Not a Nappy Head in the Bunch
The Rutgers Women’s Basketball team responded with class and poise to racist comments from Don Imus’s Imus in the Morning show at a press conference on Tuesday.
The radio/television host and his producer, Bernard McGuirk, referred to the Big East champions as “nappy-headed hoes” and “jiggaboos” last week after their loss to Tennessee in the NCAA Women’s National Championship game. Imus will serve a two-week suspension beginning on Monday, April 16.
Rutgers team members refused to comment on the severity of the punishment or on whether they thought it was just. The university used the opportunity to highlight the accomplishments of the group this season and to focus on their intellectual prowess. Rutgers has tough academic standards, and according to Coach C. Vivian Stringer
“These young ladies before you are valedictorians, future doctors, musical prodigies… these young ladies are the best this nation has to offer and we are so very fortunate to have them at Rutgers. They are young ladies of class, distinction. They are articulate. They are gifted.”
The team has agreed to meet with Imus to discuss his comments at an undisclosed location.
According to a transcript of the segment (from MediaBistro), Imus and McGuirk compared the game between Rutgers and Tennessee to “the Jigaboos vs. the Wannabes” from Spike Lee’s School Daze (misidentified by the show’s co-host as Do The Right Thing).
DON IMUS: So, I watched the basketball game last night between — a little bit of Rutgers and Tennessee, the women’s final.
SID ROSENBERG: Yeah, Tennessee won last night — seventh championship for [Tennessee coach] Pat Summitt, I-Man. They beat Rutgers by 13 points.
IMUS: That’s some rough girls from Rutgers. Man, they got tattoos and –
BERNARD McGUIRK: Some hard-core hos.
IMUS: That’s some nappy-headed hos there. I’m gonna tell you that now, man, that’s some — woo. And the girls from Tennessee, they all look cute, you know, so, like — kinda like — I don’t know.
McGUIRK: A Spike Lee thing.
IMUS: Yeah.
McGUIRK: The Jigaboos vs. the Wannabes — that movie that he had.
IMUS: Yeah, it was a tough –
CHARLES McCORD: Do The Right Thing.
McGUIRK: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
IMUS: I don’t know if I’d have wanted to beat Rutgers or not, but they did, right?
ROSENBERG: It was a tough watch. The more I look at Rutgers, they look exactly like the Toronto Raptors.
This isn’t the first time Imus’s crew has been guilty of “racially insensitive remarks”. In 2001, sports guy Rosenburg said Venus and Serena Williams would have a better chance at appearing in National Geographic than in Playboy. And Imus called the New York Knicks a bunch of “chest-thumping pimps.”
Many, including Rev. Al Sharpton, who hosted Imus’s formal apology to the African American community on his talk show, believe Imus should be fired for his remarks. Sharpton told Matt Lauer on Tuesday’s Today Show that suspension was, “not nearly enough. I think it is too little, too late.”
There is a chance that Imus will emerge from his suspension unscathed. Perhaps these comments aren’t as incendiary as Michael Richards’ racist tirade or Mel Gibson’s Jew-hating rant, but the Imus show is simulcast on national radio and television. He must adhere to a higher standard than Richards in a comedy club or a drunken Gibson in a bar.
What message does this send if Imus gets a two-week slap on the wrist for yet another racist joke?
And why doesn’t the suspension begin immediately? Imus is supposed to host a telethon for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and his networks don’t want the charity to lose money because of Imus’s absence. His very presence may have the same unfortunate effect.
The most frustrating aspect of this incident is that rednecks like Imus and his team can steal thunder from these powerful, intelligent and yes, beautiful women with racist remarks and bad jokes. This was their time to celebrate a magnificent season, not defend their womanhood, beauty and race from idiots like the Imus crew.
As additional pennance, Imus and his entire team should each donate a month’s salary to the Rutgers general scholarship fund and Imus’s radio station WFAN and MSNBC should match the number. That might start to undo the damage they have done.
posted by Nadir at 2:54 PM
16 Comments:
Hi Nadir,
I've made several reasoned comments to this thread on Paul Hue's site yet he continues to arbitrarily block them.
Just thought I'd let you know.
Nice thread by the way.
Thanks for trying, Steve. I wondered why we hadn't heard from you on this issue. Now I see we have.
LOL!!
When you get a chance Nadir, ask 'ol Paul how he squares his stance about us "hypersensitive black babies" toughening up and stop trying to get people fired for offensive language with him blocking me from his blog because he doesn't like what I have to say.
Like everything else with rightwingers, it's all situational.
paul hue sez...
"Nadir: I have not "banned" Steve, but merely rejected one of his comments, which chastised you and your friends for not assaulting me for comments that you oppose. I am not attempting to have Steve ejected from Blogger.com, I am not banning his comments which conform to my rules of comport, nor am I attempting to boycott or otherwise punish any blogs that post his comments which I reject."
He's an out and out liar.
I've posted 4 very reasoned and civil comments and he's blocked all of them.
I responded to your comments about Paul needing his ass kicked by wondering out loud why you haven't already kicked it.
That's funny.
Paul and I are friends, and though we constantly have our quarrels, they are most often confined to cyberspace.
I have talked some other cats down who were very upset about some of his comments. Despite his hypocrisy and his obvious racist tendencies, he is actually a likeable guy in person.
Paul,
You are not answering my question.
If you are an advocate of free speech and you abhor political correctness, why are you blocking my posts?
I've posted this one on Nadir's as well so he can see that I am not being profane or uncivil.
I will continue this practice (if you don't mind Nadir) until you, Paul Hue, cease to censor me arbitrarily, or admit that you are being grossly inconsistent on the issue of speech.
Nadir,
Saw your post unloading on Hue about his use of the "n" word in the title of a thread.
You had to know this was coming.
It's the basis of his whole philosphy and position of race and speech.
People like Paul Hue long for the master/slave relationship between blacks and whites.
He feels that he should able to say whatever he wants to blacks whenever he wants with no negative consequenses.
In the meantime he can't deal with black people yelling back at him.
Anyhow good for you brother.
I think I'll pass on his site as well.
Ill drop in here every now and then.
And feel free to drop me a line sometimes.
vaughnfair@aol.com
Steve: I cut and pasted that headline from an article by a black leftist on a black news website; the Chicago Defender recently used the N word in one of its front page headlines.
Above you call me a "lier" for saying I blocked only one of a batch of four of your posts. You claim that I blocked all four. In fact, two of your posts were identical; I approved one and blocked the other. I approved two unique posts, and rejected one in which you issued insults against me. I realize that Nadir approves you issuing blanket, unprovable insults against me (Paul wants a master/slave relationship) and that he issues them as well (Paul has racist tenancies).
Since you can't enter my mind, Steve, you can never know what relationship I want. I can never get Nadir to define the word "racism" that he so often accuses me of, whereas I define it for him constantly:
Racism: belief that people can be categorized by "race" according to inherited genetic traits, combined with a belief that these racial traits dispose any "race" towards special intellectual or physical behaviors, limitations, or capacities, and/or the belief that people assigned to any "race" should have special privileges or limitations placed on them.
How do I qualify as a "racist" based on this definition? On what definition of "racism" do I qualify?
You guys both qualify according to my definition. The woman in my source article is black, so she can use the N word, but I am white so I can't even quote her!
And as always, my support of low tax rates and school vouchers causes you guys to label me as "racist" because you guys categorize me as "white", but it causes you guys to label Tom Sowell a "sellout" and "uncle tom" because his identical view to mine combines with your categorization of him as "African American".
Nadir, the above comments by Steve are impressive to you?
Steve: Please post here the comments that you say that I blocked from my blog. These comments all have timestamps. Let's see whose rendition is accurate. I have all the emails corresponding with all your attempted posts.
Nadir: You have tossed out here that I am a hypocrite and a racist, or at least have demonstrated such actions. Please define these terms and demonstrate how I qualify for such ugly judgements.
I will email Nadir all of the Steve submissions to my blog. Here is the entire contents of one that I rejected:
=======================
Paul HueYou are a pathetic liar and a racist.I pity you.
=========================
How does such a comment contribute to a discussion?
Here's another submission from Steve that I rejected. Is it "reasoned"? Does my rejection qualify as "arbitrary"? He calls for you and your friends to assault me:
===========================
nadir"And Paul, you should know the same thing. I have several friends
who want to kick your ass because of things you've said. And you
deserve your ass kicked because of some things you've said."My question
is "Why haven't you kicked his ass"?This Hue is little more than a
snarky little racist puke who gets his jollies provoking blacks over
the internet.If any of you guys allowed him to disrespect you face to
face to then I blame you for enabling him the same way these
politicians and media figures enabled Imus.
Nadir: I have emailed you every submission from Steve in the past few days. You will see the duplication that I mentioned, and the only non-duplications that I rejected I posted here, which includes one in which he chides you and your friends for not physically assaulting me for saying things that "offend" y'all.
You guys say that "context doesn't matter", if a cracker uses this language, you automatically conclude that the speaker is "racist", whether that speaker be Bull Conners, Don Imus, or Paul Hue. Yet you guys indeed worship context in these matters: if the speaker is black, no penalty.
I still disagree with this assessment. Rappers and comedians are increasingly coming under fire for their use of derogatory language.
I just apologized for unintentionally offending a Black person by my use of the phrase "nappy head" in the title this very post!
I think we just need to be a more civil society and stop calling each other names.
Paul, you disagree because you feel it is your right to insult anyone at any time that you please!
And I feel that it is anybody else's "right" to say things to me and around me and about me that I find "offensive" without me physically assaulting him or her, and without me attempting to fire him or her, or punish him her her. There is a word for this: toleration. I consider it a sign of maturity and self-confidence.
Paul,
You've got it totally backwards.
"Tolerance" is accepting, respecting and dealing with differences as long as they do not interfere with the conduct of the workplace, your personal space and lives of fellow citizens.
What you advocate is provocation, harrassment, and behavior in the name of free speech and expression.
Unless, of course, it's speech or expression that offends YOU.
Typical RIGHTY.
Post a Comment
<< Home