gunshot was heard, and now one of them is dead. Did one guy shoot the other guy or did the guy shoot himself? You and others are assuming option B, I and others are assuming option A.

Okay, now I'm not fine with it. I am in no way excusing the action. I said it was hurtful. I qualified my point -- the only point that I was making -- that this isn't absolute proof of his racism four times.

That is fair enough, And i'm sorry. Like, actually sorry.

This is an issue, this type of defense and appologia that can really piss me off. I've had to rail against it a lot in the past, and i may have read in to you what i've seen and heard others say to the point that it blurred together in my head a bit.

But can you see here, how "I mean it's hurtful, and it's bad, but it's not like TOTAL evidence" is basically exactly what Uther Bentrazor was talking about just below your post? because that was pretty much my entire issue with what you were saying and why i replied specifically to you.

And to shift gears a bit:

Has anyone here tried to do so?

I think a fairly credible argument could be made that the people, including Etrigan who basically go "well it's evidence but it's not proof are like, constructively defending it by at the very least sitting at the intersection on to the road of splitting hairs with their turn signal on... if not just totally getting reductionist about the whole thing.

All we want to know is, what's the root cause of this maniacal obsession? Why do so many people want to say it? We don’t get it. Tell us why.


Every time i've seen it, although i'll admit my experience, opinion, and sample group is skewed to mostly tiresome highly likely racists on reddit... It seemed like it stemmed from the same place that makes bratty children want to scream fuck over and over: Because you told them they weren't allowed.

It makes a certain subset of nerdy, but also generally white dudes angry just because someone made a rule that there's actually something they don't get to do "arbitrarily", and it makes them angry as shit because Hey, i'm a White Man, i get to do whatever i want! You can't stop me!

It's totally blind toxic privilege entitled baby shit.
posted by emptythought at 12:28 PM on August 5, 2013 [10 favorites]


This is the More Anti-Racist Than Thou card, and it taints everyone who uses it. I think we can be more charitable towards people who have different opinions on whether or not this guy should be kicked off a sports team.

But can we at least all agree that what he said was fundamentally racist?
posted by mudpuppie at 12:28 PM on August 5, 2013


Has anyone here tried to do so?

What would you call "well, he was drunk" and "he's not as bad as Vic?"
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:30 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


I think a fairly credible argument could be made that the people, including Etrigan who basically go "well it's evidence but it's not proof are like, constructively defending it by at the very least sitting at the intersection on to the road of splitting hairs with their turn signal on... if not just totally getting reductionist about the whole thing.

I dunno. You start with "Some assume A, Some assume B" but mostly end with "Not assuming A means you assume B".
posted by Drinky Die at 12:33 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


More Anti-Racist Than Thou card

1) There are no "race cards." You don't get a set of fun cards for being systematically oppressed.

2) For the zillionth time people are not playing 'I want to be cool' games when they express their personal opinions on an issue regarding race relations, politics, sexism, etc. They are expressing their personal feelings based on iived experience (this goes for any side of the privilege divide, for progressives).

3) Do we need to link to the jay Smooth video again about how calling out racist behavior isn't the same thing as saying "you're a racist" but people need to not shut down immediately when racist behavior is being called out because it is really, really important to talk about?
posted by sweetkid at 12:34 PM on August 5, 2013 [28 favorites]


What would you call "well, he was drunk" and "he's not as bad as Vic?"

Context?

I have to say, some of the attitudes expressed in this thread are simply astonishing to me. If you want the core reason why America is such a brutal society, with so many people in prison and with such an unforgiving attitude toward the poor, this is it, right here: the idea that if you do not completely define a human by the worst moment of his or her life, you're somehow defending the act.
posted by dsfan at 12:37 PM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


I'm a little amazed at the attitudes here. None of us personally know Cooper (I live in Gainesville, and I am certain that I know people who know him, but we never met). We do not know the content of his character. We do not know how he behaves on a daily basis. What charities (if any) he contributes to or what personal flaws he has and is (or is not) trying to overcome.

To say that one incident, one!, is enough to indict him and cast him as an irredeemable villain is ridiculous. And it is not an argument to say "Well, I've never said that word." That is no more relevant than the fact that some other people have said (while drunk or sober).

All that we know is that there has been a single, one, instance of a racist slur. That's it. If you think that's enough to cast him as a racist, you certainly are welcome to do so. But, I suspect that, with such impossibly high standards (a single use is all it takes!) you'll find yourself judging (and find them wanting) every single person you'll ever meet as none of us are without fault.
posted by oddman at 12:37 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


3) Do we need to link to the jay Smooth video again about how calling out racist behavior isn't the same thing as saying "you're a racist" but people need to not shut down immediately when racist behavior is being called out because it is really, really important to talk about?

Apparently.

In complete seriousness, that video should be mandatory viewing.
posted by dubold at 12:37 PM on August 5, 2013 [5 favorites]


Are we really in that world? People do all kinds of amazingly stupid shit while drunk and I don't think hanging this guy by a cross is really a responsible or proportionate response.

Maybe if you lived on the sharp end of 400+ years of institutionalized racism you'd feel differently about what's an "appropriate response".

Give him the boot. His apology is the first step on the road to enlightenment - it doesn't absolve him though.
posted by Pudhoho at 12:41 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Saying "nigger" isn't like, this natural state of being white in America that can "accidentally" slip out.

Really hardcore died in the wool racists think this though. Like, that these are things that everyone with a brain must think because they're like true you know? and the people who don't accept them are either in denial or like, have an agenda or are generally deluded or whatever.

Hardcore racists think that's the natural state of being because they legitimately 100% believe black people are inferior. They just know not to say that word in polite company, but when one of their own does it they show up and go "Oh, shit, he accidentally said it in the wrong place... poor guy"

NOTE: I am not calling anyone in this thread or on this site racist... yet. Including the people who i've quoted or debated in previous comments. I was just expanding on the thread of this thought, about people in general.

To say that one incident, one!, is enough to indict him and cast him as an irredeemable villain is ridiculous.

Very few to no people have said that, and i did not say that. What i am saying is that people seem to be defending him because they think it's like "super unfair man!" if he gets labelled as a racist, or even like "possibly a racist" or "probably a racist, has said racist things" because of this.

He may not be a racist, but he should absolutely have to deal with the fallout of having said something racist up to and including being dropped from the team or pilloried a bit in the media for this.

I personally think it probably means he's a racist, but he may very well not be. The fact that he might not be isn't a reason he should get a pass for threatening to attack someone while calling them a racial slur though. The context in which he said it is pretty bad as far as the "Probably not a racist" side goes.
posted by emptythought at 12:42 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Do we need to link to the jay Smooth video again about how calling out racist behavior isn't the same thing as saying "you're a racist" but people need to not shut down immediately when racist behavior is being called out because it is really, really important to talk about?

Has anyone here been arguing against that? I think everyone seems to agree that that is racist behavior. People are just differing as to what the consequences should be for said racist behavior, and whether or not the racist behavior means the guy himself is actually a racist.
posted by corb at 12:42 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Actually, thinking more about it (and spitballing), I think Paula Deen is a more apt comparison than Michael Vick -- not because she and Cooper are both white, but because they're facing flak for the same thing. Deen was a recognizable brand with millions of dollars in endorsement deals, which she ultimately lost. She lost them not because she admitted to using the N-word, per se, but because having used it makes people wonder what her actual attitudes towards people of color are. Let's give her the biggest benefit of the doubt and say she doesn't "see" race. Or let's be really cynical and say that she thinks every person of color she encounters is ignorant and unclean and fit only to wash dishes, but she smiles at them anyway and thus convinces her self of her magnanimity. We don't know where her beliefs fall on the spectrum, but we're uncomfortable enough with the possibilities that we, and her sponsors, dismantled whatever pedestal her celebrity entitled her to. That made her ineffective at her job, and she got fired by her employer(s).

Cooper is in the same boat, but with an added twist -- a very large percentage of his "coworkers" are people of color, and especially African Americans. Regardless of whatever sanctions are handed down, if he keeps his spot on the team a lot of his teammates are going to be thinking "Okay, but what does he think about me?" A big part of a football team's success or failure is going to come from how things are in the locker room. And that unknown -- "what does he think about me" is going to haunt him. It already is. It makes him potentially ineffective at his job.

Anyway, my whole point is that I don't think the Michael Vick second chance is a good allegory. I think the Paula Deen one is better, but she hasn't gotten her second chance yet, and it remains to be seen if she will.
posted by mudpuppie at 12:42 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Also, drunk's no excuse for anything.
posted by Pudhoho at 12:42 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


At the same time, though, I do think that there is a strong piece of Khalid Salaam's article that does bother me. He says that people want to know if they can say the N-word. I don't think I've known anyone where that is the case.

Just two weeks ago, Rush Limbaugh got all excited because Rachel Jeantel said it was OK to say "nigga," which he proceeded to do multiple times. This is very much a trend, particularly amongst conservative media.

Because if anyone that defends a racist is a racist, then there is no end to that shithole.

If someone is defending a racist by telling other people that the original person didn't say or do something racist (or that it's not that bad) despite all evidence to the contrary, then, yeah, I think it's fair to lump them in with other racists.

This is the More Anti-Racist Than Thou card

Seriously?

the idea that if you do not completely define a human by the worst moment of his or her life, you're somehow defending the act.

Saying a guy shouldn't be allowed to be paid money after doing something shitty is not the same as completely defining their existence.

To say that one incident, one!, is enough to indict him and cast him as an irredeemable villain is ridiculous.

This would be an argument if that was what was actually being said. Again, saying he should be kicked off a football team is not the same as casting him as an irredeemable villain.

And it is not an argument to say "Well, I've never said that word." That is no more relevant than the fact that some other people have said (while drunk or sober).

Did you miss all the arguments about the societal forces behind it and the aggressive behavior he was exhibiting, or are you just ignoring them?
posted by zombieflanders at 12:45 PM on August 5, 2013 [12 favorites]


Because if anyone that defends a racist is a racist, then there is no end to that shithole.

corb, are you really sure you want to go down this path again?

But, OK, yeah, it is a shithole, and it was dug deep and filled high with centuries of evil behavior, and that does not get cleaned up in a generation or two, especially since the system apparatus of racism is still very much functioning.

And, I suppose, there is some slight chance that someone has gotten labeled a racist unfairly, and so it's really unfair that you defending your friend risks getting you labeled racist as well, but that's pretty long odds in the USA these days. Because, if you say racist stuff, it's pretty hard for people to assume you were joking or being all metaphorical or something. And, if you want to keep hanging out with your friend who says racist stuff, well, you're putting your own own reputation on the line. You really want to hang out with that guy that much?

Besides, getting called a racist isn't as bad as having a racist, say, shoot you....
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:45 PM on August 5, 2013 [9 favorites]


I agree that this guy should be punished for using a racial slur. I don't care that he was drunk (or stupid).

But, can someone explain to me how it is ok for black people to use the N word while telling others that they can't without major backlash? I think it's a terrible word that shouldn't be used at all, by anyone, white, black, etc. I'm not trying to stir up shit, here, I just genuinely want to understand the reasoning.
posted by tafetta, darling! at 12:48 PM on August 5, 2013


Well Deen had a history of racist behavior that went beyond using slurs, right? Cooper doesn't. To say that they are equivalent is misleading. They are, more correctly, different points on a continuum which would suggest that they don't deserve the same punishment (losing their job).

Again, saying he should be kicked off a football team is not the same as casting him as an irredeemable villain.

Then you are saying he should be fired for a single transgression. Isn't that the sort of standard that would raise unemployment really, really fast?
posted by oddman at 12:49 PM on August 5, 2013


Is there some Metafilter-approved definition of "racist" here? Necessary and sufficient conditions, including "uses racist slurs more than once, and not while drunk"?

It's really demoralizing that we're still having this conversation, folks, even here, even now. Different language communities have different conceptions of the term "racist", and I don't think there's any question that Cooper is one. As a white person, I'm pretty sure most white folk raised in the U.S. are racists, full stop. It's hard work not to act in ways that are at best annoying to people of color, and at worst make their lives really difficult. Cooper doesn't seem to be trying very hard not to act in a racist way... and really, this seems like a case of simple assault, if I remember my common law correctly.

The question is, what kind of employment contract does he have? This seems like a perfectly fireable offense to me, given how many people get fired for the wrong haircut or making personal phone calls on company time, ffs.
posted by allthinky at 12:49 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


Besides, getting called a racist isn't as bad as having a racist, say, shoot you....

Can i just like, pre-emptively say before any mod comes in here and [posts] about it...

Lets not bring up that case or that situation AT ALL in this thread, because seriously fuck blasting apart another discussion by comparing it to that.

Parallels can be made between it and nearly any occurrence of racism, but i have a feeling it's going to become a sort of like.. godwins law thing because it just adds a level of hyperbole and anger to the discussion that does it a disservice.
posted by emptythought at 12:50 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


>What would you call "well, he was drunk" and "he's not as bad as Vic?"

Context?


Context used to excuse Cooper's behavior.
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:50 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


tafetta, darling!: "But, can someone explain to me how it is ok for black people to use the N word while telling others that they can't without major backlash? I think it's a terrible word that shouldn't be used at all, by anyone, white, black, etc. I'm not trying to stir up shit, here, I just genuinely want to understand the reasoning."

Reclamation.
posted by scrump at 12:51 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


Can i just like, pre-emptively say before any mod comes in here and [posts] about it...

Yeah... sorry about that. I apologize; I should have not gone there even in the heat of the moment. I'd be OK with the mods deleting that comment and anything that refers to it.
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:53 PM on August 5, 2013


Reclamation.
posted by scrump at 12:51 PM on August 5


See also: Queer.
posted by mudpuppie at 12:54 PM on August 5, 2013


What would you call "well, he was drunk" and "he's not as bad as Vick?"

Well Vick tortured and killed dogs for sport. Cooper said something stupid and offensive.

I'm not going to defend Cooper, but there's a pretty big gulf between the two.

Also, I have to say that I am a little uncomfortable with his job being on the line for something he did not at work and not acting as a representative for his employer. Yeah, I know public persona and all that - and I'm not saying there shouldn't be ramifications - it's just.... not maybe the best standard, I guess.
posted by Pogo_Fuzzybutt at 12:55 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


And in some cases, those barriers aren't "I shouldn't use the N-word in public even though I totally think that blacks are lesser creatures," but they're "I shouldn't use the N-word because it's a horrible, hateful word for my fellow human beings whom I genuinely respect."

The fact that it could be either of these should give you pause before assuming the second one. People who assume the first are acting on exactly the same evidence as the people who say it's not, but backed up by lots of experience with other people acting this way. The split between these situations is basically as if two people had walked in to a room with a gun on the table and closed the door. A gunshot was heard, and now one of them is dead. Did one guy shoot the other guy or did the guy shoot himself? You and others are assuming option B, I and others are assuming option A.


Again, no I'm not. I'm saying -- explicitly, both times -- that option B is possible, as is option A.

I simply believe that there's a possibility -- however slim -- that Cooper is genuinely appalled at himself for what he's done. I'm not saying it to cast him as a better human being; I'm just saying that I disagree that this incident is proof that Cooper's hatred of black men was lurking right there waiting to pop out. It's certainly evidence that he's a racist, but I'd say that it's only proof that he needs to come to terms with his drinking.
posted by Etrigan at 12:56 PM on August 5, 2013


How long ago did Elvis Costello stoop so low? He's still living that down, even though Brother Ray forgave him publicly. The problem with using the "I was drunk" excuse is that drunks usually tell their truth. There's even a fancy latin phrase for it you can use if you like. In my book, calling somebody by that name in anger when you're drunk reveals more about you than you might expect.
posted by dubwisened at 12:56 PM on August 5, 2013 [5 favorites]


and not acting as a representative for his employer.

He was on video and broadcasting his voice because he played for the Eagles.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 12:58 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Context used to excuse Cooper's behavior.

It's not an 'excusing his behavior,' it's refining the scope of the appropriate response, both professionally and for judging him as a person.
posted by dsfan at 12:58 PM on August 5, 2013


Dude's a racist. The only fellow white people I know who would use terms like this, drunk or not, are racists.

Sure, everyone makes mistakes. But part of making a mistake is paying the price. If you were an account rep for a big company who got drunk at a mixer and called someone there a "nigger" you bet your ass you'd be gone Monday AM. And depending on what world your business was in and how small it was, you might be done with that industry, period. And that's fair.

I note that the racists I know now use the term "negro" as a synonym for "nigger" and it's real clear when they say it they're pleased as punch about it, too.
posted by maxwelton at 1:01 PM on August 5, 2013 [7 favorites]


so, he's a wide receiver and the NFL is notorious for its culture of dirty hits by defensive players for no better reason than the target happens to be good at playing football

i don't know if this is a bad enough offense to fired for, although being suspended for a game or two and losing that pay seems right

it's irrelevant - someone's going to take his ass OUT
posted by pyramid termite at 1:02 PM on August 5, 2013


Anyway, my whole point is that I don't think the Michael Vick second chance is a good allegory.

I think I miscommunicated big-time with what I wrote when I brought up Vick. I did not really want to compare what they did because they are both so clearly beyond the pale. It is just that literally the same person who hired Vick and made a big deal about why second chances are necessary will be making the decision on Cooper and Vick has already made the comparison to himself. For all we know Jeffery Lurie would have given Dean another shot.

I really have no idea what Lurie will decide if the controversy lingers. I felt much more confident that Andy Reid seriously believed in the principle of second chances because of his experience with his sons. Lurie is more image conscious and may decide to go a different way with this.
posted by Drinky Die at 1:03 PM on August 5, 2013


Also, I have to say that I am a little uncomfortable with his job being on the line for something he did not at work and not acting as a representative for his employer. Yeah, I know public persona and all that - and I'm not saying there shouldn't be ramifications - it's just.... not maybe the best standard, I guess.

I'm not. In fact i'm actually uncomfortable with the number of times i've seen someone not only face no consequences for their direct actions, but also that "scandals" like this tend to end with "And now the person they fucked over/wronged is in XYZ shitty position, and the person who did ShittyThing still has their awesome job making megabux as bla bla bla corp"

Shaming people out of their jobs shouldn't be something that's considered problematic. Companies, sports teams, record labels, whatever should be publicly shamed for looking the other way when their popular person/executive/whatever turns out to be a bit of a shitheap.

Nothing is wrong here, the system is starting to work as it should. People have been protected from losing their jobs for being shameful assholes for far too long as far as i'm concerned.

The internet has just greatly accelerated the Shame Engine here in the form of the Internet Hate Machine. And this kind of stuff is one of the few cases when it's totally fine like the paula deen scandal

On preview, maxwelton nails what i'm talking about.
posted by emptythought at 1:04 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Then you are saying he should be fired for a single transgression. Isn't that the sort of standard that would raise unemployment really, really fast?

I doubt it, because most people aren't demonstrably racist, even if they harbor deep levels of hate. I've worked for the same company for several years and there's only been a few examples of racism/sexism/homophobia, all witnessed by at least one other person (one of them was in the hallway and overheard by a couple dozen other employees). None of them were kept employed by the company. And for a single transgression that is public, visibly fueled by anger, and makes other employees upset? Most definitely.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:05 PM on August 5, 2013 [6 favorites]


Also, I have to say that I am a little uncomfortable with his job being on the line for something he did not at work and not acting as a representative for his employer.

Always remember, in cases involving professional athletes: Their job is not actually to catch footballs or throw baseballs or hit golf balls into small holes. Their job is to entertain. That is not just based on what they do on the field, or there wouldn't be interviews after every game and SportsCenter interviews and guys showing off their houses on Cribs and the ridiculous media scrum the week before the Super Bowl. Athletes' conduct off the field has been part of the story for a century, and when they encourage it by taking money for endorsing products and appearing at parties and autographing footballs, they are also allowing for the flip side of that when they do something incredibly stupid and hurtful in public.
posted by Etrigan at 1:06 PM on August 5, 2013 [7 favorites]


Well, I hadn't intended to bend the rules
But whiskey don't make liars
It just makes fools
So, I didn't mean to say it
But, I meant what I said...

-James McMurtry
Too Long In The Wasteland
posted by Benny Andajetz at 1:07 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


There's even a fancy latin phrase for it you can use if you like.

People seem to be in love with in vino veritas, (which I find just a pernicious attitude), but you know there is another latin phrase, almost as famous, and, given the evidence, just as likely to apply non compos mentis
posted by oddman at 1:08 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Also, I have to say that I am a little uncomfortable with his job being on the line for something he did not at work and not acting as a representative for his employer.

The concert was held at the Eagles home field, and the security staff I would guess also work Eagles games. It was at least like behaving in this way at his place of work during hours when he was off the clock. A firing would not seem so out of place if they decide to go that way.
posted by Drinky Die at 1:10 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Let's just say I think one-strike-your-out standards have little to do with justice. To have a one size fits all punishment is problematic.

I get that many of you think what Cooper did is equivalent to what Marge Schott did, but I simply disagree (both because of context and severity).
posted by oddman at 1:12 PM on August 5, 2013


The concert was held at the Eagles home field, and the security staff I would guess also work Eagles games.

i wasn't aware of that - yeah, maybe he should be fired
posted by pyramid termite at 1:13 PM on August 5, 2013


I think it's also lacking in a sense of history to suggest that now is the first time people are being fired for what they do in their private lives. It's just that previously you would get fired for being or sympathizing with a minority or low socio-economic class of people, while now you get fired for being offensive to them.
posted by corb at 1:14 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


I think someone mentioned it above: what's doubly awful is the way he delivers it in the video: home boy doesn't just drop the N word, he puts some extra spicy hot sauce on it and drives it home with hammer blows. Dude's angry. Dude really fucking wanted to hang with Kenny Chesney.
posted by xmutex at 1:17 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


"overstand"...It's a conscious hip hop term. Shorthand for "acquire a holistic knowledge of something"

OK, now I grok it.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 1:24 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


I found Khalid Salaam's article informative, but the thing I took away from it with a sense of confusion over why his feelings of outrage should be tempered by the possible chances of success his favorite sports team should have.
posted by BrianJ at 1:25 PM on August 5, 2013


Etrigan: "Always remember, in cases involving professional athletes: Their job is not actually to catch footballs or throw baseballs or hit golf balls into small holes. Their job is to entertain. That is not just based on what they do on the field, or there wouldn't be interviews after every game and SportsCenter interviews and guys showing off their houses on Cribs and the ridiculous media scrum the week before the Super Bowl. Athletes' conduct off the field has been part of the story for a century, and when they encourage it by taking money for endorsing products and appearing at parties and autographing footballs, they are also allowing for the flip side of that when they do something incredibly stupid and hurtful in public."

Unfortunately, as someone else pointed out upthread, Riley is in a business that rewards brutality, and this entire situation is tailor-made for someone to put him in a wheelchair for life. Defensive backs in the NFL hit like freight trains, and one of the biggest sources of those "holy shit, I can't believe anyone walked away from that" hits that get on the TV shows is a wide receiver crossing downfield with a pass on the way, and a DB coming the other way, looking to solidify his contract.

The combined momentum and the physics involved have crippled people. Now imagine that you're playing for, say, Atlanta, and the Eagles are coming to town. Atlanta-the-city is majority black. You're a young DB, local. And here comes this Riley motherfucker, crossing pattern...

Riley needs to retire from football before someone kills him on the field. Because there's something about this whole situation that seems more electrified than other occurrences; there's an undercurrent this time. Maybe it's the synergy of this episode coming at a time when real political power is being devoted to straightforward racist, poll-tax kind of shit.

I'm not surprised he's getting death threats. I'm more surprised that he thinks he still has a future in the NFL where he leaves the field under his own power.
posted by scrump at 1:28 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


maxwelton: "I note that the racists I know now use the term "negro" as a synonym for "nigger" and it's real clear when they say it they're pleased as punch about it, too."

One of the better ways I've seen this phenomenon described is "people for whom it comes naturally to pronounce the word 'Negro' with two r's".
posted by scrump at 1:30 PM on August 5, 2013


Metafilter: really fucking wanted to hang with Kenny Chesney.


anybody?


Of course he put the sauce on it; just like Michael Richards, he was pissed and took the nuclear option. There is no point in trying to determine what percentage of the racist thoughts he has but does not express out loud. The question should be "What happens when a public figure does a bad thing?" not "Is this public figure a bad person?"
posted by dubold at 1:31 PM on August 5, 2013 [8 favorites]


The question should be "What happens when a public figure does a bad thing?" not "Is this public figure a bad person?"

Ding ding ding.
posted by sweetkid at 1:32 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


he was pissed and took the nuclear option.

There was nothing for Cooper to be pissed about. I don't think he was pissed. What makes you think he was pissed?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 1:33 PM on August 5, 2013


Oh god, Marge Schott. I don't care trying to isolate and name precisely what degree of racist Riley Cooper is. And since we talked about Jay Smooth's video but never linked it. The difference between what they did conversation and the what they are conversation.
"...the 'what they are' conversation on the other hand takes things one step further and uses what they did and what they said to draw conclusions about what kind of person they are. This is also known as the "I think you are racist" conversation. This is the conversation you don't wanna have. Because that conversation takes us away from the facts of what they did into speculation about their motives and intentions and those are things you can only guess at, you can't ever prove, and that makes it way too easy for them to derail your whole argument.

...because the 'what they are' conversation is a rhetorical Bermuda Triangle where everything drowns in a sea of empty posturing."
posted by cashman at 1:34 PM on August 5, 2013 [5 favorites]


How about this? He hears the word bandied about by his team mates on a pretty regular basis and gets it into his head that because of being on the same team he's also an honorary brother.

Only it turns out that not everyone else sees it that way.
posted by IndigoJones at 1:36 PM on August 5, 2013


How about this? He hears the word bandied about by his team mates on a pretty regular basis and gets it into his head that because of being on the same team he's also an honorary brother.

Then why does he threaten to fight them?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 1:37 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


If you want the core reason why America is such a brutal society, with so many people in prison and with such an unforgiving attitude toward the poor, this is it, right here

considering the topic and the demographics of those most often fucked by the criminal justice system, this comment is shockingly tone deaf. the prisons are stuffed to the gills for a lot of reasons, and big honking one is racism. trying to excuse a powerful and rich white guy threatening a black guy/guys using that racial slur is beyond fucked up.
posted by nadawi at 1:38 PM on August 5, 2013 [15 favorites]


oh, and, michael vick was fired for what he did and he went to jail. and AFTER paying his debt to society, and having a lot of very respected people in the nfl world vouch for him, he was given a second chance at the eagles. dude's never gonna wear a falcons jersey again. second chances doesn't mean "oh, i followed the advice of the pr person and now i'd like to keep on going exactly like i did before." and while final decisions lay with lurie - it's important to note that both the head coach and the general manager are different guys than the ones who supported vick's hiring.
posted by nadawi at 1:38 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


IndigoJones: "How about this? He hears the word bandied about by his team mates on a pretty regular basis and gets it into his head that because of being on the same team he's also an honorary brother. "

This is an sarcasm, right?
posted by Mister_A at 1:39 PM on August 5, 2013 [5 favorites]


There was nothing for Cooper to be pissed about. I don't think he was pissed. What makes you think he was pissed?

He was being prevented from going backstage and having an extreme temper tantrum over it that led to the violent threat+slur. Eagles center Jason Kelce is right off camera trying to get him to calm down.
posted by Drinky Die at 1:41 PM on August 5, 2013


he absolutely was not using it in a brotherly way. the context matters as much or more than the word itself.
posted by nadawi at 1:41 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


I don't think the eagles are going to drop Riley Cooper. I think they're going to let him sit on the roster for a while. He probably would have been getting a lot of reps, but Kelly will probably stick with Desean, a bunch of Avant and Celek, and work Momah in. I think maybe sometime around midseason, maybe home vs the giants, he'll get a play or two. I don't think they're going to take him off the team.

At this point the extent of his punishment is like 33 grand. I think he makes what, 600k a year? I think if someone tries hurt the guy it'll be at the start of the game and nobody has scored, or if the game is out of reach one way or the other. He has a helmet though, and receivers on the eagles have already gotten flattened in previous years, so it isn't like this is going to be anything different. Desean already got wiped out and concussed and missed games. Maclin got creamed and missed games. Avant knocked himself out making a block (and thank you for that!). And Celek got flattened. Heck, Cooper got splattered himself and his helmet knocked off. He might get knocked around but he won't die. And the narrative will turn after a few hits anyway, and it'll be back to normal (though not forgotten).
posted by cashman at 1:45 PM on August 5, 2013


lots has been said here. i'm not sure if i have anything substantive to add, but i did want to simplly register my position in the column with folks who agree: if you call someone a nigger, you're a racist.

you may be the nicest, most charitable person at your place of worship. you may have a diverse collection of friends. you may be humble and pious and kind, but if you use the word nigger, you're a racist.
posted by rude.boy at 1:47 PM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


yeah - any extra abuse he gets on the field is more likely to be at the bottom of piles - not the sort of thing that will paralyze him, but will be effective as a statement of disapproval.
posted by nadawi at 1:48 PM on August 5, 2013


I like Lenny Bruce's approach. (Here's a dramatized version) When too much power is given to a word, then that word it can be used against you.

I was listening to an NPR program last night where the cosmologist who ran the SETI program for 10 years (I didn't get her name) said that if we could all just step back and realize that we're all a part of one tiny speck in the cosmos, and made from the same star-stuff - we'd better understand that the differences we create based on race and other variables, are inconsequential.

Winnie the Pooh: "Everyone is alright, really!"
posted by Vibrissae at 2:03 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Oh please.
posted by cashman at 2:11 PM on August 5, 2013 [6 favorites]


Yeah, I feel the same way about white people going on some "The word loses it's power the more we say it!" as I do people trying to sell me dick pills: I'm not buying it, also you're full of shit.
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 2:34 PM on August 5, 2013 [11 favorites]


When too much power is given to a word, then that word it can be used against you.

When that word carries a history of enslavement, savagery, murder, and denigration, then it's really not up to me, an individual, to decide that it's "just" a word like cat, or bourbon, or human.

I get to decide what I call myself, and I get to decide what boundaries I will draw around what other people call me. My dyke friends can call me a dyke. The homophobic asshole who hurls it at me as an insult does not get to do that and have it somehow not be insulting.
posted by rtha at 2:35 PM on August 5, 2013 [16 favorites]


Vibrissae: "I like Lenny Bruce's approach . (Here's a dramatized version ) When too much power is given to a word, then that word it can be used against you. "

Lenny Bruce could pass for a white guy, to be crude.

This is a nice slogan, but I've personally never seen it written or heard it said by anyone other than white cis people, who are used to being listened to when they say something hurts them.

The question that you really need to ask about that statement is, "when too much power is given to a word" by whom? If someone's getting kicked in the face because of the color of their skin, and someone's screaming "NIGGER" at them, I'm not sure the dude on the ground is the one responsible for the word's impact.
posted by scrump at 2:44 PM on August 5, 2013 [8 favorites]


I learned this from an estate attorney who has seen his share of feuding inheritors: "It's not about things, it's about what things mean."

So, same applies to Riley Cooper. "Words can hurt,"* doesn't cut it. It's not the word, it's what the word means.
posted by surplus at 2:53 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


No one is going head-hunting on Cooper because under current rules that's the end of your career as a defender; it's just a matter of his outburst making it very uncomfortable and divided in the locker room. I'd cut the guy, personally, but maybe a team meeting and a player vote is the way to go.
posted by Mister_A at 2:59 PM on August 5, 2013


Jay Smooth takes his thoughts about talking about race a step further in this TED talk, which I like even better.
posted by Killick at 3:02 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


the idea that current rules keep players from settling scores on the field is hilarious.
posted by nadawi at 3:07 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


Really? You think someone is going to throw his career away spearing this guy because he appears to be an ignorant cracker? That is hilarious.
posted by Mister_A at 3:18 PM on August 5, 2013


why would he throw his career away to hit a guy a little extra hard or shove his thumb into his balls under a pile? that shit goes on all the time already. there are lots and lots and lots of ways to play enough within the rules and still express your displeasure. i mean, suh has been caught in his shady tactics, and his career seems just fine, even if his reputation and pocket book took a hit.
posted by nadawi at 3:24 PM on August 5, 2013


Mister_A: "Really? You think someone is going to throw his career away spearing this guy because he appears to be an ignorant cracker? That is hilarious."

Under what circumstances could the league possibly give out any kind of penalty that would "throw away [the] career" of someone who hit Cooper in the flow of a normal game? You realize that the longest suspension ever for on-the-field conduct was Albert Hanyesworth's 5 game penalty when he stomped on a guy's head, right? You think someone who hit Cooper would get more than that? At a minimum, the league would have to have some kind of evidence that it was due to Cooper being racist -- it'd have to be some sort of called shot or pre-game tweet or something. Otherwise, I figure they serve one game, two tops -- hardly a career-ending move.
posted by tonycpsu at 3:25 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


rtha: I get to decide what I call myself, and I get to decide what boundaries I will draw around what other people call me. My dyke friends can call me a dyke. The homophobic asshole who hurls it at me as an insult does not get to do that and have it somehow not be insulting.

First, I want to strongly recommend the TEDx video posted by Killick, above.. It's only 12 minutes long. Here are a couple of quotes from Jay Smooth's talk - please kep them in mind. "You will never bat 1000% when it comes to dealing with race issues" and "I'm not supposed to be perfect when it comes to navigating race". There are lots of other very insights in his discussion, and I would hope that they would apply here, and on any other thread that discusses race on metafilter.

rtha, Did you take time to listen to Bruce's monologue? Did you hear how he diffused the power of the N-word; he was trying, through humor, to make a general point that he *proved* to be true, because his experimental audience laughed together and bonded together as he finished the monologue. That happened in a live audience - right in front of African Americans, Italians, Jews, Latinos and Irish audience members - and other groups who have been ridiculed for their ethnicity.

Racism and generalized prejudice is an awful thing - no matter who engages in it. We should be doing everything we can to stop it, but I don't see how making a *word* a trigger point for conflict makes sense, especially when that word is claimed as a "special privilege" by those who have been its victim. That gives a word too much power. The more power that one gives to a word, the more it can be used against the intended victim of that word. That's all I'm saying. I'm *not* saying that we should suddenly be making ethnic slurs, and calling people names. on an individual basis. What I am saying is that we have given certain words too much power to hurt. I don't have answers for how to change that, but think it would be worth opening a conversation about that.

And, yes, you get to set boundaries about what other people call you.


scrump: The question that you really need to ask about that statement is, "when too much power is given to a word" by whom? If someone's getting kicked in the face because of the color of their skin, and someone's screaming "NIGGER" at them, I'm not sure the dude on the ground is the one responsible for the word's impact.

You make a good point, but now the N-word has been given even more power because it means not only the negative connotations that were given to it by racists, but also those who use it to condemn and shame those who use it as a racist term. Thus, the N-word is *way* more powerful than it used to be.

I'm a proponent of bringing shame back into the public sphere; I think it's a good thing that Cooper has been publicly shamed for his inappropriate use of the word. I think that his shaming and the fact that he has been fined, is enough. He's not perfect, and neither are any of us.

Last, another thing I find disappointing in this thread is how many people who are upset with what Riley Cooper said seem to be fine with people trying to "take his head off" when he goes back on the field. That is the most hypocritical thing I can imagine. Why should we wish anyone physical harm for saying a word, even after s/he has apologized and paid a penalty. Does anyone really believe that that kind of behavior will help a perpetrator grow in a direction of less hate and resentment toward the original target of his/her prejudice.

We have a long way to go in America when it comes to race, and one of the ways that we're limited, like Jay Smooth suggests in his TEDx talk, is that most people don't realize that most others are well-intended, and nobody's perfect when it comes to talking about race. Riley Cooper did a bad thing; he has apologized and paid a penalty - now let's help the guy grow, and move on.
posted by Vibrissae at 3:31 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


"...but also those who use it to condemn and shame those who use it as a racist term."

Why shouldn't white people who say "nigger" be shamed? This is a known consequence that white people have been attempting to talk their way out of for centuries. It really shouldn't be news to anyone who has spent more than 10 minutes in this country.

You know how the word and its consequences would have absolutely 0 power over Riley Cooper? If he hadn't fucking used it at all.
posted by Uther Bentrazor at 3:40 PM on August 5, 2013 [15 favorites]


rtha, Did you take time to listen to Bruce's monologue? Did you hear how he diffused the power of the N-word; he was trying, through humor, to make a general point that he *proved* to be true, because his experimental audience laughed together and bonded together as he finished the monologue. That happened in a live audience - right in front of African Americans, Italians, Jews, Latinos and Irish audience members - and other groups who have been ridiculed for their ethnicity.

He was Lenny Fucking Bruce, using his brilliance on a group of people who volunteered to go see Lenny Fucking Bruce. I'm pretty sure that even he would say that no one has the power to just declare the word powerless and have it be so. It will take a shitload of work - how many years did he hone his craft? - and it still leaves open the question of who is "responsible" for "giving" the word power, and what the context of that power is.

You make a good point, but now the N-word has been given even more power because it means not only the negative connotations that were given to it by racists, but also those who use it to condemn and shame those who use it as a racist term. Thus, the N-word is *way* more powerful than it used to be.

Because the people against whom this word was used without even a raised eyebrow now have sufficient power to say "That shit is not okay." People who use it as a pejorative should be ashamed and shamed.

and move on.

I always see this when people just don't want to hear anymore how offensive and hurtful something is. They don't want to hear from black people how they feel about it. Tough.
posted by rtha at 3:44 PM on August 5, 2013 [19 favorites]


Why hasn't he (or why hasn't Eagles management insisted that he) immediately made the Brett Ratner play?

That is, don't just say you're sorry, or try to claim that you were quacking like a racist and walking like a racist but aren't REALLY a racist, say that seeing yourself in that video has put a cold hard freakin' mirror in your face and you want both (a) to change for the better and (b) to take advantage of your celebrity and privilege to help stop more people like you from thinking it's okay or just an "oopsy" to say racist things.

He could, for example: Announce that he's donating [large number]% of his season's earnings to the NAACP/UNCF/SPLC. Join the Big Brother program, twice. Audit a black history class at Temple. Host a fundraiser for the Philly Boys & Girls Club. Ask to have lunch with Khalid Salaam, the mayor of Philadelphia, Jay Smooth, Maya Angelou and anyone else who might possibly say yes. Take out ad space in Sports Illustrated now, and again at the end of the season, to talk openly and humbly about what you've learned.

Hell, something along those lines seems like the way to go even if all he or the team or the NFL cared about is the respective financial hits they're now facing (though it'd be nice if they actually cared about racism). Regardless, there's at least a chance some good would come of it, no?

I might even actually start rooting for the Eagles* if he did anything close to that.

*not really
posted by argonauta at 3:45 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


seem to be fine with people trying to "take his head off" when he goes back on the field

for my part - i'm not "fine with" it - i just accept that it's a part of playing football. he's going to get some vicious hits this year, with or without this, but i think the intensity will be ramped up a little because of this.

you see this sort of thing all the time, honestly, it's really not exceptional to this story - one guy leaves a team in a shitty way, next time his new team meets the old team, the guy just seems to keep ending up at the wrong end of a pile or hit or even shoulder checked hard every time he gets up. hell, the show soundfx will sometimes focus on these sorts of rivalries and using the awesome power of nfl films show all the perfectly legal, but still extracurricular, activities.
posted by nadawi at 3:51 PM on August 5, 2013


When too much power is given to a word, then that word it can be used against you.

I genuinely thought i was lost on reddit for a second, and some major sub had turned itself blue as some sort of metafilter parody. I was wondering if it was the sites birthday and it was a send off.

Because seriously, this is some shit i'd hear over there.

The more power that one gives to a word, the more it can be used against the intended victim of that word. That's all I'm saying. I'm *not* saying that we should suddenly be making ethnic slurs, and calling people names. on an individual basis. What I am saying is that we have given certain words too much power to hurt. I don't have answers for how to change that, but think it would be worth opening a conversation about that.

I'm sorry, but i'm just not buying what you're selling. I'm also sorry if i'm a bit suspicious of you and off put, but i've just heard this exact point brought up by too many nerdy white dudes who want desperately to conclude the whole thing with "And therefor, everyone should get to say it and then it'll loose power"

You said a lot of words there, but i'm just not buying what you're selling. The whole "well everybody kinda sucks so people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones lol!" thing you have going on here is really somewhere in the condescending territory. Oh how high and mighty you are peacemaker, how wide a vantage you have over the battlefield.

You make a good point, but now the N-word has been given even more power because it means not only the negative connotations that were given to it by racists, but also those who use it to condemn and shame those who use it as a racist term. Thus, the N-word is *way* more powerful than it used to be.


So i'm pretty damn confused as to what your actual point is here. You think shaming people is great and needs to make a comeback, but you think it's a horrible bad negative doubleplusungood thing for us to be shaming people who use this word because it gives the word itself too much power?

Sorry, but this just sounds way too much like a song i've heard before quite a few times. That song is in fact, pretty overplayed if you've argued with nerdy white dudes about this before.
posted by emptythought at 3:51 PM on August 5, 2013 [6 favorites]


He could, for example:

There really isn't anything he can say or do to make it better with the incident still so raw and such big news but I would expect something along those lines to happen eventually.
posted by Drinky Die at 3:53 PM on August 5, 2013


Racism and generalized prejudice is an awful thing - no matter who engages in it.

This is a pernicious idea. Because power is always an issue, and the people with the power need to lay down their arms without expecting anything in return before the people without can be expected to trust them at all. Does it seem unfair? Sure. Asymmetry is always unfair, and this is a very asymmetrical situation.

We should be doing everything we can to stop it, but I don't see how making a *word* a trigger point for conflict makes sense, especially when that word is claimed as a "special privilege" by those who have been its victim. That gives a word too much power. The more power that one gives to a word, the more it can be used against the intended victim of that word. That's all I'm saying. I'm *not* saying that we should suddenly be making ethnic slurs, and calling people names. on an individual basis. What I am saying is that we have given certain words too much power to hurt. I don't have answers for how to change that, but think it would be worth opening a conversation about that.

I don't think you get to say how the target of hate speech gets to feel about that speech. These words have centuries of violence encoded in them, and, every time they are used (except, maybe, by the targets reclaiming them), they have that legacy of violence encoded in them. That's the point of using them. That's why cowards like Limbaugh love to deploy them; so they can luxuriate in that feeling of violence without having to risk physical danger.

These words are weapons, and every time they are deployed, it's a reminder of the violence they represent and which the users dearly with would come again. That's why people are so angry about them.

Also, that Jay Smooth talk is about communication between people of good will. We don't get anywhere when we let the violence in those words lead us to attack people with good intentions, where calm discussion and focusing on what was said and teachable moments and so on is actually productive. Jay Smooth has generally not had a problem calling out racists, homophobes, and misogynists in his talks, probably because they are not people of good will. Trying to make a universal rule out of a specific tactic is not a recipe for success.
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:54 PM on August 5, 2013 [7 favorites]


Drinky Die: I would expect something along those lines to happen eventually.

You're more optimistic than I am.
posted by argonauta at 3:56 PM on August 5, 2013


. Thus, the N-word is *way* more powerful than it used to be.

i would say that when it was used against people who many thought of as less than human and those fucked up ideas were codified in law, the word and other racial slurs had a lot more power than it does today. honestly this sounds like some of the bullshit my clueless racist family spouts - shit like "relations between blacks and whites are worse today than they were 50 years ago." like the only way that's true is if you're talking to sheltered white people who feel they've heard enough about it all.
posted by nadawi at 3:58 PM on August 5, 2013 [7 favorites]


oh he'll totally go on a reputation fixing tour just like culliver did last season when he talked about how the san francisco 49ers couldn't accept gay guys on the team.
posted by nadawi at 4:00 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


bonus stuff i didn't want to break the rules by editing in for the "When too much power is given to a word, then that word it can be used against you. " post

Your whole point sounds like it's getting dangerously close to some weasel words that imply that any person of color(or otherwise!) making a big deal out of saying the N word is basically playing the race card, and that harping on that is like "making too big of a deal about it" and "making the situation worse". I said i'd heard this song before, but this is an especially gross version as you skipped over all the tells and trigger phrases that would make it obvious "Now don't rock the boat or be too angry about this or you're just digging the hole deeper for yourself" garbage.

The people reacting to the word being used are not the ones who the onus is on to change the situation. They can't even really effect that much change, obviously, or we wouldn't be in this situation at all because that guy never would have said this. In a proper world where those people had any power this would be like him making sexual gestures at a toddler and no one would be defending it. Police would have been called.

The onus is on the white people saying the word to shut the fuck up, calling them out and "making drama" about it is not somehow making the problem worse or giving the word more power in any sense except for if you're willing to compare racists to highschool bullies who call someone a name just to get a rise out of them. I could give some credence to that argument, but just like bullying it is not the bullied persons responsibility to solve.

Focus on the person doing the harm, not the person being harmed. Anything else is victim blaming and fucking bullshit. Especially when you're telling them that them reacting or getting angry for being mistreated is "making the situation worse".

To repeat something often said, that's a bad look. Avoid that look. You're being a bit of the racism equivalent of a victim blamer WRT rapists here.
posted by emptythought at 4:00 PM on August 5, 2013 [6 favorites]


He could, for example: Announce that he's donating [large number]% of his season's earnings to the NAACP/UNCF/SPLC. Join the Big Brother program, twice. Audit a black history class at Temple. Host a fundraiser for the Philly Boys & Girls Club. Ask to have lunch with Khalid Salaam, the mayor of Philadelphia, Jay Smooth, Maya Angelou and anyone else who might possibly say yes. Take out ad space in Sports Illustrated now, and again at the end of the season, to talk openly and humbly about what you've learned.
He could be the avatar for the millions of Americans who like him need to have that conversation. Unfortunately he's a racist idiot and Damascus is a little tricky to get to at the moment.
posted by fullerine at 4:02 PM on August 5, 2013


Last, another thing I find disappointing in this thread is how many people who are upset with what Riley Cooper said seem to be fine with people trying to "take his head off" when he goes back on the field. That is the most hypocritical thing I can imagine.

You really need to step up your imagination game then, man. How about having slaves while proclaiming "it's a free country! :D"

Anyway, in the NFL, people get popped for saying all kinds of things. One of the eagles dbs got nicknamed "candybar" last year. Guys will slam other guys into the turf and then mock them with their own touchdown celebration. Riley Cooper said himself he will accept any punishment that comes. Don't think he didn't know, after playing years of football, that it wouldn't come on the field too. Personally I think provided he gets back out there, he will get laid out a few times and not helped up, then laid out a few times and then helped up. Everybody (in the league) knows he knows he messed up bad. Him getting back out there at all will bring a modicum of respect, so long as he takes his licks. It's kind of like an agreed upon thing. Hell, people like to hit certain receivers just because they talk too much in general, much less using racial slurs. Oh and don't think a nonblack player on defense won't lay him out either. They will. He'll be alright though. These guys already deliver some pretty brutal hits. Have you been watching football the past few years?
posted by cashman at 4:06 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Uther Bentrazor: Why shouldn't white people who say "nigger" be shamed?

That's what I said: read it again: vibrissae: "I'm a proponent of bringing shame back into the public sphere; I think it's a good thing that Cooper has been publicly shamed for his inappropriate use of the word."

And, you're right, he shouldn't have said it.

rtha: I always see this when people just don't want to hear anymore how offensive and hurtful something is. They don't want to hear from black people how they feel about it. Tough.

I suggest you look at the Jay Smooth video pointed to above, and stick with attacking the *act*, and not the person. Are you perfect? Am I? Answer: No. How do you know people "don't want to hear from black people" about how hurtful the N-word is? Nobody's perfect.

And, whether or not Lenny Bruce is a comedian who has honed his craft is not my point, nor was it Bruce's point; he was making a *perfectly valid point* that people *understood* - i.e. they "got it" during their "aha" moment in that club. There is more than a germ of truth in Bruce's monologue, that's why people laughed, together. They realized a truth - i.e. that we give words too much power, and they bonded during that moment. I think that's worth considering beyond the boundaries of a comedy club. And again, I would point you to the Jay Smooth video.

btw, I would also point emptythought to Jay Smooth's TEDx talk - i.e. think about Jay Smooth says, and look for some perspective, before you throw stones.

Genjiand Proust: Also, that Jay Smooth talk is about communication between people of good will.

No, he's not. Listen to his TEDx talk.

We don't get anywhere when we let the violence in those words lead us to attack people with good intentions, where calm discussion and focusing on what was said and teachable moments and so on is actually productive. Jay Smooth has generally not had a problem calling out racists, homophobes, and misogynists in his talks, probably because they are not people of good will. Trying to make a universal rule out of a specific tactic is not a recipe for success.

and

You're being a bit of the racism equivalent of a victim blamer WRT rapists here.

You just proved Lenny Bruce's point! Look at the implied (and direct) accusations made on this thread since the Lenny Bruce idea was introduced, including yours, about me and my worth, as a person. Pretty darned sad on your part. I think Jay Smooth's talk should be required listening for you, because now you're venturing into territory that proves Leny Bruce's point. More than several people on this thread need to really listen to what Jay Smooth says in that TEDx talk.

cashman: Everybody (in the league) knows he knows he messed up bad. Him getting back out there at all will bring a modicum of respect, so long as he takes his licks. It's kind of like an agreed upon thing. Hell, people like to hit certain receivers just because they talk too much in general, much less using racial slurs. Oh and don't think a nonblack player on defense won't lay him out either. They will. He'll be alright though. These guys already deliver some pretty brutal hits. Have you been watching football the past few years?

Used to be a fan of pro football, but I stopped watching pro football because it's a sport that ruins bodies, and glorifies violence. Especially, given the very strong evidence that there is no way that any equipment made can stop one's brain from crashing into the interior wall of one's skull and causing permanent, debilitating brain injury - not to mention permanent physical injury, not to mention the ignorant ex-jock football players that go on to become announcers that go on to become TV commentators that make the sport sound like it's a gladiator match.

And, how do you know that Cooper will survive the vicious hits that he will no dount have dished out to him. He did a bad thing; he made a racist slur; he has profusely apologized and been fined; he has embarrassed his family. Now, you want to see him pummeled on the field, or maybe blindsided by a safety when he's most vulnerable, in mid-air after leaping for a catch? Really?
posted by Vibrissae at 4:18 PM on August 5, 2013


Unfortunately he's a racist idiot and Damascus is a little tricky to get to at the moment.

Oh, I wasn't thinking he'd actually need to BELIEVE it. I just can't understand why even the people around him who are only motivated by money aren't insisting that he make some kind of non-perfunctory move.

Paula Deen had even more at stake, and no one on her team seemed to realize how short the window of time would be for her to save her own proverbial bacon. It'd be fine by me if at least the Head Start-type programs in Philly or Savannah got some money out of either of them.
posted by argonauta at 4:23 PM on August 5, 2013


who is saying they want to see him hit harder for it? i'm seeing people saying he will be hit harder. for someone fighting this valiant fight about the power of words, you seem to be missing what people are saying.
posted by nadawi at 4:23 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Look at the implied (and direct) accusations made on this thread since the Lenny Bruce idea was introduced

The Lenny Bruce idea was introduced to discussions about taboo language for a whole lot of people long before you trotted it out in your comment in this thread, is the thing. You're wondering why people are bristling, part of it is that your trying to tell 'em how to suck eggs.
posted by cortex at 4:26 PM on August 5, 2013 [9 favorites]


You guys will be here all night talking to Vibrissae, going around in circles.

Vibrissae is convinced various rappers are virulent sexists, and are "song and dance hoes" who should be denounced yet people should not let their emotions get the best of us with Riley Cooper and instead turn it into some kind of redemptive moment.
posted by Ad hominem at 4:30 PM on August 5, 2013 [6 favorites]


emptythought: You're being a bit of the racism equivalent of a victim blamer WRT rapists here

You just proved Lenny Bruce's point! Look at the implied (and direct) accusations made on this thread since the Lenny Bruce idea was introduced, including yours, about me and my worth, as a person. Pretty darned sad on your part. I think Jay Smooth's talk should be required listening for you, because now you're venturing into territory that proves Leny Bruce's point. More than several people on this thread need to really listen to what Jay Smooth says in that TEDx talk.

nadawi
who is saying they want to see him hit harder for it? i'm seeing people saying he will be hit harder. for someone fighting this valiant fight about the power of words, you seem to be missing what people are saying.


But I don't see you arguing against the fact that he will be hit harder. Why not? Why are the others talking about it with a kind of implied glee? If you don't get that implication, then we plainly disagree - regardless of your attempt to put your own meaning to my words.

cortex: The Lenny Bruce idea was introduced to discussions about taboo language for a whole lot of people long before you trotted it out in your comment in this thread, is the thing. You're wondering why people are bristling, part of it is that your trying to tell 'em how to suck eggs.

So now you're telling me what my intentions are? I think you need to listen to that Jay Smooth TEDx talk. Just sayin'

Ad hominum Vibrissae is convinced various rappers are virulent sexists, and are "song and dance hoes" who should be denounced yet people should not let their emotions get the best of us with Riley Cooper and instead turn it into some kind of redemptive moment.

First, your bringing this up here is a major derail, and you have taken my words out of context to prove your erroneous point, and at the same tiem reinforced the point I'm trying to make about the power of the N-word, and how that power can be used for good, AND bad (to reduce the user of said word to a bad person, instead of a person who did a bad thing, and may be otherwise good - as Jay Smooth makes clear in his TEDx talk). And, you are, like emptythought, proving my point (and Jay Smooth's point) about the power of words being used to label the whole person, in a way that doesn't IMPROVE anything.

You have also not listened to the Jay Smooth TEDx talk that Killian (and I, in subsequent comments) have brought up. And, if you have listened to it, you missed the point. You have disingenuously taken what I said on another thread entirely out of context, because you are apparently still upset (*really?*?) that I objected to the hagiographic fawning-over Kanye West's overt misogyny and sexism and utter disrespect for women by some low-rent, so-called critical theorist, as an apologist for Kanye's sexism because he "needs to be that way as a political act". Good grief! And you're bringing this up now - to defend, what?
posted by Vibrissae at 4:48 PM on August 5, 2013


Vibrissae, you probably need to break your responses up into several comments. It's pretty hard to respond sensibly, especially since you are mixing up emptythought's and my comments.

Anyway, I have listened to the TEDX talk, and to a lot of Jay Smooth's other material, and I will repeat: Jay Smooth has no problem calling people out for racism, sexism, and homophobia. He has a gentle way of doing it, but he does it. Nothing in that talk would apply to someone screaming racial epithets, because it assumes a certain mount of good will between the parties. Jay Smooth, for example celebrated Stonewall rather than chiding the participants for not gently admonishing the police.

You just proved Lenny Bruce's point! Look at the implied (and direct) accusations made on this thread since the Lenny Bruce idea was introduced, including yours, about me and my worth, as a person. Pretty darned sad on your part. I think Jay Smooth's talk should be required listening for you, because now you're venturing into territory that proves Leny Bruce's point. More than several people on this thread need to really listen to what Jay Smooth says in that TEDx talk.

Again, not sure who exactly you are responding to, but you'll not that I called you ideas pernicious, not you personally.
posted by GenjiandProust at 4:53 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


So now you're telling me what my intentions are?

No, I'm telling you how your actions are coming across. I'm saying that busting in with "yeah but Lenny Bruce" makes you seem like you're mostly here to hear yourself talk and are disregarding the likelihood that the people you're revealing that wisdom to are already plenty familiar with the man and his theses on this and other topics.

I don't know why you're digging into this thread this afternoon, but it's kinda sucking the air out of the conversation and making it about What Vibrissae Thinks About All This, which is something we've had to talk to you about before and it'd be great if you'd cut it out and go do something else for a while.
posted by cortex at 4:53 PM on August 5, 2013 [8 favorites]


GanjiandProust: Sorry for the mixup, I made another comment leading off with what emptythought said. I appreciate your perspective.
posted by Vibrissae at 4:56 PM on August 5, 2013


First, your bringing this up here is a major derail, and you have taken my words out of context to prove your erroneous point, and at the same tiem reinforced the point I'm trying to make about the power of the N-word, and how that power can be used for good, AND bad (to reduce the user of said word to a bad person, instead of a person who did a bad thing, and may be otherwise good - as Jay Smooth makes clear in his TEDx talk). And, you are, like emptythought, proving my point (and Jay Smooth's point) about the power of words being used to label the whole person, in a way that doesn't IMPROVE anything.

I'm not even mad. I'm just disappointed. I promised never to listen to Kanye West ever again And here you are defending racists.

You know damn well that Jay Smooth isn't talking about actual racists. He is talking about your drinking buddy who made a watermelon joke.

You ever think that maybe Riley Cooper is an actual racist that isn't chagrined at all? And maybe when confronted with the fact he offended millions of people, he won't give a shit beyond losing money.

I dunno, Maybe Jay Smooth is wiser than I am but it sounds very close to "there are no bad dogs" to me. Some of these not-bad dogs will burn your church down.

I also don't care what Lenny Bruce says. I proved him right that what, when someone tries to insult another person they end up insulted?
posted by Ad hominem at 4:57 PM on August 5, 2013 [5 favorites]


So, we *can* agree that Cooper used that word for bad purposes, and did a bad thing, and may or may not be a bad person. We can also agree that Lenny Bruce and Jay Smooth were/are awesomesauce.

Since everything here turns on those first two points, and nothing, really, on the third, I'm not sure what you are trying to do, here, Vibrissae?
posted by allthinky at 5:12 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Genjiand Proust: Also, that Jay Smooth talk is about communication between people of good will.

No, he's not. Listen to his TEDx talk.


Vibrissae: He specifically mentions good intentions in the TEDx talk. I think you have a profound misunderstanding of what he's talking about in that talk, and how it applies or doesn't in this situation.

I also feel 100% confident that you and Jay Smooth do not agree on race relations and how to discuss them, and you should consider that a lot of people you are asking to watch the video have watched it or Jays YouTube stuff and the problem is more that you do not get it.
posted by sweetkid at 5:19 PM on August 5, 2013 [7 favorites]


Ad hominem already said some of what i wanted to say, but honestly i think we're never really going to meet in the middle here Vibrissae. You essentially skipped addressing my entire posts in all but spirit and jumped to my(admittedly a bit inflammatory) final words.

You know damn well that Jay Smooth isn't talking about actual racists. He is talking about your drinking buddy who made a watermelon joke.

Really covers a lot of it. But what i really want to get in to is stop using that video as a club. It's playing right now in another window, and i've heard most of it. It's pretty obvious that what ad hominem says is exactly what he's talking about.

But to really get to the meat of my opinion here, i think by essentially saying "what these actions say about the person is off the table" you're doing two things.

1. separating a persons actions from the person themselves. This is fucked up in pretty much exactly the same way that the "oh, he was drunk so XYZ" stuff i was sledgehammering above is. You CAN'T separate actions from the person. In doing so, you're ripping out a huge chunk of the context. What you're essentially saying here is that it's pointless to address a persons character, and we're only allowed to examine their actions. You keep coming back and doubling and tripling down on this.

2. Jay's video is about how if you try and address a persons character and not their actions directly to them it's futile. It isn't some kind of godwins law conversation destroying pointless dark road for us to be talking about what his actions speak about him as a person to be bringing that up here.

Taken together, this entire thing seems like an extremely cleverly constructed debate siege weapon to essentially get to the end goal of "lets not ever call anyone a racist, we can call their actions racist but not them" backed up with a fairly compelling, but only at a superficial level relevant video.

I'd like to note that i do like this video, and nodded in an "ugh, yep" sense when he brought up the "what are you?" question. I'm biracial(native on my moms side, german on my dads side) and i've gotten that, "where are you from?" and "whats your ethnicity?" questions a bajillion times sometimes even followed up with weird racist "jokes" or whatever. I want to be very clear that it's a great, interesting video(especially since there's some shitty ted talks out there) but you're trying to force it in to service in a context it only works in if the people you're battling don't really parse it.

While we're repeating things, i think what scrump said above really needs to be said to you again as well.

This is a nice slogan, but I've personally never seen it written or heard it said by anyone other than white cis people, who are used to being listened to when they say something hurts them.

There is absolutely such a thing as light skinned and passing privelege. I don't want to really jump in to that rabbit hole here, but if you go ask any other random black dude you know what he thinks about these opinions i really doubt he's going to agree with them.

None of my POC friends who would say your having an ass half full attitude and approach here(you know, like glass half full but...) have MeFi accounts or i'd link them to this thread and go "Oh man, look at whats going on in this shit". But yea, just because two guys said it on the internet doesn't mean that they have the definite opinion on this, or that they're backing it up with anything but personal experience and opinion. These are both basically op-eds. I realize it's not theirs the BIGOT-O-METER 4000 or some like scientific way to measure this, but basically...

1. Are you white? Is anyone in your family not white?
2. If a bunch of people tell you you're probably wrong, and it's a subjective thing, and you're a white dude riding this hobby horse you should probably just get off now. Because it isn't just that people disagree with you. You're probably just wrong.

Like, you can ride this shit straight in to the sun and burst in to flames, but like... "hearts and minds", dude.
posted by emptythought at 5:21 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


Let's leave Vibr and his comments alone he's out of the thread. My problem is not with the defenders or even really with Riley. I don't give a shit if he's a secret hate monger or not, he got caught being awful in public and should be fired or sent to the minors or whatever.

My problem is with the NFL. The fact that they barely fine a dude for threatening to fight someone with mega racial slurs while blithely tolerating Dan Snyder and his taunts makes me sick. I think I'm done with football for a while.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:27 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Let's leave Vibr and his comments alone he's out of the thread.

Yeah, since cortex told Vibrissae to stop engaging on this particular issue, I think maybe this derail has reached its endpoint. The real question is whether there is a point to get back to.

I am pretty sure that my mom taught me from a very early age that this particular slur was one of the worst things I could say, and I had better not. Which is why I am always a little perplexed at the number of white people who seem really aggrieved that they can't say it. English is incredibly full of words. Why this word in particular (and, to be fair, a few others, some of which appeared upthread) is so vital to our white communication that it's being off limits is the Barrier That Must Be Eternally Tested, I have no living clue.
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:37 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Hmm, just to be clear -- I posted the Jay Smooth video not because I thought it applied to Riley Cooper, but because other people had commented about the more well known video, and I think this one carries some good ideas a bit further.
There's a difference between you and I trying to negotiate a race conversation in a productive way and a celebrity being a dick and then offering a canned apology. I don't know whether Riley Cooper can be educated or not, and honestly I don't really care. We tend to treat celebrities like they are indispensable, and they're not. The guy should have been fired right after this came to light.
And I think that the hypocrisy of the NFL denouncing Cooper while defending the Redskins' choice of names should be pointed out repeatedly.
posted by Killick at 5:41 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Now, you want to see him pummeled on the field, or maybe blindsided by a safety when he's most vulnerable, in mid-air after leaping for a catch? Really?

Not to bring this back up, but since it is irrelevant who said it, I just want to clarify that I personally am not interested in seeing Cooper get crunched (hey, I'm running out of adjectives for tackle, cut me some slack here). My point was that if he gets walloped with a hard hit that isn't dirty, don't get up and get mad. Don't complain to the refs. Don't whine and point. Take your licks and compose yourself and head back to the huddle or the sideline. If he does that a couple of times, watch how quick the narrative shifts. Guys won't forget, they've already said that. But they will forgive. He's just got to take his punishment. As long as there are no dirty hits, I'm fine with that.

Heck, I remember all the way back to Earnest Givens talking so much that he got walloped going across the middle, I believe it was. Of course you also have T.O. who got blasted off the Dallas Star. There are lots of things you can do to set yourself up for getting deservedly popped. He's going to get popped. He should actually just let it happen. The more he gets away from it and gets demonstrative, the harder the hit will be when it catches up to him. This is how things happen in football. If he acts right, in a year it'll be like none of this ever happened, in terms of on the field action.
posted by cashman at 5:42 PM on August 5, 2013


My problem is with the NFL. The fact that they barely fine a dude for threatening to fight someone with mega racial slurs...

The amount of the fine was limited to a max of $37,000 by the collective bargaining agreement. I am unclear on if he was fined the max by the Eagles. The CBA also apparently prevents the league from punishing Cooper further when the team already acted.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:54 PM on August 5, 2013


Martin Luther King, Jr “Loving Your Enemies,” Sermon Delivered at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church on 17 November 1957.
Another way that you love your enemy is this: When the opportunity presents itself for you to defeat your enemy, that is the time which you must not do it. There will come a time, in many instances, when the person who hates you most, the person who has misused you most, the person who has gossiped about you most, the person who has spread false rumors about you most, there will come a time when you will have an opportunity to defeat that person. It might be in terms of a recommendation for a job; it might be in terms of helping that person to make some move in life. That’s the time you must do it. That is the meaning of love. In the final analysis, love is not this sentimental something that we talk about. It’s not merely an emotional something. Love is creative, understanding goodwill for all men. It is the refusal to defeat any individual. When you rise to the level of love, of its great beauty and power, you seek only to defeat evil systems. Individuals who happen to be caught up in that system, you love, but you seek to defeat the system.
posted by Golden Eternity at 5:56 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


Mod note: Vibrissae, you can make your comment without the extended mod rant at the beginning of it. I'll MeMail it to you.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 6:19 PM on August 5, 2013


ad hominum:
And here you are defending racists.
You have again proved Jay Smooth's point. Don't you think that Riley Cooper and his teammates should be handling this in a way that is more similar to Jay Smooth's approach? Have not Riley Cooper and his teammates been "drinking buddies" (as you say, above), to which Jay Smooth's philosophy should apply? If not, why not? Last, you don't know me; you don't know what I've done in my life to combat racism. Get over yourself.

Of course, we can't continue this conversation, because our overlord cortex is putting a halt to it, essentially using his interpretation of my intentions as the "truth". That's what happens when moderators operate primarily chilling from personal agenda, instead of *moderating*.

althinky: So, we *can* agree that Cooper used that word for bad purposes, and did a bad thing, and may or may not be a bad person. We can also agree that Lenny Bruce and Jay Smooth were/are awesomesauce.

Since everything here turns on those first two points, and nothing, really, on the last, I'm not sure what Vibrissae is doing here?


Now that your overlord cortex has also decided to pile on, you join in on the pile?. Nice! It's really interesting how people who call themselves "liberal" on social issues can go to the dark side to chill speech when others don't fall in, lockstep, to their every nuanced belief about what is "right and true".

sweetkid: I also feel 100% confident that you and Jay Smooth do not agree on race relations and how to discuss them, and you should consider that a lot of people you are asking to watch the video have watched it or Jays YouTube stuff and the problem is more that you do not get it.

How do I disagree with Jay Smooth? How are not Riley Cooper and his teammates - who he has played with for FIVE years - not been, as ad hominum claims "drinking buddies". And, with that as a given, how is it that Jay Smooth's ideas can't play in the Eagle's locker room arena, or even on the pro football field? Why can't Jay Smooth's meme work in the Eagle's locker room, and then spread from their amongst pro football peers, and then to the general population that loves this blood sport?

Finishing, full circle, Lenny Bruce's point is that words that are claimed as exclusive in any way, or given too much power in any way, can be trouble - and that one can use well-intentioned actions to diffuse the power of those words, even among the most ardent racist. It happens! Lenny Bruce used comedy to make a point that his audience *experienced, and understood*. Frankly, from what I've seen on this thread, too many people have not experienced and understood that "aha" moment, and thus stand to learn from it.

empthythought: 1. Are you white? Is anyone in your family not white?
2. If a bunch of people tell you you're probably wrong, and it's a subjective thing, and you're a white dude riding this hobby horse you should probably just get off now. Because it isn't just that people disagree with you. You're probably just wrong.


Does it matter whether one is white, or not, while trying to make a point about how the power of a word can be made too powerful, and in turn be used in a way that perpetuates the negativity originally intended by that word in a way that perpetuates ANY kind of institutional bias? It matters to the degree that if one is white, one has never felt the living hell that is racism. That said, does it mean that someone who is white has never felt the constant bias and prejudice that comes from the way that s/he looks or talks, or acts...not out of any attempt to offend, but simply because of who they are, has no right to comment on institutionalized bias, including racism? To say that one has to be black to understand the pain of generalized prejudice is a mistaken notion, period. Racism is a bad thing, but it's also a subset of other institutionalized ways of excluding and beating up on "the other". My point all along has been to try to see if Lenny Bruce's insight might be applied in ways that diffuse racism. Is that possible? Maybe. I don't know, but I like what he said, and I liked what results he achieved amongst the mixed racial crowd that he entertained (and educated) that evening.

btw, there is no "winning" conversations like this, because the work of eradicating racism and generalized prejudice is constant. We are all biased in one way or another. If you don't believe me go take some of the Project Implicit tests at Harvard (Google it).

I'm not going to present to mefites who have wrongly accused me of racism (and worse) all the things that I have done to stop racism and prejudice in my life. My life speaks for itself. What is interesting to me about this thread is how people of good will - and, I count all members of the metafilter family people of good will - should start making personally insulting accusations about the whole person, when there is disagreement about any topic.

Instead, what has been seen here is personal attack and reading-into-intention made by all too many on this thread, including a moderator. Of course, that's your right (and the moderator's privilege).

That said, I've appreciated the more measured comments, and especially Killak's pointing to Jay Smooth's video, which so many people want to dismiss as a possible solution to the angst between Cooper and his peers. That - and my sheer disappointment at the personal attacks and accusations that have no place in a civil discussion among well-intentioned people, no matter their differences.

And, Lordy be! I'll close with a quote from the last post I've seen on this thread - we could all learn from it!

Martin Luther King, Jr. "Another way that you love your enemy is this: When the opportunity presents itself for you to defeat your enemy, that is the time which you must not do it. There will come a time, in many instances, when the person who hates you most, the person who has misused you most, the person who has gossiped about you most, the person who has spread false rumors about you most, there will come a time when you will have an opportunity to defeat that person. It might be in terms of a recommendation for a job; it might be in terms of helping that person to make some move in life. That’s the time you must do it. That is the meaning of love. In the final analysis, love is not this sentimental something that we talk about. It’s not merely an emotional something. Love is creative, understanding goodwill for all men. It is the refusal to defeat any individual. When you rise to the level of love, of its great beauty and power, you seek only to defeat evil systems. Individuals who happen to be caught up in that system, you love, but you seek to defeat the system."

Good evening.
posted by Vibrissae at 6:29 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Some other quotes by Martin Luther King, Jr.:
Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.

Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will.

Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.

We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability; it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co-workers with God, and without this hard work, time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. We must use time creatively, in the knowledge that the time is always ripe to do right.
posted by argonauta at 6:38 PM on August 5, 2013 [9 favorites]


I was going to say this before but I was going to let it drop.

How do we know what Riley Cooper thinks about his teammates or what they think of him.

He wasn't quoting Denzel from Training day he was threatening to fight people, but only people of a specific color.

Anyone think this is the first time he's done this?
posted by Ad hominem at 6:38 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Finishing, full circle, Lenny Bruce's point is that words that are claimed as exclusive in any way, or given too much power in any way, can be trouble - and that one can use well-intentioned actions to diffuse the power of those words, even among the most ardent racist. It happens! Lenny Bruce used comedy to make a point that his audience *experienced, and understood*.

The idea here - which has been brought up many, many times before - that it is some kind of exclusive privilege to claim that a word injures a person, is absurd and condescending. You don't get to decide for other people, "this word no longer hurts you", nor lecture them about letting go of the wonderful privilege of being the target of hateful language. You don't get to tell them, "No, see, now you just have to stop giving a shit. We don't have to stop saying it. We decided, because Lenny fucking Bruce for the billionth time." How about just not saying it? Why try to browbeat against the real pain other people feel, and defer to the simple act of just not saying it?
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 7:01 PM on August 5, 2013 [12 favorites]


To clarify: I do not, and would not, call myself "liberal". Also, far from "chilling" speech, I was really honestly trying to figure out your point. No intent to pile, but rather to clarify. I still don't get your point, but I've no confidence that more words from you will fix that.

Finally, I do not accept cortex as my overlord ... but maybe that's not a thing I have a choice over? Seriously, though, it's a fairly rotten thing for you to have said, about me, and about cortex.

/derail on my part.
posted by allthinky at 7:21 PM on August 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


Finally, I do not accept cortex as my overlord

Nor I. It's ants, it's going to be the giant ants.
posted by sweetkid at 7:25 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


Lenny Bruce used comedy to make a point that his audience *experienced, and understood*.

You keep quoting Lenny Bruce here. And yet, you know, I get the feeling you certainly never have experienced hearing words directed against you that carried the threat of 300 years of arbitrary murder, because you certainly haven't understood what that might entail to the people that sort of language is directed to.

I read your comments and I had to go away and do something else. I was thinking of disabling my account - Metafilter has seemed like a kind of oasis of good faith in the online world, but if what you said was going to fly, well...

But I checked back and saw several people had made good answers to you. I am consoled, I am re-assured. Basically I just had a really bad experience online, when a prestigious British newspaper which should have known better allowed a Black British columnist to be harrassed by the EDL. It's like cluelessness. Who are you aligning yourself with? Why? Is this an abstract to you? We've got to love the poor racists because they don't know any better? I, a grandmother, have got to love people I'd be scared to meet in the street because - because what, exactly? Because a comic who died some years ago says so? What did he say about the racist language that specifically refers to his own ethnicity, did he say anything about that? I honestly don't know, I'm curious.

You know, when you say 'we' it's just so obvious your 'we' doesn't include anyone who knows what the threat of that word means. You can't even imagine your 'we' having people like me in it.
posted by glasseyes at 7:29 PM on August 5, 2013 [9 favorites]


Does it matter whether one is white, or not, while trying to make a point about how the power of a word can be made too powerful,

Yes it really does. D'uh.
posted by glasseyes at 7:32 PM on August 5, 2013 [8 favorites]


Yes, "too powerful" to whom exactly also matters.
posted by sweetkid at 7:35 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


"You don't get to decide for other people,

Who's trying to do that? Racism is wrong. Comprende? And, where did I say that one should go about saying words like the one under discussion (or any word like it) in public? I'm making a point about the negative power of certain words, and how one might think about finding additional or novel ways to diffuse them. You're reading into my words and intentions, and making wrong assumptions, in spite of my prior attempts to clarify - and then going on to make your own, erroneous (and personally comfortable) conclusions about what I mean.

I'm essentially in agreement with you about all the points you made - except for your implications about what I mean, or intend. And, I have in fact taught many people to eliminate racism from their lives and actions - including racist language. That said, I don't think there is anything wrong for looking for novel ways to diffuse the negative power of racist or other words that indicate general institutional bias/discrimination.

glasseyes: You can't even imagine your 'we' having people like me in it.

Sad, and pompous. You know nothing about what I've experienced, and even if I tried to tell you your mind is made up. Really sad. Go watch the Lenny Bruce video and try to make yourself a little less "holier than thou" - you'll get on better in life. Follow that with the TEDx video that recommends a civil discussion so that people can grow, together.

At this point I am going to really stop posting on this thread, because I've been asked to, and because there are too many people here who want to make what was a simple suggestion to ameliorate the negative power of a word, to have a *civil* discussion about that - into a lightning rod full of personal insults to justify their *understandable* anger about racism. So, in deference to that justifiable anger, if anyone else wants to discuss this further, send memail.

Good evening, I'm out.
posted by Vibrissae at 7:45 PM on August 5, 2013


Go and watch the Lenny Bruce video and try to make yourself a little less "holier than thou" -you'll get on better in life.

You're calling me pompous? You're telling me how to get on better in life? Gee, if only I wasn't so uppity?

And then you're complaining about personal insults?

You know, if you didn't mean to sound like that you really have a tin ear.
posted by glasseyes at 7:49 PM on August 5, 2013 [11 favorites]


Good thing vibrissae's "out" because that was just too odious.
posted by sweetkid at 7:50 PM on August 5, 2013


Mod note: Let's stop making it personal, now please. People can feel free to leave aside Vibrissae's comments, and he's said he's done in this thread, so the conversation can move on. Thanks.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 7:51 PM on August 5, 2013


One of the most valuable franchises of the NFL is named "The Redskins" as a way to "honor" Native Americans. Obviously the player in this story was just usng the n-word to show respect for the African American person he was talking to.
posted by humanfont at 7:58 PM on August 5, 2013 [6 favorites]


I'm not trying to pile on at all, and I hope Vibrissae checks back in, because there's something I'd like to point out. That is, I don't think the word "diffuse" is correct the way you're using it. Do you mean "defuse?" I really am trying to help, but I understand if it's not appreciated, at this point. Thanks for your time.
posted by Ice Cream Socialist at 8:02 PM on August 5, 2013


Ice Cream Socialist: I'm not trying to pile on at all, and I hope Vibrissae checks back in, because there's something I'd like to point out. That is, I don't think the word "diffuse" is correct the way you're using it. Do you mean "defuse?" I really am trying to help, but I understand if it's not appreciated, at this point. Thanks for your time.

Yeah, my bad. Thanks for the correction; I meant "defuse". Good evening!
posted by Vibrissae at 8:05 PM on August 5, 2013


Everything considered, I think a high-profile employee of a company having a very public outburst like this, getting fired? Probably not unprecedented, and seems a pretty reasonable course of action.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 8:08 PM on August 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


If you're not a member of the class being oppressed, you don't get to have a fucking opinion on how they should feel or react. If you don't like it, well, damn, ain't that a hell of an object lesson.

Because, see, that outraged, how-dare-you feeling that's got you all fired up right now? That's the feeling of being told "guess what: you don't get a say".

Now, while you're imagining all the righteous snark you're going to lay on me, imagine this: being told "guess what: you don't get a say" your entire life.

So I say this with all the civility I can generate: if you're white, my in-laws, my wife, and my half-Diné boys appreciate your concern but you can stick your opinions about First Nations culture right up your ass.
posted by scrump at 8:13 PM on August 5, 2013 [4 favorites]


Oh, and my marrying into the Diné means exactly jack and shit when it comes to tribal matters, and I knew and accepted that going in.

Dances With Wolves is a cute movie and a fun time, but there are some things that should never be forgiven. And I have to own my complicity in it. No, I personally didn't participate in the native genocide. But I have a duty and obligation to try to work off some of the debt that's owed in whatever way I can.

I won't be forgiven, and I don't expect to be: I'll die without being forgiven. That is exactly as it should be: some debts are too large for one life, and it's not like our government is doing shit to pay it off.

I don't get to tell any of my Diné family how to feel about these things. Mostly, I listen.
posted by scrump at 8:21 PM on August 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


Oh, look, another alum of the Urban Meyer school for wayward tots.

(I know it was a while ago, but)
At the same time, though, I do think that there is a strong piece of Khalid Salaam's article that does bother me. He says that people want to know if they can say the N-word. I don't think I've known anyone where that is the case.

A lovely world you live in. The topic has not come up yet in my family, but I know what will be said because the same thing was said during the Michael Richards scandal, and when Paula Deen came up. "Why is he being punished at all? They use that word all the time, why can't we?"
posted by dirigibleman at 8:41 PM on August 5, 2013


It happened on metafilter. To this day I still don't get it. I mean I do, but I just haven't fully taken in how it feels to be so entitled that you cannot take another person at their word and agree not to call them this hateful thing they were called while horrific acts of violence were going on. And not just a one time thing either, but there was a structure and logos and clothing and meetings and people born and raised in it.

Key and Peele did a joke skit helpful video about it this awesome new app. If one of the eagles put this on Cooper's phone, I would crack up laughing. It exists, right?
posted by cashman at 9:39 PM on August 5, 2013 [9 favorites]


First, I, unlike the rest of these apostates, cheerfully welcome cortex as my new overlord, and willingly extend my services in running, not languishing in, the new gulag you heretics will no doubt be thrown into.

Also, that Jay Smooth talk is about communication between people of good will. We don't get anywhere when we let the violence in those words lead us to attack people with good intentions, where calm discussion and focusing on what was said and teachable moments and so on is actually productive. Jay Smooth has generally not had a problem calling out racists, homophobes, and misogynists in his talks, probably because they are not people of good will.

I think my problem with this is tactical, not moral. Because the problem is that calling someone a racist /is/ a big conversation about Who They Are, and even if you're not talking directly to them, that's a thing that a lot of people will step up to defend. There will be prolonged arguments about whether or not the person really is racist, because racist /is/ a dirty word and not one generally applied to "people with good intentions" and it is one that no sensible person wants applied to themselves or anyone they think is a decent human being.

And those discussions are just plain not useful. They are not useful to anyone. They don't make anything better - instead they get into what someone's intentions are, which no one can know but God. We can try to say what we think, but it's just going to be a vicious battle where nothing moves forward. Whereas if we leave aside the question of whether or not someone is a person of good will or a racist, we can talk about what we think appropriate actions for someone who has engaged in racist behavior are. Whether we think people who say racist things should be fired, whether or not they are actually racists. Whether we think public apologies or donations of income or what have you are useful.
posted by corb at 1:58 AM on August 6, 2013


And those discussions are just plain not useful. They are not useful to anyone. They don't make anything better - instead they get into what someone's intentions are, which no one can know but God. We can try to say what we think, but it's just going to be a vicious battle where nothing moves forward. Whereas if we leave aside the question of whether or not someone is a person of good will or a racist, we can talk about what we think appropriate actions for someone who has engaged in racist behavior are.

I get your point here, but there is a downside -- the idea of an "endless new day," where no one ever is a racist but just said/did something racist this one time and let's look at that in isolation, kind obscures the way that some people say/do/defend racist things a lot, and there are patterns of behavior and scripts and playbooks and all of this serves to derail productive discussion about racism, and I don't think that's an accident. At what point do you get to say "there is a pattern of behavior here that is hurting the community?" When does "this guy is always the one saying/doing/defending racist things" become a euphemism for "this guy is A racist?" Because, at some point, practically speaking, discussion becomes impossible, and it's not because "we can't talk about racism," it's because not everyone does so in good faith.
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:58 AM on August 6, 2013 [8 favorites]


because racist /is/ a dirty word

the guy who used a racial slur while threatening violence will probably have to just get used to a few dirty words thrown his way. being called a racist is not worse than being a victim of racism.
posted by nadawi at 6:23 AM on August 6, 2013 [9 favorites]


Genji: I think that those are actually exactly the kind of conversations that taking a step back allows us to have. It allows us to say "Hey, you say seem to say racist things a lot. Without using accusatory language that will automatically get you upset regardless of your intent, what's up with that?" Maybe they picked up the language from somewhere that had a lot of racism - for example, my Hispanic family picked up a lot of 1950s pro-white racist phrases without understanding those were racist phrases just because the movies they learned English from used them. Or maybe they do in fact have some racist ideas - and I think even then it is important to talk to them about them.

Two of my friends are the biggest Nazi-haters I know. They have gone to the personal danger of infiltrating meetings to get lists of white supremacists in order to do serious anti-racist work. They are some of the strongest anti-racists I have ever met. These friends are reformed white supremacists. I didn't know them when they were - and to be honest, I'm not sure I myself am capable of having the calm discussions necessary to puncture through the white supremacist language. But someone was, and someone did. Someone did what I can only imagine was backbreakingly difficult spade work, in order to bring those people - who, again, are now staunch anti-racists and do enormous work - away from their racist beliefs into better ones. And I do not think those conversations can take place when we're smugly superior about our evolved knowledge - which, after all, came about largely because other people had conversations with us, often when we were too young to remember it, that racism is wrong.

You talk about patterns of behavior and scripts and playbooks, and I don't know a lot about that, but I trust that you know what you're talking about, that these things essentially do exist. But I think a good way to deal with that is to figure out the conversations people are trying to have with each other, and to steer around the rocks they are always going to break on in order to have the conversations that they can.

Because I think there are very, very, staggeringly few, actual mustache-twirling racists, who are out to deliberately stop all mention of race in order to let racism flourish, with planning and forethought. I think that there are people who are defensive of other people in their communities and defensive of their ideas and what feels right to them. There are people who are angry at their circumstances and their lives and who have been convinced that minorities are to blame for them.

What are the discussions you think we need to have? Do you think we need to have the discussions without those people? If so, why? And if so, how do you think we are actually going to change things? Because in all seriousness - getting people to be afraid of saying words without having the deeper conversations about why those things are wrong and hurtful only makes the racism go underground. It doesn't get rid of it. And that stuff festers, and that stuff is going to come out, and people are going to continue to be hurt by racist behavior until we purge it completely. And we can't do it by shunning or jailing or killing ten percent of our population (Estimated) who harbor racist beliefs. We have to live with them, which means we have to convert them.
posted by corb at 6:40 AM on August 6, 2013 [1 favorite]


I feel superior to other people in many ways, for a variety of reasons, some good and some bad, and I feel superior because of a lot of different things I do/feel/act/interact.

However, race and gender are the only issues where I am regularly told to not feel superior to other people. The implication being that just because I'm not bigoted and actively fight against even subtle forms of bigotry, its wrong for me to boast about that. As if it was easy to get there. But the implication is that its ok to boast about my other accomplishments in life.

It wasn't easy for a white, blue-collar, middle class cis male to be virulenty anti-racist, and I'm damn proud of it! Believe me, it makes interacting with people I grew up more difficult. Why can't I feel good about that?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 7:20 AM on August 6, 2013 [4 favorites]



It wasn't easy for a white, blue-collar, middle class cis male to be virulenty anti-racist, and I'm damn proud of it! Believe me, it makes interacting with people I grew up more difficult. Why can't I feel good about that?


Well I for one think that's awesome and you should be proud.

I'm an Indian American woman but there are still a lot of ways I could have just not "gotten it," having grown up fairly affluent and having the sort of racism in my direction that's so subtle you have to think about it to recognize it's happening. I know plenty of other Indian Americans who don't think about it at all. (We even have some entering Republican politics, sorry about that, but we also have Reshma Saujani whom I'm pretty excited about).

That's a key point in the Jay Smooth video, which has been wildly misinterpreted by just one or two people here. Not being bigoted is something you have to work on all the time, every day. Like Jay says in the video, our society is actually set up for all of us to think about it the wrong way, the bigoted way, the "those people are like that way," for a reason, and it's up to us to work on it and fight it within ourselves every day.
posted by sweetkid at 7:30 AM on August 6, 2013 [3 favorites]




Should someone be fired for using a racial or ethnic slur? In this case, I'd recommend a really large fine(33% of a year's pay or so), to be donated to an organization that teaches people about not being racist. NAACP comes to mind. I don't know what 'counseling' the player got, but I'd add a serious course on African-American history.

Blacks use 'nigger,' Italians use 'wop' and 'dago,' (some) women use 'cunt,' Irish use 'mick,' etc. Comedians and parodists use racial and ethic slurs for effect. Can we please stop? I never hear Jews using 'kike,' and I don't hear most members of ethnic groups use most slurs. If nothing else, it's crass, disrespectful and ill-mannered. I'm tired of crass, disrespectful and ill-mannered being acceptable and even fashionable. Use racial and ethic slurs in a song, and I won't buy it, play it, listen to it or allow it in my house.
posted by theora55 at 8:18 AM on August 6, 2013


Because in all seriousness - getting people to be afraid of saying words without having the deeper conversations about why those things are wrong and hurtful only makes the racism go underground. It doesn't get rid of it.

I can appreciate wanting to have a deeper, wider, more serious discussion about race as a means of fighting racism. I'm not exactly sure how this pertains to Cooper who, while threatening other people with physical violence, hurled racist epithets at them. He is a high-profile employee for a high-profile company, who knew he was in the public eye. He decided to behave like a racist jackass before many, many eyes. I think firing him would be a totally reasonable course of action, but more so, people are free to come to their own conclusions about what's going on with him. I'm afraid I can't shed any tears for a dude who was handed a promising career on a silver platter and decided to exhibit patently racist behavior for all to see.

And we can't do it by shunning or jailing or killing ten percent of our population (Estimated) who harbor racist beliefs. We have to live with them, which means we have to convert them.

10% of the US population are being jailed and killed simply for having racist beliefs? Where is this from?

Either way, I agree that "fighting racism" is a bottom-up process that involves education (from a very young age) and open dialogue. I don't think that's mutually exclusive with firing a guy who chose to behave the way he did.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 8:20 AM on August 6, 2013 [4 favorites]


Because I think there are very, very, staggeringly few, actual mustache-twirling racists, who are out to deliberately stop all mention of race in order to let racism flourish, with planning and forethought. I think that there are people who are defensive of other people in their communities and defensive of their ideas and what feels right to them. There are people who are angry at their circumstances and their lives and who have been convinced that minorities are to blame for them.

Well, yeah, but there are a lot of (mostly) white people who just need to say that word, who love to say it, and who get really mad at being called out on it. Look at Rush Limbaugh. And there are even more people who just want racism to go away, who don't want to discuss it, who don't want to face it, who don't want to look at their own behavior and try and do better (sweetkid addresses this well just above).

The former, while easy to spot, is fairly rare, at least in the threads of MetaFilter. The latter, on the other hand, are much more common, and they do gum up the threads by throwing out excuses for racist behavior or by insisting that people shouldn't be offended or whatever their particular spins on the racism-denying standard plays are. (We also saw this activity in the recent Female Experience Simulator thread, although, obviously, presented somewhat differently for that topic).

That sort of thing is really exhausting, and it often serves the purpose of keeping every conversation at the "101 level" or (worse) arguing about tiny differences in definitions rather than having a more in-depth discussion of the topic at hand. Which was about a sports figure throwing around racist epithets during a drunken altercation.
posted by GenjiandProust at 8:30 AM on August 6, 2013 [6 favorites]


Not being bigoted is something you have to work on all the time, every day.

Yes. And it doesn't require superpowers to do so. It takes work and consciousness and thoughtfulness.

The hardest thing (for most people, it was and is for me) is to be willing to shut your mouth and open your ears. It can also be hard to not get defensive on behalf of someone who is like you (e.g. white, in this context), even when you have never done the thing or said the thing they have done or said. It's like when some men in discussions about sexism or sexual harassment defend or excuse the behavior of some other guy (who they don't even know) even though they themselves have never catcalled anyone or told some stranger to smile just because she's female.

As for how we discuss or confront racist speech and actions, well, that's really going to vary depending on context. No one here in this thread knows Cooper personally; no one here is going to be in a position to say "Hey, dude, [personal conversation stuff." This incident, like many others, serves as a proxy, and how we talk about this stuff when the Guy Who Did And Said That Thing is not in the room and is not going to be in the room is going to be quite different than if he were.

One of the things I find frustrating about discussions like this is that there always seems to be this assumption that those of us who voice sentiments in threads like this that amount to "Fuck that guy" must also carry on that way in person with people we know. There's this assumption that somehow we haven't had or don't have difficult, painful discussions with people we care about about hurtful things they've said or done - like, we need advice on how to be kind, and nuanced, and willing to listen to The Other Side. And I'm betting that for most of us, that's just not the case.
posted by rtha at 8:33 AM on August 6, 2013 [9 favorites]


#Eagles WR Riley Cooper has returned from his excused absence and is scheduled to practice with the team today.

And he's playing on Friday vs the Patriots! I thought he'd be on ice a little bit longer as far as being with the team, and playing in a game. I still think he'll be on the sidelines the whole game (and preseason) but heck, it seems like they're just going to throw him in there. Crazy! Guess we'll see.
posted by cashman at 8:45 AM on August 6, 2013


Should someone be fired for using a racial or ethnic slur?[...]Blacks use 'nigger,'

black people very rarely use 'nigger' unless they're repeating what white people say. i know a lot of folks don't want to come along and accept it, but nigga is a completely different word at this point and pretending like they're exactly the same is not helpful. also, arguing that in group usage is just as bad as violent threats that contain racial slurs borders on willfully obtuse.

this is the same line that kept coming up with paula deen. the headlines are all about the word, but the thing being discussed is actually much bigger than that. this is not one maybe clueless white guy throwing his arm around his teammate's shoulder and saying "my nigga! where you been? i missed you!" this is a professional athlete, attending a concert at his home field, who became upset enough after being denied entrance to backstage that he said to the person working security who was black (and who might actually work for the stadium) "I will climb that fence and fight every nigger here."

obscuring the actual even to just endlessly bat back and forth about the word (and then using that to grind some ax about rap music) is pretty lame.
posted by nadawi at 8:47 AM on August 6, 2013 [4 favorites]


they might throw him on the field during preseason just so the announcers have anything at all to talk about (and of course, they'll do it in the pr approve way, making the story about immediate redemption, his hard work, how serious he seems about being sorry, etc, etc, blah blah blah, gag me).
posted by nadawi at 8:48 AM on August 6, 2013 [1 favorite]


I'm in my 50s. I'm white. I grew up with the Civil Rights movement, the death of Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the riots of the 60s. My parents were pretty typical of educated white Americans - they were always against violence towards Blacks, and became more aware of cultural attitudes, growing less racist over time. I'm aware of racism in my culture, and do my best to respond to it, in others and in myself.

I remember the 1st time I heard racial and ethnic slurs, from kids in my neighborhood who were of a particular religion, and, to be honest, I associate that religion with racism. Guess I have to work on that, too.

How do I go beyond Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. thank you, argonauta.

So, some googling finds
http://imnotaracistbut.tumblr.com/
http://racismschool.tumblr.com/post/34601978533/thats-not-how-not-racist-works
http://yoisthisracist.com/
http://www.wikihow.com/Stop-Being-Racist
https://twitter.com/alittleracist
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/busting-myths-about-human-nature/201305/how-not-be-racist
http://www.livinganthropologically.com
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/floyd-elliot/how-not-to-be-racist_b_3530368.html

[entering Pollyanna mode] I can be intolerant of racism, sexism, anti-gay, anti-Semitic, culturally biased crap on facebook and elsewhere. I can complain about racist, sexist, ageist, disability-biased comments at work. I can notice that buildings and websites are not accessible (and you're doing your employer a favor - fixing it is cheaper than getting sued and then fixing it). I can educate people by responding to a comment about 'squaws, braves, Indians' in team names with some knowledge about the Trail of Tears, germ warfare/ blankets with smallpox. I can spend some time educating myself about discrimination based on race, age, sex, sexual orientation, disability status, national origin, religion. [I do tend to be rather earnest at times.]
posted by theora55 at 9:07 AM on August 6, 2013 [4 favorites]


That sort of thing is really exhausting, and it often serves the purpose of keeping every conversation at the "101 level"

This, so much. There really needs to be an FAQ on the wiki or something, to link people to when they purposely or unknowingly repeatedly bring things down to the 101 level. On this and other topics. Because ultimately in many of these conversations, it stops the level of discourse from rising to a point where solutions or at least great strategies emerge. Just my opinion.

black people very rarely use 'nigger' unless they're repeating what white people say. i know a lot of folks don't want to come along and accept it, but nigga is a completely different word at this point and pretending like they're exactly the same is not helpful.

They are definitely 2 different words. If Riley would have said ... well you know. There would have been a much different conversation.

they might throw him on the field during preseason just so the announcers have anything at all to talk about

There is no way that could possibly be the rationale. The Eagles have more than enough to talk about. New coach with a new system that nobody knows if it will work or not. QB battle (Kelly put both guys on there as the starter for friday), no Maclin, questions on defense. There is no way they wanted to make more stories. I wonder if this is some kind of feel out move. I still can't imagine he will actually be on the field for multiple plays this Friday.
posted by cashman at 9:09 AM on August 6, 2013 [3 favorites]


oh i was mostly making a joke about how freaking dull the preseason is (and who is or isn't on the field doesn't really relate to who will be playing come opening day, yadda yadda) and also a prediction about what's gonna be said in the booth the next time he is playing.
posted by nadawi at 9:19 AM on August 6, 2013 [1 favorite]


Brandon Blatcher: This team gave a dog torturer another shot, they can give Cooper another shot.

There's a difference between dogs and black people.
There's a difference between torturing an animal to death for sport, and saying hateful words.
posted by IAmBroom at 9:34 AM on August 6, 2013


Yes, and Michael Vick went to jail for two years, something no one is asking Riley Cooper to do.

I mean WTF why is this still coming up
posted by sweetkid at 9:37 AM on August 6, 2013 [10 favorites]


Because it's an idiotic comparison, with a large number of favorites.
posted by IAmBroom at 9:41 AM on August 6, 2013


And he's playing on Friday vs the Patriots! I thought he'd be on ice a little bit longer as far as being with the team, and playing in a game. I still think he'll be on the sidelines the whole game (and preseason) but heck, it seems like they're just going to throw him in there. Crazy! Guess we'll see.

The unofficial depth chart the Eagles just released has Cooper as a starting wide receiver. If that's really how he stands in the WR pecking order and they intend to keep him, they are going to have to play him in preseason.
posted by Drinky Die at 9:46 AM on August 6, 2013 [1 favorite]


Looks like a tear off the scab/bandaid/whatever situation. I guess they feel like everybody knows what he said, the team has talked about it, what else is there to wait for. Throw him out there and have him take his licks. If his first routes are crossing routes, it'll be clear they are just trying to hurry up and get it over with.

I am not sure this is a good strategy. Too soon.
posted by cashman at 9:52 AM on August 6, 2013


Moutache-twirling racists I've encountered some serious racism among people who are just ignorant. In Maine, where I live, there used to be plenty of people who had seldom encountered African-Americans, because there were so few Blacks in Maine. That's changed. There are probably more 1st-generation African immigrants in Maine than African-Americans descended from slaves. There was a lot of prejudice against Franco-Americans, because many people immigrated from French-speaking Quebec to work in mills and shoe factories. I often find that people who have little feel the need to find somebody who has less to feel better than. Human nature can suck.

Institutionalized racism is alive and thriving. There's a strong movement by the well-organized, well-funded Fundamentalist Conservative Right to deny voting access to voters who will vote against them, and specifically Blacks. This is institutional racism at its worst and most evil. If this exists in your state - voter ID cards, barriers to voter registration, etc., - fight it tooth and nail. oh, and the Voting Rights Bill - yeah, we still need that. The US Justice system, courts, and juries are more likely to judge African-Americans harshly in arrests, verdicts, sentencing, etc. Affirmative Action = all other things being equal, give members of a protected class a break. Personally, I think Affirmative Action is a form of Reparations, and I support it.
posted by theora55 at 10:19 AM on August 6, 2013 [5 favorites]


Nice list, Theora55. I have been listening to the "You Is This Racist" podcast, and it's pretty good, although I wish Andrew Ti would do more research on some of the questions ("Are Ancient Astronaut theories racist?" The correct answer is not "um, maybe?" but "OH MY GOD, YES! CRACK THE COVER OF ANY OF THOSE BOOKS AND THE RACISM JUST OOZES OUT!"), and he sometimes skirts making excuses for homophobia and sexism, but generally he's pretty thought-provoking. A lot depends on who his guest is for the week is. Anyway, they are only like 8 minutes each, so it's like eating popcorn, although popcorn that's been sitting by the jug of racism all week.
posted by GenjiandProust at 11:02 AM on August 6, 2013


One of the things I find frustrating about discussions like this is that there always seems to be this assumption that those of us who voice sentiments in threads like this that amount to "Fuck that guy" must also carry on that way in person with people we know.

I am not in any way saying these things are the same magnitude, but:

(possible trigger) In a lot of the work I do, we spend a lot of time talking about the general culture of the society we want to change. Primarily feminist stuff, we talk a lot about rape culture as a thing we want to change. One of the ways that some of us want things to change is we want people to stop talking about rape, even in jokey ways - because even if the person joking would never, ever think of raping someone, the joke itself creates the culture in which it is okay to think about such things. And someone new, coming into the culture with those ideas, thinks that it's okay to carry them out. I am using this example not because I think they are similar in degree - they're not - but because I think it's a well known example, and they are similar in kind.

Likewise, when we say, even on the internet, even in threads far away from this guy, "Fuck that guy", we are contributing to a culture where we are attacking people and not their actions. We are contributing to a culture where racism is a thing you are, not a thing you do - and thus, letting people off from the hard work of trying to be better every day that both Genji and sweetkid are talking about. We are also contributing to a culture where people don't feel safe saying, "I've done racist things. Help me be better." Yes, everyone here who is expressing those sentiments may be gentle and kind in real life with people they know - and that does matter, that absolutely matters - but at the same time, our impersonal actions work just as much towards creating the culture we live in as our personal ones.

10% of the US population are being jailed and killed simply for having racist beliefs? Where is this from?

No no no, not at all. I was estimating that at least ten percent of the population harbor some racist beliefs, and saying essentially that those people won't go away - you can't make them go away, or lock them up in a jail, or kill them (or at least, I think no one would want to) - so they have to be reasoned out of those beliefs if we are to live in the same country with them. Sorry if that read weird.
posted by corb at 11:23 AM on August 6, 2013


Likewise, when we say, even on the internet, even in threads far away from this guy, "Fuck that guy", we are contributing to a culture where we are attacking people and not their actions.

Am I reading this right? You're saying that people who say "Fuck Riley Cooper" are making the world more racist?
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:32 AM on August 6, 2013 [3 favorites]


No no no, not at all. I was estimating that at least ten percent of the population harbor some racist beliefs, and saying essentially that those people won't go away - you can't make them go away, or lock them up in a jail, or kill them (or at least, I think no one would want to) - so they have to be reasoned out of those beliefs if we are to live in the same country with them. Sorry if that read weird.

Oh, OK, I gotcha. 10% might be thinking very optimistically, but it's neither here nor there. No one is proposing jailing or killing racists in this thread, and I think most people would agree that education and honest dialogue is the best way to fight racism.

Likewise, when we say, even on the internet, even in threads far away from this guy, "Fuck that guy", we are contributing to a culture where we are attacking people and not their actions. ... We are also contributing to a culture where people don't feel safe saying, "I've done racist things. Help me be better."

I'm not sure how this is the case. Cooper didn't come forward to tell the public that he was grappling with his white privilege and could we all help him get better. He threatened to physically harm a bunch of people, in public, while hurling racist epithets at them. Those were his "actions". I can see nothing wrong with calling out said behavior as racist behavior, nor do I think having him fired would be going way too far.

I think I understand that you're asking for this kinder, gentler world where we can all have an open, honest, respectful dialogue about race, and conquer racism in this way. I don't think that voicing your disgust with Cooper's openly racist behavior, nor calling for said behavior to have the same consequences that one could reasonably expect at any workplace for the same behavior, somehow works against us having that dialogue.

Actions have consequences, and part of this "dialogue" is saying, "Wow, what a complete asshole. Dude deserves to be fired." If you can provide evidence for how denouncing racist behavior somehow works against the fight against racism, though, I'd be happy to see it. As it is, it sounds like speculation.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 11:42 AM on August 6, 2013 [6 favorites]


I am using this example not because I think they are similar in degree - they're not - but because I think it's a well known example, and they are similar in kind.

i get that you're saying it's not the same magnitude - but even with that caveat, your analogy doesn't seem very apt. it's more like you're advocating that people, specifically people who have been victims of rape, shouldn't say "fuck that guy" about people who are screaming rape threats in women's faces while they're at work. you can't just swap where the power is coming from (and who the victims are) in these sorts of analogies.
posted by nadawi at 11:55 AM on August 6, 2013 [4 favorites]


There are many ways to fight injustice, and many people employ different techniques depending on the context. I have marched and taken over buildings and also dressed up and met with trustees. I have carried signs at anti-sexual assault rallies and also served as in-court support for a friend who decided to press rape charges. I have said angry things and also had tearful conversations with people I know.

There are many ways to engage. Not everyone must only ever do one thing. There is no single one thing that works. I've been rereading MLK's Letter from Birmingham Jail a lot lately. It is still as apt now as it was then.
posted by rtha at 12:03 PM on August 6, 2013 [7 favorites]


One practice means absolutely nothing long term, but Cooper has apparently not missed a beat in his return to the team.

@MattLombardo975: Vick hits Cooper in stride along sideline. #Eagles players chant "Cooooop". So there's the answer to the chemistry question. #NFL


@pdomo: Riley Cooper is having a career practice. Has caught 3 TD passes, 2 from Vick, in 11 on 11 work v Patriots.
posted by Drinky Die at 12:12 PM on August 6, 2013




Answer to the chemistry question? It was a football in the air. You can watch the practices online. I can't even address "having a career practice". That is hilarious. I mean, we're talking about practice.
posted by cashman at 12:18 PM on August 6, 2013


cashman: "we're talking about practice."

We ain't talkin' about the game! We talkin' 'bout practice!
posted by tonycpsu at 12:29 PM on August 6, 2013 [1 favorite]


I mean how could you NOT link that.
posted by sweetkid at 12:32 PM on August 6, 2013


I knew you guys would get the reference.
posted by cashman at 12:33 PM on August 6, 2013 [1 favorite]


They just showed Cooper speaking live after practice. I'm pretty fine with how he's handling things. He's going to get popped, but he knows it's coming (he didn't bring this up just now). He hasn't been perfect with it, but I'm pretty okay with what he has been saying thus far, his demeanor, and his actions. It's still too soon, but we'll see what happens.
posted by cashman at 12:35 PM on August 6, 2013


You're a pretty forgiving and generous guy, cashman. I admire you for that.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:28 PM on August 6, 2013 [2 favorites]


I think the chemistry comment was in regards to the cheering teammates, not the ability to catch.
posted by Drinky Die at 1:34 PM on August 6, 2013


Heh. Yeah I kind of missed that.
posted by cashman at 2:52 PM on August 6, 2013


I think the chemistry comment was in regards to the cheering teammates, not the ability to catch.

I keep reading that as cheering tomatoes and think I need to switch up my contacts.
posted by sweetkid at 2:53 PM on August 6, 2013 [1 favorite]


I think that those are actually exactly the kind of conversations that taking a step back allows us to have. It allows us to say "Hey, you say seem to say racist things a lot. Without using accusatory language that will automatically get you upset regardless of your intent, what's up with that?"
The problem with this is that

A. It just feels like coddling and tiptoeing around someone being an asshole. I know this is a shitty "i just didn't want to concede" type of feeling that should possibly be shoved in a bag, but the reason i don't think it's entirely crap is...
B. This is still close enough to calling someone a racist that it WILL get them all riled up and defensive and SHIELDS UP RED ALERT. If someone is quacking like an asshole and you try and go all nonviolent communication on them like this, they will still flip out.

As genjiandproust said, with "When does "this guy is always the one saying/doing/defending racist things" become a euphemism for "this guy is A racist?"" the people who say shitty things jump to that conclusion WAY faster than the people surrounding them do in my experience. It's a sort of little kid who stole his friends brownie at lunch type of situation where since they know they did something other people might not like(even if they refuse to accept it was wrong or think they're entitled to) they're automatically a bit defensive. Acting guilty, so to speak.

Slow walking this shit does not lead to a calmer more productive discussion in a lot of cases. You're not gaining some higher level of discourse by avoiding saying something like "Hey, that was a pretty racist thing to say, and if you don't apologize and shut the fuck up and not double down on it people are going to call you a racist, and there's a good reason for that".

I went to a hippie alternative highschool that was full of this "now don't directly attack anyone!" kinda shit, and it didn't help anything. I've seen plenty of the exact same crap tried and failed in adult life as well.
Because I think there are very, very, staggeringly few, actual mustache-twirling racists
No one has implied this at all. All the other types of racists you mentioned are the kind we are talking about. No one is talking about these hypothetical(but definitely existing somewhere, and probably wearing swastikas on their sleeves at bro-down neonazi meetings) mega-racists.
black people very rarely use 'nigger' unless they're repeating what white people say. i know a lot of folks don't want to come along and accept it, but nigga is a completely different word at this point and pretending like they're exactly the same is not helpful. also, arguing that in group usage is just as bad as violent threats that contain racial slurs borders on willfully obtuse.
While this is true, you gotta be really careful with how you present this point. because "the soft r/a ended version is a totally different word!" is often spooged out by gross neckbeard entitled white nerdy guys who want an excuse so desperately to be able to say it. You just tack a "and since it's totally different bla bla bla" on the end. I cringe every time i hear someone talking about it being a separate word simply because i've heard it used in that context every time. You kinda need to tack a "but they're both still pretty offensive if the wrong person says it, and the second version is still a pretty personal thing so white dudes still need to shut the fuck up" on the end pretty much every time it's mentioned or people WILL get the wrong takeaway from this. I mean, i expect better from basically everyone on here but i've heard this point be brought up by fairly smart people only for some asshole in the audience/around the discussion to have their takeaway be "and therefor, the second version should be ok for me to say!"
If you can provide evidence for how denouncing racist behavior somehow works against the fight against racism, though, I'd be happy to see it. As it is, it sounds like speculation.
I can't help but just read it as tone argument bullshit. I keep trying to read it in as good of faith as i possible can, and that's all that comes out. It's like "Now if you were just a little bit nicer and didn't rock the boat too much people would take you more seriously!" type shit served up on a nice fancy platter. Seriously, someone convince me that it's not. It's especially crappy when it isn't even the person who did wrong, or in a position of power saying to be all nice, but just some random bystander armchair quarterbacking.

People have been saying "be nice" since the beginning of the civil rights movement and shit. Nothing got done by "being nice". This isn't even some sort of nonviolent protests/gandhi logic here. It's straight up "Do not ever attack a person for their actions" stuff twisted in a really weird way.

Some people seem to be freighting this a LOT. And i mean, it's a freighted thing.. but they're doing it in a weird way. It's basically saying that calling someone a racist for saying or doing something racist is an ad hominem, with a side dish of some sort of tone argument crap.

This is pretty gross. Examine your motives and message here, jesus.
posted by emptythought at 3:14 PM on August 6, 2013 [6 favorites]


While this is true, you gotta be really careful with how you present this point.

i agree with all of this, which is why i said the thing about how in group usage differs. i get the argument of "this feels uncomfortably close to this other problematic thing" but, i feel like it's pretty clear that my comment in no way condoned white people saying either. i do think in this specific case (and in paula deen's case) it's important to keep pointing out "and they didn't just say the word" because those same clueless people want to give everyone a pass because "black people say it too" (which is a bullshit defense anyway) - but, this usage was incredible specific, and just about the worst it gets when not accompanied by actual violence.
posted by nadawi at 3:35 PM on August 6, 2013


VikingSword: "I'd never heard the word "overstand" before. Turns out it is used in rasta culture?

From the very link you provided:

"when they absorb and correctly perceive an idea they “Overstand” it."

Seems pretty clear, no? "Go ahead and say it, but overstand something important" - "Go ahead and say it, but absorb and correctly perceive something important".
"

So, it is grokking then?

hides under desk - flashes geek gang sign as he ducks
posted by Samizdata at 4:13 PM on August 6, 2013


i agree with all of this, which is why i said the thing about how in group usage differs. i get the argument of "this feels uncomfortably close to this other problematic thing" but, i feel like it's pretty clear that my comment in no way condoned white people saying either. ... but, this usage was incredible specific, and just about the worst it gets when not accompanied by actual violence.

Yea, we're on the same page here. I just think that you need to throw in a "however, that does not make it ok for you to bla bla bla" thing EVERY time this "the words differ" thing comes up. For the same reason you need to have a yield or a stop sign at nearly all intersections that aren't totally residential.

My only point with that part of the post was just to make sure people didn't read your post and get the wrong idea with what you were saying since they'd only grab what they wanted to hear, because i've seen that shit happen way to many times before.
posted by emptythought at 4:37 PM on August 6, 2013


ah-ha, ok. i guess i thought the in group part of my comment covered this, but i'll be even more explicit if i find myself making a similar point in the future (which honestly seems slim, because like you, i feel like too many people try to hang a shitty hat on that argument).
posted by nadawi at 4:41 PM on August 6, 2013


By the way, overstand is one of the most faux revolutionary terms I encounter. I probably have limited experience with it, but all the times I've heard someone say it, it was basically this person right here.

Also, another one of our WRs went down - Arrelious Benn. ACL. And the Eagles released another one - Ball. Momah looked slow as dirt today, so we're left with Avant, Cooper, Djack and Demaris Johnson. The depth chart is looking pretty thin. Anybody here play WR and want to show up at Novacare for the next practice?
posted by cashman at 6:05 PM on August 6, 2013


Seems like the most popular play in the Eagles playbook in recent years is the Double Wing Right, 78 X Image Rehab. Ready... break!

Oh, and we might as well add former Eagle Hugh Douglas to the "COME ON, MAN!" list.
posted by tonycpsu at 6:38 PM on August 6, 2013


cashman: "Anybody here play WR and want to show up at Novacare for the next practice?"

I hear there's a former Eagle with an NFC Championship ring that's rested, ready, and in great shape!
posted by tonycpsu at 6:58 PM on August 6, 2013 [2 favorites]


I still love that man.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:07 PM on August 6, 2013 [1 favorite]


By the way, overstand is one of the most faux revolutionary terms I encounter. I probably have limited experience with it, but all the times I've heard someone say it, it was basically this person right here.


Maybe i'm more of a cynical dick, or just more of a dick or something... but it makes me think of highschool kids trying really hard to be slam poets. I can't find the post at all right now but somewhere out there on the 'tubes there's a really hilarious biting and spot on "list of things that makes it easy to identify someone new at this trying really hard to sound clever".

Overstand wasn't on the list, but it freaking should have been because i can't read or hear it without instantly thinking of that guy, you know?

I actually like urban dictionaries top definition of it, it sounds quite concise and nice. But the type of person i usually hear using it is a lot more tiresome than what a lot of people would imagine. "faux revolutionary" is super spot on.

Kinda like how conscious hip hop has the unfortunate association of "Macklemore" in my brain ever since i heard a friend describe that as being why he didn't like him. It's funny, and possibly not even apt, but it stuck.
posted by emptythought at 8:43 PM on August 6, 2013 [1 favorite]


overstand is one of the most faux revolutionary terms I encounter

I saw an interview once where Peter Tosh was explaining this, and it made sense to me. The point I remember him making is that "understand" was demeaning and took a bit of power away from the recipient of a piece of information. "Overstand" meant that you got the point, but that you would make up your own mind about what you did with that information. Tosh was pretty intense about the power of words. He also believed that the actual sound of a word has the power to destroy or elevate. Not the meaning...the sound.
posted by dubwisened at 10:05 PM on August 6, 2013


The sound is most definitely part of the meaning people actually interpret when it comes to words. Why do you think that people such as speechwriters, marketing experts, etc are so highly valued and paid in various industries? Phrasing is very much a thing, and it's not just the dictionary definition of "meaning" of the word that matters here.

Try explaining that to people who just love words like, quite topically, niggardly though. Plenty of people love to have the "But mom, i mean ass like a donkey!" conversation in earnest, as fucking adults. I've been far down that dark road.

I'm not hating on the word as a concept, it's actually pretty cool. It's just one of those cool things that has a clear use that was co-opted by a certain kind of tiresome person and for many, will be forever associated with the type of tiresome person they've encountered using that thing/word/etc multiple times.
posted by emptythought at 10:50 PM on August 6, 2013


I also just noticed, another recent thread opened with a great and applicable line that sums up this whole situation.

There is no force on this earth so whiny as white people who have been told they were doing something kind of racist.
posted by emptythought at 11:38 PM on August 6, 2013 [1 favorite]


Slow walking this shit does not lead to a calmer more productive discussion in a lot of cases. You're not gaining some higher level of discourse by avoiding saying something like "Hey, that was a pretty racist thing to say, and if you don't apologize and shut the fuck up and not double down on it people are going to call you a racist, and there's a good reason for that".

I personally came to nonviolent communication as a practical solution, for trying to deal with (among other things) strong sexism and racism in a group of largely male combat veterans who were trying to oppose the war. It was not initially my natural form of communication - when I heard about it it seemed too touchy-feely, and even now I'm strongly tempted to the other way, calling people directly on their shit, and it takes a lot of work for me to use NVC instead.

I use it because, more than any other factor, it worked.

We had combat veterans - one of the most defensive groups I know - who were used to using racial slurs for Arabs and Muslims on a daily basis - turn around and start changing their language and how they behaved to other people. When we said "That's racist, you're a racist who is doing racist shit" it just plain did not work. It caused more doubling down and some pretty vicious fights. It caused people to embrace the language rather than get rid of it, because by god, nobody was going to tell them who was and wasn't racist for what they said. When we said "You're being sexist", it produced a lot of "I sure by god am not, it's just natural for women to be blah blah." It didn't work, and it caused a lot of tears and rage and frustration and poisoned the movement and we lost a lot of people.

When we started turning to non-violent communication, on the advice of some allies, we didn't fix everyone and it didn't fix everything - but it changed the organizational culture in a matter of years. Now years may seem long to you - but to change an entire culture of several hundred individuals is a really huge thing. And we did it not by calling people names (whether or not they were justified. Sometimes they really were.) but by talking as though we assumed the other people were good people who simply didn't know that they were hurting other people.

"Hey, you know I love you, brother, but it really bothers me when you refer to people as savages. I know you're trying to talk about technology levels, but it reminds me of when someone (someone ELSE, someone FAR AWAY) said something like that about my culture/people, and it hurts. Can you try not to do that?" Huge first step. Doesn't even make it about what-you-are-doing-is-wrong, but goes to what-you-are-doing-has-unintended-consequences. "I know that you're just trying to build comraderie with your friends and don't mean anything by it, but when you talk about women like that, it makes me feel hurt personally." You can move on up after that, but each step being smooth really does go a long way.

Even when you know with every fiber of your being that by god they really did mean it.
Even when what they said makes you want to punch them in the mouth and never talk to them again.


I'm not saying that people who can't do that - like I myself can't sometimes - are somehow morally wrong necessarily - there's a lot of moral high ground in calling bullshit where you see it. But from where I sit, it's just not productive. It causes bitter, emotional fights that don't leave anything solved.
posted by corb at 6:20 AM on August 7, 2013 [1 favorite]


in this specific instance we're discussing a white man who threatened violence against a black man while using a racial slur. this isn't a situation of trying to get allies to come along or trying to change things within a specific organization. i'm glad you've found something that works for you, but i don't really see how it pertains here.
posted by nadawi at 7:12 AM on August 7, 2013 [4 favorites]


Well, in this situation, for example: we could say this guy is a racist and that he should be fired OR we could call for the guy, who clearly did something insensitive, to publicly donate a portion of his salary to X organization for racial justice to show that he didn't actually mean it. (Again, whether he really did, or didn't.) The first one is a really strong, clear showing: it punishes racists, but at the same time, the guy himself doesn't learn anything and no one is really benefited other than that it feels good. The second one is a less strong, clear showing - we lose the satisfaction of this guy being gone forever. On the other hand, an organization now has a lot more funding to do important work.

I'm not morally opposed to either position, but I think the latter one will aid more in the long term.
posted by corb at 7:40 AM on August 7, 2013


The second one is a less strong, clear showing - we lose the satisfaction of this guy being gone forever. On the other hand, an organization now has a lot more funding to do important work.

And the guy still doesn't have to learn anything, and it doesn't prove that he didn't actually mean it, since it's "Donate or GTFO."
posted by rtha at 8:39 AM on August 7, 2013


OR we could call for the guy, who clearly did something insensitive, to publicly donate a portion of his salary to X organization for racial justice to show that he didn't actually mean it. (Again, whether he really did, or didn't.)

This sounds like he gets to publicly play the redeemed anti-hero while still pulling a salary. I mean I like the points you make about education and talking it out. I try to engage in this in my daily life with people I know. Sometimes it even works. But what you're proposing sounds more like a reward for bad behavior than anything he could possibly learn from and take to heart.

The thing for me is this: talking things out through NVC, in my experience as someone who worked in immigration law reform here, works best when the person saying racist shit isn't an actual racist. You know, the guys who've been throwing around racial epithets to be edgy, or because that's the vocabulary of their workplace, or because they think "well they call each other that why can't I" and such. When these people are made to understand how hurtful these slurs can be, they do tend to learn and understand.

Actual racists, as in people who believe Minority X is a threat to them in some way that must be fought or avoided? Never. They are beyond saving. They've reached some ideological point where they will not turn back, because their prejudices have been allowed to take root as a part of their identity.

Now, where Cooper falls isn't something I'll speculate about from a distance. I think though that threatening to physically harm people, out loud and in public, while hurling racist epithets at them does not bode well. The thing to remember, though, is that Cooper - undoubtedly in a place of great privilege and knowing public exposure when he behaved the way he did - put himself in this situation. I believe education away from racism can work. But I don't think the onus is on us to "save" every openly racist asshole in the world.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 9:10 AM on August 7, 2013 [3 favorites]


I should amend the statement "They are beyond saving". They are not. It just takes something incredibly, life-changingly extraordinary to bring that person around once they're at this point.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 9:15 AM on August 7, 2013 [1 favorite]


Actual racists, as in people who believe Minority X is a threat to them in some way that must be fought or avoided? Never. They are beyond saving. They've reached some ideological point where they will not turn back, because their prejudices have been allowed to take root as a part of their identity.

Have, they, though?

There's some really great material from W.E.B. Dubois - I'll try to see what I can dig up when I get home in terms of specific pieces - as to how the poor white was prevented from class consciousness by the development and encouragement of racism as a deliberate divisive component of predatory capitalism. Howard Zinn talks about this as the manufactured divide between indentured and purchased slaves in America, an attempt to separate them from rebelling:
Only one fear was greater than the fear of black rebellion in the new American colonies. That was the fear that discontented whites would join black slaves to overthrow the existing order. In the early years of slavery, especially, before racism as a way of thinking was firmly ingrained, while white indentured servants were often treated as badly as black slaves, there was a possibility of cooperation. As Edmund Morgan sees it:

There are hints that the two despised groups initially saw each other as sharing the same predicament. It was common, for example, for servants and slaves to run away together, steal hogs together, get drunk together. It was not uncommon for them to make love together. In Bacon's Rebellion, one of the last groups to surrender was a mixed band of eighty negroes and twenty English servants..
So because a poor white believes that Minority X is a threat to them in some way that must be fought against does not necessarily mean they are to-the-bone racist or have reached an ideological point beyond which they can't reach - it may mean that they are mistakenly looking at Minority X as the source of their economic woes, due to historic forces that have worked to systematically oppress minority populations as a way to control the rest of the population.

And the guy still doesn't have to learn anything, and it doesn't prove that he didn't actually mean it, since it's "Donate or GTFO."

Sure. You are 100% right - there is no way to know what is in his heart. But if that happens, it makes it easier for the same thing to happen next time - and there will be, much as I wish there wouldn't be, a next time - and ultimately feeds a significant sum of money into hands working on racial justice work who can use it to better advantage than forcing that one guy to "learn a lesson."
posted by corb at 10:19 AM on August 7, 2013


and ultimately feeds a significant sum of money into hands working on racial justice work

a nice thought, for sure - but in this specific case, a fairytale, it seems. he's been fined by the eagles an undisclosed amount (not exceeding 37k of the 1/2 a million or so he'll earn this year), he went back to his parents place for a few days to hide out. he doesn't appear to have received any formal counseling and at least at present there doesn't seem to be any donations to charities coming down the pipeline. so - threatening to commit a hate crime results in a tiny blip and then business as usual. it's not surprising, but it is disheartening.
posted by nadawi at 11:09 AM on August 7, 2013


So because a poor white believes that Minority X is a threat to them in some way that must be fought against does not necessarily mean they are to-the-bone racist or have reached an ideological point beyond which they can't reach - it may mean that they are mistakenly looking at Minority X as the source of their economic woes, due to historic forces that have worked to systematically oppress minority populations as a way to control the rest of the population.

The point Zinn brought up was more about how race issues were (and are) used as a divide-and-conquer tactic against the poor, but that poor people of any color often found common ground. That's true. But that doesn't really discredit what I said, which was that actual racists are more often than not unreachable barring some life-altering experience that turns their world upside down, whereas your straight-up ignorant types can often be woken up through NVC.

Any therapist will tell you that actual changes comes from a willingness to change. If Cooper shows such willingness, sure, who are we to deny him. Are we seeing much of that willingness now? That, I'm not so sure about.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 12:01 PM on August 7, 2013 [2 favorites]


Good job citing Zinn and referencing Du Bois. I'm not sure that you can shock anyone out of the capitalist mindset that has become the foundation of American society, to shock them out of racism and get them to believe that their true enemy is the upper class.

You want to transfer the projection of "other" to the upper class. So presumably people who look at black people and other nonwhites and have a litany of slurs, jokes, misnomers, stereotypes and so forth, will think "wait, the real group I should be attacking is the upper class!"

I don't think that will ever work because in this society C.R.E.A.M. is the foundation of daily life. But I'm just going to be honest here and say that based on previous things you've said regarding race and in light of recent cases, that I'm not inclined to think you have a viable handle on these matters. You can't just completely not care about the plight of black people in a nationally relevant and historic case, then try to flip it a few weeks later like you're bell hooks. It's pretty incongruent, and that makes a lot of us give you a side eye right about now.

I think for a lot of things being really nice and completely nonthreatening works. If I slap someone upside the head and then they come to me really meek, asking why I did that, I may feel bad, and feel sorry for them. If they come back at me ready to swing though, I may swing at them. This is what you're saying to do. Come at them meekly. Try to get them to feel sorry for you. And what you may not be fully appreciating is this isn't the first time we've been punched. Someone slam a hammer down on your toe? Well meekly ask why, and try to get them to feel sorry for you. That will probably end up with better results than grabbing a screwdriver and going at them, right?

But after a while, if you keep getting your toe smashed to bits. If you keep getting slapped upside the head, if you keep getting called nigger, and porch monkey, and tar baby, and everything under the sun, and treated like you're inferior, and followed in stores, and having your children shot to death, and your entire existence treated like a scourge, then you're not meekly begging people to change. You're not trying to engender pity, and appeal to the person's good side. This isn't a first event. This is like the millionth event in a series.

So yes, Cooper deserves every punishment that comes his way. And the good thing is, he knows it too. That's why every time he gets up there, he's like put it all on me. I hope all the racists and people using that word see him saying he takes full responsibility for what he said, and he's sorry, and he knows that he hurt people's families. He knows he hurt people's kids. Cooper said that yesterday. He said he knows people will say things on the field, but he has to be the bigger man. I have little doubt that someone will take that wrong, but he's saying he has to accept what is said. He can't complain or try to go back at the person. And that's what I've been referring to. But he knows what he did, and he felt the pressure of not having the power in this situation. I think you want the people you deal with to retain their power, and choose on their own what they feel like doing. Maybe it hurts racist white people of all ses levels to be forced to change. It just makes them more rebellious. But it helps those people who are affected by these things. It gives them power. It changes their lives. It makes them feel a certain way. It lifts them up.

You want to ask these people to change? Some of us are tired of asking.
posted by cashman at 12:18 PM on August 7, 2013 [12 favorites]


The call on "Yo, Is This Racist" podcast today ("Circle of Friends"), was from a young woman in college who was worried if her lack of non-white friends was some kind of racism). Anyway, Andrew Ti and guest pretty much said she was OK, but that was something to pay attention to, and it sounded like she was. And then they talked about white people asking themselves (and call-in shows) whether they themselves were racist. And Andrew Ti commented that one great way to find a racist is to suggest that someone or something is racist. Because the racists all get really mad, while the people who are trying at least think about it and say "yeah, that was, sorry" or "really? let's talk about that more" or something like that. I'm not sure the tactic works all that well on the internet, but it's a counter-argument to the "calling people racist never helps." It may help find racists.
posted by GenjiandProust at 6:14 AM on August 8, 2013 [3 favorites]


Somewhat related (i.e., I'm putting it here because the previous Washington Sports Team threads are closed):

The Washington _________: Why Slate will no longer refer to Washington’s NFL team as the Redskins.
Slate is far from the first to take a stand against the nickname. Why are we joining Washington City Paper and Gregg Easterbrook and writers from the Buffalo News and the Philadelphia Daily News? We’re a national, general-interest magazine, not the Washington Post or ESPN. Our coverage is sporadic, and I doubt that Dan Snyder or Roger Goodell have Google alerts for our NFL stories. When we stop using the name Redskins, hardly anyone will notice. But it will also represent no great sacrifice for us to stop using the word—it’s easy enough to substitute “Washington” or “Washington’s NFL team.” (To be clear, though we’re striking the word from our vocabulary, we will not bowdlerize quotes—if a public official utters the nickname in a newsworthy speech, we will not strike the word Redskins.)

Changing how you talk changes how you think. The adoption of the term “African-American”—replacing “Negro” and “colored”—in the aftermath of the civil rights movement brought a welcome symmetry with Italian-Americans and Irish-Americans, groups defined by geographic origin rather than by race or color. Replacing “same-sex marriage” with “marriage equality” helped make gay marriage a universal cause rather than a special pleading. If Slate can do a small part to change the way people talk about the team, that will be enough.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:49 AM on August 8, 2013 [3 favorites]


And it looks like The New Republic is onboard, too.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:42 PM on August 8, 2013


Cooper in H.S.: Amazing athlete living close to the edge

A peek into Cooper's boyhood in and around this sunny resort town revealed instead a physically gifted kid from a well-to-do family who found plenty of trouble, a penchant apparently exacerbated by an inability to tame the same aggressive impulses that made him a top national prospect in two sports.

"His intensity," said Mike Jalazo, his football coach at CCC, "was overwhelming."

Emilio Fernandez, who managed Cooper one summer on a Florida Bombers baseball team that captured a national title, said his centerfielder and middle-of-the-order hitter was "basically a good kid."

"He had his moments," Fernandez said. "If he had a problem, it was that he was more aggressive than your average 17-year-old, which is something I think came from his football background. And he came from some money, so he was probably a little bit spoiled."

posted by Drinky Die at 7:20 AM on August 11, 2013


Also, another one of our WRs went down - Arrelious Benn. ACL. And the Eagles released another one - Ball. Momah looked slow as dirt today, so we're left with Avant, Cooper, Djack and Demaris Johnson. The depth chart is looking pretty thin. Anybody here play WR and want to show up at Novacare for the next practice?

Eagles signed Jeff Maehl, arguably Chip Kelly's best receiver over 6 years at Oregon despite a lack of raw speed. Avant reminds me of him, or vice versa.

Greg Salas has been fantastic in training camp and against the Patriots, albeit usually against 2s and 3s, but he has at least 3 fantastic one-handed catches this year which would work against anyone. Benn wasn't showing much even before his injury, and Momah's a stiff, but Demaris has potential despite being only 5'8". He ran a punt back 62 yards against Pats.
posted by msalt at 7:34 PM on August 14, 2013 [1 favorite]


The Riley Cooper controversy seems to have gone away. In the meantime, the other racially charged decision at Philadelphia came in today, and Michael Vick will be the starting QB over Nick Foles.

Besides the leadership role he played on the Cooper issue, Vick has just been incredible in the preseason, completing 86% of his passes, playing smart, running occasionally and well. Chip Kelly's decision to have an open competition seems to have paid big dividends -- Foles also stepped up his game (78% completion rate but a few turnovers) and now is a much better backup than he would have been otherwise. Vick has been clearly so much better that it doesn't even look like a decision of Kelly's so much as the acknowledgement of an obvious reality.
posted by msalt at 11:53 PM on August 20, 2013


I think we're just going to go with Celek/Desean/Avant/Cooper/Harbor/Shady as primary targets. I do like the way Salas has looked, but for some reason I don't think he's going to get much time unless (and realistically until) some other receiver goes down. Since as is clear, Demaris is the next guy up after the core group. Cooper is still going to take that hit, by the way. It hasn't happened yet, but it will. I remain surprised at how quickly it blew over, but I guess never underestimate what a sincere apology and the (mostly) support from your teammates can do.
posted by cashman at 11:19 AM on August 21, 2013


He's not a particularly famous player and there just isn't any new developments to sustain coverage. If he has a breakout year in the starting role the story will probably get more attention. It will almost certainly be at least mentioned during the MNF opener against Washington if he gets the start which seems likely. As long as he stays far away from creating any new controversy it shouldn't haunt him too much going forward. His marginal talent is more likely to end his career.
posted by Drinky Die at 3:08 PM on August 21, 2013


Chip is showing some fascinating looks before he even closed practices (2 days ago). The doublestack formation, four tight ends, and that's just the teaser.

Say what you will about Cooper, but Vick likes him as a target. Also, I don't buy the idea that DBs are going to target him for hard hits. That can only happen if they're holding back on hard hits against opposing players whose racial views they approve of, which I just can't imagine.
posted by msalt at 3:12 PM on August 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


I honestly think I understand more details about Chip's offense after reading all the Fishduck stuff and the preseason breakdowns than I do Andy's even after years of watching it.
posted by Drinky Die at 3:19 PM on August 21, 2013 [1 favorite]


This thread will close a couple of days before the Redskins game, unfortunately. Maybe a Kelly thread will pop up around then.
posted by cashman at 5:27 PM on August 21, 2013


Someone could start a topic about the website for this awesome book. (self-link) Or about this weekly column on Chip Kelly and the Eagles. (again) Only if they wanted to.
posted by msalt at 8:20 PM on August 21, 2013 [3 favorites]


Why Your Team Sucks 2013: Philadelphia Eagles
Vick's primary receiving targets include DeSean Jackson (who unofficially retired two years ago) and Football Michael Richards.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:49 AM on September 4, 2013 [3 favorites]


For any Oregon Eagles fans, there's this IRL for Monday's game. (self-link)
posted by msalt at 6:31 PM on September 4, 2013


looks like cooper might be taking a couple hits from his own team today, getting into more than one scuffle with cary williams. vick apparently stepped in. fights happen during camp/practice all the time - there's always at least one shown every season of hard knocks - but cooper will certainly find those unfavorable headlines if he's involved in them with this incident in his history.
posted by nadawi at 9:36 AM on September 5, 2013


« Older Way Ahead of the Technology   |   How Hollywood Helped Hitler. Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments