GDT Sun 7/29, Dodgers

sturg33 said:
Apologizing and owning it just doesn't seem to be enough these days
Click to expand...

I imagine that the apologies are authentic about as often as the outrage is.

I hate the politicizing of sports. It was always nice to be able to sit down with someone I disagree with about everything else and cheer for the same team for a few hours without worrying about a political hot button coming up.
 
msstate7 said:
Are both not an offensive term? You can be labeled a redneck simply for being born in my state. I save my outrage for more important things (miss state sports, braves, and saints lol) than dumb insults.
Click to expand...

not similarly offensive - no. and it's not really about the term, per se, but about the treatment of the groups.
have rednecks and gay people had similar treatment in the history of america/the world? like, at all?
 
sturg33 said:
Keith Law was asked if the Josh Hader thing was being handled well.

Law said no, not even close.

Of course he never clarified what would have been acceptable. I suppose he should have been suspended for something he did as a teenager? Or just thrown out of the league?

Apologizing and owning it just doesn't seem to be enough these days
Click to expand...

I think in the case of Newcomb, Hader, etc...an expression of regret is enough and we can all move on...i'm not a big fan of sensitivity training classes...
 
sturg33 said:
Keith Law was asked if the Josh Hader thing was being handled well.

Law said no, not even close.

Of course he never clarified what would have been acceptable. I suppose he should have been suspended for something he did as a teenager? Or just thrown out of the league?

Apologizing and owning it just doesn't seem to be enough these days
Click to expand...

Just be glad this isn't the NFL. Newcomb would of been suspended for half the season
 
thewupk said:
yeah but rednecks have been keeping down blacks and homosexuals for years so it's ok to hate on them
Click to expand...

i mean, they have yes - but that's not really the point here. the usual deliberate obtuseness.
the way gay people have been treated in our country (and the entire world) for a long time is the issue.
when was the last time a state tried to ban "rednecks" from getting married? this isn't even the worst of offenses against gay people, but to say their treatment is at all comparable is insanely stupid.
 
Jaw said:
The guy being called a redneck because of the dialect he was born into would likely disagree, especially since one of these things is now a protected class and the other is a socially acceptable punching bag.
Click to expand...

gay people are a protected class? where?
allowing them to actually be married in some places is what you consider "protected"?
who's been treated worse in american/world history - gay people or rednecks?
let me guess - the southerners were the victims in the civil war, too.
christ almighty, man.
 
sturg33 said:
Keith Law was asked if the Josh Hader thing was being handled well.

Law said no, not even close.

Of course he never clarified what would have been acceptable. I suppose he should have been suspended for something he did as a teenager? Or just thrown out of the league?

Apologizing and owning it just doesn't seem to be enough these days
Click to expand...

My guess is the vast majority of fans--and I mean true fans--think it is enough. Why should anyone be concerned about what Keith Law says? There doesn't have to be universal unanimity on these types of issues and the problem with both sides is that they seem to believe that has to be the final result.

I feel the same way about what Joe Simpson said the other night. Joe--as a former Dodger who came up through their system in the Lasorda "bleed Dodger blue" era--has a strong opinion about what that uniform means to him. I frankly thought his comments were a bit odd, but I found the reaction to those comments--both here and elsewhere--to be way over the top. Joe has a strong opinion about something as inconsequential as batting practice jerseys. He is entitled to that opinion and it really wasn't offensive.

I am older the Joe and make an effort to try not to complain about what these youngsters are up to with their newfangled ideas, but this one hit a nerve with Joe. People should just sit back and say "Thanks for the birthday card and the $20 Grandpa" and leave it at that. I am convinced that our entire society from extreme right to extreme left has become overly sensitized and anything that doesn't mesh with one's internal wiring causes them to go from zero to sixty in seconds flat and that an immediate response is warranted and that response must be worded in the strongest terms possible.
 
sturg33 said:
Just found out my fiancee had an away message on AOL Instant Messenger when she was 13 that read "boys go to Jupiter to get more stupider"

Think we're gonna need couples therapy and she's going to need to express some real regret about this.
Click to expand...

right because boys in general have been treated (and continue to be treated) the same as gays have/are.
the false equivalence is strong in here.
 
Super said:
i mean, they have yes - but that's not really the point here. the usual deliberate obtuseness.
the way gay people have been treated in our country (and the entire world) for a long time is the issue.
when was the last time a state tried to ban "rednecks" from getting married? this isn't even the worst of offenses against gay people, but to say their treatment is at all comparable is insanely stupid.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is trying to say their treatment is at all comparable. But in 2018 I would think we should try and treat each group of people equally regardless of how they were treated in the past. However that doesn't seem to to be the case for some reason.
 
So what is the official order of offensive terms?
Native Americans, African Americans, gay people, women, rednecks?
 
thewupk said:
I don't think anyone is trying to say their treatment is at all comparable. But in 2018 I would think we should try and treat each group of people equally regardless of how they were treated in the past. However that doesn't seem to to be the case for some reason.
Click to expand...

you're right. it doesn't.
gay people are still treated worse than rednecks.
insulting someone for being gay is still worse than calling someone a redneck.
and it's because of the past and current treatment of each group.
 
msstate7 said:
So what is the official order of offensive terms?
Native Americans, African Americans, gay people, women, rednecks?
Click to expand...

none of the above is offensive...seriously you want a list?

there is one term that is used for blacks

there is one term used for gays

and i can think of two for women

i'm probably missing one or two others...but that's the extent of my no use list...others are offensive, but imo we need to be very selective about things we put beyond the pale
 
Super said:
do you think all derogatory terms are equal?
Click to expand...

In a way they are. In other ways not.

You shouldn't call anyone names. It isn't nice.

But it isn't hard to see which ones carry the most consequence and why. If you can't figure it out that's on you. Campaigning for the freedom to call people ***s and ******s is a pretty bad place to be, but amazingly some folks do it all the time.
 
Super said:
you're right. it doesn't.
gay people are still treated worse than rednecks.
insulting someone for being gay is still worse than calling someone a redneck.
and it's because of the past and current treatment of each group.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Both show prejudice/ignorance of the person doing the insulting. Assuming they are being serious which I doubt was the case for Newcomb and most situations like his.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
Super said:
gay people are a protected class? where?
allowing them to actually be married in some places is what you consider "protected"?
who's been treated worse in american/world history - gay people or rednecks?
let me guess - the southerners were the victims in the civil war, too.
christ almighty, man.
Click to expand...

Ever heard of the EEOC? You can choose to not hire someone because of where they're from, or how they talk. But not because they're gay. Yes, homosexuals are a protected class, both by the government and the "woke" PC police.
 
thewupk said:
I disagree. Both show prejudice/ignorance of the person doing the insulting. Assuming they are being serious which I doubt was the case for Newcomb and most situations like his.
Click to expand...

well i think the difference is whether the term is used to dehumanize a certain group...dehumanizing a group is the first step to not treating them as humans

i don't think redneck is anywhere close to that...in some contexts it is a term of endearment...in others it is an insult...but it does not put the other person in a sub-human category...it is more like the derogatory terms that exist for Italians, Poles, Jews, Irish, Mexicans, etc...best not to use them, but imo not beyond the pale
 
i don't feel any differently about sean newcomb as a person than i did two days ago. i don't think he's necessarily a bad person today.
being asked and forced to answer for this does not make him a sympathetic character.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top