Huggins might be in trouble, DUI is good, Bees are bad

[MJ271]

I have a close relationship with a black woman from Africa. She was surprised to find out blacks use that word so freely here, she thought it was just for show in music. In Kenya there is no real resentment for white people like people might believe, even when it is justified through their history and colonial oppression.

I also have a close friend from Venezuela who is black and they couldn't give a **** about skin color there. What I'm getting at is America is unique to the world except for Europe when it comes to racism. We're especially messed up.

Well of course The human condition isn't unique to America. I'm not trying to write a research paper here but I'm glad to discuss further.

Well that happened quick.

 

[VeloClone]

I think that it is great that we have been able to have this conversation with everyone acting like mature adults. The thread is a dozen pages long and it hasn't had to be caved.

Kudos...

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

Well that happened quick.

I mean if you want to play semantics sure. I could do the same. Unique doesn't mean worse which is essentially what you're using in your argument and they're subjective pretenses so what are we really arguing over here? People's feelings?

 

[Jer]

So..... Bob Huggins, what's up with that?

 

[Gorm]

 

[WhatchaGonnaDo]

I hope that the take away from my long-winded diatribe wasn't that this conversation is black and white -- derogatory vs honest mistake. If so then I guess I should restate my point because it really had nothing to do with Huggins' words and more to do with conversations between and disagreements within the progressive movement.

To restate my point, it serves no purpose to "one up" potential allies by emphasizing that ____ was "never acceptable" when the point being made was that it was more socially acceptable/normalized language at that particular time. It is pedantic and counterintuitive.

Regarding your question, Huggins should know better and I think it is fair that we expect better from him. He absolutely is culpable for his words and actions because this change in language is not something new. It is established that such derogatory terms really don't have a place in modern America, especially given the context in which he used them. His words were derogatory, insensitive, and unacceptable. As far as what that means for him professionally, I don't really know. I think it really comes down to how he responds.

Does he attempt to make amends? Does he take this feedback to heart and seek to learn from this? Or does he double down? Does he simply pay lip service to make it go away?

The thing is that people are minimizing the severity of the word because it used to be so common. That's where my problem is.

I promise you the people impacted by that word never found it acceptable, and that should be the barometer.

**** the bigots and **** the bullies who made it normal, and **** their opinions on the severity of the word now. Call that infighting if you want, but I won't tolerate it, no matter your politics. Bigots deserve to sit with that discomfort if they disagree. It also deserves to be called out. I don't give a damn about potential allies if that's what they believe.

 

[VeloClone]

The thing is that people are minimizing the severity of the word because it used to be so common. That's where my problem is.

I promise you the people impacted by that word never found it acceptable, and that should be the barometer.

**** the bigots and **** the bullies who made it normal, and **** their opinions on the severity of the word now. Call that infighting if you want, but I won't tolerate it, no matter your politics. Bigots deserve to sit with that discomfort if they disagree. It also deserves to be called out. I don't give a damn about potential allies if that's what they believe.

I don't think anyone has said that. I must have missed it if they did. They said it was common, that doesn't make it acceptable.

Bullying was common when I was in grade school and junior high. I got bullied no end. It was common. That doesn't mean it was okay. They crack down a lot harder now on what I put up with every day. Things change.

You've made your point, again. I think we all got it.

 

[MJ271]

I mean if you want to play semantics sure. I could do the same. Unique doesn't mean worse which is essentially what you're using in your argument and they're subjective pretenses so what are we really arguing over here? People's feelings?

I apologize to everyone, I really don't want to cave this thread. I just wanted to make the point that I don't think it's useful to claim the U.S. is "uniquely" bad in terms of race when nearly every country with racial and ethnic diversity either has had or still has significant issues of discrimination, persecution, and/or violence of a minority group. Minimizing the global issues makes it seem like something that is solved, which is incredibly far from the case, no matter where you are in the world.

I'll shut up on that issue now.

 

[Al_4_State]

No, the point is not "to create social strife", its one group that's been typically hurt by it owning it as their own. Much as lgbt groups have taken "queer" and owned it as well.

If you see either one as something designed to create conflict, that says more about you than anything.

Straight people can say queer in certain contexts without risking assault or pariah status. The N word is its own beast.

 

[exCyDing]

But there is a difference when you are coopting a hurtful word, embracing it and taking the sting out of it. The LGBT community did that with the word "queer." And they did it without telling the vast majority of people they coudn't then use it. I don't really care but there is a difference there. It you want to turn that word on its ear and wash the centuries of hate out of it - absolutely more power to you, but why turn it that way in some contexts but still call it the most hateful word in the language in others?

To me what has become of the word "queer" is one of the best language stories of redemption there is.

I see your point, but I think there's a difference between words that evolved into being used as a slur ("queer" is one example), but could still be used in a non-slur context, and words that really only ever existed as a slur. Granted, anyone who frequently uses words that evolved into slurs, but not as a slur, in their everyday speech is probably doing it intentionally be provocative.

That said, it's pretty clear from the context and word choice exactly what Huggins was trying to communication.

 

[alarson]

Straight people can say queer in certain contexts without risking assault or pariah status. The N word is its own beast.

Its just to a different degree. There was such an additional level of hate and hostility tied to it

 

[ISUTex]

Ya that's a hell whole. Africa is so messed up and it's all the white people's fault.

Don't forget the Arabs.

 

[CyPhallus]

There's a ton of racism banter in this thread that seems unrelated and I don't care enough to go back and read why. I will drop this Bob Huggins/DeSean Butler video here for you all though:

 

[BWRhasnoAC]

There's a ton of racism banter in this thread that seems unrelated and I don't care enough to go back and read why. I will drop this Bob Huggins/DeSean Butler video here for you all though:

It wasn't about Huggins. It was related to the use of slurs and tangentially related.

 

[enisthemenace]

Societal strife, confusion, division and conflict is far more attributable to various forms of racism/sexism/lgbqt+-phobia than communities that are targets of that hate co-opting hurtful words to use as their own.

Anyone can use whatever words they want in whatever context they want. But no one is free from others judging them based on the words they chose to use and the context in which they choose to use them.

You know the bold isn’t exactly true, right?

 

[exCyDing]

You know the bold isn’t exactly true, right?

Yeah, should’ve added a “practically” in there.

My point was, people are free to follow Huggins lead, but they’re not entitled to the freedom from social repercussions of their choice.

 

[SimpsonClone]

The thing is that people are minimizing the severity of the word because it used to be so common. That's where my problem is.

I promise you the people impacted by that word never found it acceptable, and that should be the barometer.

**** the bigots and **** the bullies who made it normal, and **** their opinions on the severity of the word now. Call that infighting if you want, but I won't tolerate it, no matter your politics. Bigots deserve to sit with that discomfort if they disagree. It also deserves to be called out. I don't give a damn about potential allies if that's what they believe.

I had a response but it is basically repeating what I said before. I feel like your responses are based in emotion which is totally understandable given the topic at hand. That said, it is incredible difficult to rationalize and respond in any meaningful way so I’m just gonna leave it at that. Have a good night.

 

[CycloneVet]

Looks like his lawyers have written a statement for him. I doubt anything happens to him although I feel like some discipline would be appropriate.

I am 62 and have never said that word. When I was in high school, I heard it said by boys frequently but never girls. I never heard it at our house either and I had four brothers.

Being Catholic in small town southern Iowa, I did hear slur words about Catholics frequently as well. One of the high school teachers brought in her husband’s KKK robe and hood for some bizarre show and tell. The handful of us Catholic students, the two Jewish students, and the three black students all tried to decide at lunch one day if it was aimed at all of us or just a select group or two, or if the teacher was just clueless in general. My brothers were old enough to remember the Klan burning a cross in our churchyard, but it was before I was born.

What years were you in high school? Because I don’t believe this ever happened. Things have changed quickly over the past few years but a KKK robe at school hasn’t been even remotely ok for the last 50 years

 

[Cloneon]

What appears to be the common theme here is not to condone Huggins choice of words, but rather to put them in 'generational' context. That aside, the real question everyone should be asking themselves is "What is the best way to purge that type of behavior?" This question, in my opinion, covers the gambit of poor behavior (eg lack of respect, littering, laziness, racism, bullying, etc., etc.) I believe there are two camps here: 'legislation' and 'education'. I believe 'legislation' is more effective when the per capita occurrence is high enough to justify the expense. 'Education' is the best method, but is fraught with "drawing the lines in the sand", thus emphasizing the very differences they're trying to eliminate. It's a precarious task, but one which must start (and be represented properly) at home.

 

[enisthemenace]

What appears to be the common theme here is not to condone Huggins choice of words, but rather to put them in 'generational' context. That aside, the real question everyone should be asking themselves is "What is the best way to purge that type of behavior?" This question, in my opinion, covers the gambit of poor behavior (eg lack of respect, littering, laziness, racism, bullying, etc., etc.) I believe there are two camps here: 'legislation' and 'education'. I believe 'legislation' is more effective when the per capita occurrence is high enough to justify the expense. 'Education' is the best method, but is fraught with "drawing the lines in the sand", thus emphasizing the very differences they're trying to eliminate. It's a precarious task, but one which must start (and be represented properly) at home.

Do you believe this “type of behavior” can be 100%, completely “purged” from society?