« Flopping Aces Uncovers the Latest Case of Media Malpractice | Main | Oops! The Predictions for a Terrible Hurricane Season Were Way Off »

The voice of rage

Now that the initial furor over Michael Richards' outburst has faded, I've had a bit of time to think about it a little -- and Mel Gibson's idiocy, and similar things. And I have a theory of my own that I'd like to toss out.

Some people say that, especially in Gibson's case, "in vino veritas" -- that these outbursts reveal much about the inner workings of these two men's minds and show that they had such hateful thoughts and feelings within them, and the incidents merely brought them to the surface.

I'm not sure.

I'm no expert on psychology, but it seems to me that the common element in both is anger. Rage. Fury.

In that state, the most important thing to the inflamed mind: not speaking truth, but lashing out. Hitting. Hurting the target of your fury -- or whoever is convenient -- as badly as you can. Whether true or not, whether an accurate representation of your true feelings or not, the most important thing is to cause pain and suffering.

In Gibson's case, there is the added factor of his father's anti-Semitism. This means that anti-Jewish venom and rhetoric is something with which he's intimately familiar. So those were probably the words of anger and hate that sprang to his booze-addled mind. His treatment of the female officer -- "sugartits" -- adds to this theory.

In Richards' case, he was being antagonized and hassled by two men. The two most noticable things about them, from his perspective, was that they were assholes and black. He can't tell much else about them -- he had no clue who they were, what they did for a living, what their families were like, where they were from, their personal histories, none of the other things that we use when we verbally attack people. All he had to go on was their behavior towards him and their appearance -- so that's what he used. And he was so disconcerted and so blinded by his own fury that he latched on to that one element and tried to use it to strike back at them.

Now, I'm no "Seinfeld" fan. I don't think I've ever seen more than a half a dozen episodes, and they didn't do much for me. But Richards had a very major role in one of my favorite movies, and I resent his tainting my enjoyment of that film.

But I don't think that Richards' behavior really reveals what a lot of people say it did.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The voice of rage:

» The Thunder Run linked with Web Reconnaissance for 11/27/2006

Comments (45)

So, Richards is not a jerk ... (Below threshold)
smartguy:

So, Richards is not a jerk for being a racist (he says he's not racist, so he must not be, right?).

But he is a jerk for flying into a rage.

Either way, he's still a jerk.

"In Richards' case, he was ... (Below threshold)
JimK:

"In Richards' case, he was being antagonized and hassled by two men. "

According to other witnesses and the men themselves, this is not entirely true. They were arriving at the club late, in a large group, and were waited on by staff. They admit they were being overly loud and joking with the waitress while ordering, but allegedly, Richards started in on them as soon as he noticed the large group. It wasn't until he said that he was rich enough to buy them "like the old days" that they responded. Rightly so, if that's the way it went down.

The current word - and it may change of course - is that Richards was thrown by the commotion and started in with the racial invective almost immediately. He's not known for being able to handle heckling, disturbances during the act, etc. This is not the first time he's melted down.

The biggest problem here, aside from Richards himself, is why the hell was the club seating people and taking orders DURING an act? What kind of two-bit club is this? If you're going to seat a party, you take their drink orders at the bar or in the back of the room.

It doesn't really matter wh... (Below threshold)
Wyatt:

It doesn't really matter whether Richards is racist or not-- he's officially been labelled. Sharpton and Jackson are having a field day with it. It's over for Richards.

I disagree. I believe that... (Below threshold)

I disagree. I believe that in moments of rage is precisely when people start showing their true colors.

Quite often people can put up a facade and never speak what they truly think but when you are enraged, you lose control of yourself and THAT is when people stop caring who they hurt and start saying what they really feel. Been witness to it far too many times to have any other theory.

There's not one person on t... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

There's not one person on this earth that doesn't have a breaking point where they will say and do anything to get back at someone or something that is bugging them. Pick the most gentle person you know, push them constantly and they'll turn into a cold blooded killer with you as the target. Call me a certain term and I will hurt you one way or another. Happens every day in every part of the world.

99% of the people on here think or say the dreaded 'N' word on a daily basis. They just lie to try and remain a 'goody, goody. The 'N' word in no worse that calling someone a honkie, cracker or whitey when used the way Richards used it. Want to be the 'offended' parties don't use these words frequently?

The country is simply ate up with the PC's and holding it in for so long is a recipe for disaster sooner or later. Everyone is running around looking for something to be offended about (and money to gain), and they find it daily. Time to get back to the old 'sticks and stones' days. Unless you are one, words can't make you one.

All right Jay! I LOVE that ... (Below threshold)
DocJ:

All right Jay! I LOVE that movie (UHF), too! (thought I was the only one ;-) I, too, am saddened that Richards has now tainted my great memories of "Stanley Spadowski." I never cared much for Seinfeld either, and Richards was always "Stanley" in my mind.

Ok, Richards is a jerk.... (Below threshold)
RSP:

Ok, Richards is a jerk.

Lets not forget that the two black guys responded in kind to his remarks. Are they racists?

How many black comedians would have to get real jobs if they couldnt say cracker or whitey?

The guy was wrong, he apologized. Does it matter any more?

Gibson was drunk. Richards ... (Below threshold)
VagaBond:

Gibson was drunk. Richards was not. Big difference.

In general, I would surmise... (Below threshold)
DaveD:

In general, I would surmise that as a law-abiding societies mature, outright physical violence has become less of an accepted means of settling arguments between aggrieved individuals. Releasing one's anger verbally is less damaging physically, but now we find that verbal indiscretion can damage the psyche of a certain groups of "sensitive" individuals permanently. The composition of the group depends upon the topic of the indiscretion, I guess. Being human, there has got to be outlets for anger/frustration that remain personal - a sort of OK, I got it out of my system sort of thing. I can't see much justification for unprovoked public humiliation, or repeated verbal abuse, though. I think there are tons of people on this earth who are way too sensitive to verbal slips. Taking offense when none was meant. In this particular case from what I've seen, I think Michael Richards was the initial offender. Unfortunately, with Jesse Jackson and his well oiled extortion machine, I bet Richards is going to pay big time for a long time.

If a black commedian had ye... (Below threshold)
Thomas:

If a black commedian had yelled "Shut up you Jewish kyke motherfucker. Hitler should have finished the job when he had the chance" what would any decent Jewish American do? Even if such antisemitic comments were somehow induced by a racist, Jewish audience member, wouldn't the ease with which such comments were accessed and resorted to suggest that they had been developing and gestating in the black commedian's mind well before the outburst? Wouldn't the JDL be all over that performer? Jews continually use self-deprecating humor, but NON-JEWS are not so

Richards' standup is vanilla, outdated, and NOT funny. His observations largely banalities punctuated by pratfalls and childish spastic physical lunges for attention. His rage issues from his sense of entitlement and his professional frustration. He is smart enough to know his act is mediocre, but powerless to improve. Thus his racist hostility toward blacks a further desire to control and another attempt to slash and burn his way to funniness, regardless of the consequences. It is the behaviour of someone who has had too many limosine (sp) doors opened for him.

The appropriate punishment for audience members who scream out racial taunts to on-stage performers is banishment from the club; the appropriate punishment for someone like Richards is to be banished from performance. By the way, he is not fricking Lenny Bruce. His act is very very weak.

Jewish Americans need to rally around blacks, distance themselves from this asshole, and examine their own sense of entitlement, privilege, and apologetics that Richards -- post-tirade -- embodies.

We keep talking about stuff... (Below threshold)
plainslow:

We keep talking about stuff that is pent up inside us. And that's the true feelings. Is'nt all relegion's designed to keep people from using those pent up feelings. The Burka to keep you from Lusting for example. So I believe everyone has feelings inside that they don't act on. Rage or alcohol can bring them out, without making the person bad. So when they come to the surface it's just human. Stupid, but human. it's how they respond to it that I care about. Michael Richardss can give half his money to Dafur aid for example. Nt many others are helping those blacks, not even those here.

I think what you say makes ... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

I think what you say makes sense, Jay. Not that it excuses the behavior, which you aren't doing either, but that it helps explain how someone with no history of making racist comments might suddenly do so if angry enough, out of a desire to hurt the other person. I think the apology tour Richards has been doing has been ridiculous. Apologize -- absolutely, but he sounds like he is trying to strike just the right PC chord to be forgiven and I wonder how much of what he is saying is sincere. He sounds like he is about to cry in all of his interviews and it just seems phony to me. I can understand someone crying in multiple interviews about a lost loved one or something like that. But it strikes me as contrived to be moved to tears over and over again about the pain they caused a stranger by yelling racist garbage at them. Maybe once or twice, but after that, I get the feeling he is acting.

Thomas, you are aware that ... (Below threshold)

Thomas, you are aware that while Cosmo Kramer was Jewish, Michael Richards apparently isn't?

J.

Only right wingers would tr... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Only right wingers would try and minimize obvious racist comments. You folks never cease to amaze me. You don't make racist comments if you're not a racist. Pretty simple really. Amazing the lengths you folks go to to excuse, justify, minimize or just plain deny racism in this country.

So that explains it. Micha... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

So that explains it. Michael Richards isn't Jewish and therefore doesn't get the free pass in America as a racist 'comedian'... like Borat, et al.

Faux Jew in any line of work is rife with land mines. Career over. Next.

Whats the matter dosnt his ... (Below threshold)
spurwing plover:

Whats the matter dosnt his little royal snottyness JESSE JACKASSON belive in FREEDOM OF SPEECH why dont he go get a life instead of getting on his soapbox and rant about certain things

spurwing:Kinda lik... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

spurwing:

Kinda like what you just did?

RSP, I didn't know the heck... (Below threshold)
Joe:

RSP, I didn't know the hecklers responded in kind... where'd ya see that?

Hugh, only a delusional moo... (Below threshold)
D-Hoggs:

Hugh, only a delusional moonbat would turn this incident into a right versus left argument. You're an idiot.

Richards made anti-black co... (Below threshold)
Scott:

Richards made anti-black comments. HE HAD EVERY RIGHT TO DO SO.

The First Amendment gives him this right. Whether or not you agree with his statements or are offended by them is irrelevant.

He could take the act on he road and probably sell out nationwide.

Sad, but true.

And it's perfectly legal.

Until we get over our self-inflicted victimhood fantasies, PC will never die.

Contrary to popular belief, we are NOT required to like everyone.

And YES, I'll say it: some of the most vile racist statements I've ever heard came from blacks talking about whites and Asians.

Move on.

Doesn't have to be a "victi... (Below threshold)
Faith+1:

Doesn't have to be a "victimhood" issue Scott. It's clear he was a jerk. Yes, he has the legal right to be a jerk--and we have the legal right to treat him like one. He was also being racist. That, too, is nothing new. Blacks being racist is also irrelevent to the issue whether he is or not.

The only issue is that an actor of same fame who has made a point of appearing on several talk shows in the past criticizing others for being "evil" and "racist" blowing up over a minor incident and showing he is just as racist as those he sat in judgement of not too long before.

His pathetic apology and "Bush made me angry" excuse just made him appear to be even more transparent.

What is clear is that he does, whether they like it or not, represent a lot of the extreme left's thinking--that others are beneath contempt and unworthy to decide their own fate and should be told what to do by others.

Everyone does know that "hu... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Everyone does know that "hugie" belongs to the "club" don't they?

What about Robert Byrd, Hug... (Below threshold)
plainslow:

What about Robert Byrd, Hugh. If he's a Dem member of Congress it's Ok to have been in the KKK. I bet he said the N word a few times in his life.

RSP: You should watch that... (Below threshold)
Lisa:

RSP: You should watch that video again: They did not respond in kind. Stop spreading that lie. They told him he wasnt funny, that he was washed up. They did not call him a cracker, honkey, or anything else. They were jerky hecklers, but not racist spewers.

Bottom line is this: You say stuff like that in public, dont expect alot of sympathy. It is annoying that the two guys are now running around calling themselves victims. Please, they are drunken slobs who heckled a racist who then called them the nasty things that racists call you when you piss them off. Happens all the time.

That said, Richards should slither away. It was his screw up, he loses. If I got burned up at a student and started calling them racist names, I would be fired and I would not work at another university in this lifetime. Michael Richards is getting a taste of reality. We all have to control our tempers at work. We have to keep our biases to ourselves.

Nevertheless, Richards was ... (Below threshold)

Nevertheless, Richards was wrong - dead wrong. But I believe his apology is heartfelt. And I agree with Wyatt. Jackson and Sharpton are seizing on this like Christmas came early.

This is not a Democrat or "right-winger" issue and I think it's sad that some will drag that into this.

Faith: Even though Richard... (Below threshold)
Lisa:

Faith: Even though Richards has been trying to politicize this, it is stupid to take the bait. Being a racist jerk doesn't represent the "far left" or the "far right". It is an equal opportunity affliction. Further, saying stupid stuff to defend your racism when you are caught at it is certainly a non-partisan activity (that is actually the most entertaining part of a public screw up of this nature - the weird dissembling that happens as the person tries to explain their way out of it).

Plainsow:Honest to... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Plainsow:

Honest to god why do do many of you folks act like 1st graders in a school yard? One posts a point and immediately you feel the need to point out some democrat who behaved in an intolerable way or some democrat who did the same thing.

That wasn't the point of my post nitwit. The point was the lengths to which so many righties go to minimize or deny patent racism.

Robert Byrd doesn't get a free pass. He was a racist and should have been condemned for it. If he hasn't changed and still is, he should be condemned for it.

Richards' comments were not... (Below threshold)
Denny F. Crane!:

Richards' comments were not racist at all. He was pissed off by an idiot, and he reached for the strongest, most insulting, word he could apply to the heckler. If the heckler were Irish, Italian, Slavic, Jewish, Asian, Latino, female, fat, freckled, tattooed, whatever, I'm sure he would have found an equally insulting word that would have outraged other identity groups to the same degree. But his use of the N-bomb in this instance does not suggest to me that he is biased against black people -- it only tells me that he was pissed at a rude heckler who happened to be black, and he over-reacted and lashed out foolishly.

Gibson's incident is different. I'm afraid that revealed some lurking bias.

"99% of the people on here ... (Below threshold)
Denny F. Crane!:

"99% of the people on here think or say the dreaded 'N' word on a daily basis."

Huh? What the fuck are you talking about? Speak for yourself, moron.

Sorry I've seemed to have b... (Below threshold)
plainslow:

Sorry I've seemed to have bothered you Hugh. Seeing how I am someone who has blirted a stupid statement (not racial) or two in by life. One's that are not the same as my views or how've I'ved lived my life, before or after the blirt. I have a tendacy to forgive people for one indiscretion. I don't like dismissing someone for one stupid act. This is one racial slur (that may be his only one-I don't know) that will cost him more than if he was a pedofile in Vermont. Wheras Mr Byrd used to support the very things Mr Richard said, which was a lifestyle choice. If that makes me a nitwit, than thanks for the compliment.

Joe:> RSP, I didn't know th... (Below threshold)
RSP:

Joe:> RSP, I didn't know the hecklers responded in kind... where'd ya see that?

Lisa:> RSP: You should watch that video again: They did not respond in kind. Stop spreading that lie. They told him he wasnt funny, that he was washed up. They did not call him a cracker, honkey, or anything else. They were jerky hecklers, but not racist spewers.
=================================
Heres the link -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu8-coFmka4
- time would be approximately 1.07 into the vid.

I belive the phrase they us... (Below threshold)
RSP:

I belive the phrase they used was White Cracker-*ss Mother F**ker

You Tubes spelling, not mine.

So my question is repeated, are these young men racists?

RSP: Sorry, I failed to ca... (Below threshold)
Lisa:

RSP: Sorry, I failed to catch that. Yes, then they could rightly be branded as bigots because they were responding to racism with more racism. Believe me, I have no sympathy for them as "victims". I am not buying that. But simply calling someone a nigger, a cracker-assed motherfucker, etc. shows you are an asshole, and probably a racist. Experessing your desire to return to the days of lynching and slave buying kind of hints that you probably have some serious racial supremacy issues.

Thank you for correcting on the audience members response but the fact remains that Richards deserves what he is getting (his career is done - stick a fork in it) if I called someone a crackerassed peckerwood motherfucker; a chink; spick; fag; etc at work, I would be fired. I would have a hard time finding a job (maybe I could get Al Sharpton to march in front of said building to get some publicity for a while, lol - but I would essentially be screwed). Richards is getting the same treatment. He is done as a comedian. Fired. It seems harsh, but none of us working class slobs would have gotten away with that kind of language while doing our jobs.

Denny Crane: You are kiddi... (Below threshold)
Lisa:

Denny Crane: You are kidding/trolling right? So it is just simply "rude" to call someone a nigger and express a desire to lynch them or purchase them at a slave auction; but it is totally wrong to say "fucking jews cause wars!".

Both sentiments reveal latent bias. One group of people are not more important than the other. To talk trash about blacks is just as nasty as talking trash about Jews.

BTW, I totally agree with t... (Below threshold)
Lisa:

BTW, I totally agree with the original post. If you get a person angry enough, they are going to go below the belt. This does not necessarily make you a racist. However, you sure look like an asshole. Unfortunately, if you are a prominent figure you are going to have an anchor around your neck forever. You may or may not recover from it. I think it is easier for a politician to overcome past racist statements and actions because they can build themselves a more flattering history by making noble speeches/legislation that show them as a person who has changed or become enlightened. Robert Byrd did it successfully, George Wallace did it at the end of his life, and I bet Trent Lott will similarly redeem himself (his own black constituents expressed fondness for him even after he misspoke - they really like him as their legislator).

But an entertainer does not have similar opportunities. People just stop buying what you are selling and forget about you. The pocketbook punishes harder than the voting booth.

Lisa,You clearly m... (Below threshold)
Denny F. Crane!:

Lisa,

You clearly missed my point, and you are apparently not very familiar with the two situations. The trigger for Richards was much different from the trigger for Gibson--vastly different contexts. Their statements were equally outrageous, but they came from different places, and I think the intent and meaning were different.

Richards may or may not be a racist pig, I don't know. But his lousy performance at the club does not really tell me one way or the other.

Lisa, if you were a despicable person who pissed me off to the extreme, I might call you a piece of shit cunt, or some other lovely name. But anyone who knows me would tell you that does NOT come from a disrespect for women. I might choose that merely because I know most women loath that word. In this case, it would be you I hate, and not women in general.

Same with Richards. He chose an inflammatory name to evoke the emotions he was feeling toward the hecklers. That does NOT mean he disrespects blacks in general, even latently. Of course, he might, but I would not conclude that from just this encounter.

Denny:I know you w... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Denny:

I know you were communicating with Lisa but I am just dumfounded that you would think the use of the "c" word somehow doesn't come from disrespect. That's ludicrous. The word itself is shows nothing but disrespect. That's what the word is about. It's a vile word and connotes nothing else. The same is true for the "n" word. On their face those 2 words are despicable and racist/sexist.

I continue to be amazed at people miinimizing/justifying or outright denying the meaning behind those words. We are judge by our words as much as by our behavior. Words connote how we feel and what we believe.

Point taken Denny. In the ... (Below threshold)
Lisa:

Point taken Denny. In the heat of anger, frustration, embarassment, etc. I find myself searching for the shittiest thing I could possibly say to someone to lash out. I would like to think that I would NEVER use racist, homophobic or sexist language, but that is total bullshit. The other day I was talking to some asshole at Comcast with an accent and as my anger level rose the urge to say "Listen Punjab, get me your fucking manager" was nearly overwhelming. I managed to ask for his manager without calling him Punjab, Pradeep, or Sunil. But it was hard.

I realize Gibson has a family history of anti-semitism, plus his rant was unprovoked and had nothing to do with his traffic stop.

Maybe Richards was just pissed. Maybe he is a racist piglet. Either way, he is reaping the karmic winds for his piteous lack of self control (hello!!! you are a stand up comedian, heckers are par for the course, buddy).

Sorry for the knee jerk reaction, but I actually have had people say " Stop being so racially sensitive! Nigger is just a word, after all". But those same folks gasp in horror if someone casts aspersions on a jew or a gay person I think if you make racist or bigoted public remarks about any group, you deserve the public flogging that you get. However, I would not go so far as to cry victimhood and call in the JDL, GLAAD or the NAACP just because some drunken slob or a really unprofessional and unbalanced comedian said bigoted things.

So I guess I kind of agree - yes, calling Jesse Jackson in as reinforcement and naming the two hecklers "victims" was stupid. However, I don't feel sorry for Richards at all. Good ole capitalism is going to clean his clock. When you are out of control and liable to blow up and spew angry bigoted, unfunny filth, people are not going to line up to see you. If you are going to spew bigoted filth, you have to be like Richard Pryor and Dave Chappelle: Cleverly channel your anger and for Gods sake please be funny.

Hugh:I somewhat ag... (Below threshold)
Lisa:

Hugh:

I somewhat agree. Alot of the time when people spew hateful shit, it is revealing some deepseated prejudice. However, I think that sometimes shitty, nasty bigoted thoughts can pop into any of our heads when we are EXTREMELY angry or embarassed. We mentally go for the juglar. But MOST of us don't use them. We know we are just angry/hurt and want to draw blood. We generally pass over that fleeting urge to sink to the lowest, lousiest denominator. That is what separates the men and women from the boys and girls. Letting something like that come out of your mouth says that you dont give a shit about who you are talking to or even how stupid you look uttering it. Race, sexuality, religion, etc. has nothing to do with whehter someone is an asshole or not, but you know that it will really shock and anger that asshole when you just want to make them hurt. I won't pretend that I have never wanted to say the WORST to someone who I considered a vile person. But I almost NEVER say the dirty thing (asshole, motherfucker, assclown, etc. usually suffice) Calling someone a racist name in anger is like seeing a rat on a subway full of people and using a grenade to kill it. You are randomly bloodying up loads of people in the attempt to get that one little rodent.

As a black person, I have t... (Below threshold)
Carbon Mike:

As a black person, I have to say I view this whole incident with more amusement than anger (although I'm a little pissed that Seinfeld is ruined for me now). Even though there are plenty of racists who never use derogatory language, It's pretty obvious to me that Richards is harboring some serious racism -- just like Gibson is an obvious anti-semite. Christopher Hitchens said it best: "one does not decide between the third and fouth martinis that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are true". Similarly, the ease with which Richards suddenly pulled 150 proof Jim Crow out of his ass suggests that he's got more issues than National Geographic WRT racial issues. Someone's been repressing!

Let's be clear: what was shocking to most people (at least most thinking people, both black and white, that I know) wasn't that he just said the word "nigger". It was that he clearly left comedy space and entered ad-hominem space, speaking with relish (not sarcasm or irony or any kind of comedic inflection) about lynching and white supremacist attitudes.

But enough talking; I have a question. (A serious one, not a troll). Why do so many white people who discuss this issue seem to think that "black public opinion" -- as if it were monolithic and always coincided with what putative black leaders have to say -- is enough to sink the career of someone who is deemed a racist?

Just as a matter of pure numbers (I'm not complaining, so keep the victimology flames down please) I'm not aware that there's a single black executive in any major Hollywood studio who can greenlight or redlight a film project. Similarly, there are few or no black major casting directors, TV producers, or station chiefs in the US television and motion picture industry, so if RIchards's career (which wasn't exactly on fire anyway) fizzles entirely, can it really be because of some hollywood "black mafia"? (And you can't tell me that thes execs are listening to Al Sharpton instead of their shareholders -- these guys are in it to win it, not to make friends with the black elite).

If a bunch of white guys in Hollywood decide not to advance another white guy's career because racists (or anti-semites) are bad for ticket sales and therefore bad for profits, doesn't that say something good about American society? Why all the sturm und drang about "censorship" ?

CM

BOOK CRITICAL OF AFRICAN AM... (Below threshold)

BOOK CRITICAL OF AFRICAN AMERICANS WHO USE THE N-WORD

Los Angeles, CA., - Author H. Lewis Smith has written a thought provoking, culturally divided book that will not only spark heated conversation, but can also bring about real change. The N-word is often used in the African American community amongst each other and is generally not a problem when spoken by another African American. However, once the word is used by a Caucasian person, it brings on other effects. The question is "who can use the word and why?" Smith believes it is a word that should be BURIED!!!!

The book is written in a manner that all can understand. The points are well-taken and the wording is easy to follow. There are quotes from great people in our history including Martin Luther King, Jr., Harriet Tubman, James Baldwin and many, many others. Smith has mixed history with honesty, love with life, education with effects. This is a great book for educators, parents, managers, professionals, newsmen, and anyone else wanting an in-depth look at the N-word, the effects and the solutions. A MUST READ!!!!

To learn more about Bury that Sucka, please visit http://www.burythatsucka.com

Hugh:Like Lisa, yo... (Below threshold)
Denny F. Crane!:

Hugh:

Like Lisa, you don't easily comprehend, do you.

OF COURSE nigger is disrespectful! OF COURSE cunt is disrespectful! That's the purpose of those words. Fuck, Hugh, you seem like an idiot!

But the USE of those words can be used against INDIVIDUALS without maligning or disrespecting everyone who belongs to the identity group or class of people to which the target belongs. If I say "cunt," I'm not talking about women, I'm talking about someone I despise, who happens to be female, and I know will bristle at the use of the word. That's precisely why I would use it. I would use a different, but equally insulting word for a man.

Oops, I apologize, Lisa. I... (Below threshold)
Denny F. Crane!:

Oops, I apologize, Lisa. I didn't read your followup comment until after I reacted to Hugh.

I have no idea what was going through Richards' mind when he went off, but I'm glad you got my point about grasping for hot buttons to push during a rage.

I don't consider myself racist (and people who know me would agree). Nor would I use racial epithets, because I have been conditioned not go go near certain words or phrases, even if joking or in a rage. But I do play on stereotypes from time to time, because I think some are comical -- not because I believe in them. Well, I take that back. When I see an Asian make a right turn from the left lane, or an illegal Mexican driving 55 in the fast lane to avoid being pulled over (even though the speed limit is 70), then some racial sentiments fly.

Enough. Time to pour more wine.

Denny:You can yell... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Denny:

You can yell and you can mock others but that doesn't change your absurd rationalization. One word is a gender word, the other is a racial word. Both describe groups. One is racist, the other is sexist. it's very simple.

People who spew racial and sexist epithets rarely consider themselves racists like an alcoholic doesn't consider himself an alcoholic until recovery. Both use denial. As do you.

The best part is that you actually admit what you believe in your "when I see an Asian" sentence. See, you didn't see a driver driving poorly, you saw an Asian. Classic stereotyping. Classic racism. The "c" word is classic stereotyping of women, classic sexism (sic).

Perhaps I seem like an "idiot" but I'd rather be an "idiot" than have your attitudes and belief system. Thank you.

"If a bunch of white guy... (Below threshold)

"If a bunch of white guys in Hollywood decide not to advance another white guy's career because racists (or anti-semites) are bad for ticket sales and therefore bad for profits, doesn't that say something good about American society?"

Thank you Carbon Mike. That made a very salient point.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy