Yes, that's exactly what's taking place. All over the place people are questioning what they are saying and why, speaking out about what they like/don't like etc.,mnaz wrote:Smoooch!!!Defend this statement. What exactly is "no longer being tolerated"? Using the word "ho"? Only certain people of certain races of certain ages using the word? What spasmodic wellspring of enlightenment are we witnessing, O enlightened one? Will rappers no more misogynize and comics never again utter the cosmically offensive word? Or are they simply next on the list and we simply had to start somewhere?... perhaps with this un-hip crusty old radio cowboy, tone-deaf in the latest slang for example?...whimsicaldeb wrote:Exactly. It's been tolerating, and now that is all changing; it's n longer being tolerated as it once was.
Examples/references to such - try these:
The con side has this: (those who don't want change)
Shock Radio, Playing Rough, Shrugs at Imus’s Fall
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/busin ... =1&_r=1&hp
The middle ground has this:
Imus Versus Imus
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2 ... paumgarten
The pro side has this: (those who do want change)
http://www.ballerstatus.com/article/news/2007/05/2513/
Al Sharpton Leads March Demanding 'Decency' In Hip-Hop Lyrics
You name anything, and it's all happening, all at once. And the pro/con categorization is subjective. Feel free to change it if it bugs you.
I have not put words in his mouth, or changed his/their intent and while I based my conclusions on all his/their postings: this one fits the why I think as I do the best and (imo) fits my conclusion well:mnaz wrote:What shocks me here is that (A) you manipulate words from different sources so as to put words in Cecil's mouth that he did not speak, and (B) you outrageously extrapolate from that manipulation the assertion that Cecil must therefore support prejudiced and attacking comments, and by extension, a "bigoted" world POV. Then again, you oughtta know. You are indeed skilled in the art of attacking comments.What shocked me, was coming in here and finding out that Cecil, the S8 resident guru, not only "tolerates Imus prejudiced and attacking comments for so many years" but support his right to be that way towards others as well. I found that shocking; couple that with insensitivity about a subject matter everyone was admitting they personally knew anything about (but continued to talk about anyway) appalling.
mtmynd wrote:Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:47 pm
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 Posts: 1917 Location: phar lepht
soo and i will miss his show... watched it daily while having our coffee. damned entertaining, altho it took some time to adjust to the old curmudgeon's ways. a bigot? not a chance if anyone watched his show. like any good shock jock he laid shit on anyone including favorites of his (and they did likewise to him). a bigot?? he had black athletes on, black musicians, played some black preachers jesus ravings (without insult).
i guarantee you the mouths that wanted him off the air never got into his show.
as soo says his actions were proof of his goodness. he has done one hell of a lot of good - has a ranch for cancer kids, helped raise big money for a hospital for the injured vets, did not let the walter reed bullshit die, helped (with his wife) get an autism act passed, gave tremendous support to the green movement (along with his wife), never had guests that he didn't like, introduced his listeners to some great musical acts (live, in studio), recently gave a black kid who has cancer in his eye, a ride on his jet from AZ to to some big hospital on the east coast, with his wife attended the funeral of one of their ranch kids who had died... the list goes on and on. all that unfortunately erased by three words that grew out of proportion: "nappy-headed hos".
the whole thing sucks from the vacuous mouths of ignorance bringing notice to their agendas far less important than what don imus has done during his career.
and life goes on... with one less bit of goodness.
I did not read ST postings in their entirety but the others I did, and yes I paused and took my time in my replies. I have to say going over them again to answer you now: I still feel the same way, just no longer as surprised and shocked as I was then.mnaz wrote:Just more of the same. I have to ask... Did you read these posts in their entirety? Did you take that extra pause before loading your guns?However, after reading his and soosen's replies in this thread, I do indeed view Cecil as a bigot, racist, and sexist and consider him a hypocrite.
Oh my gawd, mnaz. What the hell is that?mnaz wrote:You're really enjoying a chance to punish us, aren't you?That others here can be so unaware of all this ... so unaware of mine and how others ways of feeling/thinking, ways of being. Again: shocking/appalling (sad and pathetic). Why not? Why don't you (you=group meaning - not simply person specific) know this? Why weren't you (you=group meaning - not simply person specific) aware?
No. I'm not doing this to punish anyone.
No. I'm not deliberately trying to humiliate anyone.
No. I'm not 'getting off' on this, like some sort of ego thing.
Perhaps you would prefer not knowing what I think; like Doreen wrote - she thinks that better, kinder. And, on many things I do keep feelings and thought to myself.
But this subject matter; sexism, racism - It's too goddamn important to allow it to remain in the dark; under the carpet; out of site and out of mind; just because it makes people uncomfortable, or they don't like how or what I'm expressing.
Too Important!
I'm out of my own comfort zone doing this, most of the time I just and walk away. For me to take the time to stay and work it out; it's gotta mean something... and I don't mean money in my pocket and a fame & glory ego feed.
I'm not getting off on this, or my working out some need to be seen. This subject is important. I would have thought that was clear by now.
Nothing can ever better when it's not address. Things need to faced head on. Just like a wound has to be exposed to cleaning before it can be bandaged to healed (and that stings and hurts) ... you know it, but you do it/face it anyway, for the results.
I don't know how to answer this one for you mnaz. bohonato has addressed this before, and addressed it well (imo):mnaz wrote:How many? Who decides?It's what's being said, the meaning behind it; who's saying it where ; to whom - and most of why - that's offensive. Not just to me... but to many MANY others.
bohonato wrote:The problem isn't the words. Its the meaning behind them, which changes with context, the subject, and the person saying them. Totally subjective. I hate to fall on the 'I know it when I see/hear it' cop out, but then again, there's a good reason why I'm not going into public policy.
How many, exactly. I have no clue.
Who decides: Each person individually
Thanks mnaz.mnaz wrote:I couldn't have said it better myself Deb.This isn't just a "Deb" thing ... this is an important issue to many MANY people. If you walk away with anything from this thread - walk away with that understanding.
This is an important issue, for many reasons, for many people, and making light of it and belittling it/us over it is insulting and demeaning to those of us who have and hold deeper different feelings, ideas, and thoughts about then subject than you (group you) do.
So please respect our differences - and show your respect us by not making light/fun of either the situation or those within it, and by taking the time to learn more about it before you speak out.
