eflynn

I always say I'm not going to get involved with this shit but it's almost impossible for me to sit back and watch someone speak unintelligently about "them" when "them" are people me. I've commented on things you've said about black people previously and there's a common thread in every single one... You don't know anything about us. Whenever you open your mouth to speak about black people here, stereotypes fly out. If that's all you know that's unfortunate but it that's indeed the case you need to either broaden your horizons or shut your mouth. "Suppose a black person refuses to speak proper English, uses foul language around older people and families with kids, dresses like a criminal, flaunts his attitude toward the law, plays rap music with foul language really loud in his car while driving with the windows rolled down, etc. Should that guy expect a really warm welcome? Might his behavior affect others' attitudes toward blacks?" Remember this? Here's what you think of us. Now to this post... First off his arrest record has nothing to do with his civil rights which were violated during the traffic stop. Second and more to the point of your complete lack of understanding of black people, the riots were not a show of support for Rodney King. There are no Rodney King t shirts, posters, speaking engagements, or books. Why? Because nobody in the black community cares about him as an individual. Actually, once he said "Can't we all just get along" the general consensus was "To hell with Rodney King." The incident/case/verdict acted as a catalyst. Take Rodney King and replace him with me (a black man with a blank record) and the same thing would have happened. The riots were chiefly about the treatment of black people by the police in LA. Anger, mistrust, and hatred built up over years and exploded into the riots. The same could be said for the 1965 incident you cited. Same basic ingredients, similar result. The O.J. comment I'm not going to really get into but most of my thoughts are summed up in a documentary I saw on HBO about race relations in the US citing the Mexico city olympics and the OJ trial. Find it and watch it.

I wondered how long it would take someone to post this here.

I've photographed concerts since '93 and the only artists I've ever seen draw a 90 plus percent Black crowd was Maxwell (in part because nobody knew who he was and it was during Morehouse's homecoming). From Destiny's Child to Ashanti to R Kelly they're moving lots of units to people who aren't Black. Don't believe me? Go to a show. Gospel's a niche unto itself. It's not very difficult to track who's buying what. It's done by where the music stores are located and which one is selling what and how many. I have a few friends here and there in the music industry but it's mostly common sense. As far as the grammar correction I don't need to divert anyone from my point. I could do that by simply not posting.

BET hasn't created a particular vernacular that only Black people understand and I don't see the "I'm lovin' it" commercials on BET only. The programming isn't "Black only" it's simply comprised of hip hop, r and b, jazz, and gospel. When an artist is moving 1 million plus records there are more than Black people buying the record. As far as your summarization of BET's programming I think it's a bit one sided but there is some truth to it. I'll be the first to say BET is by no means perfect or ideal but it does have some redeeming qualities. I think it lacks an consistent intellectual voice and focuses more on fluff. But again, it is an "entertainment" network and is ultimately now there to make money first. As you said, shows like that don't sell. On any network. PS It's speak English well, not speak good English.

Probably not. But I would also have a problem with White TV... And I am sure a lot of people in the black communities would also have a problem So you don't have a problem with TV One? Same basic format as BET, not as much money or distribution but in essence is a scaled down version of BET. As far as WET it really wouldn't differ from existing networks and I really wouldn't care. Some would, as someone always has something to say. No since they are in a totaly different language. Its not all about culture, some people can't speak English Well, it has the same format and it's definitely targeting latin (I'm not sure if "latin" or "hispanic" is correct) people. The language really doesn't have anything to do with it. If it was all in English everything else would be the same and it certaintly does address the culture differences between latin people and others.

I was responding to Ron saying it wasn't "white tv." For the record my point is it's not targeted toward Black people.

Paul Wall is great.

MTV plays more rap than rock. It has "Cribs" ect....Not white TV. That's just not the case. TRL is MTVs prime time shit. Last week of the top ten songs, two were hip hop songs. "Cribs" is just an updated version of lifestyles of the rich and famous. The only bias they show as far as who's on the show is money. White people love money just as much as Black people which makes it White TV. But if you want to talk numbers, last season they profiled 21 Black homes, 31 White homes, and 3 homes of people who were neither. I didn't see ONE white listed on BET. Kurt Elling, Miroslav Vitous, Dave Brubeck listed in the Jazz section, Paul Wall, Eminem, Bubba Sparks listed elsewhere on the site.

he majority of the shows on the WB have all black actors, however they dont advertise that it is geared towards the black community. Wrong again. "Smallville," "Blue Collar TV," "Charmed," "Everwood," "7th Heaven," "Gilmore Girls," "One Treel Hill," "Reba," "Summerland..." I could go on but that's over half their programming. The biggest issue with BET is that it is actually called BLACK entertainment television and publicly states that it is geared towards the black community If it was called something different you would still feel the same way. Is Telemundo racist because it's programming is targeted at latin people? Or is it okay because it's not LET? How about Oxygen which is aimed at women? Is that network sexist?

Sometimes that is the only way stuff gets delt with Sometimes that's the case but I still don't feel like Cosby handling it the way he did did anymore good that it would have done if he'd handled it in a different venue. [ hr] SWEET....is she hot? It lacked the cinematic quality or an onionbooty.com clip but it was cool. Dude its in their charter...BLACK Entertainment Television. I'm well aware what the name stands for and as I said earlier, if the name was anything different you would feel the same way about it. The demographics are black males 18-35. The simple fact is that BET is racist. It is an organization created for one segment of the population. Now they don't disallow white viewers...But the simple truth is that a white only channel would catch grief. I still don't see why its OK for blacks, not OK for whites. (I know you say you don't care, but the truth is all hell would break loose) No player Ron, it's not racist. A chief component of racism is an inherent supeority of one race. BET doesn't embody anything of the sort. It targets one segment of the population the same way Parachutist and porn pop up ads do. We'll again have to agree to disagree.

"Self checked" means you don't guard the person and let them shoot. They're not a threat. At an event about "brown v BOE" I think it was a pretty good place The event I was referring to was Howard University's commencement. Even still, I personally feel like you shouldn't air dirty laundry in certain venues or beat your child in public. That's a personal thing and I suspect that same thought played a part in the way people reacted to his comments. In addition he's no saint himself and has had his fair share of parenting issues. Both of his daughters went to Spelman which is the sister school of the college I went to Morehouse. I saw a video of his oldest daughter doing her best adult video star impression while she was still in school. We can all throw rocks at each other and all of our homes are glass on some front. While I like and respect Bill Cosby, he like other humans, has had his fair share of drug issues. You don't hear about it because everyone loves him. So a golf club that only catered to whites would be OK? Or a club that only wanted whites as members? You're missing the point. How would a Black golfer's needs be catered to differently than a White golfer's? With BET, either you like and enjoy the programming or you don't. There is no focus on Black musicians verses White musicians. It's a certain type of music. You could extend this same logic to anything else covered on BET. BET doesn't only want Black viewers as you seem to be trying to say (referencing your club that only wants whites). The programming attracts viewers with certain interests. Just like programming on any other station. Again, Black Colleges, and Black shows. Notice there are no white colleges The white colleges are on ABC, NBC, and ESPN. But again what are we really arguing about? Do you think more people watch BET college football or ABC? Which translates into exposure and ultimately money. Yo don't think PUSH would be all over WET I'm tired of talking about PUSH. They're not a threat or really an issue. And what I am saying is that blacks said "You already have WET, so I want BET. No, that's not how it worked. It was never about "they have televison stations we want one too." There was little to no representation of Black people in the media and the little there was was rarely accurate.

We already addressed this.

You reallly honestly believe there's some group of white guys sitting in a room saying "Lets just produce shows for whites only? Did I say that? A portion of the the decisions they make does involve the race. Ask some of the Lefties on this site. They will tell you I am right. Because they agree with you doesn't make them correct.

Ah, yes. Because if you oppose them you are a "Racist". So most just ignore them. I am surprized that more in the black community are not telling them to shut up Read the sentence after the one you quoted for the answer. If you ignore them they'll just go away. If you argue with them you give them fuel. Ever played basketball? Do you know what the term "self checked" means? Have you noticed that is not on the news? And how some bashed Cosby for speaking his mind I've noticed it's on BET's nightly news, and was in the AJC. Perhaps WET, ABC, and NBC missed it or didn't feel it was relavent. The Bill Cosby thing touched off nerves for a number of reasons and would require an entirely different thread. In a nutshell, Bill Cosby said things most Black people would agree with but there's a time and a place for things. In addition Bill Cosby has a gang of stuff in his own closet. It's not quite tantamount but similar to MJ doing spots against child endangerment. you have one group of people promoting themselves and saying how they are better. BET and JET aren't saying Black people are better than any other race. Can you name ONE show on BET that is aimed at whites? No, because as you quoted from the website ""Find headline and music news, explore articles on health and lifestyle, and check out sections for African American women and professionals." Does that make it racist because you aren't interested in watching a network whose programming is targeted at us? No. It simply means you aren't interested. That's it. There are no shows, hosts, or content that expouse hatred toward any other race. You and I had a frank discussion about the "n word" so it would seem to me that you'd stand to learn more about how other Black people feel about the word by watching "The Cousin Jeff Chronicles." Black College Football show teams from historically Black Colleges and Universities playing. The same way ABC and ESPN shows teams from larger universites playing. You are wrong, Jessie Jackson, Al Sharpton the NAACP all would be up in arms. It would be called "Racist". I don't agree. Initially there would be some chatter and raised eyebrows but shortly thereafter it would be chuckles and laughter. Some people are always going to have something to say. So what. You claim its not all about blacks, but then you say it is to "highlight the accomplishments and achievements of Black people." Which is it? If it is only there to "highlight the accomplishments and achievements of Black people."...Then it is discriminatory and racist. Show me where I said it wasn't about all Blacks so I can address what you said in context. It would be racist if it was there to "highlight the accomplishments and achievements of Black people" and at the same time had derogatory things to say about other races. How is that not racist Because it doesn't downplay any other race. Racism implies one race thinking or acting as if they're superior. When was the last time you've looked through JET? The "you have one, I want one too" way of thinking can be a bit pointless -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You mean how blacks have BET and JET? Or is it only OK for Blacks to have these things? No I mean how you seem to say, even if it's for argument's sake, you have BET I want WET. WET already exists by default. The media certaintly isn't creating the majority of it's programming with Black people in mind. YOU maybe, but there would be a big stink about it from several other blacks. You asked me what I would say. Someone's always going to have something to say. So what.

You make an interesting point. I don't believe the rise in Black coaches is solely due to the mandate. I think there a number of factors, some of them tangible some of them not, that play a role in the rise of the number of Black coaches. I don't know enough about the Art Shell v the Pollard alliance to have an intelligent conversation with you about it. I do feel like no matter what policy exists someone will always take issue with it.

Do you think that supporting one variation of racism (black to white) will make another (white to black) go away? I don't think it will ever go away. Are you saying that the foundation of the US is bad I'm saying that race relations in this country have a terrible foundation. Black people in were initially viewed as property not people of even Americans. So simply saying "Okay everyone, they're not slaves anymore, they're people now" doesn't change how people think or feel. They're just words. You quoted the constitution and said it wasn't practiced as it was written. Yes and no. Perhaps to those it was intended to protect, which is debatable, but slaves (Black people at that time) definitely weren't taken into consideration when it was written. So from jump, all those glorious notion of freedom and liberty aren't really relative to Black people. Later, once Black people were "recognized as people," the constitution was amended to basically include us. I'm not saying the US is all bad. I'm saying race relations are what they are today in large part due to the way things here began. Not what was written on paper but what was practiced.

Push is pretty noisy. So is Jessie Jackson and Sharpton Do you know why PUSH is allowed to make so much noise? Because they're not a threat. And they're certaintly not the voice of the Black community. Neither are Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton any more than Neal Bortz or Newt Gingrich is the voice of the White community. They're on tv/radio so people assume they speak for all of us. I told you this once before, but there's a class action lawsuit against Jesse Jackson for in a nutshell"speaking for all Black people." In addition if you look at the post I responded to, he mentioned JET magazine and BET. Not Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. Thats easy. Happens all the time in sports. You promote yourself, and seperate yourself. In the Military we had a saying "We own the night". It said we were different than other militarys...And it was a promotion. We're not talking about sports we're talking about a group of people. The military example doesn't correlate with races of people. BET, or the Gay network exist. WET would never be allowed since it would be racism.... Tell me, how is allowing a color specific TV station NOT racism? And why is it OK only for Blacks? Did you read my post? It's not a color specific TV station. When was the last time you watched BET? On top of all that it's owned by Viacom which also owns MTV. There are no Black execs at Viacom. There aren't that many White people on BET for the same reason there aren't that many Black people on the Country Music Station. They're just not interested. Honestly, after you sit down and think about it, WET wouldn't differ that much from ABC without "My Wife and Kids." I think his point is that if a white magazine came out with the SAME format as "Jet" it would be labled racist. How is "Jet" not racist? Do they ever profile notable white figures, politicians, musicians, artists, businessmen ect? If not, and by their own charter...Are they not a racist publication? NOBODY would care if there was a white version of JET magazine. No they don't profile notable White figures becasuse Newsweek, Time, Money ect already do. There's no need for the White version of JET or WET. Both entities grew from a need/desire to highlight the accomplishments and achievements of Black people. And, again, if you read JET or watch BET you really wouldn't be that upset. BET is 90% music and JET is nowhere near the caliber of Time or Newsweek. The "you have one, I want one too" way of thinking can be a bit pointless. Except CMT is "County Music Televison", not "White Music TV". You are free to turn it on or not, just like I am free to turn on BET. However CMT was not founded to support whites. It was set to promote County Music...Well, OK it was created to make money just like BET. But if you read a press release where some guys were comming out with WET, and even though the programs didn't interest you, would you consider the station racist There's more to the station than the name. If it was changed to "Urban Entertainment Televison" would we still be having this converstion. Yes. Because when you turn "UET" on you would still see the same thing. BET wasn't founded to "support Blacks;" It was founded to highlight and display things that mattered to Black people be it music, politics, culture ect. Today it's basically music. I remember watching Rap City on BET in '87 from start to finish. No changing the station, or going to the fridge. Why? Because that was the ONLY place I could see videos for the music I liked. I still remember trying to get the entire dance routine down from EPMD's "You Gots to Chill." Today there are definitely more in number and more diverse images of Black people on television but as you said eariler, BET is now a profitable enterprise so nobody is going to simply disband it. As far as the WET press release, I would just laugh. Just because one race does something doesn't make it racist. It's not that simple. There's nothing stopping White people from starting WET. Or do they already realize it sounds hella stupid and there's no need for it.

When you say it's all in people's heads it sounds as if it's not real. I don't feel like that's what you mean but I could be wrong When people stop demanding special treatment based on race (BTW thats racism), and stop blaming all of their problems on what color their skin is...then racism will go away. Let's say that all Black people "stop demanding special treatment (although I don't feel like we do nor do I think you think we ALL do). If there are still people that refuse opportunity to these same Black people, because they're Black, then racism will still exist. It's not going to just go away if Black people turn the other cheek. All the policies and notions we're talking about are as a result of one another. It didn't begin with AA, it didn't begin with jim crow, it didn't begin with the NFL mandate. If you go back to the beginning of the US and examine how the country was founded, what it's principles were then you'll see a clear correlation to what's going on now. It was never intended to be "fair" or "equal." That's part of the foundation, what everything else that comes after it rests on. If you build a home on a poor foundation, no matter what you do from that point it will never be as it was intended.

But having the NFL interview a black for every coaches job *IS*. I would like nothing better for people to be judged solely on merit. The unfortunate thing is people sometimes have to be forced to do what's right. i.e. giving all people an equal opportunity. It would be wonderful if people did it without being forced to do so but that's not the world we live in.

So, what if the black person interviewed does not get the job...Whats next? Claim it was just a "token" interview, and demand that the NFL have a ratio of black coaches? Then he doesn't ge the job and life goes on. That's what's next. We can "what if" all day. If the agreed on policy is in place, and it's being adhered to, then there's nothing to complain about. Cause it easier to say, "Sure, OK". Do the token interview and produce the illusion of equality...till people say "Why have you interviewed "X" number of blacks for coaching jobs, but not hired any?" If they were all "token interviews" then the number of Black coaches wouldn't have increased after the policy was instituted. There is always going to be someone who's unhappy with whatever policy exsist. Whether it's "only d licensed pilots land here" or "after 9pm only 18 year old swimmers allowed."

There is blatant promotion of the black community going on in todays day and age blatant: noisy especially in a vulgar or offensive manner. Assuming you knew the denotative definition of the word before you wrote this, it says a lot about your views of Black people in general. How does one promote it's own community and at the same time, as you said, "segregate themselves from the rest of the world?" If you're promoting yourself how are you trying to keep yourself seperate? You're speaking in circles and once you nick the surface there's little to no truth underneath. BET: Would our community ever accept something named White Entertainment Television station? Hell no. When was the last time you watched BET? It's MTV with Black hosts. How would WET differ from MTV outside the name? But let me play along with your sophomoric rationale... Let's say BET was a super political voice for the Black community, which it's not, and you felt there was a need for White people to be represented on television the same way. Perhaps you would create ABC, NBC, CBS... By default, most entities aren't representing Black people. Do you think JET magazine would allow a white female model in the magazine? Hell no. If Cosmopolitan turned down a black model solely based on skin color would they be labeled a racist organization and slapped with a lawsuit? Hell yes. Care to explain this one? First of all, JET magazine isn't a fashion publication like Cosmo. Second, if you look at the covers of JET they generally have notable Black figures, politicians, musicians, artists, businessmen ect. Third, if you're referring to the JET Beauty of the Week there actually have been White women featured there. So what was your point again? The black man needs to realize that the promotion of "black only" oriented type organizations does not help the cause. BET and JET magazine aren't Black only. There's nothing stopping you from watching or buying a magazine. It sounds like you just aren't that interested in BET's programming or JET's content. The same way I'm not interested in the Country Music Channel.

You dont consider a mandate to interview at least one black candidate for certain NFL positions a hand out? Think for just a second, or scroll back to where I addressed this. It's an interview. An interview guarantees what? Nothing. So what's being handed out? There aren't a finite number of interviews so it's not taking an opportunity away from someone else. If it's such a horrible policy why did the NFL agree to it? All the end of the day, the NFL is a business and isn't going to do ANYTHING that's would jeopardize it's financial security. Including hiring a coach who isn't qualified.

Preach is a bit of an exaggeration. You just keep saying that blacks are "different". Because we are and it's evidenced by this discussion Let me draw some parallels between the discrimination that many blacks perceive in the culture and another scenario. I travel overseas occasionally. Let's say that I go to another country, flaunt my disdain for the local government and culture, treat the locals rudely for no apparent reason and absolutely refuse to show respect for their culture by learning the language, eating the local foods, etc. What kind of treatment should I expect to receive? Beyond that, what kind of treatment should other people from my culture expect to receive as a consequence of my behavior? Anyone who has travelled to other countries knows full well what happens with the above kind of behavior. They also know that not doing those things will get them a far better reception. Why should that NOT apply in this country? For example, let's say that I go to a black neighborhood, act as arrogant as possible and show disrespect toward the locals. Should I expect really warm treatment? Obviously not. Could my behavior affect the way the next white person in that neighborhood is treated? Could be. Suppose a black person refuses to speak proper English, uses foul language around older people and families with kids, dresses like a criminal, flaunts his attitude toward the law, plays rap music with foul language really loud in his car while driving with the windows rolled down, etc. Should that guy expect a really warm welcome? Might his behavior affect others' attitudes toward blacks? That is the situation we have in this country. It is obviously more complex than that, but do you see the parallels? Many blacks in this country have a lot of baggage that few people want to deal with. Can you blame them, or is it simply another case of Whitey just doesn't understand? To tie this back to my paranoia comment, I think a lot of stuff that might be interpreted as racism, is more a case of people being alienated by offensive behavior and bad attitudes on the parts of some blacks. I don't view that as racism at all. Of course me being Whitey, maybe I just don't understand. Walt I understand the parallels but the problems is your "example" is based on the furthest extreme. Remember me saying you only knew one type of Black person? Well that's the one you used in your example and that's the one that pops into your head when someone says "Black guy." "Refuses to speak proper English:" Go back a few pages and you'll see where I corrected you English, but more to the point is this isn't a Black thing. People of all races butcher the English language. "Uses foul language around older people and families with kids:" I suppose Black people have a monopoly on this behavior too. Have you ever listened to the way people speak at DZs? It's basically a bar where people skydive. "Dresses like a criminal:" It seems to me the biggest criminals in history have typically worn suits. Somehow I don't think that's the picture you're painting. How do criminals dress? "Flaunts his attitude toward the law:" *shaking my head and laughing* "Plays rap music with foul language really loud in his car while driving with the windows rolled down:" Yes of course. Think about it. When an artist sells 7 million albums do you think it's all Black people who bought it? No. The funny thing about this is at least once a day I have someone pull up to me at the light playing hip hop loud enough for me to look over... and they're not Black. On top of all this you're example fails again because we're talking about the same country not a foreign country. It all goes back to what I said about your understanding of Black people... you have very little. If that's okay with you then it's fine with me. But understand your perception of us is based almost entirely on stereotypes. It's tantamount to me saying... Suppose a white person is condescending, openly displays a sense of entitlement, is disrespectful to his parents, displays no home training... blah blah blah (I'm wondering how many people reading this realized these are some of the negative stereotypes Blacks have about Whites). I run into a version of this daily. But I'm smart enough to know it's one type of person and not everyone is like that. So, no, you don't understand. No because you're white, but because you haven't taken the time or don't want to take the time to.

Listen. If his point was he disliked lazy Black people, it wouldn't have been an issue and there wouldn't have so many raised eyebrows. That wasn't his point. It's not our version of "white trash." That wasn't what he was saying. As I remember he was talking about working class Black people. As I also recall, he grew up around working class Black people. When you have some time and you're not trying to improve your life by learning and shit, you should rent "Bamboozled."

I thought the same thing. Kirk is still the hardest guy in the galaxy.