Is Michael Irvin a racist?

[Jigga]

The point of this post was a simple one of double standards. And it proves my point about the double standard of how the media responds racial remarks. In the same week you have a second rate TV actor who goes off when he was heckled and it is all over the media for a week (or more), and a HoF Football player and a ok TV commentator who implies that a white athlete must have a little black in him to be good and it isn't even news. Imagine if Sean Hannity said that Barack Obama is only smart because he has some white in him, or Katie Couric said that Dr. Condoleezza Rice must have some white in her to be Secretary of State. The media often overlooks black on white racism. Why? Even the comments posted were quite telling. The same folks who implied Michael Richards was the Grand Dragon of the KKK, also found nothing wrong with Michael Irvin's remarks.

Wow, you certainly showed us!

[fiasco!]

i think the point you people are missing is that it's tolerated because white folks haven't been persecuted for all of eternity. in fact, it's quite the opposite. since white people have historically been the aggressors in most of history's shenanigans, it's more acceptable to "let it slide".

i, for one, take absolutely no offense when my race is made fun of. maybe because i view us all as the "human race", as opposed to being white, black, yellow, etc.

[TFoA]

The point of this post was a simple one of double standards. And it proves my point about the double standard of how the media responds racial remarks. In the same week you have a second rate TV actor who goes off when he was heckled and it is all over the media for a week (or more), and a HoF Football player and a ok TV commentator who implies that a white athlete must have a little black in him to be good and it isn't even news. Imagine if Sean Hannity said that Barack Obama is only smart because he has some white in him, or Katie Couric said that Dr. Condoleezza Rice must have some white in her to be Secretary of State. The media often overlooks black on white racism. Why? Even the comments posted were quite telling. The same folks who implied Michael Richards was the Grand Dragon of the KKK, also found nothing wrong with Michael Irvin's remarks.

Dude, Irvin was joking. Richards was dead ass serious when he said what he said. Irvin said a dumbyhead comment, and pulled a dumbyhead move like OJ did recently. Richards basically pulled out words from back in the Civil War-days.

[CaolinaJoe]

I think it is "overlooked", as this thread has proven, because the media knows that once you call out an african-american on racism you are labeled the racist. That is why they don't touch it with a 10 foot pole, career suicide.

[Squeaks4]

i think the point you people are missing is that it's tolerated because white folks haven't been persecuted for all of eternity. in fact, it's quite the opposite. since white people have historically been the aggressors in most of history's shenanigans, it's more acceptable to "let it slide".

Really? Hmm, thats funny because if I remember correctly the Jews have been persecuted FAR longer than anyone. I know that is a religion and not a race being persecuted, but to be honest, the persecution that the Jews have had to go through is much older and more severe than the days of Slavery. Don't get me wrong, slavery wasn't something to just look over, but lets not forget how long ago that was and lets also not remember who actually sent the slaves over here. It was not right in ANY way, but please don't forget that the African kings actually sold their fellow race to the white man.

And no, Michael Irvin is not a racist. I don't really view his comments as negative towards white people. It was a dumb joke, but not a racist one from a racist person.

EVERYONE on this earth is prejudice. I don't particularly like certain groups of blacks, whites, latinos, asians, ect. Its far more a type of person then it is race. I hate ignorance and arrogance, not race.

[Cyclopsis Joe]

I think you guys need to cool your jets about it. I'm from the south, my family is all "a-hyuck, monster truck" rednecks, and I still think that you're grasping at straws.

Did I mention the confederate flag? Oh yes I'm sure I did.

[Jigga]

I'm just so glad that so many people here are experts on race, racism, and race relations in the United States.

[slapshot]

I got my doctorate in raceology from Whitey U.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

i think the point you people are missing is that it's tolerated because white folks haven't been persecuted for all of eternity. in fact, it's quite the opposite. since white people have historically been the aggressors in most of history's shenanigans, it's more acceptable to "let it slide".

That's pretty much the same point I made in the other reverse racism thread. And I just find it so funny that much of the same crowd so eager to label people sensitive to race and class as being "too PC" are now ready to run Michael Irvin for offending their white sensibilities.

To even compare Irvin's silly (but empirically kind of true) remark about blacks being better than whites at sports (I mean, have you looked at the racial makeup of the NFL?) to Michael Richards screaming N-word at the top of his lungs to some pretty innocuous heckling is quite the stretch.

Again, if you're born a white, straight American -- I'm assuming the majority of this board -- you've got it pretty good. It's certainly your right to get bent out of shape over Michael Irvin, but really, what's the point?

[STL FANATIC]

It's not racism. It's a joke from a stereotype. And because it was a joke Irvin quite probably doesn't by into that stereotype.

The only real negatives are that (1) this might re-enforce that stereotype to the feeble minded, and (2) in a reversed roles, the white analyst probably would have been fired.

Should be an non-issue, unless the issue is proving that other things should be non-issues too.

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

i really don't think anyone that is white is bothered by his statements, to me its nothing but bad humor. however what he said was not hatefull and malicious, it was just stupid and really no one should take offense.

HOWEVER, the comments made by Michael RIchards and lets throw in Mel Gibson, were hatefull and malicious. THey deserved to be called out for what they did. So you really can't compare Irvin to Gibson and the 10th rate unfunny comedian. Its apples to oranges.

however i would like to compare it to Rush calling McNabb overrated and getting attention because of obvious reasons. While not hateful and malicious, it was just a stupid analysis. Samething with Irvin, not hateful but just an unfunny joke. Comments either made by RUsh or Irvin are just fuel for people who want to make much ado about nothing. In fact we shouldn't even be having this discussion. Just the mere fact that we are discussing somethign as trivial as someones words just shows how weak our society has become. WE have more important issues goign on in the world than worrying about trivial bs like unfunny racial jokes and bad analysis.

btw, if we want to get in to trivial wanking here, lets start with the nut radio host in SF who once called for concentration camps on the radio.

[Milo Meningocele]

i think the point you people are missing is that it's tolerated because white folks haven't been persecuted for all of eternity. in fact, it's quite the opposite. since white people have historically been the aggressors in most of history's shenanigans, it's more acceptable to "let it slide".

That's pretty much the same point I made in the other reverse racism thread.

There's no such thing as "reverse racism". I hate that phrase. Racism is racism no matter what direction it's going.

[Cyclopsis Joe]

I'm just so glad that so many people here are experts on race, racism, and race relations in the United States.

Yourself included?

(Sorry about that)

[Mings]

I'm just so glad that so many people here are experts on race, racism, and race relations in the United States.

Yourself included?

(Sorry about that)

Joe, I just think you may have opened something you might wanna close immediately.

Not a good thing to poke lightly at a subject that Greg deeply cares about.

Now onto my opinion......It was a joke. Dumb, but a joke. Nothing more. No point in getting panties, boxers, g-strings, thongs, boy shorts, whitey-tighties, boxer-briefs all tied up in a bunch.

As far as those that go commando, then its whatever you guys tie up.

[Cyclopsis Joe]

I'm just so glad that so many people here are experts on race, racism, and race relations in the United States.

Yourself included?

(Sorry about that)

Joe, I just think you may have opened something you might wanna close immediately.

Not a good thing to poke lightly at a subject that Greg deeply cares about.

I thought the same thing and came back to edit. But now that you've quoted me (and I've quoted you), it's kind of pointless.

Greg, if you are turning red with anger and starting to write a long diatribe that I'm sure I'll regret, it was a bad joke. My point is that it was a bad joke (just like Irvin's) but it's neither here nor there, so I apologize.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

That's pretty much the same point I made in the other reverse racism thread.

There's no such thing as "reverse racism". I hate that phrase. Racism is racism no matter what direction it's going.

"Reverse racism" is a colloquialism and I use it as such. I agree with you, it's a stupid phrase. But it has meaning and people understand that meaning. That's all.

[tajmccall]

Its a benign comment. People are allowed to make jokes about race. Relating this to Michael Richards in anyway would be short-sided. Kramer lost it and unleashed his inner Clayton Bigsby, Michael Irvin merely exposed Tony Romo's great grandmother as a chocolate dipper

on the early century Jazz scene.

[jkrdevil]

I don't think Irvin is a racist as much as I think he is just a complete idiot.

[HedleyLamarr]

however i would like to compare it to Rush calling McNabb overrated and getting attention because of obvious reasons. While not hateful and malicious, it was just a stupid analysis. Samething with Irvin, not hateful but just an unfunny joke. Comments either made by RUsh or Irvin are just fuel for people who want to make much ado about nothing. In fact we shouldn't even be having this discussion. Just the mere fact that we are discussing somethign as trivial as someones words just shows how weak our society has become. WE have more important issues goign on in the world than worrying about trivial bs like unfunny racial jokes and bad analysis.

I know what you're getting at, but you got the Rush/McNabb thing all wrong.

[CaolinaJoe]

however i would like to compare it to Rush calling McNabb overrated and getting attention because of obvious reasons. While not hateful and malicious, it was just a stupid analysis. Samething with Irvin, not hateful but just an unfunny joke. Comments either made by RUsh or Irvin are just fuel for people who want to make much ado about nothing. In fact we shouldn't even be having this discussion. Just the mere fact that we are discussing somethign as trivial as someones words just shows how weak our society has become. WE have more important issues goign on in the world than worrying about trivial bs like unfunny racial jokes and bad analysis.

I know what you're getting at, but you got the Rush/McNabb thing all wrong.

He got the Rush/McNabb situation pretty much dead on.

"I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well,'' Limbaugh said. "There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team."