shape
carat
color
clarity

Is Paula Deen getting what she deserves?

Is Paula Deen getting what she deserves?

  • She is being punished too harshly.

    Votes: 56 54.9%
  • The punishment is just right.

    Votes: 30 29.4%
  • She should be punished more harshly.

    Votes: 14 13.7%
  • Other, please explain.

    Votes: 2 2.0%

  • Total voters
    102
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.

hlmr

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
2,872
AGBF|1372740404|3475841 said:
hlmr|1372734879|3475801 said:
HollyS|1372641840|3475055 said:
I prefer to not be part of the mob yelling, "Crucify!"

Hmmm....well, eeeeek, I have been offended by this particular phrase all day...... but I kept it to myself until I read your most recent comment to Thing 2, MAC-W, and realized I would be remiss in doing so, as I am quite certain many people would find this offensive too.

Well, since Holly is using the (Christian) son of God being martyred as a metaphor for Paula Deen's ordeal, it might, indeed, raise some eyebrows. That is why I commented above that that mob yelling, "Crucify!" was not one which one would wish to join. <Smile.> I do think that we should look at the context of who is posting if we know the poster, however. Holly is known on these boards as a Christian woman who is active in posting music at holiday time. From that we can derive that she meant no disrespect to Christians. I suspect that she didn't mean to compare Paula Deen's sufferings with those of Jesus.

Deb/AGBF
:saint:

Hi Deb. This was not what I was offended by. I realize my post/quote may have been confusing.
 

dragonfly411

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
7,378
AGBF|1372740404|3475841 said:
hlmr|1372734879|3475801 said:
HollyS|1372641840|3475055 said:
I prefer to not be part of the mob yelling, "Crucify!"

Hmmm....well, eeeeek, I have been offended by this particular phrase all day...... but I kept it to myself until I read your most recent comment to Thing 2, MAC-W, and realized I would be remiss in doing so, as I am quite certain many people would find this offensive too.

Well, since Holly is using the (Christian) son of God being martyred as a metaphor for Paula Deen's ordeal, it might, indeed, raise some eyebrows. That is why I commented above that that mob yelling, "Crucify!" was not one which one would wish to join. <Smile.> I do think that we should look at the context of who is posting if we know the poster, however. Holly is known on these boards as a Christian woman who is active in posting music at holiday time. From that we can derive that she meant no disrespect to Christians. I suspect that she didn't mean to compare Paula Deen's sufferings with those of Jesus.

Deb/AGBF
:saint:


Jumping in to ask: Why is it ok to let a poster off the hook based on who they are and context, but not ok in the case of an old woman who cooks on national television? I don't agree with what she said, just an interesting thought to ponder.

I think she is being punished too harshly. Although she said something she shouldn't have, she was HONEST about having said it all those years ago and is being punished for being honest. She also said several times that she did discuss her brother's behavior with him. I imagine that until recent events, she wasn't totally aware of how serious his behavior had been. She has so many ventures, one restaurant with her brother managing is not something she is going to be sitting over every day watching every move that is made. I don't agree with what she said, and I don't think it is ever ok to say, and that includes black people saying it. But I also don't think a person should lose their entire career over something they said years ago. And YES people can change. Can you honestly say you're the same person now as you were 20 years ago? Truly?


ETA: Thing, I am not religious, but I do think it is offensive to some to post something like that on a public forum. I've known you to be brash and outspoken in the past, and you don't care how it affects anyone. Perhaps you need to take others into consideration and think on your own words before you just let things spew out of your fingers. I personally don't think any poster should be let off the hook simply based on context and who is posting, the same way others think that Paula shouldn't be let off the hook for the person she is or the context she may or may not have said something in. You said it. Own up to it. Face the backlash. Move forward. Since that's the attitude everyone wants to take towards some old woman.
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,225
dragonfly411|1372874903|3476744 said:
Although she said something she shouldn't have, she was HONEST about having said it all those years ago and is being punished for being honest.

Uhm ...

She is not being punished for being honest.
She is being punished for what she said.

Also, you can say that she is being punished for what she said in spite of being honest about saying it.
But she is not being punished FOR being honest.

If I murder some one but confess should I go free?
Certainly murdering is not the same as using the N-word, but the logic of admitting something not making it okay remains.
Being honest that you did something bad is more honorable than lying about it, but you still did the bad thing.
 

House Cat

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
4,602
In Paula's testimony, she speaks of "professional black men" performing duties as waiters. She states that she was very impressed by the job they were doing at the restaurant where she was being served. When she was asked if there was any possibility that she could have called these men "n-words" her response was "no, because that wasn't what they were."

This response tells me that she still uses this word in some fashion. That she categorizes African Americans into "professional black people" and "n-words."

Remember, her testimony was recent, not 20 years ago.
 

dragonfly411

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
7,378
kenny|1372875680|3476751 said:
dragonfly411|1372874903|3476744 said:
Although she said something she shouldn't have, she was HONEST about having said it all those years ago and is being punished for being honest.

Uhm ...

She is not being punished for being honest.
She is being punished for what she said.

Also, you can say that she is being punished for what she said in spite of being honest about saying it.
But she is not being punished FOR being honest.

If I murder some one but confess should I go free?
Certainly murdering is not the same as using the N-word, but the logic of admitting something not making it okay remains.
Being honest that you did something bad is more honorable than lying about it, but you still did the bad thing.


Kenny
Point well made. I should have worded that better. She is being punished for having said something, despite being honest about having said it and apologizing. Sorry!
 

Matata

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Messages
8,997
dragonfly411|1372874903|3476744 said:
She also said several times that she did discuss her brother's behavior with him. I imagine that until recent events, she wasn't totally aware of how serious his behavior had been. She has so many ventures, one restaurant with her brother managing is not something she is going to be sitting over every day watching every move that is made. I don't agree with what she said, and I don't think it is ever ok to say, and that includes black people saying it. But I also don't think a person should lose their entire career over something they said years ago. And YES people can change. Can you honestly say you're the same person now as you were 20 years ago? Truly?

With regard to allegations of a hostile work environment, the law says that the person in charge either knew or should have known about the alleged behavior and is responsible for said behavior. Claiming ignorance of the behavior isn't an out. She grew up with her brother and no doubt knows him well. Talking to him without stopping the alleged behavior isn't an out. If the allegations prove true, she is just as responsible as he is according to the law. Having multiple ventures isn't an out. Being an old lady isn't an out. People do change, but not always for the better.
 

dragonfly411

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
7,378
House Cat|1372876466|3476761 said:
In Paula's testimony, she speaks of "professional black men" performing duties as waiters. She states that she was very impressed by the job they were doing at the restaurant where she was being served. When she was asked if there was any possibility that she could have called these men "n-words" her response was "no, because that wasn't what they were."

This response tells me that she still uses this word in some fashion. That she categorizes African Americans into "professional black people" and "n-words."

Remember, her testimony was recent, not 20 years ago.


How do you get that she is racist from that statement? She said they are not that. They asked her to answer a question directly based on a word. She said no they are not that. It's not exactly a black and white statement (very honestly no pun intended here), which means you can neither say yes or no to her being racist by that statement. You can't read her mind for pete's sake.
 

dragonfly411

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
7,378
Matata|1372877160|3476774 said:
dragonfly411|1372874903|3476744 said:
She also said several times that she did discuss her brother's behavior with him. I imagine that until recent events, she wasn't totally aware of how serious his behavior had been. She has so many ventures, one restaurant with her brother managing is not something she is going to be sitting over every day watching every move that is made. I don't agree with what she said, and I don't think it is ever ok to say, and that includes black people saying it. But I also don't think a person should lose their entire career over something they said years ago. And YES people can change. Can you honestly say you're the same person now as you were 20 years ago? Truly?

With regard to allegations of a hostile work environment, the law says that the person in charge either knew or should have known about the alleged behavior and is responsible for said behavior. Claiming ignorance of the behavior isn't an out. She grew up with her brother and no doubt knows him well. Talking to him without stopping the alleged behavior isn't an out. If the allegations prove true, she is just as responsible as he is according to the law. Having multiple ventures isn't an out. Being an old lady isn't an out. People do change, but not always for the better.


Matata - I wasn't aware of said law. Good to know. Although I feel like it would become fuzzy based on sizes of companies? If the CEO of Starbucks is made aware of a situation, addresses it at some point, believes it has been handled, but the situation continues behind closed doors..... it's his/her fault? Do I have that right?
 

Matata

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Messages
8,997
dragonfly411|1372877319|3476779 said:
Matata - I wasn't aware of said law. Good to know. Although I feel like it would become fuzzy based on sizes of companies? If the CEO of Starbucks is made aware of a situation, addresses it at some point, believes it has been handled, but the situation continues behind closed doors..... it's his/her fault? Do I have that right?

Correct. In the case of discrimination/harassment, poop rolls uphill and downhill.
 

dragonfly411

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
7,378
Interesting. I guess perhaps it doesn't get put into play and/or the public doesn't see as many cases as are presented to court rooms? Not just for this but for other issues.
 

Matata

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Messages
8,997
dragonfly411|1372877816|3476790 said:
Interesting. I guess perhaps it doesn't get put into play and/or the public doesn't see as many cases as are presented to court rooms? Not just for this but for other issues.

When I worked in this field, we preferred to settle rather than go to court in most cases because it was cheaper. Most of the cases filed against us (at the state level) were fraudulent and it made economical sense to settle for a relatively small amount of money to make it go away rather than drag it through the court which could take years and a lot of money.
 

Laila619

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
11,676
thing2of2|1372710312|3475559 said:
Circe|1372630137|3474952 said:
I think this thread may be demonstrating what I think of as the "But Enough About Me, What Do YOU Think About Me?" effect, wherein members of the majority succumb to the irresistible temptation to redirect the conversation back to what really matters ... themselves.

You see it in conversations about female genital mutilation, where you can just mark the seconds until somebody (usually male, sometimes a lady with a well-internalized sense of patriarchy) comes along to turn the focus to male circumcision. A really serious problem suffered by lower status people is sidelined in favor of paying yet more attention to the less-urgent concerns of a group that already has plenty of resources.

You see it in conversations about rape, where no matter how heinous the example at hand, somebody is almost always on hand to talk about, a) how women make false accusations, b) shouldn't drink/wear skirts/leave their windows open to tempt those poor susceptible men, or, c) well, awful as it is, it's not the sort of thing we should ruin a young man's future over, is it? Because on a society-wide level, we're indoctrinated to be more concerned about how things affect the people with the most potential to be powerful, and, sadly, it ain't the ladies.

And you definitely see it in conversations about race. Dudes. Paralleling a non-influential anonymous Internet poster's commonly used expression of surprise via a reference to the dominant culture's deity is SO NOT THE SAME as casually dropping the n-bomb. It's not EVEN a difference of degree and not kind. It is completely different in scope and effect, to the point that it's beyond being irritating or frustrating or offensive. What it is? Is TELLING. It will point you to where a society's primary interests lie, every time.

Let's resist temptation, maybe? And keep talking about Deen specifically? Because some of these answers are actually proving kinda illuminating. Like, I actually had no idea people felt like reclaimed language represented a double standard. Hoping Ella doesn't have to shut us down, and that this thread proves fruitful, not hurtful ....

Well said as always, Circe. Honestly I'm just too lazy to deal with the ridiculous false equivalencies that occur everywhere, all the time, always from people with privilege, both here and IRL. I'm not sorry I said "Jesus Christ"-it's a common expression of surprise, and I was surprised, even shocked at the posts I was reading.

Additionally, the saying "Jesus Christ" is not discriminatory in any way, shape or form, nor is it an insult of any kind. Same with "Oh my God!" or even "OMG!" They're not even insults, just expressions, figures of speech, etc.. Calling someone a "nigger" is so far removed from using "Jesus Christ" in a sentence that to draw a comparison between the two is truly laughable. I actually did laugh when I read that because it's truly ridiculous. Because of COURSE that's where the conversation would go. Forget the giant racist, let's talk about someone taking the lord's name in vain!

How hard is it to type "Sorry I offended people", Thing?
 

House Cat

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
4,602
dragonfly411|1372877196|3476775 said:
House Cat|1372876466|3476761 said:
In Paula's testimony, she speaks of "professional black men" performing duties as waiters. She states that she was very impressed by the job they were doing at the restaurant where she was being served. When she was asked if there was any possibility that she could have called these men "n-words" her response was "no, because that wasn't what they were."

This response tells me that she still uses this word in some fashion. That she categorizes African Americans into "professional black people" and "n-words."

Remember, her testimony was recent, not 20 years ago.


How do you get that she is racist from that statement? She said they are not that. They asked her to answer a question directly based on a word. She said no they are not that. It's not exactly a black and white statement (very honestly no pun intended here), which means you can neither say yes or no to her being racist by that statement. You can't read her mind for pete's sake.
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2013/06/entertainment/deen-deposition/
Page 130

Maybe I paraphrased, but I can't see how one does not see this as racist. Maybe it can be explained to me in a different way? I don't read hostile tone well. It just becomes blurred mumbo jumbo no matter how intelligent the argument may be.

Furthermore, I am entitled to my thoughts on this matter just as anyone else on this thread. I would deeply appreciate not being flamed for sharing. Thanks dragonfly.
 

dragonfly411

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
7,378
House Cat|1372900281|3477029 said:
dragonfly411|1372877196|3476775 said:
House Cat|1372876466|3476761 said:
In Paula's testimony, she speaks of "professional black men" performing duties as waiters. She states that she was very impressed by the job they were doing at the restaurant where she was being served. When she was asked if there was any possibility that she could have called these men "n-words" her response was "no, because that wasn't what they were."

This response tells me that she still uses this word in some fashion. That she categorizes African Americans into "professional black people" and "n-words."

Remember, her testimony was recent, not 20 years ago.


How do you get that she is racist from that statement? She said they are not that. They asked her to answer a question directly based on a word. She said no they are not that. It's not exactly a black and white statement (very honestly no pun intended here), which means you can neither say yes or no to her being racist by that statement. You can't read her mind for pete's sake.
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2013/06/entertainment/deen-deposition/
Page 130

Maybe I paraphrased, but I can't see how one does not see this as racist. Maybe it can be explained to me in a different way? I don't read hostile tone well. It just becomes blurred mumbo jumbo no matter how intelligent the argument may be.

Furthermore, I am entitled to my thoughts on this matter just as anyone else on this thread. I would deeply appreciate not being flamed for sharing. Thanks dragonfly.


I'm sorry, not sure how I flamed you?

I think that Paula Deen made some mistakes. I think that she slipped and said the word with regards to a man who held a gun to her head. I think discussion happened about the wedding thing. I also think that movies are made where black people portray slaves, servers, what have you. Should the women who acted in "The Help" be offended that someone wrote a story about that? It's acting. They were discussing a period based wedding scene. If she said that word, she should not have, and she certainly needs to understand that it is not okay to say. But I also don't think we can assume she is a racist person based on what was said. Many of the allegations being made are not proven at this time, and some have even been refuted. Do I think she messed up? Yup. Do I think she should lose her career for it? Nope. I wouldn't expect to lose my career for something I said 20 years ago (mind you 20 years ago I was a mindless 7 year old, but this mindless 7 year old called her my little pony a bastard once, should I lose my job for it? Am I prejudiced against people who have no father?). I don't expect anyone to. People change in that amount of time. It is a given. She may or may not have been racist, and may or may not be now. But she shouldn't lose her entire living over it. She's a gifted cook, and a gifted teacher of cooking. I don't think those things change just because she made a mistake.
 

Indylady

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
5,717
Circe|1372630137|3474952 said:
I think this thread may be demonstrating what I think of as the "But Enough About Me, What Do YOU Think About Me?" effect, wherein members of the majority succumb to the irresistible temptation to redirect the conversation back to what really matters ... themselves.

You see it in conversations about female genital mutilation, where you can just mark the seconds until somebody (usually male, sometimes a lady with a well-internalized sense of patriarchy) comes along to turn the focus to male circumcision. A really serious problem suffered by lower status people is sidelined in favor of paying yet more attention to the less-urgent concerns of a group that already has plenty of resources.

You see it in conversations about rape, where no matter how heinous the example at hand, somebody is almost always on hand to talk about, a) how women make false accusations, b) shouldn't drink/wear skirts/leave their windows open to tempt those poor susceptible men, or, c) well, awful as it is, it's not the sort of thing we should ruin a young man's future over, is it? Because on a society-wide level, we're indoctrinated to be more concerned about how things affect the people with the most potential to be powerful, and, sadly, it ain't the ladies.

And you definitely see it in conversations about race. Dudes. Paralleling a non-influential anonymous Internet poster's commonly used expression of surprise via a reference to the dominant culture's deity is SO NOT THE SAME as casually dropping the n-bomb. It's not EVEN a difference of degree and not kind. It is completely different in scope and effect, to the point that it's beyond being irritating or frustrating or offensive. What it is? Is TELLING. It will point you to where a society's primary interests lie, every time.

Let's resist temptation, maybe? And keep talking about Deen specifically? Because some of these answers are actually proving kinda illuminating. Like, I actually had no idea people felt like reclaimed language represented a double standard. Hoping Ella doesn't have to shut us down, and that this thread proves fruitful, not hurtful ....

+100000000
 

iheartscience

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
12,111
dragonfly411|1372874903|3476744 said:
AGBF|1372740404|3475841 said:
hlmr|1372734879|3475801 said:
HollyS|1372641840|3475055 said:
I prefer to not be part of the mob yelling, "Crucify!"

Hmmm....well, eeeeek, I have been offended by this particular phrase all day...... but I kept it to myself until I read your most recent comment to Thing 2, MAC-W, and realized I would be remiss in doing so, as I am quite certain many people would find this offensive too.

Well, since Holly is using the (Christian) son of God being martyred as a metaphor for Paula Deen's ordeal, it might, indeed, raise some eyebrows. That is why I commented above that that mob yelling, "Crucify!" was not one which one would wish to join. <Smile.> I do think that we should look at the context of who is posting if we know the poster, however. Holly is known on these boards as a Christian woman who is active in posting music at holiday time. From that we can derive that she meant no disrespect to Christians. I suspect that she didn't mean to compare Paula Deen's sufferings with those of Jesus.

Deb/AGBF
:saint:


Jumping in to ask: Why is it ok to let a poster off the hook based on who they are and context, but not ok in the case of an old woman who cooks on national television? I don't agree with what she said, just an interesting thought to ponder.

I think she is being punished too harshly. Although she said something she shouldn't have, she was HONEST about having said it all those years ago and is being punished for being honest. She also said several times that she did discuss her brother's behavior with him. I imagine that until recent events, she wasn't totally aware of how serious his behavior had been. She has so many ventures, one restaurant with her brother managing is not something she is going to be sitting over every day watching every move that is made. I don't agree with what she said, and I don't think it is ever ok to say, and that includes black people saying it. But I also don't think a person should lose their entire career over something they said years ago. And YES people can change. Can you honestly say you're the same person now as you were 20 years ago? Truly?


ETA: Thing, I am not religious, but I do think it is offensive to some to post something like that on a public forum. I've known you to be brash and outspoken in the past, and you don't care how it affects anyone. Perhaps you need to take others into consideration and think on your own words before you just let things spew out of your fingers. I personally don't think any poster should be let off the hook simply based on context and who is posting, the same way others think that Paula shouldn't be let off the hook for the person she is or the context she may or may not have said something in. You said it. Own up to it. Face the backlash. Move forward. Since that's the attitude everyone wants to take towards some old woman.

What exactly am I not owning up to again? The super offensive use of the phrase "Jesus Christ"? Did I deny that I said it? Did I offer a silly rationalization? I used it, and I'm not sorry, and the continued focus on me letting the oh so offensive exclamation "Jesus Christ" spew from my finger tips is a convenient way to not focus on the issue at hand.

As a reminder, the issue is the racist language Paula Deen used and the multiple posts both defending her use of racist language and some even agreeing with it.
 

iheartscience

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
12,111
Laila619|1372884011|3476865 said:
thing2of2|1372710312|3475559 said:
Circe|1372630137|3474952 said:
I think this thread may be demonstrating what I think of as the "But Enough About Me, What Do YOU Think About Me?" effect, wherein members of the majority succumb to the irresistible temptation to redirect the conversation back to what really matters ... themselves.

You see it in conversations about female genital mutilation, where you can just mark the seconds until somebody (usually male, sometimes a lady with a well-internalized sense of patriarchy) comes along to turn the focus to male circumcision. A really serious problem suffered by lower status people is sidelined in favor of paying yet more attention to the less-urgent concerns of a group that already has plenty of resources.

You see it in conversations about rape, where no matter how heinous the example at hand, somebody is almost always on hand to talk about, a) how women make false accusations, b) shouldn't drink/wear skirts/leave their windows open to tempt those poor susceptible men, or, c) well, awful as it is, it's not the sort of thing we should ruin a young man's future over, is it? Because on a society-wide level, we're indoctrinated to be more concerned about how things affect the people with the most potential to be powerful, and, sadly, it ain't the ladies.

And you definitely see it in conversations about race. Dudes. Paralleling a non-influential anonymous Internet poster's commonly used expression of surprise via a reference to the dominant culture's deity is SO NOT THE SAME as casually dropping the n-bomb. It's not EVEN a difference of degree and not kind. It is completely different in scope and effect, to the point that it's beyond being irritating or frustrating or offensive. What it is? Is TELLING. It will point you to where a society's primary interests lie, every time.

Let's resist temptation, maybe? And keep talking about Deen specifically? Because some of these answers are actually proving kinda illuminating. Like, I actually had no idea people felt like reclaimed language represented a double standard. Hoping Ella doesn't have to shut us down, and that this thread proves fruitful, not hurtful ....

Well said as always, Circe. Honestly I'm just too lazy to deal with the ridiculous false equivalencies that occur everywhere, all the time, always from people with privilege, both here and IRL. I'm not sorry I said "Jesus Christ"-it's a common expression of surprise, and I was surprised, even shocked at the posts I was reading.

Additionally, the saying "Jesus Christ" is not discriminatory in any way, shape or form, nor is it an insult of any kind. Same with "Oh my God!" or even "OMG!" They're not even insults, just expressions, figures of speech, etc.. Calling someone a "nigger" is so far removed from using "Jesus Christ" in a sentence that to draw a comparison between the two is truly laughable. I actually did laugh when I read that because it's truly ridiculous. Because of COURSE that's where the conversation would go. Forget the giant racist, let's talk about someone taking the lord's name in vain!

How hard is it to type "Sorry I offended people", Thing?

Is "Sorry I offended people" really an apology? The only thing I'm sorry about is that my use of a commonly used phrase that is not discriminatory or insulting in any way gave multiple posters a convenient thing to focus on so they didn't need to confront the racism displayed in this thread. So, yes, I am sorry, for giving a some people an easy out.
 

Ella

Brilliant_Rock
Staff member
Premium
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
1,622
Ladies, for civility lets please let the use of the phrase, whether common or inflammatory, drop.
 

VRBeauty

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
11,210
thing2of2|1373116197|3478018 said:
Is "Sorry I offended people" really an apology? The only thing I'm sorry about is that my use of a commonly used phrase that is not discriminatory or insulting in any way gave multiple posters a convenient thing to focus on so they didn't need to confront the racism displayed in this thread. So, yes, I am sorry, for giving a some people an easy out.

Those mind-reading skills must come in handy! :wink2:
 

ruby59

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
3,553
VRBeauty|1373137204|3478178 said:
thing2of2|1373116197|3478018 said:
Is "Sorry I offended people" really an apology? The only thing I'm sorry about is that my use of a commonly used phrase that is not discriminatory or insulting in any way gave multiple posters a convenient thing to focus on so they didn't need to confront the racism displayed in this thread. So, yes, I am sorry, for giving a some people an easy out.

Those mind-reading skills must come in handy! :wink2:


The "N" word was also commomly used in its day, so .....But what I find ironic is when someone can label others and be so unyielding when they do not share the same view but then can be totally unsympathetic to what another finds distasteful.
 

dragonfly411

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
7,378
ruby59|1373139915|3478212 said:
VRBeauty|1373137204|3478178 said:
thing2of2|1373116197|3478018 said:
Is "Sorry I offended people" really an apology? The only thing I'm sorry about is that my use of a commonly used phrase that is not discriminatory or insulting in any way gave multiple posters a convenient thing to focus on so they didn't need to confront the racism displayed in this thread. So, yes, I am sorry, for giving a some people an easy out.

Those mind-reading skills must come in handy! :wink2:


The "N" word was also commomly used in its day, so .....But what I find ironic is when someone can label others and be so unyielding when they do not share the same view but then can be totally unsympathetic to what another finds distasteful.


Well said Ruby.
 

Circe

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
8,087
Soooo, Ella's last warning?
 

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
53,980
dragonfly411|1373141661|3478220 said:
ruby59|1373139915|3478212 said:
VRBeauty|1373137204|3478178 said:
thing2of2|1373116197|3478018 said:
Is "Sorry I offended people" really an apology? The only thing I'm sorry about is that my use of a commonly used phrase that is not discriminatory or insulting in any way gave multiple posters a convenient thing to focus on so they didn't need to confront the racism displayed in this thread. So, yes, I am sorry, for giving a some people an easy out.

Those mind-reading skills must come in handy! :wink2:


The "N" word was also commomly used in its day, so .....But what I find ironic is when someone can label others and be so unyielding when they do not share the same view but then can be totally unsympathetic to what another finds distasteful.


Well said Ruby.

Wow, how can you even compare the 2? I say OMG all the time...is that offensive? What thing said cannot even in the wildest imaginations be rationally compared to what Paula Deen said. And for all of you to keep making inappropriate comparisons is truly derailing this thread. It's like you are a dog with a bone and just keep hammering away at it. Thing did nothing wrong-and if it offended you well, then you are easily offended because it is a common phrase used by even religious people. It is used as an expletive to express anger or frustration. It is not used in the context of Christian worship.
 

Kaleigh

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
29,571
I come back here hoping for what we had in the past. Not sure if that was good but miss it..

If I say something about the topic that is my experience and is relevant to me, it's my right to do so. And SOOOOO not putting it about me.

GRRRRRRRRR. :devil: :devil: :devil:
 

ruby59

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
3,553
missy|1373144696|3478243 said:
dragonfly411|1373141661|3478220 said:
ruby59|1373139915|3478212 said:
VRBeauty|1373137204|3478178 said:
thing2of2|1373116197|3478018 said:
Is "Sorry I offended people" really an apology? The only thing I'm sorry about is that my use of a commonly used phrase that is not discriminatory or insulting in any way gave multiple posters a convenient thing to focus on so they didn't need to confront the racism displayed in this thread. So, yes, I am sorry, for giving a some people an easy out.

Those mind-reading skills must come in handy! :wink2:


The "N" word was also commomly used in its day, so .....But what I find ironic is when someone can label others and be so unyielding when they do not share the same view but then can be totally unsympathetic to what another finds distasteful.


Well said Ruby.

Wow, how can you even compare the 2? I say OMG all the time...is that offensive? What thing said cannot even in the wildest imaginations be rationally compared to what Paula Deen said. And for all of you to keep making inappropriate comparisons is truly derailing this thread. It's like you are a dog with a bone and just keep hammering away at it. Thing did nothing wrong-and if it offended you well, then you are easily offended because it is a common phrase used by even religious people. It is used as an expletive to express anger or frustration. It is not used in the context of Christian worship.

You just proved my point, Missy. You cannot conceive that some find taking the Lord's name in vain offensive. Yet you cannot comprehend that some do not find that photo racist. You cite excuses for the phrase, but cannot understand other people's interpretation of the photo. My point was not about comparisons of offenses, but having respect for other people's feelings.

And for the record, I am not "easily offended" and there is definitely "no bone." I was not rude to anyone, can you say the same in your response to me?
 

isaku5

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
3,296
Kaleigh|1373148147|3478259 said:
I come back here hoping for what we had in the past. Not sure if that was good but miss it..

If I say something about the topic that is my experience and is relevant to me, it's my right to do so. And SOOOOO not putting it about me.

GRRRRRRRRR. :devil: :devil: :devil:

I remember some of those good old days too, Kaleigh, and like you, I miss so many of our cyber friends with whom we could exchange ideas politely and respectfully. Where is everyone?? :wavey:
 

Ella

Brilliant_Rock
Staff member
Premium
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
1,622
Congratulations ladies and gentlemen, you have officially closed the thread by failing to heed our warnings. If you want to be able to discuss sensitive topics in the future, you need to learn how to do so respectfully and politely.
 
Status
Not open for further replies. Please create a new topic or request for this thread to be opened.
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top