The horrible horrible world of sports

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It's also a question of context. Your kid is playing sports with friends that he's going to have around for a while. He's insulting people in his own tribe. For kids anybody they play sports with will always be people in the same tribe. For adults in national competitions, it's another environment, with a hell of a lot more riding on succeeding. When more is riding on winning, people might say more unfortunate things.

Eh ? That's not the way youth sports work. There are cross town rivalries, high school rivalries, out of state tournaments. You actually seldom compete within your "tribe". You compete almost always against another tribe. Jeezus, high school basketball, softball AYSO soccer gets real chippy and that's just the girls !! Parents are ejected from gym/field all the time too.

Eh is right. Best I can determine is Zoid isn't athletically versed.

 

[Rhea]

I am not defending racism or am trying to protect them. I just think that sometimes, in the heat of the moment, people might use colourful language without thinking how it lands.

I have many times said horrendous things, but in contexts where its been appreciated as obvious jokes. My sense of humour is highly inappropriate.

I don't think that makes me a racist

I am trying to determine from your arguments what you think is wrong with racism, anyway. I was surprised to read this. Isn’t it okay to call you a racist both because 1) I can call you anything I want and you’d be good with it and 2) also because racism isn’t really bad and people’s feelings shouldn’t be hurt by it?

I’m surprised you care whether anyone calls you racist. We’re all good here, right?

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's also a question of context. Your kid is playing sports with friends that he's going to have around for a while. He's insulting people in his own tribe. For kids anybody they play sports with will always be people in the same tribe. For adults in national competitions, it's another environment, with a hell of a lot more riding on succeeding. When more is riding on winning, people might say more unfortunate things.

Eh ? That's not the way youth sports work. There are cross town rivalries, high school rivalries, out of state tournaments. You actually seldom compete within your "tribe". You compete almost always against another tribe. Jeezus, high school basketball, softball AYSO soccer gets real chippy and that's just the girls !! Parents are ejected from gym/field all the time too.

I was thinking pre-teens.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I am not defending racism or am trying to protect them. I just think that sometimes, in the heat of the moment, people might use colourful language without thinking how it lands.

I have many times said horrendous things, but in contexts where its been appreciated as obvious jokes. My sense of humour is highly inappropriate.

I don't think that makes me a racist

I am trying to determine from your arguments what you think is wrong with racism, anyway. I was surprised to read this. Isn’t it okay to call you a racist both because 1) I can call you anything I want and you’d be good with it and 2) also because racism isn’t really bad and people’s feelings shouldn’t be hurt by it?

I’m surprised you care whether anyone calls you racist. We’re all good here, right?

My point is that context matters. We're living in the age of taking things out of context and passing judgement based on the new context. It's dumb.

What I care about is whether or not I think I am a racist. I'm cool with other people having whatever opinion about me they like. I do care about what people I respect think about me. But those I don't... meh.

Here's an example from my childhood. I have a black childhood friend. When we were teenagers I made a racist joke that made him very upset. Six months later we had a serious talk and he said he was grateful that I'd done it. Coming from me of all people was disarming and it had made him realize that he took himself way too seriously, and I'd made him stop and think. Which he needed at that time. But he might as well not have needed that. I didn't know. And that's ok. It's ok to fuck up now and again. What makes you a good or bad person is how you deal with your mess. Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence. This incident brought me and my black childhood friend closer. We both learned something from that incident. It both made us better people. As adults we ended up working together, with absolute trust in each other. Trust we still have for one another.

There's an old Buddhist/Hippie saying that comes in handy. "Knowing the name of something doesn't mean you understand it". I think this is something that a lot of people on this forum (including me) needs to be reminded of on a regular basis. Just because you have labelled a certain word as racist that doesn't mean everybody who uses it is racist. The stand up comedian Lisa Lampanelli famously has a stand up routine that is nothing but a 90 minute long racist rant where she relentlessly attacks members of the audience. Everybody is laughing. It's hilarious. I don't think anybody thinks she's a racist.

 

[Politesse]

Here's an example from my childhood. I have a black childhood friend. When we were teenagers I made a racist joke that made him very upset. Six months later we had a serious talk and he said he was grateful that I'd done it. Coming from me of all people was disarming and it had made him realize that he took himself way too seriously, and I'd made him stop and think. Which he needed at that time. But he might as well not have needed that. I didn't know. And that's ok. It's ok to fuck up now and again. What makes you a good or bad person is how you deal with your mess. Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence. This incident brought me and my black childhood friend closer. We both learned something from that incident. It both made us better people. As adults we ended up working together, with absolute trust in each other. Trust we still have for one another.

Aw shucks, thank goodness we still have folks like you around to make racist jokes and then whine about being seen as racist. You truly inspire us all to find the best in ourselves.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Here's an example from my childhood. I have a black childhood friend. When we were teenagers I made a racist joke that made him very upset. Six months later we had a serious talk and he said he was grateful that I'd done it. Coming from me of all people was disarming and it had made him realize that he took himself way too seriously, and I'd made him stop and think. Which he needed at that time. But he might as well not have needed that. I didn't know. And that's ok. It's ok to fuck up now and again. What makes you a good or bad person is how you deal with your mess. Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence. This incident brought me and my black childhood friend closer. We both learned something from that incident. It both made us better people. As adults we ended up working together, with absolute trust in each other. Trust we still have for one another.

Aw shucks, thank goodness we still have folks like you around to make racist jokes and then whine about being seen as racist. You truly inspire us all to find the best in ourselves.

What a surprise you didn't understand. The person on this forum, who more than anyone, takes everything literally.

 

[Toni]

Here's an example from my childhood. I have a black childhood friend. When we were teenagers I made a racist joke that made him very upset. Six months later we had a serious talk and he said he was grateful that I'd done it. Coming from me of all people was disarming and it had made him realize that he took himself way too seriously, and I'd made him stop and think. Which he needed at that time. But he might as well not have needed that. I didn't know. And that's ok. It's ok to fuck up now and again. What makes you a good or bad person is how you deal with your mess. Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence. This incident brought me and my black childhood friend closer. We both learned something from that incident. It both made us better people. As adults we ended up working together, with absolute trust in each other. Trust we still have for one another.

Aw shucks, thank goodness we still have folks like you around to make racist jokes and then whine about being seen as racist. You truly inspire us all to find the best in ourselves.

I am in awe of people like Dr.Z who are courageous and generous enough to help their one black friend grow beyond feeling offended at the casual racism of ignorant white people who think their casual disregard for others makes them cool.

 

[Politesse]

Here's an example from my childhood. I have a black childhood friend. When we were teenagers I made a racist joke that made him very upset. Six months later we had a serious talk and he said he was grateful that I'd done it. Coming from me of all people was disarming and it had made him realize that he took himself way too seriously, and I'd made him stop and think. Which he needed at that time. But he might as well not have needed that. I didn't know. And that's ok. It's ok to fuck up now and again. What makes you a good or bad person is how you deal with your mess. Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence. This incident brought me and my black childhood friend closer. We both learned something from that incident. It both made us better people. As adults we ended up working together, with absolute trust in each other. Trust we still have for one another.

Aw shucks, thank goodness we still have folks like you around to make racist jokes and then whine about being seen as racist. You truly inspire us all to find the best in ourselves.

I am in awe of people like Dr.Z who are courageous and generous enough to help their one black friend grow beyond feeling offended at the casual racism of ignorant white people who think their casual disregard for others makes them cool.

I love how his friend apparently told him, and he apparently believed, that being the butt of a racist joke was somehow unusual for him! It's interesting also that he got the right message - "It's ok to fuck up now and again... What makes you a good or bad person is how you deal with your mess" is genuinely excellent advice, even necessary in the case of racial issues where it is easy to fall accidentally into offense- but is utterly failing to put that principle into practice, as the way to deal with the mess you create by using racial slurs as a teeenager is to stop using them and encourage others to do likewise, not to write impassioned justifications for racism on the internet.

 

[Toni]

I am in awe of people like Dr.Z who are courageous and generous enough to help their one black friend grow beyond feeling offended at the casual racism of ignorant white people who think their casual disregard for others makes them cool.

I love how his friend apparently told him, and he apparently believed, that being the butt of a racist joke was somehow unusual for him! It's interesting also that he got the right message - "It's ok to fuck up now and again... What makes you a good or bad person is how you deal with your mess" is genuinely excellent advice, even necessary in the case of racial issues where it is easy to fall accidentally into offense- but is utterly failing to put that principle into practice, as the way to deal with the mess you create by using racial slurs as a teeenager is to stop using them and encourage others to do likewise, not to write impassioned justifications for racism on the internet.

Staying true to himself is one of Dr. Z’s biggest strengths.

 

[Rhea]

Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence.

I can see your point when applied to getting out of your comfort zone, trying new things, meeting new people, going new places, observing new things.

But saying racist shit as a requirement to be your authentic self? That doesn’t compute.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence.

I can see your point when applied to getting out of your comfort zone, trying new things, meeting new people, going new places, observing new things.

But saying racist shit as a requirement to be your authentic self? That doesn’t compute.

Well, it does make it easier on the rest of us when the racists don’t try to hide their racist rhetoric.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence.

I can see your point when applied to getting out of your comfort zone, trying new things, meeting new people, going new places, observing new things.

But saying racist shit as a requirement to be your authentic self? That doesn’t compute.

It does, you just go in the wrong direction. Ideas to results. You gotta stsrt with the results.

People see Dr. Z as a racist, or at least possessing racist tendencies.
Dr. Z does not wish to be called a racist.
Dr. Z says racist things from time to time.
Dr. Z need a reason this is laudable, not lamentable.
People who use racist terms are therefore the more honest people.
People who manage to self-censor are self-limiting.


I was raised Mormon in a small town. You said, "Damn!" Or "Shit!" and Mom knew before you got home. Two weeks into bootcamp, i used "fuck" as punctuation. I don't swear THAT badly anymore, but i have spent a lot of time considering words i use to convey intensity, anger, disappointment, pain, and on and on. I use every swear i know of.
Except certain words that are derogatory against a race or gender.
It's a choice. I really cannot see that i live life any less for not using words on the left side of my vocab. So, you know, fuck that idea.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence.

I can see your point when applied to getting out of your comfort zone, trying new things, meeting new people, going new places, observing new things.

But saying racist shit as a requirement to be your authentic self? That doesn’t compute.

The racism isn't required to be your authentic self.

I have a friend today who is a fancy academic who gives talks on feminism and is a hero among progressives. He used to be a neo-Nazi. Lucky for him he was a Nazi before social media.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence.

I can see your point when applied to getting out of your comfort zone, trying new things, meeting new people, going new places, observing new things.

But saying racist shit as a requirement to be your authentic self? That doesn’t compute.

It does, you just go in the wrong direction. Ideas to results. You gotta stsrt with the results.

People see Dr. Z as a racist, or at least possessing racist tendencies.
Dr. Z does not wish to be called a racist.
Dr. Z says racist things from time to time.
Dr. Z need a reason this is laudable, not lamentable.
People who use racist terms are therefore the more honest people.
People who manage to self-censor are self-limiting.


I was raised Mormon in a small town. You said, "Damn!" Or "Shit!" and Mom knew before you got home. Two weeks into bootcamp, i used "fuck" as punctuation. I don't swear THAT badly anymore, but i have spent a lot of time considering words i use to convey intensity, anger, disappointment, pain, and on and on. I use every swear i know of.
Except certain words that are derogatory against a race or gender.
It's a choice. I really cannot see that i live life any less for not using words on the left side of my vocab. So, you know, fuck that idea.

Exactly. Excellent point. We all need to find our way in the world, and experiment. And be given a chance to learn from our mistakes.

 

[Toni]

Somebody who never fucks up, who always says the right thing, IMHO they aren't really participating in the world. They're self censoring themselves out of existence.

I can see your point when applied to getting out of your comfort zone, trying new things, meeting new people, going new places, observing new things.

But saying racist shit as a requirement to be your authentic self? That doesn’t compute.

The racism isn't required to be your authentic self.

I have a friend today who is a fancy academic who gives talks on feminism and is a hero among progressives. He used to be a neo-Nazi. Lucky for him he was a Nazi before social media.

If racism isn't required to be your authentic self, why be racist? Why say racist things?

Also: you know a fancy academic????? I know lots of academics but not one who is fancy.

 

[TSwizzle]

The offense archeologists have been hard at work again;

Peterborough striker Jonson Clarke-Harris has been banned for four games over historic social media posts featuring homophobic comments. The posts date from late 2012 and early 2013, when Clarke-Harris was 18 and establishing himself with loan moves from Posh to Southend and Bury. Clarke-Harris, now 27, has also been fined more than £5,000 and is required to complete a face-to-face education program the Football Association has announced.

DailyMail

Jonson was 18 years old when he made the posts, whatever they were. What kind of sick fuck goes trawling social media looking for this type of thing?

And the FA want to look so woke. They look like idiots.

 

[DrZoidberg]

The offense archeologists have been hard at work again;

Peterborough striker Jonson Clarke-Harris has been banned for four games over historic social media posts featuring homophobic comments. The posts date from late 2012 and early 2013, when Clarke-Harris was 18 and establishing himself with loan moves from Posh to Southend and Bury. Clarke-Harris, now 27, has also been fined more than £5,000 and is required to complete a face-to-face education program the Football Association has announced.

DailyMail

Jonson was 18 years old when he made the posts, whatever they were. What kind of sick fuck goes trawling social media looking for this type of thing?

And the FA want to look so woke. They look like idiots.

This is pretty fucked.

But one question, I looked up this guy elsewhere. Other news agencies aren't as liberal with the sprinkling of added juicy details. I assume the Daily Mail made it up. As they are prone to do.

When you link to an unreliable source, you do understand that it casts doubt on the alleged crime?

In this case the Daily Mail was correct (minus the details added for effect). But my first instinct is... probably bullshit. I had to look it up in more reputable sources to find enough details to accept that I should be outraged.

Me personally, I think athletes should be allowed to be racists, homophobes, flat Earthers or Muslims. Or whatever their little hearts desire. And they should be allowed to express it wherever. They're not hired for their ability to think. It shouldn't matter.

 

[bilby]

The offense archeologists have been hard at work again;

Peterborough striker Jonson Clarke-Harris has been banned for four games over historic social media posts featuring homophobic comments. The posts date from late 2012 and early 2013, when Clarke-Harris was 18 and establishing himself with loan moves from Posh to Southend and Bury. Clarke-Harris, now 27, has also been fined more than £5,000 and is required to complete a face-to-face education program the Football Association has announced.

DailyMail

Jonson was 18 years old when he made the posts, whatever they were. What kind of sick fuck goes trawling social media looking for this type of thing?

And the FA want to look so woke. They look like idiots.

This is pretty fucked.

But one question, I looked up this guy elsewhere. Other news agencies aren't as liberal with the sprinkling of added juicy details. I assume the Daily Mail made it up. As they are prone to do.

When you link to an unreliable source, you do understand that it casts doubt on the alleged crime?

In this case the Daily Mail was correct (minus the details added for effect). But my first instinct is... probably bullshit. I had to look it up in more reputable sources to find enough details to accept that I should be outraged.

Me personally, I think athletes should be allowed to be racists, homophobes, flat Earthers or Muslims. Or whatever their little hearts desire. And they should be allowed to express it wherever. They're not hired for their ability to think. It shouldn't matter.

Why should you be outraged?

Outrage is a handle by which propagandists manipulate people. It engenders zero value to the individual who is outraged; Indeed, it provides a mechanism by which the outraged individual can be influenced to act against their own self interest.

Outrage against the actions of a close family member or friend might be appropriate if that person acts in a grossly inappropriate way. But outrage against a stranger is an act of self harm.

Much of today's "news" media consists not of information, but of invitations to outrage. These invitations should be declined by anyone who is not directly and intimately involved with the events being described. To accept them is to hand control of your emotions to people who do not have your best interests at heart.

I for one am not granting the Daily Mail any access to my emotional state, if I can possibly avoid so doing. And the same goes for ANY other player in the media space. Invitations to outrage should be seen as attempts to manipulate and control you, and the wise person would respond not with outrage against the proposed target, but against the medium presenting the invitation. Who do these cunts think they are to tell you what to think and feel? Where do these fuckers get off presenting their emotional hooks as though they were impartial information?

This vile manipulative behaviour certainly ranks near the top of the list of existential threats to our civilisation. Let's not be complicit in adding to the issue.

 

[DrZoidberg]

This is pretty fucked.

But one question, I looked up this guy elsewhere. Other news agencies aren't as liberal with the sprinkling of added juicy details. I assume the Daily Mail made it up. As they are prone to do.

When you link to an unreliable source, you do understand that it casts doubt on the alleged crime?

In this case the Daily Mail was correct (minus the details added for effect). But my first instinct is... probably bullshit. I had to look it up in more reputable sources to find enough details to accept that I should be outraged.

Me personally, I think athletes should be allowed to be racists, homophobes, flat Earthers or Muslims. Or whatever their little hearts desire. And they should be allowed to express it wherever. They're not hired for their ability to think. It shouldn't matter.

Why should you be outraged?

Outrage is a handle by which propagandists manipulate people. It engenders zero value to the individual who is outraged; Indeed, it provides a mechanism by which the outraged individual can be influenced to act against their own self interest.

Outrage against the actions of a close family member or friend might be appropriate if that person acts in a grossly inappropriate way. But outrage against a stranger is an act of self harm.

Much of today's "news" media consists not of information, but of invitations to outrage. These invitations should be declined by anyone who is not directly and intimately involved with the events being described. To accept them is to hand control of your emotions to people who do not have your best interests at heart.

I for one am not granting the Daily Mail any access to my emotional state, if I can possibly avoid so doing. And the same goes for ANY other player in the media space. Invitations to outrage should be seen as attempts to manipulate and control you, and the wise person would respond not with outrage against the proposed target, but against the medium presenting the invitation. Who do these cunts think they are to tell you what to think and feel? Where do these fuckers get off presenting their emotional hooks as though they were impartial information?

This vile manipulative behaviour certainly ranks near the top of the list of existential threats to our civilisation. Let's not be complicit in adding to the issue.

I think we should get outraged. I think it's important to. If we give a free pass to bullies to do their thing we are basically legitimizing censorship. It's naive to think that normal people don't read this and react with fear, if they feel a threat if they would speak freely about something on social media.

 

[bilby]

This is pretty fucked.

But one question, I looked up this guy elsewhere. Other news agencies aren't as liberal with the sprinkling of added juicy details. I assume the Daily Mail made it up. As they are prone to do.

When you link to an unreliable source, you do understand that it casts doubt on the alleged crime?

In this case the Daily Mail was correct (minus the details added for effect). But my first instinct is... probably bullshit. I had to look it up in more reputable sources to find enough details to accept that I should be outraged.

Me personally, I think athletes should be allowed to be racists, homophobes, flat Earthers or Muslims. Or whatever their little hearts desire. And they should be allowed to express it wherever. They're not hired for their ability to think. It shouldn't matter.

Why should you be outraged?

Outrage is a handle by which propagandists manipulate people. It engenders zero value to the individual who is outraged; Indeed, it provides a mechanism by which the outraged individual can be influenced to act against their own self interest.

Outrage against the actions of a close family member or friend might be appropriate if that person acts in a grossly inappropriate way. But outrage against a stranger is an act of self harm.

Much of today's "news" media consists not of information, but of invitations to outrage. These invitations should be declined by anyone who is not directly and intimately involved with the events being described. To accept them is to hand control of your emotions to people who do not have your best interests at heart.

I for one am not granting the Daily Mail any access to my emotional state, if I can possibly avoid so doing. And the same goes for ANY other player in the media space. Invitations to outrage should be seen as attempts to manipulate and control you, and the wise person would respond not with outrage against the proposed target, but against the medium presenting the invitation. Who do these cunts think they are to tell you what to think and feel? Where do these fuckers get off presenting their emotional hooks as though they were impartial information?

This vile manipulative behaviour certainly ranks near the top of the list of existential threats to our civilisation. Let's not be complicit in adding to the issue.

I think we should get outraged.

I think you are wrong.

I think it's important to.

I think you are very badly wrong.

If we give a free pass to bullies to do their thing we are basically legitimizing censorship.

How does not getting outraged "give a free pass to bullies"?

It's naive to think that normal people don't read this and react with fear, if they feel a threat if they would speak freely about something on social media.

Perhaps.

But it's far more naive to think that your outrage achieves anything other than to hand your emotional response to the manipulative media that stimulated that response in the first place.