Off Topic: Woman/man or PC/Non-PC thing ?

mslacat · Post by **mslacat** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 12:43 pm

This is off MSU topic but it still has to do with sports.
Last week end my wife and I had some friends over at the house. Basically two other
couples. The women were all co-workers with my wife and all from the social worker /
Physiology side of the employment spectrum. There husbands, like myself are not. The
subject turned to sports and more specifically the Denver Bronco. It was mentioned that
Shannon Sharpe retired from the Bronco's and was going to replace Dion Sanders at CBS
as a reporter . My wife asked why would CBS hire Sharpe with no TV experience. My
response was the CBS most likely wanted a color commentator with NFL experience.
Dead silence and the end of conversation or so I thought........ About 20 minutes later I am cornered by the
women with the following statements. We are offended that you would use the terms,
you did to refer to a black man, and why on earth would CBS insist on hiring a black man
to replace another? What are you really trying to say! The guy's were dumb founded on
where this came from until my friend remember I used the term "Color Commentator".
We explained that their is a difference between a "Color Commentator" and a "Colored
Commentator"(excuse my language). To a man all the all the men knew that I was
referring to a Color Commentator. To a women all of the women thought I was referring
to a "Colored Commentator" (again excuse my language). So the question of the week
is miscommunication due to a man vrs. woman issue or is it a politically correct vrs
insensitive slob issue.

The real kicker to this whole thing is that my wife used to work in radio in Eastern
Montana and Kansas and actually has done broadcasts for highschool baseball and
basketball games

Post by **kmax** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 12:56 pm

The only thing that this has to do with "PC" is the fact that people are now WAY too sensitive when it comes to anything that could be non-pc that they don't even bother to understand what someone is saying before they jump to conclusions. It is very obvious that the term color-commentator has nothing to do with race or PC. If it did, in this day and age, no doubt some sports broadcaster (can I use the term "broad"?

) would have been sued by now.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:17 pm

The ironic part is, what they thought they heard was probably right as well. It happened in the Supreme Court (Thomas for Marshall), and I'm sure CBS wants to keep a representative diversity in the studio as well. Interesting topic -- I would assume that the women who were offended are likely in favor of affirmative action (I'm guessing on that one), so they should have almost been happy about that sort of thing.

Since you opened up this whole topic, I know I hear the term "people of color" used a lot, especially by civil rights leaders, but we know that "colored" is not acceptable. Similarly, "Oriental" became taboo in about 1993 in this area, as far as anyone can tell (I've had this discussion with different Asians many times, and that's what we have come up with so far), whereas previously it wasn't considered derogatory.

I am all for avoiding terms that offend people, especially if it is just as easy for me to use a different one that everybody likes at that particular time. Who I feel sorry for are the people who don't get the memo when a term goes out of fashion, and get yelled at for offending someone else when there was no intent to offend.

A friend of mine in IT overheard a woman at their company IT helpdesk have a conversation with a guy from Georgia. The woman asked the guy who he had talked to previously at the helpdesk. He apparently replied, "I think it was an Oriental person," due to the accent. She came unglued and ripped him a new one for being a racist. The helpdesk person never stopped to think that our Silicon Valley accepted terminology for ethnic groups might not apply worldwide, or even across the U.S.

As an aside, in the U.K., people from India are called "Asians," and people from Asia major are called "Orientals," and that's the socially accepted norm.

Things get so complicated.

Seriously, though, that's a funny story. Most of the women I hang out with know more about sports than I do, so I miss out on a lot of the semantics divide between men and women when it comes to sports.

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:44 pm

so, does that woman from the help desk come unglued when she goes to a cafe and see's Oriental Chicken Salad on the menu? If that happened to me, I would ripped her right back.

Helpdesk lady: "You racist sons-a-bitches shouldn't have this on the menu, it should be Asian Poultry Non-Fat Greens!"

Trucker: "I'll just have the honky soup with some crackers"

Helpdesk lady: "Damn all of you!"

wbtfg · Post by **wbtfg** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:49 pm

The arguement (not that I understand it) is that Rugs/Lamps/Food...etc are oriental, people are not oriental, they are asian.

Bleedinbluengold · Post by **Bleedinbluengold** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 1:55 pm

Interesting, BAC. Here's another one:

Why is it fine to say, "...for the sake of Christ", but, "...for Christ's sake" is not?

Mslacat - tell the women-folk to lighten up for Christ's sake!

raincat · Post by **raincat** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 2:28 pm

Years ago for my fourth birthday (well after WWII), my sacred grandmother gave me a story book. She even signed it, "To Raincat, from Gram on your 4th birthday." It was written by a leading female educator of the time; a lady from Virginia. It is well illustrated in a sort of soft charchol, pencil sketch style. When we have dinner parties, and as the evening mellows with the glow of fine wine, I bring out this work, properly introduce it to my guests then begin reading, "Little Brown Coca Has Fun". The reactions are stupifying...all over the board. The references to stealing "chikins" and sharing watermellon with his "sassy girlfriend, Bertha" bring stares of disbelief from the younger guests and nods of understanding from the older folks. It's a real socialogical study and never fails to generate spirited discussion clear until we run out of coffee. When you look at the evolution of this great country over the past 50 or so years, you come to understand that the changes have been profound and varied. Truth is, not everyone was on the same page to begin with and never will be.

raincat · Post by **raincat** » Thu Jun 17, 2004 2:31 pm

Great post, Bleedin!!!