Stan Van Gundy on "posse"

[MU82]

Here's a guy who gets it:

http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/index.ssf/2016/11/stan_van_gundy_felt_guilty_abo.html

Main quote:

"People have to be willing I think to listen and try to learn. So when LeBron or Maverick Carter or Rich Paul or whoever makes a statement that they're offended, instead of just reflexively trying to defend yourself and say there is nothing racist about it or whatever, look, I mean, the people in the majority don't get to decide what is racist and what's not. It's like men don't get to decide what's sexist and what's not. You have to listen and if you care, you listen and you try to get better from it."

[tower912]

MU82, I am with you and I agree and I am becoming a bigger SVG fan by the day.    But this thread will not end well.   In before the lock. 

[real chili 83]

Ha.

[wadesworld]

So if a person in the "majority" calls a group of African Americans "friends" and that group of African Americans claims racism for using that term, we all have to just say, "Well, yup!  They're right!  That's racist!" because the people in the "majority" can't possibly know what's truly racist and what's not?  Or if a white person says, "Hey they look like a group of great teammates out there!" about a sports team at an all-black college, "teammates" has to be taken as racist if one of those players cries afoul about it?

Sorry, but I just don't buy this thinking at all.  In my opinion there are words that are clearly racist and offensive (the n word being the most obvious example).  Beyond that I think the intent of the person in the "majority" has to be taken into consideration.  With me being a part of the "majority," I've used the term "posse" to describe a group of "majorities."  In my opinion, the term "posse" has nothing to do with race, and the definition of "posse" is "a group of friends or associates."

Boxers, MMA fighters, whatever, they commonly walk into the ring/arena with a big group of people.  I would consider that a "posse," whether every person in that group is part of the "majority" or every one of them is a "minority" or there is a mix of both.

A minority person can just walk up to me and tell me I'm a racist with absolutely no basis behind it because, well, I'm in the "majority" so I don't know what's racist and it doesn't matter whether I was the most kind, polite person ever or didn't even interact with them in any way, if they say I'm racist then it must be?  No.

[GGGG]

Wades, its the same thing as the Indians logo.

YOU don't get to decide if it is offensive, because YOU are not Native American. 

[wadesworld]

Wades, its the same thing as the Indians logo.

YOU don't get to decide if it is offensive, because YOU are not Native American.

So if I call a minority couple an "amazing couple, great people," in the most sincere way possible, it's racism if they say that's racist? Again, sorry, but I'll never buy that in my life.

[GGGG]

No kidding. 

The point is that the recipients of your "amazing couple, great people" statement feel it is racist.  So don't call them that again.  It doesn't mean you are a bad person. 

[wadesworld]

No kidding.

Yeah no kidding. Someone claiming I'm a racist in that example for using a term that has never nor will ever be a racist or offensive term is offensive. People who I have never interacted with claiming I'm a racist out of the blue is offensive. Claiming I can't determine whether something is offensive because I'm a "privileged white male" may not be offensive, but it is certainly beyond absurd.

[GGGG]

Yeah no kidding. Someone claiming I'm a racist in that example for using a term that has never nor will ever be a racist or offensive term is offensive. People who I have never interacted with claiming I'm a racist out of the blue is offensive. Claiming I can't determine whether something is offensive because I'm a "privileged white male" may not be offensive, but it is certainly beyond absurd.

No.

No one said *you* were being a racist.  The recipient feels the *term* you used is.  Big difference.

[real chili 83]

No kidding. 

The point is that the recipients of your "amazing couple, great people" statement feel it is racist.  So don't call them that again.  It doesn't mean you are a bad person.

I tend to agree with you, however, this gets abused, thus Wade's cynicism.

[GGGG]

If you look at SvG's quote, it is NOT talking about a person.  He is talking about the statement.

"I mean, the people in the majority don't get to decide what is racist and what's not."

"WHAT" is racist.  Not WHO is racist.

[brandx]

So if a person in the "majority" calls a group of African Americans "friends" and that group of African Americans claims racism for using that term, we all have to just say, "Well, yup!  They're right!  That's racist!" because the people in the "majority" can't possibly know what's truly racist and what's not?  Or if a white person says, "Hey they look like a group of great teammates out there!" about a sports team at an all-black college, "teammates" has to be taken as racist if one of those players cries afoul about it?

Very chico-esque paragraph. I'm not comparing you to him - I think you're a very good poster here - but you are making up extreme examples to try to make your point.

Yes, the minority does get to decide what is offensive to them. By saying that, it doesn't mean you are racist, but simply unaware of any implications that it may have. Racism doesn't have to be as overt - as when Nigel Hayes spoke out about a white fan dressed as Obama with a noose around his neck. Every single rational person in the world can see that such a depiction is racism at its purist.

A minority's view of racism is going to be based on what they have had to experience in their lives We are not privy to that. I have no doubt that a black man in America faces more obstacles on a daily basis because of their color than I have in my entire life. I can honestly say that in 60 years I do not recall one single time where I was discriminated against.

Some polls now show that whites in this country think racism against whites is more prevalent than racism against blacks and minorities. I'd add more to this thought, but I am almost speechless over what to say about whites who would think this.

[wadesworld]

Very chico-esque paragraph. I'm not comparing you to him - I think you're a very good poster here - but you are making up extreme examples to try to make your point.

Yes, the minority does get to decide what is offensive to them. By saying that, it doesn't mean you are racist, but simply unaware of any implications that it may have. Racism doesn't have to be as overt - as when Nigel Hayes spoke out about a white fan dressed as Obama with a noose around his neck. Every single rational person in the world can see that such a depiction is racism at its purist.

A minority's view of racism is going to be based on what they have had to experience in their lives We are not privy to that. I have no doubt that a black man in America faces more obstacles on a daily basis because of their color than I have in my entire life. I can honestly say that in 60 years I do not recall one single time where I was discriminated against.

Some polls now show that whites in this country think racism against whites is more prevalent than racism against blacks and minorities. I'd add more to this thought, but I am almost speechless over what to say about whites who would think this.

Just like in the Indians thread, offensive and racism are two very different things.  There are obviously some very serious issues with racism in this country, I'm not trying to deny that in the least bit.  But not everything that is offensive to a minority is racism.  Phil Jackson calling LeBron James's group of friends and associates his "posse," which is *defined as, well, "a group of friends or associates" (so exactly what Phil was describing, word for word) had nothing to do with race.  If LeBron is offended by the term that's fine and completely his right, but it is not "an African American group of friends and associates" or "a minority group of friends and associates," just any "group of friends or associates."

People continue to confuse "offensive" with "racism."  That's my point.  If LeBron is offended by Phil using the term "posse" then fine, but just because LeBron is a minoirty and LeBron is offended at the term does not mean that the term is racist.  The term is offensive to LeBron.  Nothing more and nothing less.  Playing the race card in a deck that doesn't have a race card in it just doesn't make sense to me.

* http://www.dictionary.com/browse/posse?s=t

[Dr. Doctor]

Here's a guy who gets it:

http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/index.ssf/2016/11/stan_van_gundy_felt_guilty_abo.html

Main quote:

"People have to be willing I think to listen and try to learn. So when LeBron or Maverick Carter or Rich Paul or whoever makes a statement that they're offended, instead of just reflexively trying to defend yourself and say there is nothing racist about it or whatever, look, I mean, the people in the majority don't get to decide what is racist and what's not. It's like men don't get to decide what's sexist and what's not. You have to listen and if you care, you listen and you try to get better from it."

You question why America voted the way they did 2 weeks ago?  One major reason, political correctness like this ^^^^^^^^^^^

http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/09/trump-won-because-leftist-political-corr


Men don't get to decide what is sexist? Are men no longer a gender and not subject to sexism?   http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/05/when-men-experience-sexism/276355/


Sexism or gender discrimination is prejudice against or discrimination based on a person's sex or gender. Sexism can affect any gender


Is this an example of sexism?  https://monozygotic.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/sexist-attitudes-revealed-in-commentary-on-erin-andrews/





People in the majority don't get to decide what racism is?  If an Asian commits a racial act against a Hispanic, that isn't racial because neither is in the majority?  In a few years, no race will be in the majority in this country, does that mean racism ends?  Or can everyone claim racism then?


Keep thinking this way and keep losing elections because America believes this political correctness stuff is garbage.  Go to your safe zones

[Dr. Doctor]

Wades, its the same thing as the Indians logo.

YOU don't get to decide if it is offensive, because YOU are not Native American.

When Native Americans decide it isn't offensive, then what?  Then you get to decide, or do you have to count a certain number of Native Americans until you get a number you agree with?

Posse?  This is offensive?  The historical definition of a posse is a group of men helping law enforcement, typically a sheriff.  Now this is an offensive term that means a group of black men?

This is why Trump wins elections, because of stupidity like this.   All of you pat yourselves on the back.

[GGGG]

You question why America voted the way they did 2 weeks ago?  One major reason, political correctness like this ^^^^^^^^^^^

http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/09/trump-won-because-leftist-political-corr


Men don't get to decide what is sexist? Are men no longer a gender and not subject to sexism?   http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/05/when-men-experience-sexism/276355/


Sexism or gender discrimination is prejudice against or discrimination based on a person's sex or gender. Sexism can affect any gender


Is this an example of sexism?  https://monozygotic.wordpress.com/2008/08/04/sexist-attitudes-revealed-in-commentary-on-erin-andrews/





People in the majority don't get to decide what racism is?  If an Asian commits a racial act against a Hispanic, that isn't racial because neither is in the majority?  In a few years, no race will be in the majority in this country, does that mean racism ends?  Or can everyone claim racism then?


Keep thinking this way and keep losing elections because America believes this political correctness stuff is garbage.  Go to your safe zones

When Native Americans decide it isn't offensive, then what?  Then you get to decide, or do you have to count a certain number of Native Americans until you get a number you agree with?

Posse?  This is offensive?  The historical definition of a posse is a group of men helping law enforcement, typically a sheriff.  Now this is an offensive term that means a group of black men?

This is why Trump wins elections, because of stupidity like this.   All of you pat yourselves on the back.

Howdy Chicos!

[Dr. Doctor]

Stop sexist acts against men!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/quora/what-are-some-common-form_b_4473062.html


Except as men we cannot claim these are sexist, because we are men and men are no longer a gender, only women are.  The great philosophy Stan Van Gundy as enlightened us.

[Dr. Doctor]

End the sexism against men, despite Stan Van Gundy.


Men are 97% of combat fatalities.
Men pay 97% of Alimony
Men make 94% of work suicides.
Men make up 93% of work fatalities.
Men make up 81% of all war deaths.
Men lose custody in 84% of divorces.
80% of all suicides are men.
77% of homicide victims are men.
89% of men will be the victim of at least one violent crime.
Men are over twice as victimised by strangers as women.
Men are 165% more likely to be convicted than women.
Men get 63% longer sentences than women for the same crime.
Court bias against men is at least 6 times bigger than racial bias.
Males are discriminated against in school and University.
Boys face vastly more corporal punishment than girls.
60-80% of the homeless are men.
Women's Cancers receive 15 times more funding than men's
At least 10% of fathers are victims of paternity fraud.
One third of all fathers in the USA have lost custody of children, most are expected to pay for this.
40-70% of domestic violence is against men however less than 1% of domestic violence shelter spaces are for men.
Male fatality rates are vastly higher than women's
Worldwide there are 107 men born for every 100 women, by age 65 there are 78 men for every 100 women, in countries like the USA & UK, its even worse, with 75/76 men for every 100 women. Despite the fact that health care spending for men is nearly twice as effective.

Men earn 61.5% of all income but only account for 25% of domestic spending. Men only spend 40% of what they earn after tax. In contrast women make up 38.5% of all income but control 75% of domestic spending, women on average spend 90% MORE MONEY THAN THEY EARN. Men are exploited as cash machines and even with spending on children accounted for women still spend more money on themselves than the combined spending for men and children. This can even be observed in the floor space allocated to women's products in most shopping centers.


Men pay over 70% of income tax, but the vast majority of public spending is on services for women. There is more money spent on breast cancer than lung cancer and prostate cancer combined, despite the fact that lung cancer alone has 3-4 times more fatalities than breast cancer. A man's chance of getting cancer is 44% and 23% of men will die from cancer, 38% of women get cancer and 19% die. Yet there is vastly more money spent on cancer for women, this is lethal discrimination. Women pay 60% less tax despite spending 300% more in domestic spending than men. Women also consume two third of public spending, there are 3 times the amount of gender specific health services for women than men despite the fact that for equal increases in health spending a man's life expectancy rate increases nearly twice as much as a woman's.

[GGGG]

Stop sexist acts against men!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/quora/what-are-some-common-form_b_4473062.html


Except as men we cannot claim these are sexist, because we are men and men are no longer a gender, only women are.  The great philosophy Stan Van Gundy as enlightened us.

This is the last I'm posting on this because Chicos is here and it will go where it always does. (And I guess I fell for his "changed guy" bullsh*t too.)

But that's not what Van Gundy meant.  He didn't mean that men cannot experience sexism.  But that actions or comments by men, directed towards women, should be defined by women if it is sexist or not.

The entire point is that RECIPIENT defines these things.

[tower912]

Changed perspective my ass

[Dr. Doctor]

Howdy Chicos!

The best part of it is that I hate that jerk, and each time I decide to create an account it only soils him more.  It is a beautiful win win for me. 

[Dr. Doctor]

Here's a gut who gets it (sincerest form of flattery or stupidity)


“That was such bulls–t,’’ Rosen told The Post. “All of a sudden it’s a bad word. But [Allen] Iverson talks about his boys. It’s taking politically incorrect to the nth degree. Do I think he meant anything racial by it? Do you think there’s a racial bone in his body? There have been racist coaches in the NBA and Phil isn’t close to being one of them.

“It was overblown. It’s manufactured. Why is LeBron so sensitive about it? It’s Phil Jackson. If a so-called cracker said it, OK. But it’s Phil. Please. He’s not going to respect Phil again. Ridiculous. There’s racially sensitive things to worry about than freaking out about ‘posse.’ ”



http://nypost.com/2016/11/19/phil-jackson-pal-rips-lebron-for-posse-gripe-such-bulls-t/

[wadesworld]

What could've been a constructive, informative discussion...

[brandx]

Just like in the Indians thread, offensive and racism are two very different things.  There are obviously some very serious issues with racism in this country, I'm not trying to deny that in the least bit.  But not everything that is offensive to a minority is racism.  Phil Jackson calling LeBron James's group of friends and associates his "posse," which is *defined as, well, "a group of friends or associates" (so exactly what Phil was describing, word for word) had nothing to do with race.  If LeBron is offended by the term that's fine and completely his right, but it is not "an African American group of friends and associates" or "a minority group of friends and associates," just any "group of friends or associates."

People continue to confuse "offensive" with "racism."  That's my point.  If LeBron is offended by Phil using the term "posse" then fine, but just because LeBron is a minoirty and LeBron is offended at the term does not mean that the term is racist.  The term is offensive to LeBron.  Nothing more and nothing less.  Playing the race card in a deck that doesn't have a race card in it just doesn't make sense to me.

* http://www.dictionary.com/browse/posse?s=t

I agree with ya', Wades. "Offensive" is a much better term than "racist" in cases like these.

[Dr. Doctor]

Even the NY Times finally starting to get it.   You lost because of identity politics, which is what this thread is about. Until you learn, you will continue to lose.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/opinion/sunday/the-end-of-identity-liberalism.html?_r=0


The Washington Post, tidies things up nicely on political correctness, the election and the PC Posse, the words they use.  Has SVG allowed this usage?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2016/11/17/on-media-bubbles-trumps-win-and-the-redskins-name-debate/