Hmm.

Apr 15, 2007 21:34

So, I have a variety of things I could talk about. So, without further ado ( Read more... )

books, random, people, emotion

Leave a comment

Comments 8

teacupdiaries April 16 2007, 11:20:51 UTC
Yes, Imus should have had more tact. But I don't think he should be crucified for something that is cheered, applauded, and generally tolerated in many other facets of culture. He didn't even use a racial slur, and it's on par with award winning lyrics by Snoop Dogg.What on earth could be wrong about openly challenging and "crucifying" people who feel it's okay to be racist and misogynistic ( ... )

Reply

hidenplainsight April 16 2007, 17:05:22 UTC
This is a double standard, however. If words are to be banned for their emotional content, they should be banned for any and all use of those words. To crucify Imus (a rich media personality) for the use of those words while not crucifying Snoop Dogg (a rich media personality) for the same use of those words itself sends a message that race dictates what is allowable for one group and not for another.
I wish companies and communities would become outraged at all the racist and sexist comments that can be heard on the radio and on TV.
That is my complaint. They don't. If something is racist, bigoted, sexist, or hateful speech, then it must be considered hateful, racist, bigoted, or sexist no matter what person or group uses it. To selectively punish does nothing to remove such speech or decrease the hate associated with it.

Reply

teacupdiaries April 16 2007, 17:26:20 UTC
This is a double standard, however. If words are to be banned for their emotional content, they should be banned for any and all use of those words. To crucify Imus (a rich media personality) for the use of those words while not crucifying Snoop Dogg (a rich media personality) for the same use of those words itself sends a message that race dictates what is allowable for one group and not for another.It only sends that message to people who are too ignorant or blinded by their own bigotry to realise the vast difference between racist language that contributes to an already firmly established, institutionalised racism, and language that is merely racially motivated with no lasting effect on the person it is being directed at ( ... )

Reply

hidenplainsight April 16 2007, 17:42:58 UTC

I disagree that there should be any targeting priorities. If racist speech is to be disallowed, it should be disallowed completely.

Reply


hidenplainsight April 16 2007, 20:40:48 UTC

I have now disabled visible commenting.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up