Thursday, January 30, 2014

Thug: — n 1. a tough and violent man, esp a criminal (world english dictionary)

Thug is the new dog whistle word on the right used to replace the 'n' word. Thug actually means a criminal, but because conservative white men, no matter how physically imposing they are themselves, appear to be consistently afraid of any black man who is angry, no matter how justified, how provoked and antagonized.

Those angry old white men who are conservatives don't make the distinction between someone male and black who is verbally expressive, and someone who is an actual physical threat. I'm not sure they are capable of making that kind of distinction, because their prejudices get in the way.

We have not only racial and ethnicity discrimination in this country, but we have gender biases as well. We cannot reasonably expect men to be free from emotion any more than we would expect it of women or children.

This is a thug, this is a man who is using larger size and threats of physical harm to intimidate. He is actively being investigated for real crimes.


This is not a thug. This is a man who happens to be black, who is expressing anger with a member of the opposing team who not only rejected his attempt to shake hands and congratulate him on a good game, the opposing team member verbally and physically taunted and provoked him, resulting in intense words.  He is not a criminal, and is not threatening anyone for doing their job.

The white thug is abusing a reporter; the black athelete is not.


7 comments:

  1. Sorry, Richard Sherman is a major league jerk. I'll take your word for the other guy, but Sherman is a clown. I'm looking forward to seeing him get torched in the Super Bowl and, if not there, I will be waiting for him to be thumped in the upcoming season.

    FWIW, there is no such thing as "mediocre" in any professional sports league at that level--unlike, say, the U.S. Congress where, "mediocre" is a badge of distinction that is beyond the grasp of a majority of the members.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've seen multiple interviews that Sherman has done since the incident where he vented his temper.

      I am not a huge follower, so perhaps you've seen conduct I haven't seen on the field. But he was trying to shake hands with his opposition when the big bru-ha-ha incident started, and he didn't respond in kind when the other guy - Crabtree - taunted him and shoved his face mask on his helmet. That gets points from me.

      Delete
  2. Commie is right DG. Sherman has displayed awful sportsmanship throughout his NFL career. You obviously didn't watch the game, but Crabtree had every right to shove Sherman's face mask. After Sherman broke up the pass that was intercepted, he ran up to Crabtree and gave him a pat on the butt. May seem harmless to you, but in that moment. The game definitely lost for the 49er's, it was uncalled for and dare I say taunting. Then Sherman ran by the 49er's bench giving the universal hands to the throat, meaning "Choke". Sherman was completely wrong on every aspect of this post game charade. However, this still doesn't make him a thug. He has no criminal record and in fact, is completing his master's degree at Stanford this offseason.

    Bad sportsman? Yes
    Thug? No

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have no idea what sort of person Richard Sherman is when he's happy and not being competitive. If he's a jerk when he's competing, he's a jerk.

    If Sherman was a thug, knocking down old ladies and stealing their SS checks, he would not be in the same league--or anywhere near it--as the vast majority of GOP pols.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I typed a comment, it disappeared. Suffice to say that Sherman IS a jerk.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It turned up as a duplicate which I deleted; sorry for the techno-glitch.

      Not having followed Sherman over time, I defer to the opinion of others that he can be a jerk while playing football.

      I'm delighting in the fact that you and J.O.B. are in agreement on this.

      I would draw attention back to the underlying point here however that conservatives appear to have no problem with the conduct of one of their own, a big, angry, conservative white guy who is far more threatening and intimidating, while wailing and gnashing their teeth in fear and outrage at an angry black man who does far less, and who at least vents about someone his own size, not picks on someone much smaller.

      Neither behavior is completely ok, but one is proportionately more offensive and unacceptable than the other.

      Delete
  5. Oh, and I want to see him get torched on the field this evening.

    ReplyDelete