|
>Blah blah blah. Leave it up to poetx to miss a point in 114
>words that can easily be made in less than 30. And yes, if a
>white athlete ever were in a position and happened to liken
>his situation to being someone's slave, I'd light his dumb ass
>up to (probably even more so because he is.....as you morons
>like to say around here because it gives yourselves
>hard-ons......yt).
four words: you are a dumbass.
i can do it in three if i use a contraction.
>See, I tried to wrap this up specifically so I wouldn't have
>to do this again, but I'm gonna end up repeating myself
>anyway. What happened to TO is not a case of OPPRESSION, it's
>a case of DISCIPLINE. If Terrell Owens was a white
>telemarketer making $9.00 an hour and he made it a point to
>exploit what he believed were his co-workers and bosses
>inabilities, he'd be fired. My contention has nothing to do
>w/ his race, it has to do w/ another pro athlete going
>overboard to defend someone that doesn't deserve to be
>defended.
you missed all three times when i said that the analogy doesn't hold water in TO's case. oh, you mention it tangentially down below. did i ever say anything different about TO? and did i ever say that there should be no rules or DISCIPLINE (does it feel better typing that in all caps)?? no.
your point has to do with taking this instance and declaring that, across the board, there is no credence or relevance to it in any context, as it relates to sports. i clearly disagree here.
>>stage direction: Enter the strawman. but continue
>
>poetx make funny.
poetx make observation about your funny efforts to sidestep my points that i:
a) agree that the analogy doesn't fit with TO, yet
b) feel that , while strained, it is applicable in other sports contexts, and
c) that i don't feel that a white dude, regardless of his background or intentions, has any business declaring what analogies or comparisons are out of bounds for black folks to make regarding their personal or communal situation.
i furthermore know that d) you don't care about what i think about what you type, and
e) that's cool, but i'm gonna speak my piece, regardless.
>>so you've obviously missed or ignored the parts where i
>>stated, several times over, in both posts, that the analogy
>is
>>very flawed in this regard, and comes into play, NOT with
>>regard to the physical consequences to be suffered by the
>>slave/athlete, but with respect to the perpetuation of a
>>centuries old white superior/black subordinate social
>dynamic.
>
>No, I got the part where you thought it was "flawed" (another
>point you missed; it was more than just flawed, it was
>outright wrong, jackass).
i'ma jackass, now? i guess i'll just have to be that, seeing as i don't have the time or inclination to fly out to the chi to meet you behind mcdonalds and put a foot in your ass. that would be childish. and wouldn't change the fact that you are talking out your ass.
What was of more importance to me
>was shooting down your "as 'flawed' as it may be, you can't
>criticise him for using a 'flawed' analogy because you're
>white" defense.
what i said was i was inclined to agree with your criticism in this particular instance, but, yes, a white person making the blanket statement that no one could make that analogy is some bullshit. from the standpoint of a black man, i'm just pointing out that *your* opinion on the matter is null and void to me, and explaining why.
That's as dumb as the "even if John Mason was
>cooning, you can't say it because you're white" defense.
and we know how well that goes over. ion't try to tell y'all who's a pwt.
Or
>as dumb as Scoop Jackson's "it's our job to defend Dusty Baker
>because he's black" defense. Wrong-doing is wrong-doing. A
>moron is a moron is a moron. The skin color of the individual
>doing wrong bears no impact, nor does the skin color of the
>person identifying the wrong doing. Any black person who
>tries to reprimand a white person who dares identify another
>black person's wrong doing because the identifier is white is
>not only a moron, but usually also a thin-skinned little
>bitch.
lmBao @ the universality of your opinion, o great white father. the fuck outta here with that.
>>perhaps the 'black codes' would be better analogy fodder, or
>>at least more acceptable to your historical sensitivies? you
>>know, the de jure and de facto societal proscriptions under
>>which newly freed black people could not join trade unions,
>>and were made to suffer major competitive disadvantages in
>>making a living off of their skills? sure, they were
>afforded
>>niches in the economy where they could still work, but they
>>either had to accept the terms dictated by the 'master' as
>>opposed to the market (which liked black tradesmen enough
>for
>>white tradesmen to feel threatened).
>
>Hi, I'm poetx. I spent all this money on a bachelor's degree
>in English and I have nothing to show for it.
lmBao @ your ASSumptions. i tested out of english in college. i majored in engineering, and the only english class i took was an upper level elective. i can just naturally write my ass off. granted, i've been offered, and turned down opportunities to write full time, but it's still just a sidelight for a far more lucrative gig in IT, which my college degree had zero to do with, since i didn't graduate and taught myself everything i know. and got folks with their masters' in comp sci working *for* me. but that took more than three words to write. i should have just k.i.m. and let you get your little joke off.
>
>None of that is comparable to an athlete who's pissed off that
>he "only" makes $3 million a year.
again, you ignore the fact that i said that this is a bad analogy in TO's case, and, with your rhetorical flourish, dismissed the whole paragraph about RELATIVE economics, both 'intra-oppressed group', and between oppressed and oppressor. (i shoulda used 'slave' in those instances, but y'all hate the word 'oppression', or so i gather).
it's absurd to think of anyone making millions a year (most are making hundreds of thousands) as 'oppressed', i'm well aware, but in relative terms, there's a relationship between the producer and the owner, who profits at orders of magnitude greater times the primary producers, and who enacts systems to restrict the movement and freedom and ability of said producers to produce elsewhere. again, that, apart from the racial component, can also be analogous to the general worker/CEO relationship, and i said that already. but you ain't here for nuance.
and if you can't see the broad example of how white 'owners' who profit handsomely from the physical exploits of a predominantly black labor force, and enact often capricious restrictions on this black work force's social expressions and economic mobility (blackballing for political opinions, dress codes, restriction of appropriate celebrations, age limits, and a buncha other dumb shit that has nothing to do with the games) bears the slightest resemblance to this land's dominant black/white social interaction for three centuries, then "I can't do nothin for ya, man" (c) flava flav to bring this whole shit full circle.
>>again, i'd have to be as dumb as you to think that an
>athlete
>>with a contract dispute would literally be killed
>
>If you were as "dumb as me", we wouldn't be having an argument
>over this right now.
actually, it's because shit is slow over in GD and i have the ability to multitask on the job.
>>word called ANALOGY, to be used when EQUATION just doesn't
>>suffice. quick review:
i left that in because i just like it.
>You have yet to reach un-chartered territory, poet.
>
>>* if they run afoul of the rules set by a handful of mostly
>>white folks, their ability to make these sums of money in
>>their chosen profession is gone.
>
>Yeah. Notice none of that is exclusive to black players, nor
>is said protocol any different from the ways most other trades
>are governed. Thus, the corrective action taken against
>Terrell Owens is in no way comparable to slavery.
i never said it was. i just said your blanket statement was uncalled for.
>And you were the one chastising me for stating the obvious.
>What's next? You gonna tell me Elvis died a fat cracker on
>his toilet?
nah, i just seent him last week.
>>zoom out and take a look at the history, even recent history
>>of sports in society. why were black folks (and many white
>>folks) embarrassed and enraged at the bobby knight shit with
>>the whip? what peculiar institution did his little jokeyjoke
>>draw uncomfortable parallels to in the american popular
>>psyche?
>
>1) Bobby Knight cracked a whip 'cause he's a psycho, not
>necessarily because he's a racist (although if something were
>to be revealed at any point in the future that would implicate
>him as such, it wouldn't surprise me in the least; he does fit
>the prototype).
a psycho either too dumb or too indifferent to know or care about the images he conjured up.
>2) What does any of this have to do w/ Woody Hayes?
the prototypical 'hands-on', in your face. i don't like coaches who treat ANY kids, boys, women, men like that, but when that behavior is black on white it evokes images from when that was not only the acceptable, but damn near the only black/white power dynamic.
>>that 'kind' of coach has been disturbing, at least to black
>>folks, because of the larger symbolism when viewed with an
>eye
>>toward history. sure, white coaches can bitch out white
>>players, and black coaches can scream on black and white
>>players, but the disturbing fact when it's a white coach
>going
>>off on black players is because the shit is so damned
>>familiar.
>
>So you're saying black folks will never be completely
>comfortable until the position of head coach is completely
>phased out of sports altogether because the sight of a white
>coach screaming at a black player is vaguely similar to a
>slave master torturing a slave. Correct?
nope. i'm saying the fact that the bobby knight thing touched a nerve is because there is a history and its inescapable. because that history exists, it's inescapable, and doesn't lie far from the surface, AT THE VERY LEAST IN THE EYES OF BLACK FOLKS, comparisons and analogies will continue to be made. they may be made erroneously, as in the TO case. or they may be made when indentured servitude, labor/management, or contemporary american worker/CEO analogies would be more appropriate, but they will be made. and the way 'we' view something like a coach pretending to whip his players is different than the way a lot of white folks on this "kumbayaa, race no longer exists shit" will see it. if y'all can't see it, no need to comment. that's the relevance.
>
>>i was trying to keep it simple for you. your comprehension
>>level seems mad low.
>
>So says the man who chastises his debate opponent for stating
>the obvious and then fails to make a reasonable point after
>spending triple the amount of time stating all things obvious
>himself.
i'm sorry, you threw all my points hidden in those long-ass sentences and paragraphs out. that's what i get for typing white. if i made up some weak ass slang you'd prolly pick that shit right up, though, wouldn't you?
>Oh no, they are crackers indeed. But don't bitch about white
>people throwing around nigger like it's cool when you're gonna
>turn around and throw cracker around like it is. It's
>effectively the same thing ("context clues", huh).
jedi mind tricks don't work in real life. for one, until white folks have been enslaved and lynched and raped, en masse, and under the full sanction of every level of government, cracker ain't nothin but a word. and for two, i used it as a specific epithet toward folks with a history of ill action toward my folks. white folks are generally more generous with the n-word, spreading the love to all black people. you may want to note the difference before getting your e-feelings hurt. if i called YOU a cracker anywhere in this post, show me and i'll apologize.
>You might be able to get away w/ this defense against a mere
>mortal, but not against this Bulls fan. Craig Hodges was a
>one-trick pony. By 1992, the team had accumulated several
>players who were very adept at executing his trick (see John
>Paxson, BJ Armstrong, Trent Tucker). He had outlived his
>usefulness. His release had nothing to do w/ his blackness.
>
>>he was nowhere near the best player in the league, or even
>on
>>his team, but he was certainly better than the many stiffs
>who
>>ride the pine into their retirement.
>
>Uh, not by that point, he wasn't. He shot 38% from the field
>his last season as a Bull. For a role player who specialized
>in shooting (especially in the early '90s, when the league as
>a whole shot MUCH better than it has over the past several
>seasons), that wasn't a good look.
i followed the bulls as well during that time, and i'm well aware that pax and bj made him expendable. but he wasn't the worst one trick pony in the league by a long stretch. i mean, shit, bill wennington played for the bulls at one point. now, HE, i could see being cut from the bulls and not being able to make another squad. which mediocre or modestly talented players to keep is always a judgement call, but in a league run by white men that judgement includes things that have nothing to do with basketball, like hodges' political opinions.
he was no all-star by any stretch, but if not for being blackballed, he definitely would have caught on elsewhere.
>>check the mandingo reference. there were certain slaves who
>>were prized by their owners for their physical prowess, and
>>who fought them like they were pit bulls or chickens. some
>>slaveowners (probably not the majority) also 'bred' their
>>slaves. these slaves had material advantages FAR above that
>of
>>any regular ol' fieldhand. they were slaves, nonetheless.
>
>OK, now I'm confused. You guys ran Jimmy the Greek up the
>pole (whoops, there I go using those tasteless, out-of-place
>slavery analogies again with my white ass) for saying pretty
>much the same, exact thing you just said. What gives?
they treated black folks as livestock, recall? i'm not aware of what percentages indulged in this practice, it certainly didn't constitute the majority, and didn't result, to my knowledge, in any widespread genetic differences. what i'm saying is what i said, *some* slaves received treatment that was significantly preferential in comparison to their peers (eating high off the hog being analogous here to making millions instead of tens of thousands), but were nonetheless, still slaves.
for the record, i thought jimmy the greek caught a bad deal and that there didn't seem to be any malice behind his words.the country, and cbs, missed a chance to do some talking and learning there. see: air force's coach, and paterno. howard cosell's shit was worse ("look at that little monkey go") but, given his history w/ ali, i think he still should have gotten off w/ some sanction and an apology. that was just an excuse to get him off the air, imo.
>I'd be doing this website a service if I was able to put words
>in your mouth. They'd plug up all that bullshit that
>continues to fall out of it.
people that like poetx's bullshit >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people that like your bullshit.
peace & blessings,
x.
sigless for the summer, y'all.
|
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
Okay Sports 
