Wow. Also, who under the age of 50 even thinks to use the word "lynch" in any context other than a discussion of Dokken?
This is a total non-story. There is no way she intended to evoke the racist association - we have become so hyper sensitized that even though we know she meant no harm , that it was merely a slip of the tongue, we are lining up to declare our outrage. Yawnsville, population everybody.
what's outrageous is that a broadcaster would think that's an acceptable way of expressing herself. it's a public forum.
Well, glad it wasn't me being that dumb.I mean, I'm sure she didn't intend it ... but does that word even need to be in tv persons vocabulary?
Dokken, I said! BAM!
If I had said "lynch" in that context, would you be offended by the implied racism? Lynch is an English-language word meaning to hang without reason or trial. Was it a careless word choice given the context? Of course. But are you telling me that because she has the sanctified broadcasting position of TELEVISION GOLF COMMENTATOR, she needs to scrub her language of any one-syllable words that might bring up the specter of hooded klansmen stringing him up from the flag on the 16th at Augusta? Oh yeah, Augusta - the place that still doesn't allow women to be members! Doesn't anyone give a flying fuck about ACTUAL DISCRIMINATION?BTW, statement from the Woods camp:"It is a complete non-issue." Yet she was suspended. The important thing is that the superficial committment to equality remain intact in order that the pharmaceutical companies can keep shilling erection pills to the elderly on Sunday afternoons.
From ESPN.comWoods' agent, Mark Steinberg of IMG, released a statement saying, "This story is a non-issue. Tiger and Kelly are friends and Tiger has a great deal of respect for Kelly. Regardless of the choice of words used, we know unequivocally that there was no ill intent in her comments. This story is a non-issue in our eyes."According to The Associated Press, Woods and Tilghman have known each other 12 years. She was picked to host a club demonstration with Woods in south Florida when he talked about new products from Nike Golf. Tilghman, one of the most-popular on-air personalities at Golf Channel, (last year was the first of a 15-year deal by the Golf Channel to broadcast PGA Tour events) became the first female to anchor a professional golf broadcast, and one of the few to hold such a prominent position in all of sports.
I probably should have mentioned that since this is golf - i really, really do not care. But she didn't just say lynch, she said "lynch'em in an alley" which has this creepy: "Let's take him out back, boys" connontation. At least to me. But then i'm a wimp and violence scares me. However, if the only potentially aggrieved party says it's a non-issue, than i'll take him at his word. Did Dokken sing "The Last in Line" because i love that song. Oh sorry, that's Dio.
It has nothing to do with 'scrubbing her language' to keep it from offending, and it has nothing to do with the vaunted standards of the Golf channel. It has to do with the use of the imagery and the sentiment. I'm glad it's a non-issue to the Tiger Woods multinational corporation. It is a non-issue in that regard, but in a PUBLIC FORUM it is completely inappropriate and a suspension is in order.Lynch is an English-language word meaning to hang without reason or trial:No it's not. Not anymore. It has a very specific meaning. And if Alvy used the word, no I would not be offended. If Alvy used the word on television or let's say from the stage during an Alvy show and he talking about a black guy, I would say it was offensive and idiotic. And "actual discrimination" (Augusta National) is a separate issue completely. This isn't an issue of discrimination, it's an issue of insensitivity and stupidity. And comparing one to the other is an age-old reactionary tactic to divide liberal-minded people into camps of comparing the wrongs done to them which is, again, besides the point. And her suspension is not a 'superficial commitment' to equality. It's a commitment to not being completely ignorant and offensive on national television, no matter how small the market, no matter the intention. She'll survive and probably be a better whatever-the-fuck she is.
wait, so words can be come contaminated and unchangeable for all eternity? Is there a master list of words we can use in public and one we can only use in private? This is the wrong kind of policing. Intent is what counts and we should recognize that - not punish an individual in a blind attempt to not offend anyone who might be watching if they take offence. AND what's so bad about being offended anyway? She was not threatening anyone, she was making an obvious joke. AND to discount Tiger's opinion because he's rich is bullshit.
i'm not discounting Tiger's opinion because he's rich, I'm discounting it because him not being offended isn't really the point. And no, the word is not tainted for all eternity, unless you're talking about taking somebody in an alley and lynching them. In that case, it's pretty fucking tainted. Of course it can be used, of course we can be offended, but we can also say that it's simply not appropriate and we shouldn't have to listen to it. that's not policing, it's preference. and although i agree that her intent wasn't malicious, I don't agree that intent is all that counts. Ignorance shouldn't be just let slide because a person had no malicious 'intent.' damage can be done with no malice intended. Is this damaging? no, not really, because it was publicy (and I would say sanely) identified as being wrong and small steps were taken by all involved, including Tiger. There was no witch hunt. Nobody's career is ruined. What's wrong with the culture saying 'that's wrong and stupid' and the person saying 'i'm sorry. that was stupid' and that being it. I'm not calling for her head. Just her job (temporarily).
suspension=policingchoosing to watch someone else=preference
the culture at large decides a preference of what is no longer tolerable in the public forum. nobody would say 'nigger' or 'jew him down' or 'chinamen' in a public forum because the culture at large has decided that it PREFERS to keep that stuff out of the public forum.is that an answer to prejudicial behavior? No. Is it all that needs to be done? No. Is it a start? Absolutely.
Post a Comment