Jump to content
Katie

Revisiting the racism at Team Foxcatcher

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, Katie said:

It’s pretty simple.

Discrimination on the basis of race is racism. Intentionally killing an innocent person is murder. 

Mental illness might affect how you deal with racism or murder. But the bottom line is that you are dealing with racism and murder. 
 

 

You are citing a dictionary definition of racism.  Affirmative Action, NAACP, etc are racist by this definition, but may not directly negatively impact the group they  are discriminating.

Edited by jchapman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Katie said:

Oh really?

Insanity can be a defense to civil rights violations and to murder. But all that means is that people determined to be insane will be treated differently than other civil rights violators and other murderers.

treated differently and then released upon being "cured"...

it's almost like some people don't have a clue what they're even wanting to say...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2020 at 10:48 AM, jchapman said:

You are citing a dictionary definition of racism.  Affirmative Action is racist by this definition, but may not directly negatively impact the group it is discriminating.

Affirmative action apparently negatively impacts Asians and whites on the basis of their race, which could very well meet the definition of racism, even though the harm is not the aim of the practice. It may depend on the precise definition of racism at issue.

But — if it does meet the definition of racism — it’s a legal form of racism. Whether it’s a morally wrong form of racism is a political judgment.  At this point, most people seem to think it is not morally wrong.

I’d add that universities discriminate based on all sorts of factors. They seek geographic diversity, they want veterans, they want international students, they want men and women, they want athletes, they want children of donors, they want children from families with a history of attending the school, etc.

Edited by Katie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, LJB said:

treated differently and then released upon being "cured"...

it's almost like some people don't have a clue what they're even wanting to say...

You start talking about the courts, but you don’t understand the concept of a defense to legal liability, so I suppose the clueless person is you.

Share this post


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

You start talking about the courts, but you don’t understand the concept of a defense to legal liability, so I suppose the clueless person is you.

this coming from someone who can not comprehend the impact of intent...

and clearly bases their own morals on which way the wind blows...

you are a credit to whoever...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LJB said:

this coming from someone who can not comprehend the impact of intent...

and clearly bases their own morals on which way the wind blows...

you are a credit to whoever...

When it comes to murder, intent plays a role in determining the type of murder involved (first degree, second degree, etc). I’m not as familiar with civil rights violations.

But everywhere in the law, insanity is treated as a defense to legal liability, not as evidence that the underlying violation never happened.

Share this post


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

When it comes to murder, intent plays a role in determining the type of murder involved (first degree, second degree, etc). I’m not as familiar with civil rights violations.

But everywhere in the law, insanity is treated as a defense to legal liability, not as evidence that the underlying violation never happened.

uuuummmm...

duh?

do you really feel proud of yourself typing that while also missing the point entirely?

Share this post


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

When it comes to murder, intent plays a role in determining the type of murder involved (first degree, second degree, etc). I’m not as familiar with civil rights violations.

But everywhere in the law, insanity is treated as a defense to legal liability, not as evidence that the underlying violation never happened.

what is the difference between murder and manslaughter?

i mean, the end result is the same... a person is dead, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, LJB said:

what is the difference between murder and manslaughter?

i mean, the end result is the same... a person is dead, right?

It depends on the state. If you identify the elements of a particular degree of murder and manslaughter in a particular state, then it becomes possible to discuss the differences. 

but if we’re going to get technical — and I was not speaking in legal technicalities earlier — then we should acknowledge at the outset that manslaughter is a type of homicide, just like murder is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Katie said:

It depends on the state. If you identify the elements of a particular degree of murder and manslaughter in a particular state, then it becomes possible to discuss the differences. 

but if we’re going to get technical — and I was not speaking in legal technicalities earlier — then we should acknowledge at the outset that manslaughter is a type of homicide, just like murder is. 

ugh...

just put it in layman's terms...

murder has specific intent...

manslaughter is being stupid with severe consequences...

no, the end result doesn't change but intent is very relevant and the crux of this discussion... which is why our courts make the distinction...

praise odin that some lawmakers in the past were brighter than some posters here...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LJB said:

ugh...

just put it in layman's terms...

murder has specific intent...

manslaughter is being stupid with severe consequences...

no, the end result doesn't change but intent is very relevant and the crux of this discussion... which is why our courts make the distinction...

praise odin that some lawmakers in the past were brighter than some posters here...

 

I will stop this back and forth as you are clearly out of your depth here, but I never said intent was irrelevant when it comes to the law.

Further, with respect to the topic at hand, there is no reason that an insane person is incapable of intending to cause death.

The insanity defense comes AFTER there is a legal determination that the elements of murder or manslaughter have been met. 

Edited by Katie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Katie said:

I will stop this back and forth as you are clearly out of your depth here, but I never said intent was irrelevant.

Further, with respect to the topic at hand, there is no reason that an insane person is incapable of intending to cause death.

The insanity defense comes AFTER there is a legal determination that the elements of murder or manslaughter have been met. 

your claim of racism against dupont because of the fashions of the times shows you do not care about intent at all...

just grandstanding...

you are not unique...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Katie said:

You are free to have your opinions. I just believe that a team that specifically bans black people is racist, and I think most people would agree with me.

As for hiring someone and then discriminating against him or her on the basis of race, it happens all the time. There are even civil rights laws that address such situations.  

I think the discussion is over Dupont was racist from the start or did his mental illness with drug use help him become much more racist than he had been 10 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, shieldofpistis said:

I think the discussion is over Dupont was racist from the start or did his mental illness with drug use help him become much more racist than he had been 10 years ago.

No the argument is DuPont didn’t kick out the black athletes because they were African American he kicked them out because he was in a paranoid psychosis and became deathly afraid of the COLOR black, black cars, which he had like 5 of were destroyed, black houses painted, black horses he had for 20 years gone, black clothes, shoes, painting, and he didn’t decide to purge his life of all things black because he recently had enjoyed some KKK literature he did it because he was crazy his whole life and decades of heavy alcohol and cocaine abuse finally caught up with him and he became a paranoid, unhinged madman.

dave Schultz is arguably the most respected figure in our sport, he traveled the world, learned different languages, different cultures a friend of everyone, do you really think him and his kids would have stayed if he thought DuPont was getting rid of black athletes for racial reasons? He would have been gone in a second, he always stood for what he believed in, he stayed because he viewed DuPont as a friend and knew he was just crazy and  tried to help.

Edited by Antitroll2828

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my gut reaction is that these "posters" who want so desperately to call out all this perceived "racism" to make up for their own self loathing should probably go lick a boot of the first person of color they can find in the streets...

film it...

put it on the grandstanding social media platform of their choice...

and feel "better" about themselves...

it is all the rage right now and the smiles i see afterwards surely mean it is enacting real change in this country...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Antitroll2828 said:

No the argument is DuPont didn’t kick out the black athletes because they were African American he kicked them out because he was in a paranoid psychosis and became deathly afraid of the COLOR black, black cars, which he had like 5 of were destroyed, black houses painted, black horses he had for 20 years gone, black clothes, shoes, painting, and he didn’t decide to purge his life of all things black because he recently had enjoyed some KKK literature he did it because he was crazy his whole life and decades of heavy alcohol and cocaine abuse finally caught up with him and he became a paranoid, unhinged madman.

dave Schultz is arguably the most respected figure in our sport, he traveled the world, learned different languages, different cultures a friend of everyone, do you really think him and his kids would have stayed if he thought DuPont was getting rid of black athletes for racial reasons? He would have been gone in a second, he always stood for what he believed in, he stayed because he viewed DuPont as a friend and knew he was just crazy and  tried to help.

DuPont actually said something to the effect of his farm being the new headquarters of the KKK or something else along those lines to Kevin Jackson when he explained why he wanted him gone.  It made no sense at all since he'd never said anything like that before, but he was completely paranoid and using a lot of drugs and alcohol.  I really don't think he was racist, probably part of it was because he had little social interaction with anybody and seemed pretty obsessed/focused with whatever he happened to be doing at the time, like bird collecting or whatever his other hobbies were.  As far as I know or have heard he never once said anything negative about black people, though I could be wrong, but I don't think he was racist, just losing his grip on reality. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we explore the possibility of a little bit of both?  He (reportedly) grew to fear "black magic" being spread by the birds in the trees, resulting in his removal of everything black on the farm. In that, he removed all of the black athletes and (reportedly) made the comment it is now a KKK organization and black athletes are not allowed.  That is a racist move no doubt, but also a move engineered by his insanity.  I don't think the fact there were at times black athletes on the farm is a stand alone concrete evidence he is not racist.  Much like the Sterling example, having those athletes in his stable brought him something he valued very deeply, same as Sterling...it just happens to be in this case that value was not money, but kinship. But his relationship with them on the farm, not whether or not they were there, would be more of a factor.  And from all reports, prior to the removal of everything black, there was zero indication of any racism from him.  

Just my opinion.... there were times of racist actions, but those actions developed from insanity, not from inherent racism.

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, wrestlingzen said:

Here's my reasoned point: if Kenny Monday says race was an issue at Foxcatcher, I believe him. If he says it wasn't an issue, I believe him. I choose to side with the man who has experienced the effects of racism in this community and in this country.

To that end, I know of a particular match/series involving one of these two guys that resulted in a loss, where the blamed the officiating on racism.  I was there and know the official working the bout very very well, and racism absolutely had nothing to do with it.  He lost because he lost.

But.....because he believes it was, that automatically makes it so??

Edited by Lurker

Share this post


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

To that end, I know of a particular match/series involving one of these two guys that resulted in a loss, where the blamed the officiating on racism.  I was there and no the official working the bout very very well, and racism absolutely had nothing to do with it.  He lost because he lost.

But.....because he believes it was, that automatically makes it so??

This illustrates my point about a-holes and racist a-holes.  Some people are just a-holes, but if you are black and they are white, you might assume they are racist.

Share this post


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

To that end, I know of a particular match/series involving one of these two guys that resulted in a loss, where the blamed the officiating on racism.  I was there and no the official working the bout very very well, and racism absolutely had nothing to do with it.  He lost because he lost.

But.....because he believes it was, that automatically makes it so??

here in lies the problem...

i'm sure we all can recount many examples of this kind of behavior... "racism" is so easy to just throw out there and it is an all too easy claim so as not to hold yourself accountable...

it can very easily be used with an excuse mentality and that is not only dangerous, but, extremely counter productive to solving the real issue at hand... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Lurker said:

To that end, I know of a particular match/series involving one of these two guys that resulted in a loss, where the blamed the officiating on racism.  I was there and know the official working the bout very very well, and racism absolutely had nothing to do with it.  He lost because he lost.

But.....because he believes it was, that automatically makes it so??

Hey—I appreciate your response, and in the spirit of dialogue, I’ll try to offer my own perspective.

First: I admit the point I made is complex, even if I phrased it in a simple way. No answer will suffice here; it needs to be an ongoing conversation. 

Second: for me, when it comes to issues of race in this country, I believe we should listen to and believe people who have experienced firsthand the effects of racism over people who have not had that experience. I’m not inflexible, and I understand the nuance of human experience, but it’s a principle I follow. 

The bigger issue in my view  however doesn’t relate to the particular examples we’ve been discussing. These are mostly figurations through which we are trying to articulate our points of view in this particular moment.

What I find important, here, is the stance people are taking toward the topic we are discussing. Meaning: the majority of posts in this thread have been working very hard to develop a counter narrative to discredit anyone who is trying to engage in a meaningful dialogue about race in the wrestling community. That alone is telling. Here’s a few things that have been said or implied  by others in this thread: 

-Racism is a thing of the past and is no longer really an issue in the wrestling community.

-DuPont was mentally ill, not racist. (The first is established; the second seems to be a point of debate.)

-Anyone who calls attention to issues of race in the wrestling community or our culture is “sick" and "twisted” and should go out into the street and “lick a boot” of a “person of color.” 

-People like me are blowing things out of proportion for the sake of self-aggrandizement and to make themselves feel better.

-People 'get along fine' and  will call out racism when they see it in ‘real life’. (Here I’d comment: this does happen, even on the real life of message boards, but according to the men who shared their experiences through USA Wrestling, it certainly doesn’t happen all the time or even in most cases where racism is on display.)

I don’t have time to go on right now, but here’s the point I’d make: on a basic level,  we can choose to engage carefully with these issues and do the difficult work of listening, learning, and confronting them (online, offline); alternatively, we can spend our time castigating each other and trying to come up with examples and arguments to discredit the idea that racism might be an issue in this community and in this country. I'm doing my best to embody the former.

I never claimed to have answers, and I have no interest in ‘puffing my chest’. It’s a wrestling message board, and I’m here because I’m a wrestler. 

Sorry for the length of post—but now I’ve got to get back to the grind.

Share this post


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

Hey—I appreciate your response, and in the spirit of dialogue, I’ll try to offer my own perspective.

First: I admit the point I made is complex, even if I phrased it in a simple way. No answer will suffice here; it needs to be an ongoing conversation. 

Second: for me, when it comes to issues of race in this country, I believe we should listen to and believe people who have experienced firsthand the effects of racism over people who have not had that experience. I’m not inflexible, and I understand the nuance of human experience, but it’s a principle I follow. 

The bigger issue in my view  however doesn’t relate to the particular examples we’ve been discussing. These are mostly figurations through which we are trying to articulate our points of view in this particular moment.

What I find important, here, is the stance people are taking toward the topic we are discussing. Meaning: the majority of posts in this thread have been working very hard to develop a counter narrative to discredit anyone who is trying to engage in a meaningful dialogue about race in the wrestling community. That alone is telling. Here’s a few things that have been said or implied  by others in this thread: 

-Racism is a thing of the past and is no longer really an issue in the wrestling community.

-DuPont was mentally ill, not racist. (The first is established; the second seems to be a point of debate.)

-Anyone who calls attention to issues of race in the wrestling community or our culture is “sick" and "twisted” and should go out into the street and “lick a boot” of a “person of color.” 

-People like me are blowing things out of proportion for the sake of self-aggrandizement and to make themselves feel better.

-People 'get along fine' and  will call out racism when they see it in ‘real life’. (Here I’d comment: this does happen, even on the real life of message boards, but according to the men who shared their experiences through USA Wrestling, it certainly doesn’t happen all the time or even in most cases where racism is on display.)

I don’t have time to go on right now, but here’s the point I’d make: on a basic level,  we can choose to engage carefully with these issues and do the difficult work of listening, learning, and confronting them (online, offline); alternatively, we can spend our time castigating each other and trying to come up with examples and arguments to discredit the idea that racism might be an issue in this community and in this country. I'm doing my best to embody the former.

I never claimed to have answers, and I have no interest in ‘puffing my chest’. It’s a wrestling message board, and I’m here because I’m a wrestler. 

Sorry for the length of post—but now I’ve got to get back to the grind.

your victim mentality fits perfectly inline with the current climate in this country...

 

Share this post


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

Meaning: the majority of posts in this thread have been working very hard to develop a counter narrative to discredit anyone who is trying to engage in a meaningful dialogue about race in the wrestling community

The thread is called “revisiting the racism, at team FoxCatcher.” A discussion about DuPont’s mental status is fair game when discussing the motives of his actions. Also, to acknowledge that perceived racism is not always indicative of a racist motive, is not a counter narrative. To make arguments in absolution and to assume every repudiation to your stance is a “narrative” is myopic and virtue signaling at its finest. Furthermore, it’s necessary to acknowledge context and not ignore the likelihood of misunderstandings especially outside of a forum, where lives and careers are at stake. Education and dialogue needs to supplant cancel culture. But I guess it’s easier to just sit back and throw stones, as if that makes any difference or benefits anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...