Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
1032004

OK this might actually be racist

Recommended Posts

No way that lady should be allowed in another gym to watch and she shouldn't have been allowed to finish the day in the gym (Not saying she was allowed. Just saying I woulda tossed her from the gym.)

Edited by Warren_Haynes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 1032004 said:

Because it’s an Internet forum?  We don’t have enough info for informed disclosure on what’s wrong with Spencer Lee either.

Nothing is wrong with Spencer Lee.

Why do you care what people think about a social situation they know nothing about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never understand why people get upset that there is a topic on here that they don't think should be on here. 

 

I don't like mainstream country music. I don't get mad that it is on the radio. I just don't tune my dial into it and keep playing Tyler Childers at full blast. 

 

Just pass the thread up and click on one of the hundreds of other threads on this board.

Edited by Warren_Haynes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dmm53 said:

Wrestling has long had a challenge related to diversity (race and gender issues especially), though the  US wrestling community is largely in denial about it or prefers to change the subject. 

Look at one of replies above in particular.  Or look at the vitriolic anger directed toward Title IX.

The US wrestling community is extremely white, rural, Republican, religious, and conservative, and doesn't like to think or talk about systemic, institutional, or cultural issues. 

It also largely doesn't have the capacity (history, resources, curiosity) to do so.  It tends to prefer the status quo and to side with authority and authoritarians.  

It tends to flee from matters related to religion, politics, and race even though these subjects are intimately connected with athletics, global competition, the media, and many related topics.

This is absolutely incontestable.  

Other sports have tried to engage the matter: basketball, football, boxing, among many additional ones.

When the issue arose with a kid having his haircut before a match, most of the major wrestling sites (e.g., FLO) ignored it. The vast majority of the wrestling community became very defensive.

When Jordan Borroughs posted an article related to wrestling and Black History, the wrestling forums ignored it. 

These examples can be easily multiplied. 

To folks who live in urban areas or who have moved from very conservative communities to more diverse regions, most of the above points are likely pretty obvious.  

Indeed, one of the reasons why amateur wrestling is threatened as a sport is because so many of the supporters are loathe to embrace change or constructive criticism or critique. 

 

 

 

 

 

Ok how do you fix it? The constant virtue signaling doesn't seem to stop the behavior. People are just ****ty at times. I am not saying that black people aren't at the receiving end of  poor treatment a disproportionate amount of the time. They most certainly are. However the constant race baiting, victim mentality, and posts like this provided with almost no context does not seem to be a great strategy to fix racism. Please explain to me how we engage the matter more productively? I don't see it ever being fixed honestly. There seems to be no end game. No definitive spot where people can claim victory over racism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's possible to have informed, reasoned discourse without grounding it in empirical data. One premise here is that this incident is an instance of racism--or at least racial tension--and that it's a conversation we should be having in the wrestling community. You don't have to agree that the premise is true, or that we should be having this conversation--but your disagreement doesn't make the premise false, and it doesn't mean that the conversation shouldn't be taking place. Try policing less and reasoning more.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wrestlingzen said:

It's possible to have informed, reasoned discourse without grounding it in empirical data. One premise here is that this incident is an instance of racism--or at least racial tension--and that it's a conversation we should be having in the wrestling community. You don't have to agree that the premise is true, or that we should be having this conversation--but your disagreement doesn't make the premise false, and it doesn't mean that the conversation shouldn't be taking place. Try policing less and reasoning more.

 

Stop making sense!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, russelscout said:

Ok how do you fix it? The constant virtue signaling doesn't seem to stop the behavior. People are just ****ty at times. I am not saying that black people aren't at the receiving end of  poor treatment a disproportionate amount of the time. They most certainly are. However the constant race baiting, victim mentality, and posts like this provided with almost no context does not seem to be a great strategy to fix racism. Please explain to me how we engage the matter more productively? I don't see it ever being fixed honestly. There seems to be no end game. No definitive spot where people can claim victory over racism.

Fast forward enough years, and we will all be one race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, wrestlingzen said:

It's possible to have informed, reasoned discourse without grounding it in empirical data. One premise here is that this incident is an instance of racism--or at least racial tension--and that it's a conversation we should be having in the wrestling community. You don't have to agree that the premise is true, or that we should be having this conversation--but your disagreement doesn't make the premise false, and it doesn't mean that the conversation shouldn't be taking place. Try policing less and reasoning more.

 

It doesn't make the premise true either. We always end up arguing intent of the people involved which we cannot know. So how exactly is it informed? It is based entirely on our own biases and the flame war that ensues only further roots us in our preconceived notions. Unless there is a clear example of intent, I have never seen parties walk away from these discussions having learned something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, wrestlingzen said:

It's possible to have informed, reasoned discourse without grounding it in empirical data. One premise here is that this incident is an instance of racism--or at least racial tension--and that it's a conversation we should be having in the wrestling community. You don't have to agree that the premise is true, or that we should be having this conversation--but your disagreement doesn't make the premise false, and it doesn't mean that the conversation shouldn't be taking place. Try policing less and reasoning more.

 

We aren't going to have reasoned discourse about this incident.   It is counter productive to frame that discussion with this incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

We aren't going to have reasoned discourse about this incident.   It is counter productive to frame that discussion with this incident.

I think I get what you're suggesting, and I agree that it's a complicated subject. I also agree that it's super-heightened right now for other reasons, which makes it even more difficult to discuss without getting into a shouting match. That said, I don't think it's counterproductive to engage with these issues in a civil way and see if we can learn something from them, whether personally or as a community. This forum doesn't have to represent the same sh*t show we see on other parts of the web--maybe we can do better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, russelscout said:

It doesn't make the premise true either. We always end up arguing intent of the people involved which we cannot know. So how exactly is it informed? It is based entirely on our own biases and the flame war that ensues only further roots us in our preconceived notions. Unless there is a clear example of intent, I have never seen parties walk away from these discussions having learned something.

I appreciate your perspective, and I think I follow, but I wouldn't say that a premise needs to be true or false (at least in the social world). They can also be starting points for deliberation that we can show to be more or less valid in a particular time and place.

In this case, even looking beyond the woman shown, we can verify that a black man was escorted from the building by authorities. And, if the original post (by Jetlife Dre) has any validity, which I realize would be difficult to verify, there are other instances that do suggest race has been an issue in this particular community--and ways, specifically, that signify intent (e.g., racial slurs). 

All that said: the media environment makes it very difficult to get at the reality of situations like this, and ultimately, it's difficult to know what 'really' happened. It's still worth discussing in my mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just yesterday Flo Radio Live host remarks "take the headcovering off" [as in 'no way Rasheed gets #2 pre-seed if you just take the headcovering off'] when arguing that Shakur Rasheed does not deserve the high pre-seed he's received. I didn't make a post because the vocal members of this forum seem unwilling? unable? reluctant? to engage in civil discourse when it comes to Flo, bias, godawful jokes. Silly though to act as if plausible bias about race does not exist in wrestling contexts. 

N.B. My Flo quotation may well be inaccurate -- I don't have time to redownload the podcast episode.

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, russelscout said:

It doesn't make the premise true either. We always end up arguing intent of the people involved which we cannot know. So how exactly is it informed? It is based entirely on our own biases and the flame war that ensues only further roots us in our preconceived notions. Unless there is a clear example of intent, I have never seen parties walk away from these discussions having learned something.

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jon said:

Just yesterday Flo Radio Live host remarks "take the headcovering off" [my wording may well be inaccurate -- I don't have time to redownload the podcast episode] when arguing that Shakur Rasheed does not deserve the high pre-seed he's received. I didn't make a post because the vocal members of this forum seem unwilling? unable? reluctant? to engage in civil discourse when it comes to Flo, bias, godawful jokes. Silly though to act as if plausible bias about race does not exist in wrestling contexts. 

Maybe no one thought it was a big deal.. I mean, your not even sure what the correct wording is and you are  somehow trying to connect this to a race issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, russelscout said:

Maybe no one thought it was a big deal.. I mean, your not even sure what the correct wording is and you are  somehow trying to connect this to a race issue. 

I'm not sure of the wording because I'd rather not listen again to the podcast episode. The podcast episode does indeed include a suspect comment about 'take off headcovering'. Don't bother listening though -- you'll be dismissive of Flo complaints and/or plausible bias no matter what.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TBar1977 said:

The flo guy isn't racist in any way shape or form. Imo, he'd have said the same exact thing about a white wrestler who wears a head covering. 

I'm not saying the Flo host is racist. I don't even *think* the Flo host is racist. The comment about Rasheed + headcovering though is clumsy. Professional media ought not say such stuff. Objective media ought not say such stuff. It looks like a dogwhistle. Again: I'm *not* saying the Flo guy his racist. But the comment looks suspect. I'm concerned about plausible bias, perceived bias. I can't read the Flo guy's mind. Wrestling media ought not be saying stuff that could be perceived as being biased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jon said:

I'm not sure of the wording because I'd rather not listen again to the podcast episode. The podcast episode does indeed include a suspect comment about 'take off headcovering'. Don't bother listening though -- you'll be dismissive of Flo complaints and/or plausible bias no matter what.

Let me refresh your memory, the Flo guy is Pyles and what you left out are a couple of important things. 

1. He actually said 3 different "stop thew presses" type of things in describing what he was saying. The convo wasn't even about head coverings, it was just a "Stop the press" type of comment. 

2. The guy has said about a million positive things about African American wrestlers. 

It is unreasonable to suggest his comment was in any way racist. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

It is unreasonable to suggest his comment was in any way racist. 

Once more: My mention of the Flo quotation serves to highlight the appearance of bias not the existence of bias. It's about Flo conduct not about Flo racism. Ya shouldn't have to know of the Flo guy's background in order to defend the 'headcovering' comment.

"Grow the sport" happens when persons of all backgrounds, races, hair styles feel comfortable participating, as athletes and as fans and as patrons. FRL personalities talked about 'if you just take off the singlet' and 'if you just take off the headcovering'. The 'singlet' comment [as in 'if you just take off the singlet--if you just ignore the Penn State affiliation--Rasheed doesn't get two seed'] makes sense but the headcovering comment [as in 'if you just take off the headcovering Rasheed doesn't get two seed'] does not. Please reread the prior sentence and poke holes in it if you see fit.

The statement 'if you just take off the headcovering Rasheed doesn't get two seed' suggests that Rasheed received favorable pre-seed *because* he wears headcovering. Which is nonsense. And that's not even what Flo personalities mean to argue. But that is indeed what they said.

Edited by jon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, russelscout said:

It doesn't make the premise true either. We always end up arguing intent of the people involved which we cannot know. So how exactly is it informed? It is based entirely on our own biases and the flame war that ensues only further roots us in our preconceived notions. Unless there is a clear example of intent, I have never seen parties walk away from these discussions having learned something.

This was precisely my point – it was not some call to arms for empirical data. I was merely pointing out that entire diatribe was based on the premise that the white, religious, conservative wrestling community is the root of all these injustices.  As you mentioned, such a premise depends on one’s values, perceptions, and bias. I just don’t see it the same way as dmm.  I can agree with the outcome, that we should be discussing these things, without relying on all of the political and religious undertones. 

How has the wrestling community been doing lately? I view the rapid growth in women’s wrestling and the expansion of Beat the Streets into more urban centers to be a positive innovation for wrestling.  And these things don’t seem to be consistent with a wrestling community that is wholly apprehensive to change. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×