• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Racist, or just a joke?

Should ESPN have fired the writer?


  • Total voters
    35
Yellow journalism.
 
When I say "history" I'm not referring simply to the distant past. There are, in fact, racists TODAY who use words like 'chink' in racist manner. So to reiterate my original point, it's not sensitive to take that into account when determining whether or not it could be racist. This has nothing to do with "giving words power over us" or being "affected" by those words. It has to do with seeing a word and discerning the intent of the author who used it.
Yes, as I pointed out, the journalistic who, what,when, where , why, how. If someone calls me a whore (which has a lot of history and current negative undertones) I let it roll by,


I didn't say people should recognize racial undertones, I said that when people do recognize the racial undertones, they aren't automatically sensitive. That is fact. Recognizing reality does not make them sensitive, it makes them knowledgeable. Moreover, my comments had nothing to do with how people "feel" and they also had nothing to do with "meaning that we allow words to have". My comments were about the objective reality that the word "chink" has been and still is used by people in a racially charged or racist manner and that recognizing this does not make someone sensitive.
Some words have lost some of their power, for example, some people in this thread didn't even think that the headline could be offensive until it was pointed it out not because they are insensitive, but because they have been brought up in a world that is not accepting of slurs.

Why would anybody find that potentially offensive? Cinderella is not cited in American culture to refer to indentured servitude, it is cited to refer to "fairy tale" like stories.

If you have not heard of the criticisms of many Disney characters, especially the women are portrayed I suggest that you read A Two Tale Comparison :: essays papers "Fairy tales such as Cinderella have been found guilty of possessing subliminal socialization traits. Classifying genders as inferior and molding young girls into the female that society expects them to be. In Charles Perrault’s version, which is considered the most common, Cinderella is seen as passive, limited, dependent and inferior. As critics argue, these traits can hinder a child’s self esteem." Or find some other source. That is an example of how these fairy tales offend some people, who I also think need to think about their own sensitivities,

If somebody finds my signature offensive, then they are retarded.
As I see it there are 2 problems with this statement. First, there is a current movement to end the use of the word "retarded" as it offends many people. Second you don't acknowledge the stereotypical base your signature comes from: a video hide yo kids, hide yo wife, and hide yo husband 'cause they rapin' e'rybody out here. - YouTube of a stereotypical black man, this video is stereotypical, which is a component of racism. If you are going to find one slur offensive, you cannot be selective.

As for the unfortunate firing, why would someone jeopardize such a cush job with ESPN?
 
Yes, as I pointed out, the journalistic who, what,when, where , why, how. If someone calls me a whore (which has a lot of history and current negative undertones) I let it roll by,
Great, I never said that people shouldn't let things roll by.

Some words have lost some of their power, for example, some people in this thread didn't even think that the headline could be offensive until it was pointed it out not because they are insensitive, but because they have been brought up in a world that is not accepting of slurs.
Ignorance doesn't erase reality. My comment is about reality - the reality that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive.

If you have not heard of the criticisms of many Disney characters, especially the women are portrayed I suggest that you read A Two Tale Comparison :: essays papers "Fairy tales such as Cinderella have been found guilty of possessing subliminal socialization traits. Classifying genders as inferior and molding young girls into the female that society expects them to be. In Charles Perrault’s version, which is considered the most common, Cinderella is seen as passive, limited, dependent and inferior. As critics argue, these traits can hinder a child’s self esteem." Or find some other source. That is an example of how these fairy tales offend some people, who I also think need to think about their own sensitivities
This is completely off topic from my original comment.

As I see it there are 2 problems with this statement. First, there is a current movement to end the use of the word "retarded" as it offends many people. Second you don't acknowledge the stereotypical base your signature comes from: a video hide yo kids, hide yo wife, and hide yo husband 'cause they rapin' e'rybody out here. - YouTube of a stereotypical black man, this video is stereotypical, which is a component of racism. If you are going to find one slur offensive, you cannot be selective.

As for the unfortunate firing, why would someone jeopardize such a cush job with ESPN?
I used the word retarded on purpose. Moreover, what you really don't seem to grasp is that my comment was not arguing that chink is offensive, it was arguing that people who acknowledge the racially charged meaning of "chink" are not necessarily sensitive. Get it yet?
 
It was a very unfortunate choice of words, and pulling it from the website was probably a good idea. Firing the writer is going a bit too far.
 
They should have just made him do Lin's laundry for a week.

Ahhh so...
Ha cha cha.....
 
They have the right to fire him for whatever they like.

I find SB's reasoning as to why this probably wasn't a coincidence fairly convincing. I don't think it was. I think the guy is just an idiot.

While I am not personally very offended by this, and I don't think the guy is a racist, that was an incredibly poor judgment call on the part of the writer. Just jaw-droppingly stupid. Firing someone for jaw-dropping stupidity is understandable.
 
Great, I never said that people shouldn't let things roll by.
Ignorance doesn't erase reality. My comment is about reality - the reality that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive.

This is completely off topic from my original comment.

I used the word retarded on purpose. Moreover, what you really don't seem to grasp is that my comment was not arguing that chink is offensive, it was arguing that people who acknowledge the racially charged meaning of "chink" are not necessarily sensitive. Get it yet?

You say "the reality that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive" why should the rest of the world have to censor themselves because some people take things out of context or are "sensitive" to words. If someone uses a word maliciously that is probably wrong, but what about when it is not, as is the case with your signature.

As for the Linderella issue, I was merely pointing out that people were not aware or "sensitive" to how offensive some people consider the story of Cinderella. My point was proven because you had no idea that some people thought it was offensive.
 
They have the right to fire him for whatever they like.

I find SB's reasoning as to why this probably wasn't a coincidence fairly convincing. I don't think it was. I think the guy is just an idiot.

While I am not personally very offended by this, and I don't think the guy is a racist, that was an incredibly poor judgment call on the part of the writer. Just jaw-droppingly stupid. Firing someone for jaw-dropping stupidity is understandable.

Well clearly they can fire whoever they want to.

"Chink in the armor," though is a fairly common phrase. The other meaning of "chink" being a racial slur is unfortunate, but I don't believe for a second that he actually meant it, or even thought of that for a second. I had to think about it for awhile before I could see what would be offensive about it. I'd be more apt to blame the editor. Somebody should have read that over and said, "Dude, chink? Can you maybe think of something better?"
 
It was a dumb, racist, forced joke, but was it necessary to fire the guy? I dunno. I tend to think that the power of a racist epithet is directly tied to how oppressed the race was in question. The N word? Highly significant because black people were just about as oppressed as it gets (but they're only in second place since they weren't the target of actual, bona fide mother****ing genocide), but Asians? Aside from a few unfortunate missteps in our nation's history I'm not sure Asians are a terribly maligned race.* I'm not Asian and obviously can't speak for everyone.


*Disclaimer: Asian country that is currently kicking our asses economically will be looked upon in the national media with disgruntlement.
 
Of course it is.

By the way, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

Yeah? Wanna trade for my ocean front property in Arizona?
 
*Disclaimer: Asian country that is currently kicking our asses economically

You do know that they value their own currency and observe no human, labor or environmental rights, don't ya? How many people are dying per year of malnutrition and starvation in China? Healthcare? Haha. Justice? Haha. They got equal rights... no one gets any. It's like comparing apples and yellows.
 
Last edited:
How can people just assume that the writer meant is in a racist manner? That is a huge leap. Perhaps if it was on a website known for racist remarks, then you can probably assume that it was meant to be racist, but come on, it's ESPN. Bad Headline, yes, but racist, doubt it.
 
You say "the reality that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive" why should the rest of the world have to censor themselves because some people take things out of context or are "sensitive" to words. If someone uses a word maliciously that is probably wrong, but what about when it is not, as is the case with your signature.

As for the Linderella issue, I was merely pointing out that people were not aware or "sensitive" to how offensive some people consider the story of Cinderella. My point was proven because you had no idea that some people thought it was offensive.

I suspect that the # of people who think the cinderalla story is offensive is infinitesimal compared to those who know about the word "chink"

Not knowing the first makes you normal; Not knowing the latter makes you too ignorant to be a journalist for a major news provider
 
How can people just assume that the writer meant is in a racist manner? That is a huge leap. Perhaps if it was on a website known for racist remarks, then you can probably assume that it was meant to be racist, but come on, it's ESPN. Bad Headline, yes, but racist, doubt it.

How can people assume that it was not racist? I guess it is a YMMV kind of thing. When it comes to hate and racism? I would rather err on the side of caution than to take someone at that their word that it was just a harmless joke or was taking out of context. Do you REALLY think they are gonna admit it if was racist? Of course not. Come on now.
 
I suspect that the # of people who think the cinderalla story is offensive is infinitesimal compared to those who know about the word "chink"

Not knowing the first makes you normal; Not knowing the latter makes you too ignorant to be a journalist for a major news provider

My point was that none of it should be offensive. I was addressing the other user because he was intent on making the point that if you are "insensitive" to how words impact people whom they have charged meanings for that you are wrong. Things are only as offensive as you let them be. I also addressed his signature as potentially offensive because it relied on stereotypical behavior. If you read my post about taking back the power of words it might make more sense. ;)
 
It was a dumb, racist, forced joke, but was it necessary to fire the guy? I dunno. I tend to think that the power of a racist epithet is directly tied to how oppressed the race was in question. The N word? Highly significant because black people were just about as oppressed as it gets (but they're only in second place since they weren't the target of actual, bona fide mother****ing genocide), but Asians? Aside from a few unfortunate missteps in our nation's history I'm not sure Asians are a terribly maligned race.* I'm not Asian and obviously can't speak for everyone.


*Disclaimer: Asian country that is currently kicking our asses economically will be looked upon in the national media with disgruntlement.

So you are saying there are various levels of racism and what should or should not be accepted? I mean is there some Top 5 list and if that race falls below it then it is ok to spew racism towards them or something?:confused::doh Racism is Racism and it does not matter if you were really oppressed or oppressed just a little bit. None of it is cool. Give me a break. :(
 
How can people assume that it was not racist? I guess it is a YMMV kind of thing. When it comes to hate and racism? I would rather err on the side of caution than to take someone at that their word that it was just a harmless joke or was taking out of context. Do you REALLY think they are gonna admit it if was racist? Of course not. Come on now.

Why are you quick to assume that it was meant in a harmful way. Why blow your career over what may be considered a slur? Do we know that the person in question is so racist that he would destroy his career? Why not just start a hate group?
 
People are way too sensitive. Everything isn't racist, in fact, very few things actually are. I'd like to smack people who scream racism at every turn with a shovel.

Probably all right to smack them with a shovel, but probably not all right to hit them with a spade, which is what a shovel was called when I was growing up.

A chink has described a small tear or hole in something for hundreds of years. A chink in the armor was a weak spot that would be penetrated by a sword.
The holes between logs in a log house were chinks, and filling those holes with mud was chinking.

I saw the headline and didn't think anything of it. I doubt if the writer did either. But then I don't get up each morning and hunt for a reason to be offended. Time to lighten up.
 
You say "the reality that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive" why should the rest of the world have to censor themselves because some people take things out of context or are "sensitive" to words. If someone uses a word maliciously that is probably wrong, but what about when it is not, as is the case with your signature.
When did I say people have to censor themselves? I said, "the reality [is] that people who are aware of the word's racially charged connotation are not necessarily sensitive." That's my only point. I'm not talking about others having to censor themselves. Have you got this in your head yet? Why are you putting words in my mouth? Is it that difficult to address ONLY what was said and not project whatever baggage you brought into this thread all over my post?

As for the Linderella issue, I was merely pointing out that people were not aware or "sensitive" to how offensive some people consider the story of Cinderella. My point was proven because you had no idea that some people thought it was offensive.
Who ****ing cares about Cinderella?
 
Or they could have just used the expression and not think about the racial implications. It's easy to miss stuff like this if your not thinking about race IMO.

Totally agree. Some people are bent on finding racism where none exists.
 
Last edited:
It was a dumb, racist, forced joke, but was it necessary to fire the guy? I dunno. I tend to think that the power of a racist epithet is directly tied to how oppressed the race was in question. The N word? Highly significant because black people were just about as oppressed as it gets (but they're only in second place since they weren't the target of actual, bona fide mother****ing genocide), but Asians? Aside from a few unfortunate missteps in our nation's history I'm not sure Asians are a terribly maligned race.* I'm not Asian and obviously can't speak for everyone.

*Disclaimer: Asian country that is currently kicking our asses economically will be looked upon in the national media with disgruntlement.

At least Lin's ancestral homeland generally trades fairly with the United States, unlike some...
 
You do know that they value their own currency and observe no human, labor or environmental rights, don't ya? How many people are dying per year of malnutrition and starvation in China? Healthcare? Haha. Justice? Haha. They got equal rights... no one gets any. It's like comparing apples and yellows.

Lin is Taiwanese-American...
 
Back
Top Bottom