Thread: Gruden out in Vegas

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Why would the NYT be slapped with a lawsuit? They have no legal obligation to keep the info they were given private once it was leaked to them. They had every right to report on it. Little thing called the first amendment, ever heard of it?

We don’t know the whole story yet. This is too early to determine how they’ve got the information. of course it could’ve been all legal, we just don’t know that...

Originally Posted by Tned

That's the thing. Every one of us have bashed groups we dislike, whether that is ethnic, race, political, gender, or the ***** known as Roger Goodell (I really find it ironic anyone on here would criticize him for that considering how many people have used similar derogatory terms for him or maybe Ellis or others).

We are all fine when we bash the groups we think are bash worthy, but critical of others who bash groups we think should be protected.

Some groups deserve more protections than others. You can't choose your race. Or where you're born. Science is still answering the question as to how much of sexuality is a choice. Etc. There are pretty clear cut groups that fall into that category.

Which circles back as to how many people have issues with what Gruden said. Because Those were never okay. Yeah, you might not have gotten a ton of pushback on calling someone the F word depending on where you were, but that was never an okay thing to do. It's not okay to play into a racist trope. Or to denigrate women joining a profession. For all of the 'where do you draw the line' arguments, those are pretty standard lines not to cross. And for evidence of that, how many people are making the arguments of "Where do you draw the line, but for the record I don't support that shit'.

And the argument, in my opinion, or "well we've all done it," isn't a great argument. Most people from time-to-time speed when driving. A lot of people get upset and lose their temper and lash out. The frequency is less of an argument for it and more against it, especially when you're supposed to lead people that you're bashing, interact with people you're bashing, and are the face of a franchise/network.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

How so?

Go up to a black person and just say the phrase "N word", go up to another one and use the actual word, and report back to us how differently those two interactions go.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Go up to a black person and just say the phrase "N word", go up to another one and use the actual word, and report back to us how differently those two interactions go.

You've completely missed the point of what I was saying.

Not surprising, but what do you think when someone says "N word".

It's not rocket science. It's basically saying the word without saying it.

Kind of like saying F.U.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

You've completely missed the point of what I was saying.

Not surprising, but what do you think when someone says "N word".

It's not rocket science.

Yes, obviously we know what's being referenced. But when discussing the usage of the word in a theoretical sense, you have to have some sort of nomenclature to reference it.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

You've completely missed the point of what I was saying.

Not surprising, but what do you think when someone says "N word".

It's not rocket science. It's basically saying the word without saying it.

It's not an unfair point. I think it makes it the most palatable it could be. You could say "the most egregious racial slur," or some other signaler but it would probably be the same.

Interesting point, Joe.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Yes, obviously we know what's being referenced. But when discussing the usage of the word in a theoretical sense, you have to have some sort of nomenclature to reference it.

Really? Thanks, professor.

marxists erasing him from video games now.

Originally Posted by King87

It's not an unfair point. I think it makes it the most palatable it could be. You could say "the most egregious racial slur," or some other signaler but it would probably be the same.

Interesting point, Joe.

It's nothing more than avoiding saying the actual word, but everyone knows what you're really saying.

Like G.T.F.O. (that might be censored here)

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

Really? Thanks, professor.

I guess I don't understand your point? Are you saying it should be ok to say the word if we're just discussing it in the abstract and not directing it at anyone? Or are you saying we shouldn't reference the term whatsoever?

The point of using the phrase "n word" isn't to try to hide the term being referenced. It's to be able to discuss the use of the term in the abstract without actually saying the word that many people find hurtful.

Originally Posted by ShaneFalco

marxists erasing him from video games now.

EA and their player base aren't political proponents of making the means of production public, or activating the withering state, or creating a classless society, or any other hallmark of Marxism.

Originally Posted by King87

EA and their player base aren't political proponents of making the means of production public, or activating the withering state, or creating a classless society, or any other hallmark of Marxism.

Yeah but it's a fun buzzword for Shane to use so he can sound smart and edgy. Who cares if it's being used correctly?

Idk why people are so interested in dying on really dumb hills, like the ability for people to say bigoted things without facing any consequences.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

It's nothing more than avoiding saying the actual word, but everyone knows what you're really saying.

Like G.T.F.O. (that might be censored here)

Usually people say things like F.U or G.T.F.O to avoid it being caught by a censor, not to discuss those terms in the abstract. There's no practical differece been telling someone **** you or F.U.

All the same, if you were to tell a black person "you're a filthy n word!' it would be no different than using the word since you're still using it as an attack either way.

But if you're discussing a taboo word in the abstract, you have to use something as a placeholder.