On a popular social networking site, CNN correspondent Roland Martin, made the following observations:
"If a dude at your Super Bowl party is hyped about David Beckham's H&M underwear ad, smack the ish out of him! #superbowl”
"Who the hell was that New England Patriot they just showed in a head to toe pink suit? Oh, he needs a visit from #teamwhipdatass,"
As a result of using his freedom of speech, Rolland Martin, a man I am not a fan of btw, was suspended from his job, had his reputation sullied, and will forever been known as a homophobe. Forgive the cliché, but the punishment does not match the crime.
There are two interpretations of his statements 1) Is the reasonable assumption that a man who is excited about David Beckham underwear (or David Beckham wearing underwear) may be playing for the other team. 2) That a man excited about soccer or a soccer player is not a truly committed American football fan. To both of these interpretations I yawn and say so what? What’s the problem? Well the problem is that the Gay Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) and its supporters got their feelings hurt and collective panties tied in knots. In response to Rolands remarks they cried that they were offended (boo-who) and pressured CNN to suspend Martin. Really????? You don’t like what a man writes on his personal twitter account and so you elect to have him fired. Now if Martin had said, “Hey after the Superbowl let’s get together and assault a group of homosexuals,” there might be some cause for offense. But the man did not say anything that would reasonably incite violence. Censorship pisses me off.
In response to this idiocy, I wrote on my own personal Facebook status:
“so this politically correct garbage is way out of hand. You fire someone cuz he implies that a man who likes david beckam underwear is gay! What!!! Of course any many who wears underwear like that is a flaming faggot! Yeah I said it. Now try to fire me GLAAD.”
And there were people who actually intimated that I was using ‘hate speech’. HUH??? Save such rhetoric for Rev Phelps and his “God hates fags” cronies. Anyway, being a level headed person who does not substitute emotions for logic. I decided to research what exactly hate speech was. According to Wikipedia, “hate speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group.”
This definition is inadequate because basically anything a person says that makes someone else unhappy could be potentially labeled “hate speech”. In fact by writing this post, somebody could call Google and have my blog removed because my unapologetic way of addressing censorship can be construed as ‘hate speech”.
This ambiguous definition of “hate speech” makes me ask:, ‘who was hurt by what I said? Who suffered serious repercussions because of what Martin said? Did one of Martin’s Beckham-loving Superbowl friends get assaulted as a result of his comments? Were any people scrutinized, harassed, or subjected to serious consequences as a result of those statements? Whose rights were seriously infringed upon? Martin’s! Martin loss his right to tweet, his job, and his reputation.
For the love of reason! People say and do offensive things every day. What ever happened to simply saying “I disagree with that” and keeping it moving? I hate Fox News, for example. I think the entire network breeds hate. Many of their commentaries and pieces of yellow journalism “offend me” and even make me angry. So what? Does that mean that those commentators don’t have a right to say these offensive things? Does that mean that the entire network should be shut down? Guess what my solution is to Fox News: I simply don’t watch it because I know that their reactionary garbage is going to offend me.
And here is another News Flash: people can say something that makes you angry without hating you. I used the words “flaming faggot” yesterday in a Facebook status to be openly defiant against GLAAD (the nice gays that got Martin suspended), Big Brother, and the censorship police of the week. What happened? My initial point was discarded and people accused me of using “hate speech”. Then, the conversation that followed became a debate about the legitimacy of homosexuality, and gay marriage, and religion and all those things I never intended it to be. For the record, I don’t typically use the word faggot (which I vehemently refuse to call the “fword’). I used it simply because I could! And because I have the right to post whatever I want on my Facebook page until the censors shut it down and they campaign to have me fired. My point was that I refuse to develop a case of political correctness like the majority of the world has succumbed to. I also used that derogatory word because I thought it would draw attention to the article I posted about Martin.
Interestingly enough, many of the same friends (and yes, I consider you friends) who posted on my wall, listen to music that repeatedly uses the word 'nigger' and disparages women as "b*** and hoes." So we can listen to music and support artists that demean black Americans and women, we can even post inflammatory anti-Christian photos on our wall (you know who you are), but we better not use the word “fag” lest we hurt someone’s feelings? Give me a break. And I say this respectfully, because I like having friends!
The last issue I want to address in this run-on blog is a sentiment that angers me to the core of my being: that the homosexual agenda is on par with the black civil rights movement in this country. Let’s be clear, the gay agenda is NOT as much about equal rights as it is an “in your face’ approach to coercing people to accept a sexual preference or lifestyle as legitimate. Yeah I said it. When was the last time a gay community was taken out of their native country, had their culture ripped away from them, enslaved, considered 3/5’s of a person, subjected to legally imposed segregation, disenfranchised (for those of you who don’t know, gays have always had the right to vote) and told to sit in the back of the proverbial bus. Give up, historians? NEVER! Truth: gays as a community have not been subject to the same level of historical discrimination, violence, segregation, and enslavement as black Americans, or the genocide that Native American people and other true minorities have had to suffer through. Have individual gay people been subject to discriminatory practices? Absolutely! But to compare their plight with that of African American civil rights in this country is tantamount to likening the Holocaust to a traffic jam or the Rwanda Genocide to an inconvenience. There’s just no comparison.
So back to my original point. Just because a comment is mean-spirited, derogatory, or a bad judgment call, does not mean its hate speech. We have devolved to a society where almost any other group is fair game to demean (especially Christian groups) and almost anything goes, but homosexuality has become our sacred cow. If we imply anything about a homosexual person we are labeled homophobic and must be stigmatized and subjected to the most extreme consequences? We have gotten to a point where all someone has to do is cry “hate speech” and any person or organization can be castigated! We have collectively become a bunch of overly-sensitive toddlers, who will demand the most serious of repercussions if someone says something we do not like. Our selective hypersensitivity and political correctness is going to lead to a muted society, that’s afraid to speak out against social ills for fear of offending someone.
Because I support free speech, feel free to disagree with me.