+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums)
+--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0)
+---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive)
+---- Thread: Good Night Irene (/Thread-Good-Night-Irene--16635)
RE: Good Night Irene - Nately120 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 12:53 PM)Benton Wrote: Of course it swings both ways. In this case, the nutshell comes off as:
"Hey, could you be more understanding that a disproportionate amount of unarmed young black guys are getting shot by police?"
"Hey, could you understand that we don't want you to disrespect the government that is responsible for the people shooting a disproportionate amount of unarmed young black guys?"
One side needs to say "hey, let's address the issue and not the messenger."
Couldn't you be more understanding that the red man has red skin?
RE: Good Night Irene - GMDino - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 12:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Because the intent is not to be disrespectful or offensive and not everyone is offended by it.
But it's two entirely different things.
One is a slur. Recognized by almost everyone as such.
The other was nothing other than a way to voice a silent protest that some got offended over for no reason other than their own personal beliefs. As if there was a group who protested the Detroit Lions becuase they thought it meant everyone who wore their gear agree that Christians should be thrown to the Lions.
RE: Good Night Irene - bfine32 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 12:53 PM)Benton Wrote: Of course it swings both ways. In this case, the nutshell comes off as:
"Hey, could you be more understanding that a disproportionate amount of unarmed young black guys are getting shot by police?"
"Hey, could you understand that we don't want you to disrespect the government that is responsible for the people shooting a disproportionate amount of unarmed young black guys?"
One side needs to say "hey, let's address the issue and not the messenger."
You "interpretation" of both side's POV is all I need to know that you only see one side.
RE: Good Night Irene - bfine32 - 08-24-2018
It is cute to see folks try to show how this is different than the Redskins example provided; although, it is exactly the same.
Side A: "No disrespect intended, we are actually honoring your tradition. many native Americans accept the term and they are not offended, so why is it offensive?"
Side B: "I understand your intent is not to disrespect, some feel it is not, and I can appreciate your message; however, it is"
RE: Good Night Irene - Benton - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 01:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You "interpretation" of both side's POV is all I need to know that you only see one side.
I'll bite. What would yours be?
Of both sides.
RE: Good Night Irene - bfine32 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 01:45 PM)Benton Wrote: I'll bite. What would yours be?
Of both sides.
Your side A:
Side B: "I understand your intent is not to disrespect, and support your right to do so; however, many feel it as disrespectful to many citizens who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for this country"
But to credit your interpretations: You recognized both sides see it as disrespectful.
RE: Good Night Irene - Nately120 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 01:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It is cute to see folks try to show how this is different than the Redskins example provided; although, it is exactly the same.
Ehh, you're making a decent point but I don't think saying it's exactly the same is helping your cause. I'm removed from it, I guess. I'm a white guy who isn't a veteran so I can just act like anyone who is offended by either thing is being a snowflake.
RE: Good Night Irene - BmorePat87 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 12:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Is the Washington DC NFL team's name disrespectful?
Intentionally? No. Though there's an argument to be made that any slur, whether directed at someone or not, is inherently disrespectful, but I think "racially insensitive" is more accurate.
RE: Good Night Irene - BmorePat87 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 01:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It is cute to see folks try to show how this is different than the Redskins example provided; although, it is exactly the same.
I don't see how they can be exactly the same.
In the case of "Redskins", the offended party is the group that is the mascot and that the slur describes.
In the case of anthem protests, the offended party is a group that is not directly involved in the anthem and only has a personal symbolic connection to the object that the anthem is about.
RE: Good Night Irene - Nately120 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 01:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Intentionally? No. Though there's an argument to be made that any slur, whether directed at someone or not, is inherently disrespectful, but I think "racially insensitive" is more accurate.
Support of that name speaks more towards digging in your heels and refusing to accept a changing culture. Geez, I remember my mother singing "Maizy Doates" or whatever it is called to me when I was 5 or so. This was a song her mom sang to her when she was young. The song has the word "*****" in it, as in the old version of something being odd or weird. I was in kindergarten and I was always eager to bolster my vocabulary so I made a point to say the first odd thing I saw looked "*****."
Logically, this put some folks into a tizzy and I didn't know why. But my mother basically told me "That word isn't ok now, so don't say it" and I said "Ok" and went on with my life. I guess I could have insisted I wasn't trying to offend anyone, but it never occurred to me to do that. I stopped calling things and people *****. Easy enough.
That's just my story about evolving as a person and society.
EDIT: Wowza, the word is even blurred on on here. That's serious stuff, but it makes my point. Anyways, it's all personal preference.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mairzy_Doats
RE: Good Night Irene - Benton - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 01:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Your side A:
Side B: "I understand your intent is not to disrespect, and support your right to do so; however, many feel it as disrespectful to many citizens who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for this country"
But to credit your interpretations: You recognized both sides see it as disrespectful.
And if your side B was presented by the people getting heard the most, I think we'd have discussion.
Instead, there's a president calling for protestors to be fired, other politicians commenting on the messengers and not the message, talking heads saying it's essentially overpaid kids whining about nothing.
Trump, or any member of Congress, could have pushed to sit down with DoJ, but Conservatives for the last several years mostly just criticized the DoJ under Obama for acknowledging departments in Chicago and STL and other areas that, reportedly, have high instances of police abuse against minorities. Instead of saying "I understand your intent is not to disrespect, and support your right to do so; however, many feel it as disrespectful to many citizens who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for this country, get up and we'll talk about this," it's been "You shouldn't be there. Maybe you shouldn't be in the country."
RE: Good Night Irene - bfine32 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 01:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Intentionally? No. Though there's an argument to be made that any slur, whether directed at someone or not, is inherently disrespectful, but I think "racially insensitive" is more accurate....and I've said I don't think those kneeling intend to disrespect the Troops, but I did ask you do you find it disrespectful; even though it's not the intent
(08-24-2018, 01:58 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don't see how they can be exactly the same.
In the case of "Redskins", the offended party is the group that is the mascot and that the slur describes.
In the case of anthem protests, the offended party is a group that is not directly involved in the anthem and only has a personal symbolic connection to the object that the anthem is about.
Answer the question posed and then you may see.
RE: Good Night Irene - GMDino - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 01:54 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Intentionally? No. Though there's an argument to be made that any slur, whether directed at someone or not, is inherently disrespectful, but I think "racially insensitive" is more accurate.
I find an irony in the "non-pc" crowd being "offended" even after they were told it was never about them.
Two plus years of crying about safe places and calling every snowflakes who didn't man up and just let them say whatever they wanted now spun in to "I don't care if you MEANT to be disrespectful to ME....*I* think you were disrespectful to ME!"
It's like I say: Everyone think YOU should have a sense of humor about something until it's about something THEY believe strongly in.
Now it's "You shouldn't be so easily offended when we attack you...but *I can be offended even when I wasn't being attacked."
Laughable.
RE: Good Night Irene - bfine32 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 02:11 PM)Benton Wrote: And if your side B was presented by the people getting heard the most, I think we'd have discussion.You're looking the wrong direction if you're looking for somebody who thinks Trump and others are reacting to the kneeling in a less than constructive manner; however, that should not be the impetus for the kneelers to stiffen their resolve. It's fighting hate with hate.
Instead, there's a president calling for protestors to be fired, other politicians commenting on the messengers and not the message, talking heads saying it's essentially overpaid kids whining about nothing.
Trump, or any member of Congress, could have pushed to sit down with DoJ, but Conservatives for the last several years mostly just criticized the DoJ under Obama for acknowledging departments in Chicago and STL and other areas that, reportedly, have high instances of police abuse against minorities. Instead of saying "I understand your intent is not to disrespect, and support your right to do so; however, many feel it as disrespectful to many citizens who have paid the ultimate sacrifice for this country, get up and we'll talk about this," it's been "You shouldn't be there. Maybe you shouldn't be in the country."
RE: Good Night Irene - fredtoast - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 01:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It is cute to see folks try to show how this is different than the Redskins example provided; although, it is exactly the same.
It is not the same because people who think the name Redskins is disrespectful also do not think the N-word is disrespectful.
In the issue with the flag people on the right are claiming that saying the country has problems is disrespectful, but at the same time have no problem with Trump saying the country has lots of problems.
This is not just a case of each side seeing their own issue. In this case we have the right claiming to hold to contradictory positions at the same time. It is okay to say the country has problems when their beloved president says it, but it is disrespectful when a black football player says the same thing.
RE: Good Night Irene - GMDino - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 02:15 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You're looking the wrong direction if you're looking for somebody who thinks Trump and others are reacting to the kneeling in a less than constructive manner; however, that should not be the impetus for the kneelers to stiffen their resolve. It's fighting hate with hate.
Horse hockey.
When the POTUS calls you an SOB for a silent protest it better stiffen your resolve or you had no real resolve in the first place.
Had they said "You know, Trump is right and we better stop all this and be quiet again" you (yes you) and the usual suspects would jump and say how the protest was all about attention and as soon as someone called them out they back off.
Total bologna.
RE: Good Night Irene - fredtoast - 08-24-2018
BTW just so we have it on the record. Bfine is saying that the Washington DC football team using the term "redskins" is disrespectful and offensive.
RE: Good Night Irene - bfine32 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 02:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is not the same because people who think the name Redskins is disrespectful also do not think the N-word is disrespectful.
In the issue with the flag people on the right are claiming that saying the country has problems is disrespectful, but at the same time have no problem with Trump saying the country has lots of problems.
This is not just a case of each side seeing their own issue. In this case we have the right claiming to hold to contradictory positions at the same time. It is okay to say the country has problems when their beloved president says it, but it is disrespectful when a black football player says the same thing.
Your post makes the tiniest bit of sense if you are suggesting our country has issues and failing to honor the National Flag are the same. Outside of that it makes zero sense.
RE: Good Night Irene - bfine32 - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 02:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: BTW just so we have it on the record. Bfine is saying that the Washington DC football team using the term "redskins" is disrespectful and offensive.
Print it out, frame it, put it on your wall.
RE: Good Night Irene - fredtoast - 08-24-2018
(08-24-2018, 02:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Your post makes the tiniest bit of sense if you are suggesting our country has issues and failing to honor the National Flag are the same. Outside of that it makes zero sense.
This getting ridiculous. All you do is go in circles. We have already discussed this.
NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON believes that the NFL players are kneeling because we need a new flag. EVERY SINGLE PERSON WITH A BRAIN knows that the players are making a statement about the country, not the flag.