Pernetti is out

[Townie72]

Wow - I hate to break this to you, but per dictionary.com, the definition of "Redskin" is:

noun Slang: Often Disparaging and Offensive.
a North American Indian.

That's the only definition given. So I'm not sure what secondary meaning you're referring to. But yea, I should stop because clearly I already lost this debate.

While you are at it, look up "Packer", "Viking", "Cowboy" and bear".

Let us know how many references to sports teams you find.

 

[IthacaMatt]

While you are at it, look up "Packer", "Viking", "Cowboy" and bear".

Let us know how many references to sports teams you find.

LOL.

 

[Todd Gack]

Nope, that's not the argument that either one of us is making. That's your straw man. The issue is calling an ATHLETE a faggot, not calling a straight or gay man that name. That is entirely your creation, and has nothing at all to do with what Mike Rice did, or why he was fired.

Let's use some logic here -- the "athlete" is either gay or straight, right? And I'm on board that Rice wasn't implying that the "athlete" was gay -- that he was indeed calling out their masculinity. Where I differ with you and Townie is that -- as far as I can tell -- you don't think it has the same perjorative connotation for a gay guy. That by calling a straight man or a gay man that term you're implying that that that man is not as masculine as the ideal. Furthermore, as I've said before, I think the school (a public institution) had every right to can his ass if only to send a message to bullied gay kids that his behavior -- and use of the term, however he defined it -- is unacceptable.

 

[BayonneOrange]

The only difference is they've got video for Rutgers. Can you imagine how some of these coaches treat their players?

“I don’t think there’s a coach alive that does that, what you witnessed,” Pitino said. “I don’t think you have to worry about that. I’ve never seen it in my life... For eight years (in the NBA) I went around and watched college practices. I’ve seen guys who were very tough on their players, but they don’t physically throw balls at them. They don’t physically do those things. It was a very serious, isolated incident.”

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/c...ractice-video-article-1.1308339#ixzz2Pcoommnj

 

[RichmondCuse]

There's a freaking sports team 100 miles from where you live. I know they suck, but they do exist. "Now stop being such a faggot and go back to sucking that dick", as Louis CK says in the clip above.

I honestly don't know how to explain this to you if you don't understand it. Just because the Redskins team has been around for however long doesn't change the meaning of the word. The team name is a derogatory term used to describe Native Americans - as evidenced by the picture on their helmet. I don't know how I can spell it out any better than that.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Let's use some logic here -- the "athlete" is either gay or straight, right? And I'm on board that Rice wasn't implying that the "athlete" was gay -- that he was indeed calling out their masculinity. Where I differ with you and Townie is that -- as far as I can tell -- you don't think it has the same perjorative connotation for a gay guy. That by calling a straight man or a gay man that term you're implying that that that man is not as masculine as the ideal. Furthermore, as I've said before, I think the school (a public institution) had every right to can his ass if only to send a message to bullied gay kids that his behavior -- and use of the term, however he defined it -- is unacceptable.

No, the players' sexuality was not part of Rice's motivation for the names he called the players.

This isn't hard to understand. It just doesn't fit what you want the argument to be.

Did you ever play football as a kid? I'm guessing no.

How old are you? I'm guessing you were born no earlier than the 1980s.

 

[RichmondCuse]

LOL.

I can't help you two. Your ignorance has clouded your ability to see things rationally. You are correct, THE Redskins are an NFL team. A Redskin is a slang term for a Native American. That's what the team is named after. I'm not really sure what's being debated.

 

[Todd Gack]

No, I'm not. I agree that he should have been fired. I didn't defend him in any way.

What I disagree with is you and Richmond and jec and a couple other people trying to turn this into a gay rights thing, when what it is is a sports thing.

Dude, you brought up the Louis CK defense. And your "gay rights" / "sports thing" dichotomy makes no sense -- were the insults directed at Jackie Robinson on the field not a civil rights thing?

 

[RichmondCuse]

No, the players' sexuality was not part of Rice's motivation for the names he called the players.

This isn't hard to understand. It just doesn't fit what you want the argument to be.

Did you ever play football as a kid? I'm guessing no.

How old are you? I'm guessing you were born no earlier than the 1980s.

Oh, here comes my favorite "You're under 30 so you're too stupid to know anything" card.

 

[Mistakebythelake90]

I don't care if it was 100 years ago, the N word never meant anything other than a black person. That's a fact.

What Townie and others were saying was that Redskins has a secondary meaning, i.e. a second listing in the dictionary, as it were. So does "fag" or "puzzy". Those terms are politically incorrect and have been for 20 years, but they still exist in that context in society.

The N word does not exist in any context other than discriminatory usage, if used by white people. That has been the case for 50 years.

Your argument has been entirely based on false equivalence. If this were a debate, you would have lost long ago.

Just because a word has other meanings doesn't mean it is ok to use it as a slur. You are missing the forest for the trees. Whether or not the N word ever had another meaning is not relevant to the comparison. At one point, it was considered socially acceptable to use the N word. Now it is not. At one point it was socially accepted to call someone a fag/use it to describe other things. Now it is not.

Even granting that fag has/had other connotations, please tell me the last time that it was used in anything other than a derogatory manner. And please tell me that Mike Rice meant to use it as anything other than an insult. If you truly feel like fag isn't an insult, and that you use it in every day language, then I'm sorry that society has deemed it unfit for your use. I wish that I could cuss up a storm in public, but I can't. Is this one word really worth the moral crusade though? Are you really that invested that you think it should be ok to use a term that some people find derogatory? The fact is, the one negative connotation has far overriden any other uses of the word. Use it how you want in private, but public employees cannot say this word in any context.

 

[IthacaMatt]

“I don’t think there’s a coach alive that does that, what you witnessed,” Pitino said. “I don’t think you have to worry about that. I’ve never seen it in my life... For eight years (in the NBA) I went around and watched college practices. I’ve seen guys who were very tough on their players, but they don’t physically throw balls at them. They don’t physically do those things. It was a very serious, isolated incident.”

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/c...ractice-video-article-1.1308339#ixzz2Pcoommnj

He should have gone to one of Bobby Knight's practices. He once grabbed a player by the balls in order to make a point. And yet, it wasn't anything sexual.

Today, I would look at Frank Martin, or Buzz Williams, or any of a handful of screaming maniacs on the sidelines, and I would bet you they do the exact same thing in practices as what Rice was fired for. So Rick should be careful not to throw stones. This isn't unique behavior.

I honestly don't know how to explain this to you if you don't understand it. Just because the Redskins team has been around for however long doesn't change the meaning of the word. The team name is a derogatory term used to describe Native Americans - as evidenced by the picture on their helmet. I don't know how I can spell it out any better than that.

And again, you brought the N word into the discussion. The Redskins are a sports team. So are the Cleveland Indians and the Atlanta Braves. Are their teams racist for having a Native American mascot? Should Notre Dame change it's nickname from The Fighting Irish? Sports names were intended to be tough and intimidating - "Warriors" is another name that has been banished by the PC Police - why not the USC Trojans?

None of those things are in the same ballpark as the N word, which is what you were trying to compare. "Faggot" also has nothing to do with native american branding for sports teams. You are just creating an argument by yourself that has absolutely nothing to do with the Mike Rice situation, and no one is arguing the points that you are trying to impress upon us.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Oh, here comes my favorite "You're under 30 so you're too stupid to know anything" card.

No, it's not that you're stupid, it's that you're young. You grew up in a different era than half the people on this board and believe it or not, America has gone through huge changes since the middle aged portion of the board were kids.

So, when were you born? Did the Syracuse Orangemen have the Saltine Warrior as their mascot at any time while you were alive?

Were you alive during the dispute that made the Syracuse Chiefs change their name to the SkyChiefs, only to change it back years later, by saying we could by any kind of chief, it didn't have to be Indian Chief?

If you weren't around for those debates, then your age is definitely relevant to your point of view.

 

[Todd Gack]

No, the players' sexuality was not part of Rice's motivation for the names he called the players.

I'm guessing reading comprehension isn't your bailiwick because I clearly state in that post that I don't think Rice was implying the players were gay. It changes nothing about my argument.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Dude, you brought up the Louis CK defense. And your "gay rights" / "sports thing" dichotomy makes no sense -- were the insults directed at Jackie Robinson on the field not a civil rights thing?

Dude, do you think Mike Rice even considered for a split second the actual sexuality of the players he was insulting and throwing balls at?

If he didn't, then the whole "gay rights" aspect of this is your construct.

 

[RichmondCuse]

And again, you brought the N word into the discussion. The Redskins are a sports team. So are the Cleveland Indians and the Atlanta Braves. Are their teams racist for having a Native American mascot? Should Notre Dame change it's nickname from The Fighting Irish? Sports names were intended to be tough and intimidating - "Warriors" is another name that has been banished by the PC Police - why not the USC Trojans?

None of those things are in the same ballpark as the N word, which is what you were trying to compare. "Faggot" also has nothing to do with native american branding for sports teams. You are just creating an argument byyourself that has absolutely nothing to do with the Mike Rice situation, and no one is arguing the points that you are trying to impress upon us.

Actually, I didn't bring of the Redskin argument - Townie brought that into the conversation. And to be perfectly honest with you, I don't have a strong opinion on this whole "sports team name" debate one way or the other. But to half answer your question, there are plenty of people that also believe the Indians and Braves names / mascots are racist and should be changed.

I have compared the N word to the word "faggot", and I stand by that 100%. That word is used entirely in a derogatory manner, just as the N word is. It's been used to describe someone who is "less than manly" (ie. a gay person). That makes it derogatory towards gays. End of discussion.

 

[Todd Gack]

Oh, here comes my favorite "You're under 30 so you're too stupid to know anything" card.

I'm not even under 30 -- would though it were.

 

[IthacaMatt]

I'm guessing reading comprehension isn't your bailiwick because I clearly state in that post that I don't think Rice was implying the players were gay. It changes nothing about my argument.

Well then why have you asked a half dozen times about the difference between calling a straight man and a gay man a faggot, then?

If you don't think that Rice was making it an issue of sexuality, then why are you?

I'm guessing someone needs a hug.

 

[Mistakebythelake90]

And again, you brought the N word into the discussion. The Redskins are a sports team. So are the Cleveland Indians and the Atlanta Braves. Are their teams racist for having a Native American mascot? Should Notre Dame change it's nickname from The Fighting Irish? Sports names were intended to be tough and intimidating - "Warriors" is another name that has been banished by the PC Police - why not the USC Trojans?

None of those things are in the same ballpark as the N word, which is what you were trying to compare. "Faggot" also has nothing to do with native american branding for sports teams. You are just creating an argument byyourself that has absolutely nothing to do with the Mike Rice situation, and no one is arguing the points that you are trying to impress upon us.

Actually, yes, alot of those mascots are racist, but it isn't all just because they depict other cultures. I am from Cleveland, and am a Indians fan. Chief Wahoo is racist as fck. In the past 10 or so years, the Indians have been getting away from the caricature, and been moving towards using an I or a C to demote Indians or Cleveland on their apparel. There is nothing inherently wrong with calling yourself the Indians. There is a problem when your mascot is a bunch of racial stereotypes mixed into one.

 

[Todd Gack]

Dude, do you think Mike Rice even considered for a split second the actual sexuality of the players he was insulting and throwing balls at?

If he didn't, then the whole "gay rights" aspect of this is your construct.

No, I don't -- and no, it's not. Because whether directed at a straight man or a gay man it has the same meaning: You're not masculine -- and are worthy of ridicule because of it.

 

[BayonneOrange]

Finally, I figured out that Ithaca Matt knows more than Coach Pitino.

Well, that signals the end of my participation in this conversation. Tired of banging my head against the wall.

I'm going to go and hang out in the Allie LaForce thread.

Go Orange!!

 

[jgeorge322]

Is your avatar not from "Deadwood"?

Not on any side of argument here. I stay away from political topics like these. But got to give props on this response. That was pretty funny.

 

[retro44]

2013 is not when the team was named. The situation that existed when the team was named, no longer applies.

The word no longer has just the original connotation.

The people that are pushing this are just looking for headlines.

Rice also called 10-11 year old boys wearing flip-flops to a summer camp fags according to Murdock

 

[IthacaMatt]

Actually, I didn't bring of the Redskin argument - Townie brought that into the conversation. And to be perfectly honest with you, I don't have a strong opinion on this whole "sports team name" debate one way or the other. But to half answer your question, there are plenty of people that also believe the Indians and Braves names / mascots are racist and should be changed.

I have compared the N word to the word "faggot", and I stand by that 100%. That word is used entirely in a derogatory manner, just as the N word is. It's been used to describe someone who is "less than manly" (ie. a gay person). That makes it derogatory towards gays. End of discussion.

Let me know when gay people are made slaves in this country for a couple hundred years, and then you might have a case. In the meantime, gay "slurs" don't come anywhere near the hate level that black people have endured in this country for generations. I'm not saying there isn't violence against gays, there obviously is. I saw Torch Song Trilogy, and Brokeback Mountain. Those kinds of stories are too real.

Like I said earlier in this post, I have probably half a dozen gay friends who I met through my wife who, like me, are around 50 years old. And I'm sure that none of them are as worked up about Mike Rice as some of you guys are. They are more concerned with things like equal rights, and ACTUAL gay bashing and gay-directed hate speech. Mike Rice's actions had NOTHING AT ALL to do with actual gay people, and whether he actually thought any of his players were gay.

And to finish the comparison, NO ONE AT ALL calls people "niggers" in the way that people use faggot, puszy and wimp, etc., or with similar meaning.

 

[RichmondCuse]

No, it's not that you're stupid, it's that you're young. You grew up in a different era than half the people on this board and believe it or not, America has gone through huge changes since the middle aged portion of the board were kids.

So, when were you born? Did the Syracuse Orangemen have the Saltine Warrior as their mascot at any time while you were alive?

Were you alive during the dispute that made the Syracuse Chiefs change their name to the SkyChiefs, only to change it back years later, by saying we could by any kind of chief, it didn't have to be Indian Chief?

If you weren't around for those debates, then your age is definitely relevant to your point of view.

My age has zero effect on the relevancey of my point of view. Sorry. But maybe you should read my post again where I admitted to having used that word myself for years and years, never thinking twice about it. Only as I've grown have I been able to realize the impact of the word and why it shouldn't be used. Because regardless of my age, there is always room for growth - the world is ever changing, as you state, so if we realize how hurtful that word has become to a group of people, why not re-evaluate and decide if you think using it in any context is really appropriate? If you think it is, then I'm sorry but that's your choice. But I don't expect it to be tolerated in the workplace, and quite frankly, if Rutgers chose to fire Rice solely on those slurs alone, I think it would have been justified.

 

[Todd Gack]

Well then why have you asked a half dozen times about the difference between calling a straight man and a gay man a faggot, then?

If you don't think that Rice was making it an issue of sexuality, then why are you?

I'm guessing someone needs a hug.

Because they don't have different meanings -- that the person being called the term is not masculine -- and I was calling out your and Townie's belief that they do.