Incognito Reaction: I Don't Get It
-
Since that was a classless cheap shot at what I said I feel compelled to respond. I can state my opinion even though it's the popular one. Furthermore, all you're doing is providing subjective fodder to this whole argument and trying puff out your chest and say you're right. To you, this whole situation may be less serious than drugs or assault but that's a completely subjective, ignorant point of view. Thousands of people from adults to children commit suicide or self harm because of rampant bullying. This was not a case of 'name-calling'. This by all accounts fully functioning member of society was harassedand bullied so much he ruined his reputation in many ways to end it. The reason this was brought to the limelight was because it was new to the NFL, not because people hold it in the same regard as murder or serious crimes. When Big Ben allegedly raped those girls it got just as much media attention as this did if not more. To look at things as more wrong than others is again an ignorant way of viewing societies' problems.
I'm going to take a shot in the dark that you weren't bullied in school. If you were and feel this way, I feel sorry because that means the vicious cycle continued. Edit: Also, your 'analogy' is completely irrelevant and doesn't apply in any way to this situation.
You sound like the new generation of pussies who was rewarded for just participating in a sport with a letter or trophy.
You sound like the new generation of pussies who was rewarded for just participating in a sport with a letter or trophy.
you had me when you said pussies.
You are exactly right, sir. There is no conflict in the two statements. In fact, that was kind of my point. People are responding to my statement that there was an overreaction by "arguing" back that Incognito is a jerk. Yes, Incognito is a jerk. That doesn't mean there wasn't a huge overreaction to what he did.
wow! you just made incognito look like a hero.
need some puffs?
-
I don't even know what that's supposed to mean...
-
jrb,
The idea that name-calling or giving someone a male blowup doll is less serious than drug use/abuse, assault, or rape is not my idea that I'm trying to force on other people. Our society (and many societies) has decided that those latter things are serious enough to be considered crimes while name-calling and giving someone a blowup doll are not. So, are these categorizations subjective? Sure. But they're not my intellectual property. I called them "less serious" based on the laws and norms already in place in the U.S. Our legal system and our societal expectations both already arrange "wrongs" on a scale of less and more serious. So, unless all of that is "ignorant", it's not "ignorant" to view some things as more or less wrong than others.
Also, I'd like to see the footage of sportscasters screaming in rage about how terrible Big Ben is and how there's no place for him in the league. I'm sure I can find the footage where a number of them said that about Incognito. A couple of guys may have made a derogatory comment about Big Ben's off-field behavior here or there, but it is ridiculous to say it got the same reaction. In fact, I'll do you one better: Ray Rice just physically assaulted his girlfriend the other day. Where's the negative reaction to that which is equivalent to the Incognito thing? If the reaction was equivalent, I should be able to turn on ESPN right now and see red-faced folks ranting about how awful Rice is and how he shouldn't be in the league, just like it happened for days/weeks after the Incognito thing broke. Maybe my clicker is broken, because the ESPN I am seeing doesn't show that.
Also, what do you not understand about the analogy? I'll explain it to you.
Westside Steve,
You are exactly right, sir. There is no conflict in the two statements. In fact, that was kind of my point. People are responding to my statement that there was an overreaction by "arguing" back that Incognito is a jerk. Yes, Incognito is a jerk. That doesn't mean there wasn't a huge overreaction to what he did.
jrb,
The idea that name-calling or giving someone a male blowup doll is less serious than drug use/abuse, assault, or rape is not my idea that I'm trying to force on other people. Our society (and many societies) has decided that those latter things are serious enough to be considered crimes while name-calling and giving someone a blowup doll are not. So, are these categorizations subjective? Sure. But they're not my intellectual property. I called them "less serious" based on the laws and norms already in place in the U.S. Our legal system and our societal expectations both already arrange "wrongs" on a scale of less and more serious. So, unless all of that is "ignorant", it's not "ignorant" to view some things as more or less wrong than others.
Also, I'd like to see the footage of sportscasters screaming in rage about how terrible Big Ben is and how there's no place for him in the league. I'm sure I can find the footage where a number of them said that about Incognito. A couple of guys may have made a derogatory comment about Big Ben's off-field behavior here or there, but it is ridiculous to say it got the same reaction. In fact, I'll do you one better: Ray Rice just physically assaulted his girlfriend the other day. Where's the negative reaction to that which is equivalent to the Incognito thing? If the reaction was equivalent, I should be able to turn on ESPN right now and see red-faced folks ranting about how awful Rice is and how he shouldn't be in the league, just like it happened for days/weeks after the Incognito thing broke. Maybe my clicker is broken, because the ESPN I am seeing doesn't show that.
Also, what do you not understand about the analogy? I'll explain it to you.
The biggest problem with your whole argument is that you're basing what's more right or wrong on media coverage. I hate to break it to you, but ESPN and media outlets could care less about what's morally worse or better, it's all about ratings. People wanted to see about constant coverage about the bullying/harassment because it was something that never really happened outwardly in the NFL. It's the same thing when the bounty program broke, the same when Tebow eats a sandwich, and the same when Favre was seen throwing a football to high school kids. The job of ESPN is to pander for views, plain and simple. NFL players get busted for DUI, drugs, and assault all the time. Most people don't care to hear 24/7 coverage on that because it's not fresh. The whole thing then goes back to what I've said all along: what's "more wrong" is subjective. There's a growing movement in the United States that those who severely harass/bully an individual to be tried as murderers. Is that serious enough for you?
Your example is again objectifying a subjective situation. Any sane person of course would stop someone being killed from someone abusing a drug. But that's not what this situation is in the slightest. Everyone you've said is based on how media and people react to the wrong things happening. If you said something like the kid who was doing drugs got all the local news headlines while the kid getting stabbed didn't, then maybe. But this whole thing isn't mutually exclusive, it should never be about saying one thing is 'more wrong'. There's obvious things that tip the scale like murder, but when the Aaron Hernandez stuff happened they pretty much camped out at his house.
I'm admittedly biased. I was viciously harassed growing up because I moved a lot and for a decent while had a stutter/speech problem. If you haven't felt what it's like to be put through that, you just can't understand. I never thoughts of suicide or whining to all the teachers to get my way, but that 2-3 years before I grew into the person I am today were awful. For anyone who thinks it's as easy as fighting back, it's not in any shape or form. I would have GLADLY been beating up one time and be done with it than gone through the mental harassment I did every day. So yeah, to me this type of stuff is just as serious as guys abusing drugs or getting into fights. If you can't understand that, I just don't know what else to say.
-
It's not that I don't understand why the media coverage has been the way that is has with the Incognito case, it's that I don't think that reasoning is justified. I know that it was covered more because open discussion of and criticism of the issue was fairly "new". What I am saying is that if we want to right wrongs, we should prioritize how we react to things based on their severity, not based on their "newness" or "freshness". And when we recognize we are not doing that, we should correct it.
One of my undergraduate degrees is in "Speech/Language Pathology and Audiology", so I've spent some clinical time with children with speech impediments, even though I don't have one myself. Obviously, if I chose that area of study even though it's not what I do for a profession, there's a decent chance I have some compassion for people who live with speech impediments. My family was poor and also moved 10 times before I graduated from high school. When you move that many times, you're going to be the target of some people who don't like the new kid. So was I ever targeted or picked on? For brief periods of time, sure. Did anyone ever make fun of me or say mean things to me? Yep. I don't consider myself as ever having been bullied, though. However, I've seen and worked with (clinically) some kids who have. I'm not saying that it is not an issue to be addressed on some level. I'm saying, let's maintain a sense of perspective and scale about it.
Is bullying a bad/unfortunate thing? Sure. Does it deserve the death penalty? I suppose we'd have to hear the specifics of the case (torture, rape, etc.), but in the vast majority of cases, no. What about in the Richie Incognito case? Did those guys do anything serious enough to warrant severe legal punishment? Think about what they actually did, now. You can't heap all of the punishment for all of the bullying in all of the world on these guys' shoulders. Is what they actually did as serious as raping a woman or beating a woman to the point that you have to drag her out of an elevator? Come on, now. There are serious cases of harassment and bullying out there, but this isn't one of them. If you really think that what these guys did in their locker room was as serious as physically assaulting or raping a woman, then you may have to consider the fact that your own personal experience has left you too biased to consider the situation rationally.
-
I was watching an interview with Scott Pioli - when he was with the Chiefs...
back when Colt McCoy and Suh were at the combine...
and Pioli said that it wasn't just athletic ability, but also who the person the player was,
and how they could be a good fit in the locker room and community.
That avoids, surely, the incognito jerks who for sick reasons, harrass other people
by crossing way past the limit of teasing, joking around.
Nobody is perfect, but allowing extreme harrassment as easily as allowing just teasing somebody,
or giving them some non-personal harmless crap, is dangerous.
Most folks would consider that there are lines of teasing that should not be crossed. Some others
cross it to get attention, I guess. That's screwed up in a bad way.
There was kid in hs.. had disabilities. Walked extremely awkwardly, and had limited use
of one arm, and slurred speech. I remember going back to my locker for something just before class started, and on the way back to class, there this kid was, trying to get to class less late that usual. And there was two football players, Laughing.
Mocking his very awkward movements, and calling him "Retarded" and a bunch of other taunts.
Even to the point of bumping him off gait when he kept trying to ignore them and move away.
All I remember is, I flew off the handle, and told them to knock it off now, and they said they'd
kick my teeth in instead. I yelled that at least I'd be able to fight back.
But before they had time to kick my ass, a male teacher bolted out of his classroom
and instructed me escort this kid to his class, and there was a lot of one sided yelling and those two idiots
were suspended. He had heard what they'd been saying, and was on his way to his door when
I yelled at them. He was a very tough assistant football coach, but he still knew bullying when he heard it.
Now, Logic would think that kid should kill himself ?
Not so one-sided with two pro football players. But crossing the line is still bullying. And can be just as destructive to the one who gets bullied.
-
*sighs, rubs his eyes, and murmurs wearily* No one (with the exception of a few trolls) is saying that bullying isn't wrong or shouldn't be discouraged....
-
Now, without the media going berserk, this should have been handled by
the fo quickly and decisively before it ever went that far.
Failing that, as usual, the media loves a good story, especially about a conflict.
Counseling for incognito, if that doesn't work, suspension.
When that line is belligerently crossed again and again,
it all too often just keeps getting worse.
-
There you go! THAT is a rational response. Thank you, calf.
-
And I wrote it before you posted about sighing and rubbing your eyes.
Pretty good, eh?
-
This has been going on in football locker rooms forever. Then Jonathan Martin came along. He's from the coddled millennium generation and he was the first one to squeal.
Personally, I wouldn't want to be around a guy like Incognito in a work environment .... Unless my work environment was the effing NFL. Then I would embrace it ... Because I was in the NFL! It belongs there. It's tough guys being idiots. Martin should take his Stanford degree and start a nice career as a CPA ... Because doesn't fit in the NFL.
Not a fan of RI, but we all know the NFL is full of guys like that, and they are accepted and embraced ... It is Martin that is out of place.
Go find another place.
Z
Zombo said:
This has been going on in football locker rooms forever. Then Jonathan Martin came along. He's from the coddled millennium generation and he was the first one to squeal.
Personally, I wouldn't want to be around a guy like Incognito in a work environment .... Unless my work environment was the effing NFL. Then I would embrace it ... Because I was in the NFL! It belongs there. It's tough guys being idiots. Martin should take his Stanford degree and start a nice career as a CPA ... Because doesn't fit in the NFL.
Not a fan of RI, but we all know the NFL is full of guys like that, and they are accepted and embraced ... It is Martin that is out of place.
Go find another place.
Z
Pussy retired.
Zombo
--Ya ... Jimmy just quoted Jimmy.
-
martin seems to me like someone that is perfectly suited to play a victim.
needs to be on suicide watch.
-
martin seems to me like someone that is perfectly suited to play a victim.
needs to be on suicide watch.
-
The "NFL" means Not For Long. In his case it was true.
Sayonara.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login