This is a long post. Don't say you weren't warned.
As Jack Cobra just pointed out in my comments section of the last post, there have been a few scandals involving somewhat prominent female figures in the sports world. So, I'll lay off the next "Driving Grievance" post for a few hours, and give a little of my opinion on these issues.
Dana Jacobson, who is a co-host on ESPN's
First Take, got herself in some hot water when she gave an inflammatory speech at a "roast" of Mike Golic and Mike Greenberg in mid-January. No one has seen the footage, but rumor has it that Jacobson was on stage with a bottle of vodka, and said, "F**k Notre Dame, f**k Touchdown Jesus, f**k Jesus."
When Bill Donohue, the founder and seemingly only member of an organization known as the Catholic League, heard about this, he demanded that ESPN do something about it. It took a while, but ESPN eventually suspended Jacobson for one week. Jacobson also issued the following apology:
"I am sorry. My remarks about Notre Dame were foolish and insensitive. I respect all religions and did not mean anything derogatory by my poorly chosen words. I also deeply regret the embarrassment I've caused ESPN and Mike and Mike. My actions at the roast were inappropriate and in no way represent who I am. I won't make excuses for my behavior, but I do hope I can be forgiven for such a poor lack of judgment."
It is interesting that the rumors have Jacobson saying "F**k Jesus," but she doesn't address that in the apology. Maybe she said it, maybe she didn't. But apparently, just offending a Catholic university is enough for Donohue to get on his high horse.
First of all, a little background on this Bill Donohue guy. The dude is an ass-hat, plain and simple. Do you remember the last time you heard about him? It was after Kathy Griffin, who is a comedian, and is therefore paid to be funny, gave her speech at the Creative Emmys (the ones that aren't the big hoopla that is broadcast on network television). In her speech, she said the following:
"A lot of people come up here and thank Jesus for this award. I want you to know that no one had less to do with this award than Jesus. Suck it, Jesus. This award is my god now."
If you ask me, that's damn funny. And, according to someone I know who was at that ceremony, the audience was just eating it up. That particular awards ceremony is often pretty boring, but Griffin made it entertaining for about 30 seconds.
Bill Donohue, however, was not amused, and he went on a rampage (calling Griffin's remarks "hate speech", among other things) until E!, the network that was going to air the edited version of the ceremony, was forced to cut Griffin's speech from its broadcast. The point is, Donohue has no sense of humor (he equated Griffin's comments with those of
Michael Richards and
Don Imus, to give you an idea about this guy's sense of perspective). I'm not sure how he got to the position of power he's in right now, but it seems that the powers that be think that he speaks for all people of faith, and when he says jump, they ask how high.
Here's a few more Donohue quotes, just to give you an idea of the man involved in this mess:
"Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, okay? And I'm not afraid to say it. That's why they hate this movie [The Passion of the Christ]. It's about Jesus Christ, and it's about truth. It's about the messiah. Hollywood likes anal sex."
"This same guy [Dean Hamer] came up with this idea of the gay gene. I remember when that conversation was going on. Gays were all of a sudden worrying if people would start aborting kids when they found out the DNA suggested the kid might be gay or, God forbid, we'd run out of little gay kids, so all of a sudden, they became pro-life."
So, he's a douche, okay? And he really has no right to talk about others spreading "hate speech" or acting like bigots. He's the perfect example of a man in a glass house. And, as we've seen, he has zero sense of humor.
The same is true in this Jacobson case. Let's keep in mind the situation for Ms. Jacobson here. She's at a roast, right? Have you ever seen those old roasts from the 70s with Dean Martin and all those guys? If you
weren't drunk (or at least pretending to be) something was wrong with you. And the entire point is to be offensive. Generally that means being offensive toward the subject of the roast, but it doesn't have to stop there. The rules for a roast are that there are no rules. Anything goes.
Now, granted, this was an ESPN roast. But, still, I don't see what Jacobson did wrong here. She was going for humor, and she invoked the name of a man who many believe to be a prophet. I find a really hard time getting riled up about it, and if Donohue didn't have such a stick up his butt all the time, he might realize that some things can be funny even if they at first seem to blaspheme his lord. I bet Jesus had a pretty good sense of humor, you know? I can see him making a lot of jokes about sandals and robes. Can't you see him walking into a leper colony and going up to some poor soul and saying, "Hey buddy, you got something on your face" and then cracking up with the disciples, before moving on to the healing? He was probably a riot (please, please let Bill Donohue see this blog and attack me. It would be so fun! Maybe I'll email it to him.)
The deal is, there are a lot of Christians and Catholics out there who find this sort of thing funny. No one goes on a public stage in a humorous setting and says, "F**k Jesus" if they really mean to offend all of Christianity. I would think if Jacobson really hated Jesus, an ESPN roast isn't exactly the platform she would choose to make known those beliefs. It was a joke, and, as they say, a joke gets less and less funny the more you have to explain it. And since Bill Donohue is thick-headed, he needs a lot of explanation, and will therefore never understand a joke unless it's something about all gay people dying of AIDS. Because that's obviously hilarious! No explanation needed!
This will blow over, Jacobson will be back on the air soon, and Donohue will move on to his next faux controversy (cross your fingers that it involves this blog).
The other big news centered around a golf anchor, which is funny mainly because I doubt most of us could name a golf anchor (except for, like, Jim Nantz at the Masters) if we were offered one million dollars. A woman named Kelly Tilghman, who is an anchor at the Golf Channel, apparently suggested that the only way to stop Tiger Woods from winning every tournament was to "lynch him in a back alley." Now, because Tiger Woods is a minority, that statement began to receive a lot of press, and Tilghman was accused of being racist. Tilghman apologized, Woods accepted, but a few people were still pretty angry. In fact, the Reverend Al Sharpton eventually got involved, demanding that Tilghman be fired from her position.
Frankly, once again, I think this is much ado about nothing. I really, truly don't believe that Tilghman was intentionally being racist in the situation, because I know I've used the "lynch" term on more than one occasion, in completely innocent situations. Yes, I do think it was unfortunate that she chose to use the word with regard to an African-American. But, I don't think that she was up there with Nick Faldo, chatting amiably, and then suddenly thought, "Oh, I know. Tiger is black, and black people used to be lynched just for being black, so I'll use that word instead of saying 'shot' or 'beaten.'"
Sharpton is somewhat correct when he says that the word "lynch" is a specific racial term, but I think it's gotten away from that in the years since the act itself stopped happening so frequently. I think it
was a specific racial term, but it really is no longer. It's still not widely used in conversation, but when a person, black or white, uses it in the context in which Tilghman used it, I think you have to give her the benefit of the doubt. I don't think Sharpton was correct when he compared what she said to someone calling for a woman to be raped or a Jewish-American to be sent to a gas chamber. Those two things are not quite as innocuous as the word "lynch," which can be used in conversation without meaning "I hate black people," whereas "rape" and "gas chamber" are pretty damn specific.
Tilghman was suspended for two weeks, and the press keeps trying to get
Tiger to say something against her, but he won't. Woods has said in
statements that he is friends with Tilghman and also, "We know
unequivocally that there was no ill intent in her comments." So, Woods
gets it. Why can't Sharpton and the rest of the detractors back off?
Yes, Tilghman probably could have chosen a different word (though I wonder, if she had said "shot" or "beaten", don't you think there's a chance she would still be called racist, simply because she is white, Woods is black and she was advocating violence against him?) but I really don't think she intended any harm. She was simply trying to make a joke about how Woods is unbeatable, and it landed badly (so, if you think about it, this was a very nice compliment). Woods seemed to understand this, even with other prominent African-Americans calling for him to take a stand on the issue. I really can't believe that this is the issue about which they would want him to suddenly get political.
There are thousands of examples of racism out there every single day. It seems to me that the way to make sure your message against that sort of stupidity gets across is to pick your battles. Don't go crying wolf every time something happens that has the appearance of racism. Don Imus? Racist. Kelly Tilghman? Just a poor choice of words. I wish we could all see the disparity between "nappy-headed hos" and "lynch" because there is a world of difference there.
Both these cases involve women, but I'm loathe to jump to the conclusion that it's because they're women that they're receiving all this press. Perhaps that's the case in the Jacobson situation, but since it involves Donohue, it's hard to say. I'm sure he is sexist, but I don't know if that's what he was going for here. It might have gotten more press because women are supposedly more demure and less likely to curse like sailors (I guess I'm the exception to the rule), but that's about it. I think the Tilghman case is all about the racism, and probably would have had the same outcome if Nick Faldo had said it instead of her.
I don't know, though. Maybe I've just been programmed to believe that sexism doesn't happen nearly as often as I think and most men really believe women are equal, and all that. I could just be wary of playing the sexism card because it seems that when female writers do that, they are automatically taken less seriously. What do you think?
COMMENTS:
AUTHOR: Jack Cobra
DATE: 01/25/2008 02:17:47 PM
Thanks for addressing those instances.
Do you think their suspensions/penalties would have been different had a male counterpart did it?
-----
AUTHOR: Erin
DATE: 01/25/2008 02:26:55 PM
It's so hard to tell in these situations, especially since the most recent big uproar over what someone said on television was over a statement from a male (Don Imus). There's a chance that outlets like ESPN and the Golf Channel are just sensitive to any such incident, thanks to the Imus situation, among others, and that it wouldn't matter who said it, male or female.
But, at least in the Jacobson case, I tend to lean toward the opinion that, had a man said it, it wouldn't have been reported as fervently, because it would have been shrugged off as "boys being boys." A woman saying something like that is unusual (or at least perceived to be unusual), so it causes more controversy.
In both these cases, though, I think the specific networks had to do what they did to get people to shut up, and they probably would have had to do the same thing if men said them. So the issue is whether or not people would have reacted so crazily if a man had said either of these two things.
If you're inclined to believe this got more attention because it was women, then I guess you have to say that men wouldn't have received such harsh penalties because the press wouldn't have been so constant and severe.
-----
AUTHOR: Jack Cobra
DATE: 01/25/2008 03:05:13 PM
I think that if Ditka would have walked up to the podium and did the same thing then no one would have thought twice about it.
-----
AUTHOR: Erin
DATE: 01/25/2008 04:16:44 PM
I definitely agree that ESPN would have felt less inclined to apologize, and the press probably would have been minimal because it's somewhat expected of someone like Ditka, so maybe Bill Donohue would never have heard about it. But, if he had, I wonder if his reaction would have been the same.
And what about the Kelly Tilghman thing? If it had been Nick Faldo (who was with her that day) who had said it, would things have been handled differently? That one is a little tougher, I think.
-----
AUTHOR: Bruce Paine
DATE: 01/25/2008 06:11:27 PM
I will say a few things as a social scientist and a historian.
1. F**K Bill Donohue. he is using Catholicism as a bully pulpit with which to aggressively attack people and win approval from a narrow and particular subset of people. He does it for money.
2. I am no fan of the Roman Catholic church. We are Americans. We should know a king when we see one and, by golly, i see a Pope and I smell a king. The church isn't now as they once were, but I am a historian, it takes a long time to forget the past.
I just read your last post and now believe you to be some sort of deity. Goddess might be a strong word, but definitely divine in some godforsaken west coast sort of way. Keep up the good work and try to tow as many cars as possible, pictures of the car being towed would be appreciated.
-----
AUTHOR: mcbias
DATE: 01/26/2008 08:07:19 PM
I'm going to disagree on Kelly. Yes, it was just a slip of the tongue, but it showed something seriously wrong with her thinking. Why lynch? Why not something else like beat or hurt, which would have been fine? I wrote about it myself here (Sorry for the self promotion):
http://mcbias.blogspot.com/2008/01/night-of-tv-kelly-tilghman-and-that.html as to why I feel that it was worse than just a slip of the tongue.
-----
AUTHOR: Erin
DATE: 01/26/2008 10:04:51 PM
Hey, I'm all for self promotion.
I'm only giving Tilghman a break because I
know that I have used the word "lynch" in conversation at some point in my life. And I know that the idea of race was never a part of it. I really, truly think that she could have said it about any player (if, say, Mickelson was winning a lot of tournaments). And I know, as a white woman like Tilghman, that I don't necessarily always think of the word in its historical context. Maybe that's ignorant of me, or maybe it's progressive. It's a fine line. But I can't even believe that she would think of it in its racial context, even subconsciously. Maybe I'm wrong, and comparing myself to her is unjustified because she is a closet racist. But based on what I've heard, I just can't believe it.
But all opinions are always welcome here at Beantown West.
-----
AUTHOR: Erin
DATE: 01/26/2008 10:08:07 PM
Oh, and Bruce, I appreciate the worship, especially because it's just the sort of thing that might piss off Donohue ("no other gods before me" and all that, you know), if I could just get him to read the blog.
-----
AUTHOR: Smeghead52
DATE: 01/30/2008 06:58:12 PM
The lynching comment was unappropriate but I fault the Golf Channel's editors. Isn't all that stuff pre recorded? Didn't it occurr to someone at the Golf Channel you might have a problem with this? Or is the Golf Channel the whitest spot on the Sports TV dial?
Anywho I was watching the golf channel and Nick Faldo was doing a segment where he compared himself to superman for climbing a hill at a Hawaiian golf club. "Except I don't wear my y-fronts (British slang for men's briefs) on the outside.
The this female reporter asked Faldo, "Are you wearing your Y fronts today." Which totally shocked Faldo. She was trying to be cute and failed. Thats like asking someone if they're wearing underwear--which is how Faldo took it--on tv.
I wonder if it was the same woman?
Anywho SI is supposedly going to have a cover shot of Tiger as Jesus and Jack Nicholson as a disciple and Fuzzy Zoeller as Judas in a pose like the last supper. They're going to use look a likes. I don't know if this is in bad taste or not.
-----