Off Topix: Embrace the Unexpected in Every Discussion
Off Topix is a well established general discussion forum that originally opened to the public way back in 2009! We provide a laid back atmosphere and our members are down to earth. We have a ton of content and fresh stuff is constantly being added. We cover all sorts of topics, so there's bound to be something inside to pique your interest. We welcome anyone and everyone to register & become a member of our awesome community.
ESPN host spouts more racism
- Thread starter DrLeftover
- Start date
This case does well to illustrate what I believe to be one of the many pitfalls of racialization.
There is a precarious line between being controversial and just plain repugnant and Mr. Parker has a tendency to cross that line. And, while I personally find his delivery brash and insensitive, I cannot say that I am against the overreaching idea. There often is no easy way to introduce and discuss something as esoteric as institutional racism in an honest manner.
Far removed from this particular case, race will always be a part of the sports sphere as much as it is a part of any institution. To that end I don't feel it is a topic that is ever satisfyingly addressed. On one hand you have athletes - de facto representatives of the sports realm - who are fully conscious of the intricacies of racial identity, but are largely dismissive in their response to anything related to the matter (take RGII's statement, I am an African-American in America. That will never change. But I donââ¬â¢t have to be defined by that.). And on the other hand you have the few black commentators like Rob Parker who are given this 'prestigious' forum to generate dialogue but end up squandering the opportunity with statements like cornball brother.
There is a precarious line between being controversial and just plain repugnant and Mr. Parker has a tendency to cross that line. And, while I personally find his delivery brash and insensitive, I cannot say that I am against the overreaching idea. There often is no easy way to introduce and discuss something as esoteric as institutional racism in an honest manner.
Far removed from this particular case, race will always be a part of the sports sphere as much as it is a part of any institution. To that end I don't feel it is a topic that is ever satisfyingly addressed. On one hand you have athletes - de facto representatives of the sports realm - who are fully conscious of the intricacies of racial identity, but are largely dismissive in their response to anything related to the matter (take RGII's statement, I am an African-American in America. That will never change. But I donââ¬â¢t have to be defined by that.). And on the other hand you have the few black commentators like Rob Parker who are given this 'prestigious' forum to generate dialogue but end up squandering the opportunity with statements like cornball brother.
It also points out the fact that card carrying Liberal Democrats cannot tolerate anybody who thinks for themselves.
The biggest burr under Parker's blanket is that Griffin may be a Republican.
The biggest burr under Parker's blanket is that Griffin may be a Republican.
The Republican party probably needs to change in terms of having diverse representation. The Republican party remains predominately a scene of straight, White men in government while the opposite is becoming true for the Democrats where minorities (as Parker identifies) are becoming the majority.
Yes there are poster children like Jennifer Carroll and Mia Love among others. Regardless of party, it does not need to be said how rare of an accomplishment it is for these Black women to reach such a position.
However, the point I was trying to make was that, from an outsiderââ¬â¢s perspective, the partyââ¬â¢s visible and vocal members, the ones running the show, are all White males. And even outside that, the Democratic is becoming more diverse (as it is predicted that there will no longer exist the White-male majority in the Democratic House caucus). For the Democratic party, they are making an effort to immerse themselves in a more diverse base, Black/African-American, LGBT, Latino/Hispanic, Women, etc., while the Republican party, though comprising the majority of House members, is vastly a country club of White males.
However, the point I was trying to make was that, from an outsiderââ¬â¢s perspective, the partyââ¬â¢s visible and vocal members, the ones running the show, are all White males. And even outside that, the Democratic is becoming more diverse (as it is predicted that there will no longer exist the White-male majority in the Democratic House caucus). For the Democratic party, they are making an effort to immerse themselves in a more diverse base, Black/African-American, LGBT, Latino/Hispanic, Women, etc., while the Republican party, though comprising the majority of House members, is vastly a country club of White males.
The only thing that anyone has to say in response to a loaded question like that is to state he's a human being much like everyone else. None of these labels we invented for ourselves means a damn when compared to the label 'human being'.
It's obvious that this person has no interest in having a serious discussion and just wants to bait people into providing entertainment to get viewers to watch the show. People really need to tune out these types so they will quit their race baiting.
It's obvious that this person has no interest in having a serious discussion and just wants to bait people into providing entertainment to get viewers to watch the show. People really need to tune out these types so they will quit their race baiting.
Similar threads
