Nappy Headed Hoes

[Sir Stewart]

For a long time black people were ashamed of having hair like this and calling someone nappy headed was a major insult. There was(and still is) a large cosmetics industry dedicated to straightening black hair and thus giving someone "good" hair(straight hair like white people have) as opposed to not good hair

[EL the Famous]

Conason over states things a bit with the slavery analogy, but otherwise I think this article from Salon.com is pretty spot-on:

 

By saying that all those things 'don't matter', I can't take that piece seriously. He's assuming everybody asking for equal focus on the double-standards is only doing so out of support for Imus...that makes me one of his 'cronies' and, again inferring i'm a racist. Total bullshit.

 

 

[OOO]

I suppose if you are asking serious question, you deserve a serious answer....

That is the non-insulting answer. For a long time black people were ashamed of having hair like this and calling someone nappy headed was a major insult. There was(and still is) a large cosmetics industry dedicated to straightening black hair and thus giving someone "good" hair(straight hair like white people have) as opposed to not good hair . It is like alot of inside ethnic expressions, if you are from the outside, you don't want to be calling someone something that may (or may not) be okay to say to someone. It is an expression that is pretty old and carries lots of baggage. Just like any kind of ethnic "humor" you may be able to get away with it in a mixed crowd if everyone understands your intent, but even now I don't believe race relations in the US can stand an insult like even now.

 

LouieB

 

thanks louie b, thats just what i wanted to know.

[MrRain422]

By saying that all those things 'don't matter', I can't take that piece seriously. He's assuming everybody asking for equal focus on the double-standards is only doing so out of support for Imus...that makes me one of his 'cronies' and, again inferring i'm a racist. Total bullshit.

 

That's not how I read the article at all. His point was just that, no matter how opportunistic Sharpton may be, it has absolutely nothing to do with how right or wrong Imus was to say what he did, or how right or wrong it was to fire him. Where is he calling anyone a racist? The only thing that even comes close is where he points out that people vouching for Imus's character does not prove anything about whether Imus is or is not a racist.

[MattZ]

people vouching for Imus's character does not prove anything about whether Imus is or is not a racist.

 

Why don't Imus's past actions and character speak to whether he is a racist or not? He loudly supported Harold Ford Jr in the recent Tennessee senatorial race and basically trashed the entire state and Ford's opponent for being racist and running a racist campaign. He also was very vocal about the reaction to Katrina being evidence of the administration's racism (i.e., a la Kanye).

 

Imus is a shock jock. His job is to push people's buttons. He's done it for 30 years. I think the political stances he's taken and the causes he's aligned himself with go much further in telling people what he believes in than a stupid attempt at humor that fell flat. Again, people may not like the humor and people may be offended by it, but I think its pretty clear that he was trying to push the envelope and be "edgy" and he failed miserably.

 

As for comments he's made to staff off the air in the past, I have no idea. People claim that he really is a racist. I have a hard time reconciling someone being a racist and yet supporting Harold Ford Jr. in his Senate campaign. Those don't seem consistent to me.

[EL the Famous]

Where is he calling anyone a racist?

 

Every celebrated bigot has friends and sycophants who will vouch for his purity of spirit, so why should we believe the Imus posse any more than the cronies of David Duke or Louis Farrakhan?

 

the point is, this whole thing is a bigger issue than just a stupid dj saying something even stupider and getting fired over it. how can that idiot say that sharpton had no bearing in anything?! het took some awful statement and then amped up into something 10 times worse.

[MrRain422]

You just quoted a line where he says that people vouching for someone does not prove anything about their character. I suppose he's calling Imus a racist by comparing him to Duke and Farrakhan, but where is he calling Imus's supporters racists? He's not -- he's just saying that Imus's supporters voicing support for him does not actually prove anything about Imus himself.

 

And he doesn't say that Sharpton has nothing to do with anything. Obviously Sharpton has been a vocal and prominent figure in this whole thing. Conosan's point is just that Sharpton's role in this is completely immaterial to what Imus said and what should happen to him because of it. Just because Sharpton may have had less than honorable goals in all of this, it does not mean that the end result was automatically the wrong one.

 

Yes, without Sharpton, this whole incident probably would have gone unnoticed. But does that mean that that is what should have happened? Is it wrong for people to be outraged at what Imus said?

[LouieB]

Nuff said....

 

LouieB

[MrRain422]

Why don't Imus's past actions and character speak to whether he is a racist or not? He loudly supported Harold Ford Jr in the recent Tennessee senatorial race and basically trashed the entire state and Ford's opponent for being racist and running a racist campaign. He also was very vocal about the reaction to Katrina being evidence of the administration's racism (i.e., a la Kanye).

 

I don't know that support of one black guy in one election proves he's not racist, nor does criticism of someone else for being racist. There are a lot of people who are racist, but make exceptions for the few people of whatever group that they actually know. But your point is a valid one. Imus's own past is more reflective of who he is than what anyone is saying about him on either side of the issue.

 

I don't know if Imus is racist. But what he said definately was, and just a part of a long history of similar things.

 

Imus is a shock jock. His job is to push people's buttons. He's done it for 30 years. I think the political stances he's taken and the causes he's aligned himself with go much further in telling people what he believes in than a stupid attempt at humor that fell flat. Again, people may not like the humor and people may be offended by it, but I think its pretty clear that he was trying to push the envelope and be "edgy" and he failed miserably.

 

This is all true, but I don't know that it makes much of a difference. If you make your career pushing people's buttons, then you should be prepared to deal with the fallout of doing so. When your act is built around saying offensive things, then you can't complain when you offend people.

[EL the Famous]

You just quoted a line where he says that people vouching for someone does not prove anything about their character. I suppose he's calling Imus a racist by comparing him to Duke and Farrakhan, but where is he calling Imus's supporters racists? He's not -- he's just saying that Imus's supporters voicing support for him does not actually prove anything about Imus himself.

 

And he doesn't say that Sharpton has nothing to do with anything. Obviously Sharpton has been a vocal and prominent figure in this whole thing. Conosan's point is just that Sharpton's role in this is completely immaterial to what Imus said and what should happen to him because of it. Just because Sharpton may have had less than honorable goals in all of this, it does not mean that the end result was automatically the wrong one.

 

Sycophant may not be the same as racist, but c'mon...somebody who thinks Imus shouldn't have been fired is on par w/ a buddy of David Duke? Please.

 

but his role isn't immaterial though. he's holding someone to a standard, actually, asking that someone is kicked out of their job for saying the same thing, w/ a lot less malice and tons less effect, than members of the community he supposedly leads. the end result IS the wrong one and sets a horrible prescedent. again, i'm not saying he shouldn't have been punished...but to literally take down not just Imus, but a whole fucking radio station and charity work (the tax break comment is ludicrous, like who was doing it means it didn't make a difference AND it looks like he helped a lot more than a 'few kids'). salon is just as slanted as FOX, just the other way and equally as biased.

[MrRain422]

Sycophant may not be the same as racist, but c'mon...somebody who thinks Imus shouldn't have been fired is on par w/ a buddy of David Duke? Please.

 

Where in that quote does he even mention anyone's opinion on Imus being fired? Again, he's not saying anything about the people who support Imus. All he's saying is that some people coming out and saying that Imus is not a racist doesn't mean Imus isn't racist, just as people coming out and saying that David Duke is not a racist does not mean that David Duke is not a racist. You're reading a whole lot into that line that simply is not there.

 

but his role isn't immaterial though. he's holding someone to a standard, actually, asking that someone is kicked out of their job for saying the same thing, w/ a lot less malice and tons less effect, than members of the community he supposedly leads. the end result IS the wrong one and sets a horrible prescedent. again, i'm not saying he shouldn't have been punished...but to literally take down not just Imus, but a whole fucking radio station and charity work (the tax break comment is ludicrous, like who was doing it means it didn't make a difference AND it looks like he helped a lot more than a 'few kids'). salon is just as slanted as FOX, just the other way and equally as biased.

 

Salon states openly that they are a liberal media source. Fox says that they are fair and balanced. Yes, Salon has their biases, but it's hardly the same thing.

 

Regardless, your whole point seems to be that Al Sharpton is an opportunist, and therefore what he wants is automatically wrong. I'm saying that there are a lot of people who have a similar viewpoint as Sharpton on this issue, but for competely different reasons. Just because one person who is an asshole has a certain viewpoint does not automatically make that viewpoint wrong.

 

If you don't think Imus should have been fired, that's all well and good. There are a lot of good arguments for that side of the issue. I just think that Sharpton's faults have nothing to do with any of them.

 

The question should be, is this the right thing to do or is it the wrong thing to do? It should not be, who is on this side of the issue and who is on that side of it? But your whole point seems to be that the people most vocal in calling for Imus's firing are assholes, and I just don't see what that has to do with whether or not they are right on this particular issue. Their motives may be off, but that doesn't mean that their cause is totally wrong, or that other people who happen to fall on that side of the the debate are a) wrong or b ) accusing everyone who disagrees with them of being racist. It just seems to me that you're more concerned with the personalities involved than with the actual issues.

[cryptique]

salon is just as slanted as FOX, just the other way and equally as biased.

The problem with Fox is that they pretend to be "fair and balanced" when they so obviously aren't. Salon is unabashedly liberal, but they also call bullshit on lefties pretty often. For being liberal, they're actually pretty balanced.

 

That said, I've been disappointed in their coverage of this particular story.

[EL the Famous]

It just seems to me that you're more concerned with the personalities involved than with the actual issues.

 

you obviously haven't read all my posts, not that I expect you to. the personalities involved are part of the issue I have. it's not just a question of sharpton being an opportunist, it's how his actions put further racial divide in place more powerful than anything dom imus has ever said. it's also an issue about double-standards and lack of focus on more damaging language out there than this not being addressed.

 

i've never defended what imus said or said that it wasn't wrong...i think the punishment and how it actually came about was even more damaging. that's all

[MrRain422]

you obviously haven't read all my posts, not that I expect you to.

 

Do I have a history of not reading people's posts before responding to them? I'm sorry if you don't like my take on this, but it does not mean I'm not reading your posts. And quite frankly, you don't know me from your neighbor's asshole, so I don't know why you have any expectations about me one way or the other. And you're the one who accused me several times of accusing Imus supporters of being racist even though I said nothing of the sort. You're being paranoid and sort of a jerk. I didn't say anything insulting to you this whole time until now (to the contrary, I've gone out of my way to emphasise that I am not calling anyone here racist and that I can see good arguments for several different takes on this whole thing), so I'm not sure why you're being so defensive.

 

the personalities involved are part of the issue I have. it's not just a question of sharpton being an opportunist, it's how his actions put further racial divide in place more powerful than anything dom imus has ever said. it's also an issue about double-standards and lack of focus on more damaging language out there than this not being addressed.

 

i've never defended what imus said or said that it wasn't wrong...i think the punishment and how it actually came about was even more damaging. that's all

 

That's fair, although I disagree with it. I don't take issue with people who think he shouldn't have been fired -- as I said, there are good arguments on that side of the issue. I just think that focusing on Sharpton is a red herring.

[LouieB]

We haven't had this kind of discussion since the last presidential election....

 

LouieB

[EL the Famous]

Do I have a history of not reading people's posts before responding to them?

 

That's not what I meant...I really don't expect anybody to read ALL of anybody's posts. By saying I thought that you hadn't, it was because you seem to contunually miss my point and went so far as to say I wasn't interested in the actual issues...problem seems to be my opinion that there are several issues in the context of this scenario, not just imus. which is fine. no worries, no need to get defensive.

[OCP003]

Please tell me you guys heard Dan Patrick read Snoop's reaction to all of this....sooo damn funny

[Mr. Heartbreak]

I just read Snoops' reaction:

 

http://www.aolsportsblog.com/2007/04/12/sn...-me-to-don-imus

"[Rappers] are not talking about no collegiate basketball girls who have made it to the next level in education and sports. We're talking about ho's that's in the 'hood that ain't doing sh--, that's trying to get a n---a for his money. These are two separate things. First of all, we ain't no old-ass white men that sit up on MSNBC."

I must say, I'm deeply offended by Snoop's ageism and unnecessary reference to race. As a fellow old-ass white man, I demand reparations. Oh, and Snoop should lose his record contract (if he even has one these days ... doesn't he mostly film pornos with hoes from the 'hood?).

[Spawn's dad]

is that real? did he really say that?

[wheelco]

Do I have a history of not reading people's posts before responding to them?

that would be me

 

this whole idiocy is disgraceful - thankfully I never liked Imus in the first place

[bjorn_skurj]

Eh it's not a huge deal. Imus won't be panhandling in subway stations, for Pete's sake. He'll go down to his New Mexico ranch, maybe take in a just-made-illegal cockfight and partake in some just-made-legal medical marijuana. Look what Marv Albert went through, and now he's working again. So Al Sharpton won one. Give the man his due; he knows how to act offended on someone else's behalf better than perhaps anyone else in America. I still respect the Rev. Jackson, though. He's done far more good in the world - and in person is a terrific speaker - than Al Sharpton may ever do.

[mountain bed]

I still respect the Rev. Jackson, though. He's done far more good in the world - and in person is a terrific speaker - than Al Sharpton may ever do.

I remember Jesse's speech at the Dem Convention in '88...still one of the best political speeches I've ever heard. Even though I think he does have a bit of the charlatan in him, that speech was just beautiful.

[Atticus]

I don't think I could let Jackson or Sharpton eat any of my cheetos, though.

[anodyne]

anyone see sharpton on hbo's REAL TIME last night?

[Spawn's dad]

did he say cracker?