Not sure where I'll go with this, but I am really enjoying the revived interest in the 60s generated by MAD MEN (and book clubs recommending Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid by Bill Bryson). My problem is that for those of us who lived the 60s as "formative years" (I was born in 1953), the present in the show is prelude to our past and long past history to our present.
The lack of choices for women in MadMen is more disappointing because we know how much has changed but I worry how little has been accomplished. Women have infinite choices today, but children are often just one of them. I've started a new venture offering my "sitting services" to professional women as a 'last minute mom'. I realized that I enjoyed children and flexibility, so this would be a useful way to combine my need to fill my time productively with my preference for doing things I want to do. The hard part is how MANY women call themselves "stay at home moms" who in fact want childcare help every day....
Mad Men comments on Jacqueline Kennedy that women would hate her as the better looking sister who married better than you....but we all know that turned out not to be true. Women wanted to BE Jacqueline Kennedy as she spoke multiple languages, raised two children (and publicly endured fertility issues), and had the perfect home and lived in Camelot. With history as prelude, we conveniently forget that Jackie had a philandering husband (See Don Draper, Roger Sterling and Pete in Mad Men). When she lost her husband, Jackie sold out to Aristotle O to preserve her lifestyle (or presumably that played a role in the decision making).
So -- when we look at the limited choices for women in Mad Men - housewives (Betty and Roger's wife --interesting term ...), career women (Rachel), working girls (Joan and Peggy), young wives (Pete's wife Trudy and others by reference only) -- we see limited options but clear expectations. So what's changed? The options aren't limited, but aren't the expectations the same?
So let's talk 60s.....Thoughts?
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Googling "Victimization"
First Entry: Bureau of Crime Statistics -- good news!
- Since 1994, violent crime rates have declined, reaching the lowest level ever recorded in 2005.
- Property crime rates continue to decline
- According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Reports,--
The violent crime rate increased 1.3% from 2004 to 2005. From 1996 to 2005 the rate fell 26.3%. - The property crime rate decreased 2.4% from 2004 to 2005. From 1996 to 2005, the rate fell 22.9%.
Second Entry: Victimization
- Victimization and Race
Young Black Male Victims (BJS Brief, 1994) - Victimization and Gender
Murder by spouses (BJS study summary)
Murder by spouses (BJS study, full)
Violence Against Women, '95
Victimology/Social Work (Patricia McClendon's homepage)
Any questions, drop a note to: Critical Criminology - critcrim@sun.soci.niu.edu
The third entry -- now we're getting into it:
The Sexual Victimization of College Women
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTMLWhat is the extent of visual and verbal sexual victimization? ... victimization of college women and have conducted a number of studies. ...
The fourth entry:
The Trauma of Victimization - Help after a Victimization ...
There is often financial loss and physical injury connected with victimization, but the most devastating part for many victims is the emotional pain caused ...
The fifth entry:
Empowerment and Victimization - the power of choice
When we say I have to, we are making a victim statement. A column about how owning the power of choice can help to empower an individual - by codependency ...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I don't need to continue -- you get the drift. The concept is far-reaching and has lots of perspectives. You can study crime to identify its victims; you can consider society and how it creates victims. You can identify a segment of society that is victimized by some circumstance or event or social culture...that could range from statistical analysis to a personal journey.
I was delighted to see that it was only the 4th entry that started talking about pain and help for victims, and the 5th entry is about empowerment.
Now, I'm not going to comment on the individual entries as far as the quality of their data or the candor of the testimony. What I do want to talk about is the reality of victimization and the choices we make that begin to determine if we fall into one of those statistical categories of victim or we take on the burden of being victimized.
While becoming a crime statistic is not something we can or would seek, or even to avoid, becoming a victim is a subtler outcome. Today's Virginia Tech tragedies bear that out as I watch the interviews. 33 deaths create some very ugly crime statistics ... all victims of senseless violence. The scope of the devastation -- the pain of the families watching and waiting for news -- all more unsettling than I can put to words.
As a parent of 3 20-somethings, I cannot fathom the pain and terror associated with a random act of violence meted out on a college campus. But while I sit here watching interviews, I am strongly affected by watching some of the survivors talk about the day. While I know there are a great many back in their rooms or heading home, terrified and stricken with fear, these students who have ventured out to talk about the day, the experience, the survival -- they are on the path to healing. They experienced the event -- some even wounded -- but they are not showing signs of being victims. What defines that? What empowers that choice?
I've got some thinking to do. More later.
Friday, April 13, 2007
Now Terry Moran is taking away my joy
I hate to add to his readership, but I've had a hard time writing today except to try to figure out how to get this guy off this air.......Terry Moran writes about how the Duke team doesn't deserve your sympathy because of the special treatment they got from the legal system....
Technorati Profile
Technorati Profile
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Worth repeating ESPN's take on the two cases
For the sake of comparison, here's a sincere, selfless, and powerfully fearless apology from ESPN's Jemele Hill:
I never wrote it, but I felt it -- which is just as bad. I said it in private discussions with friends, some of whom tried to get me to see the whole picture, not just the picture I wanted to see.My being a black woman, my knowing too many athletes who treat women like items to be purchased in a vending machine, and my witnessing enough athlete rape trials where accusers are overwhelmed by their fame and fortune -- it all tainted my perception and made me doubt your innocence.I feel stupid now.Will the media spend as much time clearing the names of Dave Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann as it did publicizing the crimes they were accused of committing?I could blame Durham County district attorney Mike Nifong, but that would be too easy. Oh, he's a lout, no doubt. He played upon the emotions of a community and its long-held hostilities, and put his reelection bid above morality and common sense. He played all of us and should be punished with nothing less than disbarment.I could blame Jesse Jackson, who I have hoped for years would disappear to a faraway land where CNN won't follow. As usual, Jesse showed up and showed out. He incited the masses and then left everyone else to sort out the wreckage. And if Jesse wants to gain an ounce of the credibility he no longer has, he would find the nearest camera -- and we know he's good at that -- and express sorrow with all the sincerity he can muster. But the day Jesse apologizes for causing a scene is the day Rosie O'Donnell wears a muzzle.But if there is anything to be learned from Don Imus' fall, it's that real apologies are never accompanied by rationalizations.So to Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans, the three Duke lacrosse players whose lives were mangled by an unsupported rape accusation, I say two of the hardest words in the English language:I'm sorry.It's not enough, and I won't pretend that it is. For the last year, your lives and those of your families have been more difficult than any of us can possibly imagine. I'll never know what it was like walking around normal society labeled a rapist. I'll never know what it's like to lose everything -- your school, your program and your life -- because of one unproven accusation.You deserve all of that back and then some, but unfortunately, you won't get it. You have every right to not trust anyone and think less of people. Duke University abandoned you. An overzealous prosecutor tormented you. A community, a nation, didn't believe you. Journalists everywhere, sensing ratings and salivating over the salaciousness of black strippers and white athletes, chose to keep you under attack.Not that this is a contest to see who was wronged the most, but the Rutgers women's basketball team at least received justice, because Imus was suspended and dropped by MSNBC, which simulcasts his morning show. Plenty of people are outraged on their behalf.But who is outraged on your behalf? What justice will you receive? Will the same networks that willingly aided in destroying your reputations now give you airtime to vent your frustrations? Will Jessie Jackson now offer the three of you a free scholarship like he did the "victim," since he helped assist in your battered reputation?Maybe the only modicum of fairness you have received is that the News & Observer in Raleigh decided to print the name of your accuser. I don't normally advocate that the names of alleged victims be printed, but it feels right in this instance.I know I'd certainly like to ask your accuser a few questions, even though she stood by her story as North Carolina's attorney general vehemently proclaimed your innocence. Does she understand she has tanked not only her credibility, but that of other women, too? Does she understand the next time a woman comes forward with an allegation this serious, all of our minds will scroll back to this case, and we will be less inclined to believe her? Does she know women with legitimate sexual-assault complaints will look at this furor and decide silence is best?I can't deny that your race, gender and class have everything to do with how you were treated then and how you are treated now. Some people believe white men are exempt from sympathy and incapable of being maligned, so they will not swallow their pride and offer you the decency you should have received in the first place. Yes, you made an unwise decision to entertain strippers at a residence, but that just makes you guilty of being like 90 percent of college males.There will be a lot of finger-pointing in the coming days and weeks about whose fault all of this was. The media will analyze each other. Civil-rights leaders who claim to be against all injustice will stay silent. Hopefully, you will be able to regain a fraction of the life you once had.I'm glad the story of your innocence and the Rutgers situation unfolded the same week. If anyone felt a sense of victory over Imus' rebuke, they should look at what happened to you and know it will be a long time before we can truly celebrate.
Posted by LieStoppers at 5:35 PM
I never wrote it, but I felt it -- which is just as bad. I said it in private discussions with friends, some of whom tried to get me to see the whole picture, not just the picture I wanted to see.My being a black woman, my knowing too many athletes who treat women like items to be purchased in a vending machine, and my witnessing enough athlete rape trials where accusers are overwhelmed by their fame and fortune -- it all tainted my perception and made me doubt your innocence.I feel stupid now.Will the media spend as much time clearing the names of Dave Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann as it did publicizing the crimes they were accused of committing?I could blame Durham County district attorney Mike Nifong, but that would be too easy. Oh, he's a lout, no doubt. He played upon the emotions of a community and its long-held hostilities, and put his reelection bid above morality and common sense. He played all of us and should be punished with nothing less than disbarment.I could blame Jesse Jackson, who I have hoped for years would disappear to a faraway land where CNN won't follow. As usual, Jesse showed up and showed out. He incited the masses and then left everyone else to sort out the wreckage. And if Jesse wants to gain an ounce of the credibility he no longer has, he would find the nearest camera -- and we know he's good at that -- and express sorrow with all the sincerity he can muster. But the day Jesse apologizes for causing a scene is the day Rosie O'Donnell wears a muzzle.But if there is anything to be learned from Don Imus' fall, it's that real apologies are never accompanied by rationalizations.So to Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans, the three Duke lacrosse players whose lives were mangled by an unsupported rape accusation, I say two of the hardest words in the English language:I'm sorry.It's not enough, and I won't pretend that it is. For the last year, your lives and those of your families have been more difficult than any of us can possibly imagine. I'll never know what it was like walking around normal society labeled a rapist. I'll never know what it's like to lose everything -- your school, your program and your life -- because of one unproven accusation.You deserve all of that back and then some, but unfortunately, you won't get it. You have every right to not trust anyone and think less of people. Duke University abandoned you. An overzealous prosecutor tormented you. A community, a nation, didn't believe you. Journalists everywhere, sensing ratings and salivating over the salaciousness of black strippers and white athletes, chose to keep you under attack.Not that this is a contest to see who was wronged the most, but the Rutgers women's basketball team at least received justice, because Imus was suspended and dropped by MSNBC, which simulcasts his morning show. Plenty of people are outraged on their behalf.But who is outraged on your behalf? What justice will you receive? Will the same networks that willingly aided in destroying your reputations now give you airtime to vent your frustrations? Will Jessie Jackson now offer the three of you a free scholarship like he did the "victim," since he helped assist in your battered reputation?Maybe the only modicum of fairness you have received is that the News & Observer in Raleigh decided to print the name of your accuser. I don't normally advocate that the names of alleged victims be printed, but it feels right in this instance.I know I'd certainly like to ask your accuser a few questions, even though she stood by her story as North Carolina's attorney general vehemently proclaimed your innocence. Does she understand she has tanked not only her credibility, but that of other women, too? Does she understand the next time a woman comes forward with an allegation this serious, all of our minds will scroll back to this case, and we will be less inclined to believe her? Does she know women with legitimate sexual-assault complaints will look at this furor and decide silence is best?I can't deny that your race, gender and class have everything to do with how you were treated then and how you are treated now. Some people believe white men are exempt from sympathy and incapable of being maligned, so they will not swallow their pride and offer you the decency you should have received in the first place. Yes, you made an unwise decision to entertain strippers at a residence, but that just makes you guilty of being like 90 percent of college males.There will be a lot of finger-pointing in the coming days and weeks about whose fault all of this was. The media will analyze each other. Civil-rights leaders who claim to be against all injustice will stay silent. Hopefully, you will be able to regain a fraction of the life you once had.I'm glad the story of your innocence and the Rutgers situation unfolded the same week. If anyone felt a sense of victory over Imus' rebuke, they should look at what happened to you and know it will be a long time before we can truly celebrate.
Posted by LieStoppers at 5:35 PM
Coming to a sad conclusion
Today, the Duke Board Chairman sent an email to all of us in the Duke community...and Robert Steele, this native Durham resident shared the burden with Richard Brodhead, assuring us all that this has been a tough situation, but that the trustees were regularly and routinely consulted on the process and decisions. He wants to take some of the heat off Dr. Brodhead I guess.
Well, after reading his email, and comments about what Dr. Brodhead said in response to yesterday's INNOCENT declaration, I understand that they want a "do over" without having to go over all the steps they took to get to today.
Despite the public outcry for his ouster (public on the internet, anyway), I have always stood by the notion that Dr. Brodhead was in a no-win situation -- and whichever choice he made, he had a pretty good chance it would be aggressively second-guessed. Once the 3 players were indicted, I don't think the Administration could do much on their behalf, up to and including questioning the process. Duke did disclose that the DPD had told Duke's security folks that this was not a reliable witness and would not turn into much. When the legal authority of the city, Mike Nifong, goes onto national platforms saying he was sure a rape had taken place, I do not think the University could have done anything but torch more irrational anger.
My problem now is that despite the conciliatory comments about the kids and their courageous fight, and the satisfaction with the successful outcome (and no thought about lawsuits), there is a noticeable gap in the Duke Board Response: Mike Pressler.
I'll digress a bit to talk about another coach who is doing the talk show rounds right now: Vivian Stringer. This woman is being glorified for her support of her players. She is being given a forum to position her program as one of great achievement and academic integrity -- for "remarkable girls."
Well -- Mike Pressler believed HIS players. He said trust was part of their relationship, and he was fired. And unlike Vivian Stringer, who is simply speaking out on behalf of hurt feelings, Mike Pressler was willing to believe what his players told him and stood behind them in the process. The University told us he had resigned. I think that might overstate reality.
We now know that the trust he had was well founded. The "fantastic lies" of David Evans indictment speech have been uncovered. And gullible Mike Pressler, 16 year employee of Duke University , is gone. Oh -- by the way -- he was right to believe them. The State of North Carolina agrees that the allegations were fantastic lies -- and these boys were cooperating and telling the truth. Mr. Steele's letter today, and Dr. Brodhead's conciliatory (self-conciliatory I think, because no one either one of those two boys would come back to Duke unless it moves out of the Durham Police Department jurisdiction) does not mention the wrong done to the coach.
Despite the conciliatory Administrative effort, and the state proclaiming that no crime was committed (NOT that insufficient evidence exists), here's what Associate Professor of Duke Biology Sheryl Broverman had to say:
"Since we haven't gone through a normal legal process, we don't know what really happened. The fact the charges were dropped doesn't mean nothing happened. It just means information wasn't collected appropriately enough to go forward."
(Apparently tenure only comes to those who teach -- whatever they teach. Following are excerpts from Duke's Biology faculty information:
Sherryl A Broverman Associate Professor of the Practice
Ph.D Indiana University, 1990
919-668-0228 sbrover@duke.edu
104 Bio Sci
Academic Integrity Council, 2006 - present Meet monthly to analyze surveys on academic integrity and cheating, devise new honor code, advise provost on academic integrity matters.
dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd
Couldn't resist updating you on our most recent legal analyst's conclusions about the INNOCENCE of DUKE STUDENTS.
Anyway -- Mike Pressler lost his job for believing and defending his players against allegations made by a part-time exotic dancer and social escort in the courthouse. Vivian Stringer is defending her players against an inappropriate remark made out of their presence on a drive-time radio program using "street" slang popularized in the African American rooted Hip Hop culture by (ironically) a part-time philanthropist and talk show host who is now person who is suddenly out of work. See the difference?
[This is like the old urban legend about Kennedy and Lincoln and all the "amazing" coincidences - both on coins, both assassinated, congress in 1846 and 1946, elected in 1860 and 1960 - Google Kennedy and Lincoln for more fascinating coincidences. ]
Don Imus: A White male who made inappropriate comments about black hos
Chrystal Mangum: A black ho who made inappropriate comments about white males.
The Object of the comments:
Rutgers Basketball Team; reigning runner up in a Division 1 NCAA Sport, basketball
Duke Lacrosse Team; (then) reigning runner-up in a Division 1 NCAA Sport, lacrosse
Common denominator: Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton
In both situations, they defended the black females. In the Imus case, they championed the fact that these women were student athletes deserving respect. In the Duke case, they championed the (never actually met) exotic dancer for her struggle against disreputable (white) student athletes.
Some have called for Imus to pay tuitions for the Rutgers girls.
Jesse Jackson offered top ay tuition for the Durham girl.
Don Imus got fired for joking about the Rutgers girls.
Mike Pressler got fired for defending the Duke boys.
The Duke boys were exonerated on April 11.
Don Imus was fired on April 11.
Does anyone find this pattern troubling?
Anyway -- Duke needs to make their part right. Everyone says there will be lawsuits forever, but if the Duke Board really wants to make this right, they will pre-empt any reason for a wrongful termination suit (which Pressler likely won't file, because he wants to coach lacrosse and doesn't want to be vilified any further) and offer to reinstate Mike Pressler, or at least to make a public apology for his taking the bullet for an incident that never occured. The MORAL high ground means conciliation with ALL injured parties.
So Duke -- Shut up the Biology woman and apologize to the Lacrosse Man....and I promise I won't make any more Imus-Duke references.
Well, after reading his email, and comments about what Dr. Brodhead said in response to yesterday's INNOCENT declaration, I understand that they want a "do over" without having to go over all the steps they took to get to today.
Despite the public outcry for his ouster (public on the internet, anyway), I have always stood by the notion that Dr. Brodhead was in a no-win situation -- and whichever choice he made, he had a pretty good chance it would be aggressively second-guessed. Once the 3 players were indicted, I don't think the Administration could do much on their behalf, up to and including questioning the process. Duke did disclose that the DPD had told Duke's security folks that this was not a reliable witness and would not turn into much. When the legal authority of the city, Mike Nifong, goes onto national platforms saying he was sure a rape had taken place, I do not think the University could have done anything but torch more irrational anger.
My problem now is that despite the conciliatory comments about the kids and their courageous fight, and the satisfaction with the successful outcome (and no thought about lawsuits), there is a noticeable gap in the Duke Board Response: Mike Pressler.
I'll digress a bit to talk about another coach who is doing the talk show rounds right now: Vivian Stringer. This woman is being glorified for her support of her players. She is being given a forum to position her program as one of great achievement and academic integrity -- for "remarkable girls."
Well -- Mike Pressler believed HIS players. He said trust was part of their relationship, and he was fired. And unlike Vivian Stringer, who is simply speaking out on behalf of hurt feelings, Mike Pressler was willing to believe what his players told him and stood behind them in the process. The University told us he had resigned. I think that might overstate reality.
We now know that the trust he had was well founded. The "fantastic lies" of David Evans indictment speech have been uncovered. And gullible Mike Pressler, 16 year employee of Duke University , is gone. Oh -- by the way -- he was right to believe them. The State of North Carolina agrees that the allegations were fantastic lies -- and these boys were cooperating and telling the truth. Mr. Steele's letter today, and Dr. Brodhead's conciliatory (self-conciliatory I think, because no one either one of those two boys would come back to Duke unless it moves out of the Durham Police Department jurisdiction) does not mention the wrong done to the coach.
Despite the conciliatory Administrative effort, and the state proclaiming that no crime was committed (NOT that insufficient evidence exists), here's what Associate Professor of Duke Biology Sheryl Broverman had to say:
"Since we haven't gone through a normal legal process, we don't know what really happened. The fact the charges were dropped doesn't mean nothing happened. It just means information wasn't collected appropriately enough to go forward."
(Apparently tenure only comes to those who teach -- whatever they teach. Following are excerpts from Duke's Biology faculty information:
Sherryl A Broverman Associate Professor of the Practice
Ph.D Indiana University, 1990
919-668-0228 sbrover@duke.edu
104 Bio Sci
Research Interests: science literacy for non-majors; science education reform; the interaction of gender, education and global health (WOW ! I'm impressed...???)
- How inclusion of civic issues, international connections, and social engagement alters the cognitive and affective responses of non- major science students to science education.
- How course design impacts the demographics (gender, race, etc) of student enrollment in elective science courses.
- Developing international science courses.
- The factors that impact educational outcomes for girls in rural Kenya.
Current projects: Creating linked curricula on HIV/AIDS with Egerton University in Kenya., Developing international research service learning in the sciences.
Recent Publications
Ogwang-Odhimabo, R, and S.A. Broverman, Globalizing the Microbiology Curriculum, ASM News, vol. 71 no. 10 (2005), pp. 448-449 [author's comments].
Broverman, S. and G. Prestwich, Fast ion-exchange membrane purification of a microsomal protein., Biotechniques, vol. 19 no. 6 (1995), pp. 874-875 .
Broverman, S. and P. Meneely, Meiotic mutants that cause a polar decrease in recombination on the X chromosome in Caenorhabditis elegans., Genetics, vol. 136 (1994), pp. 119-127 .
Academic Integrity Council, 2006 - present Meet monthly to analyze surveys on academic integrity and cheating, devise new honor code, advise provost on academic integrity matters.
dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd
Couldn't resist updating you on our most recent legal analyst's conclusions about the INNOCENCE of DUKE STUDENTS.
Anyway -- Mike Pressler lost his job for believing and defending his players against allegations made by a part-time exotic dancer and social escort in the courthouse. Vivian Stringer is defending her players against an inappropriate remark made out of their presence on a drive-time radio program using "street" slang popularized in the African American rooted Hip Hop culture by (ironically) a part-time philanthropist and talk show host who is now person who is suddenly out of work. See the difference?
[This is like the old urban legend about Kennedy and Lincoln and all the "amazing" coincidences - both on coins, both assassinated, congress in 1846 and 1946, elected in 1860 and 1960 - Google Kennedy and Lincoln for more fascinating coincidences. ]
Don Imus: A White male who made inappropriate comments about black hos
Chrystal Mangum: A black ho who made inappropriate comments about white males.
The Object of the comments:
Rutgers Basketball Team; reigning runner up in a Division 1 NCAA Sport, basketball
Duke Lacrosse Team; (then) reigning runner-up in a Division 1 NCAA Sport, lacrosse
Common denominator: Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton
In both situations, they defended the black females. In the Imus case, they championed the fact that these women were student athletes deserving respect. In the Duke case, they championed the (never actually met) exotic dancer for her struggle against disreputable (white) student athletes.
Some have called for Imus to pay tuitions for the Rutgers girls.
Jesse Jackson offered top ay tuition for the Durham girl.
Don Imus got fired for joking about the Rutgers girls.
Mike Pressler got fired for defending the Duke boys.
The Duke boys were exonerated on April 11.
Don Imus was fired on April 11.
Does anyone find this pattern troubling?
Anyway -- Duke needs to make their part right. Everyone says there will be lawsuits forever, but if the Duke Board really wants to make this right, they will pre-empt any reason for a wrongful termination suit (which Pressler likely won't file, because he wants to coach lacrosse and doesn't want to be vilified any further) and offer to reinstate Mike Pressler, or at least to make a public apology for his taking the bullet for an incident that never occured. The MORAL high ground means conciliation with ALL injured parties.
So Duke -- Shut up the Biology woman and apologize to the Lacrosse Man....and I promise I won't make any more Imus-Duke references.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Duke Lacrosse and Rutgers Basketball
As I listened to Robert Johnson, the Founder of Black Entertainment Television tell me that Don Imus needed to be fired because Black America just wasn't going to let what he said go unchallenged...I contemplated just when the world decided that only minorities were allowed to be outraged by injustice?
In March of 2006, 46 Duke Lacrosse players -- all division one athletes, members of a highly successful program coming off an NCAA final appearance, but predominantly white, had a party. Unfortunately, these young men -- winners all -- exercised poor judgment and hired two exotic dancers to entertain them during their spring break from college.
We all know the rest of the story. Reverend Jesse Jackson offered to pay the tuition of the victim. Despite all protestations to the contrary, this black victim (whose own companion that evening said it was a "crock") was presumed honest -- and the players were presumed guilty.
Fast forward to Don Imus, whose life and career has been built bashing and mocking people on the public airwaves (Note: Until this incident, he was considered a hero to the public airwaves as he did not move to Satellite radio where, like Howard Stern, he could rant on whatever topic he chose). Don Imus has ended his career because he made extremely inappropriate comments about young division one athletes on the Rutgers Basketball team. Their coach, Vivian Stringer, has come publicly and called for justice for her team. She is a hero.
Mike Pressler, the Duke Lacrosse coach -- who was not present at the party -- was hoisted onto Reverend Jackson's petard by a liberal media and faculty and fired by Duke for what an (ironically but now publicly acknowledged) African American woman who had the DNA of 3+ men on her person said his students did. (Now -- that's a black ho -- right? )
Imus IS a symptom of a larger problem -- but the problem isn't just about the way the main stream media and liberals are offended. It's about how they pander to minorities. You cannot go crazy that Don Imus uses what is clearly "hip hop" references to athletes, but then ignore the fact that Al Sharpton was part of the "rush to judgment" in the Duke Lacrosse case. WHO was there in the main stream media to defend the WHITE LACROSSE PLAYERS -- who were accused of a crime and put through a sham process to secure black votes in a polarized Southern town.
Doesn't this irony bother anyone? Don Imus made a stupid, back-handed reference to a team of basketball players. He didn't crusade against the tatoos or the hairdos -- he made an old-man stupid racist remark. These girls were not hurt except by the repeated reference to his comment on every news program. Did any of these girls HEAR Don Imus's show that morning??? Doubtful.
Did Al Sharpton care who he hurt when he championed Tawana Brawley? Did Jesse Jackson rethink his offer to pay for college for Chrystal Mangum, the Duke accuser? Who did HE hurt?
Don't hurt the feelings of black basketball players with a stupid and callous comment on a drive-time radio program -- ruining their moment of glory. But go ahead and destroy the LIVES of 3 Duke lacrosse players and end the career of their 16-year coach.
I don't get it. Can anyone help me through this?
In March of 2006, 46 Duke Lacrosse players -- all division one athletes, members of a highly successful program coming off an NCAA final appearance, but predominantly white, had a party. Unfortunately, these young men -- winners all -- exercised poor judgment and hired two exotic dancers to entertain them during their spring break from college.
We all know the rest of the story. Reverend Jesse Jackson offered to pay the tuition of the victim. Despite all protestations to the contrary, this black victim (whose own companion that evening said it was a "crock") was presumed honest -- and the players were presumed guilty.
Fast forward to Don Imus, whose life and career has been built bashing and mocking people on the public airwaves (Note: Until this incident, he was considered a hero to the public airwaves as he did not move to Satellite radio where, like Howard Stern, he could rant on whatever topic he chose). Don Imus has ended his career because he made extremely inappropriate comments about young division one athletes on the Rutgers Basketball team. Their coach, Vivian Stringer, has come publicly and called for justice for her team. She is a hero.
Mike Pressler, the Duke Lacrosse coach -- who was not present at the party -- was hoisted onto Reverend Jackson's petard by a liberal media and faculty and fired by Duke for what an (ironically but now publicly acknowledged) African American woman who had the DNA of 3+ men on her person said his students did. (Now -- that's a black ho -- right? )
Imus IS a symptom of a larger problem -- but the problem isn't just about the way the main stream media and liberals are offended. It's about how they pander to minorities. You cannot go crazy that Don Imus uses what is clearly "hip hop" references to athletes, but then ignore the fact that Al Sharpton was part of the "rush to judgment" in the Duke Lacrosse case. WHO was there in the main stream media to defend the WHITE LACROSSE PLAYERS -- who were accused of a crime and put through a sham process to secure black votes in a polarized Southern town.
Doesn't this irony bother anyone? Don Imus made a stupid, back-handed reference to a team of basketball players. He didn't crusade against the tatoos or the hairdos -- he made an old-man stupid racist remark. These girls were not hurt except by the repeated reference to his comment on every news program. Did any of these girls HEAR Don Imus's show that morning??? Doubtful.
Did Al Sharpton care who he hurt when he championed Tawana Brawley? Did Jesse Jackson rethink his offer to pay for college for Chrystal Mangum, the Duke accuser? Who did HE hurt?
Don't hurt the feelings of black basketball players with a stupid and callous comment on a drive-time radio program -- ruining their moment of glory. But go ahead and destroy the LIVES of 3 Duke lacrosse players and end the career of their 16-year coach.
I don't get it. Can anyone help me through this?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
