Jimmy the Greek Documentery

[Demonpenz]

Saw this yesterday on ESPN, very good, I am wondering why he got everyone so fired up with is black comments. I thought they were spot on. If anyone sees a repeat I recommend watching it.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

penzing aside, it was an alright documentary. I still might throw a bone in Phyllis George.

[BigRedChief]

Saw this yesterday on ESPN, very good, I am wondering why he got everyone so fired up with is black comments. I thought they were spot on. If anyone sees a repeat I recommend watching it.It was the begining of the political correctness in america. What he said was wrong but, he didn't need to have his life destroyed for it.

Cossell had been a firece advocate of African-Americans, tons of charity work and spoke out publically for equality for all but he called someone a monkey and all of a sudden he's a racist?

[kcxiv]

People's assholes towards this are to tight. People have to understand there will always be some kind of racism. There will always be stereotypes. Just have to say eh and dont let it get under your skin.

I have said this time and time again. I am a minority and it doesnt bother me. If you say something about my race and try to make fun of me about it. So what, i have done the same.



I liked Jimmy the Greek. I remember him growing up. So long ago

[ChiTown]

penzing aside, it was an alright documentary. I still might throw a bone in Phyllis George.

+1 om the PG comment

[Demonpenz]

holy hell that lady looked good for being old

[Demonpenz]

I guess I don't even know what to google, but I am guessing it is rare that black athletes at slaves in their ancistery?

[Rain Man]

The frenzy over his statements was overblown, in my opinion, but I think it might be more because (I think) he was flat-out wrong.

I'm no expert on slavery at all, so let me know if I'm completely wrong, but first, there were a lot of free blacks in the north who weren't slaves, and second, I don't have the impression that slaves in the south were selectively bred. The little I know about them is that for the most part their social activities were not regulated to that level, so they married however they wanted to marry, but with the knowledge that the slave owner could sell one of them separately. But even then, I think they tended to be sold as family units.

This is based on little knowledge and mostly perception and at least two watchings of Roots, so if someone knows more about it, they can correct me.

But if I'm correct, then I would think Jimmy's comments were more offensive because they were describing policies that didn't exist and were even more dehumanizing than the real story of slavery.

[Demonpenz]

thanks rainman I honestly didn't know

[oldandslow]

Most slave-owners encouraged their slaves to marry. It was believed that married men was less likely to be rebellious or to run away. It was in the interests of plantation owners for women to have children. The children of slaves were considered a renewable resource. Why spend a lot of money buying slaves when you could produce your own?

There were some breeding policies. For example, Thomas Jefferson wrote:
http://www.oah.org/pubs/magazine/earlyre…

To John W. Eppes

Monticello June 30. [18]20.

...having scruples about selling negroes but for delinquency or on their own request...I know no error more consurning to an estate than that of stocking farms with men almost exclusively. I consider a woman who brings a child every two years as more profitable than the best man of the farm. what she produces is an addition to capital, while his labors disappear in mere consumption...(Farm Book, 45-46).

[KJROD20]

all of the 30 for 30s have been pretty good. I'm really looking forward to the Reggie Miller one. Looks like it will be hilarious.

[googlegoogle]

The media profits from it.

They are the ones to blame. There is also an activist crowd in media.

[Rain Man]

Most slave-owners encouraged their slaves to marry. It was believed that married men was less likely to be rebellious or to run away. It was in the interests of plantation owners for women to have children. The children of slaves were considered a renewable resource. Why spend a lot of money buying slaves when you could produce your own?

There were some breeding policies. For example, Thomas Jefferson wrote:
http://www.oah.org/pubs/magazine/earlyre…

To John W. Eppes

Monticello June 30. [18]20.

...having scruples about selling negroes but for delinquency or on their own request...I know no error more consurning to an estate than that of stocking farms with men almost exclusively. I consider a woman who brings a child every two years as more profitable than the best man of the farm. what she produces is an addition to capital, while his labors disappear in mere consumption...(Farm Book, 45-46).



Interesting stuff. But now I'm curious. Did African tribes have the same concept of marriage, or was that a western thing? Based on reading about the AIDS problem in Africa, I thought native African culture (recognizing there are a zillion African cultures, so I'm generalizing) was more of a sleep-around kind of culture, even if you had a wife. Instead of promoting marrying and facing the possibility of one of the parties being sterile and not producing children, wouldn't you instead promote promiscuity to maximize children? Or would that have ended up in fighting and stuff? Unless it really conflicted with their cultural mores, it seems to me that a slave living in a place where he could boink multiple women would be more likely to hang around.

[bowener]

Interesting stuff. But now I'm curious. Did African tribes have the same concept of marriage, or was that a western thing? Based on reading about the AIDS problem in Africa, I thought native African culture (recognizing there are a zillion African cultures, so I'm generalizing) was more of a sleep-around kind of culture, even if you had a wife. Instead of promoting marrying and facing the possibility of one of the parties being sterile and not producing children, wouldn't you instead promote promiscuity to maximize children? Or would that have ended up in fighting and stuff? Unless it really conflicted with their cultural mores, it seems to me that a slave living in a place where he could boink multiple women would be more likely to hang around.

I only had one course on West African peoples (turns out calling them tribes is both wrong and pisses them off), and from what I remember they were monogamists. What I found most interesting was the structure of their inheritance (for at least one of the groups). The son inherits his uncle's land (normally on the mothers side IIRC), and if there is no son, then it is absorbed by the uncle and his family.

[Titty Meat]

PC is bullshit anyways.

[bowener]

PC is bullshit anyways.

Yeah, no shit. Macs all teh way!!!1!!

[Rain Man]

I only had one course on West African peoples (turns out calling them tribes is both wrong and pisses them off), and from what I remember they were monogamists. What I found most interesting was the structure of their inheritance (for at least one of the groups). The son inherits his uncle's land (normally on the mothers side IIRC), and if there is no son, then it is absorbed by the uncle and his family.

Why did it work that way?

[Baby Lee]

The frenzy over his statements was overblown, in my opinion, but I think it might be more because (I think) he was flat-out wrong.

I'm no expert on slavery at all, so let me know if I'm completely wrong, but first, there were a lot of free blacks in the north who weren't slaves, and second, I don't have the impression that slaves in the south were selectively bred. The little I know about them is that for the most part their social activities were not regulated to that level, so they married however they wanted to marry, but with the knowledge that the slave owner could sell one of them separately. But even then, I think they tended to be sold as family units.

This is based on little knowledge and mostly perception and at least two watchings of Roots, so if someone knows more about it, they can correct me.

But if I'm correct, then I would think Jimmy's comments were more offensive because they were describing policies that didn't exist and were even more dehumanizing than the real story of slavery.

IIRC, this came right on the heels of Campanis' remarks [mentioned in the doc in passing] and was just weeks before Doug Williams was set to appear in the SB as the first black QB. There was an honest discussion, in hushed tones and private places, about how blacks could do 'athletic' things in sports, but not 'cerebral' things like QBing and coaching.

Plus, if you paid close attention, beyond the 'bred bucks' and 'extra bone in the ankle' there was a lament that, if the blacks burst into coaching and QBing and the rest of it, there wouldn't be anything left for whites to do in sports, which is an altogether different animal from historical hypothesizing.

Campanis' infamous remarks took place on the late-night ABC News program Nightline, coinciding with the 40th anniversary of Jackie Robinson's Major League Baseball debut (April 15, 1947). Campanis, who had played alongside Robinson and was known for being close to him, was being interviewed about the subject. Nightline anchorman Ted Koppel asked him why, at the time, there had been few black managers and no black general managers in Major League Baseball. Campanis' reply was that blacks "may not have some of the necessities to be, let's say, a field manager, or, perhaps, a general manager" for these positions. Elsewhere in the interview he said that blacks are often poor swimmers "because they don't have the buoyancy." Koppel says he gave Campanis several opportunities to clarify ("Do you really believe that?") or back down on his remarks but Campanis confirmed his views with his replies. A protest erupted the next morning and he resigned two days later.

[Mojo Jojo]

IIRC, this came right on the heels of Campanis' remarks [mentioned in the doc in passing] and was just weeks before Doug Williams was set to appear in the SB as the first black QB. There was an honest discussion, in hushed tones and private places, about how blacks could do 'athletic' things in sports, but not 'cerebral' things like QBing and coaching.

Plus, if you paid close attention, beyond the 'bred bucks' and 'extra bone in the ankle' there was a lament that, if the blacks burst into coaching and QBing and the rest of it, there wouldn't be anything left for whites to do in sports, which is an altogether different animal from historical hypothesizing.

BINGO...We have a winner. I am shocked and in disgust at Chiefs Planet that it took 18 posts before someone related it to Al Campanis. The comments Al made on "Nightline" changed the way color was to be viewed among athletes. Al made his comments about 18 months earlier...got fired and suddenly MLB had to change the way they hire front office and coaching personnel...then JTG makes his comments (Drunk in a restaurant) on camera and CBS had to fire him.

For those of you in KC you may recall Carol Coe tried to hold up stadium financing in the early '90's until the Chiefs and Royals hired more black people.
She even forced the two front offices to publicly release all employee salaries and she broke them down into black and white. Of course she left out the players salaries.