The Issue of Racism in America

Python wrote:

I recently revisited the Black Bond thread and was shocked to see the amount of racism that went unpunished..

:roll: "Schocked" Again, what the hell are you talking about?! If some discussions are over your head,
eg
https://bondandbeyond.forumotion.com/t824p135-the-inevitability-of-a-black-bond, maybe you should stay clear of such discussions.

Calling fellows members and mods racist is something we would expect from Jack Wade. Whining to M is also something we expect from Jack Wade.

Python wrote:

I dunno, saying that black people by nature are corrupt isn't something attractive for newcomers.

Agaiin, it would behoove you to attribute this accusation.

I'm beginning to think the whining to M (M's "inbox full of complaints") is without either substance or merit; a tempest in a teapot caused by the usual suspects.

But if the goal was to get GS to take his ball elsewhere. Then well done. A nice bit of Machiavellian strategy.

You take things too lightly, and I never took any of this to M. The insensitive comments were just news to me recently. I gave you a page full of examples but I suppose that that's not enough to get it through. I'll post examples later when I have access to a computer.

Python wrote:

I'll post examples later when I have access to a computer.

That would behoove you, if you are going to accuse board members and fellow mods of being racist.

It's not just accusations, it's that they could be perceived as racist if not phrased right. Like when Gravy said minorities should just assimilate to white culture. That could mean a lot of things, I think a better way of phrasing that is that certain groups within minorities should become more active in helping America become a better place in a positive way. In short, we should help each other rather better. Like us mods, I want to get us to represent this site better.

Δ

Python wrote:

It's not just accusations, it's that they could be perceived as racist if not phrased right. Like when Gravy said minorities should just assimilate to white culture. That could mean a lot of things, I think a better way of phrasing that is that certain groups within minorities should become more active in helping America become a better place in a positive way. In short, we should help each other rather better. Like us mods, I want to get us to represent this site better.

In the interest of decorum, let's just agree to disagree. I've reviewed that entire page. There is nothing remotely racist IMO anywhere on the page. In fact the most grievous post is my own, in which I blithely stated that it was John Pearson who first referenced Bond as having a baby by Kissy Suzuki, when in fact it was Fleming himself in YOLT. Pearson merely picked up on Fleming's thread, so my bad there. That sort of unconscionable error on a Bond board is decidedly not good for our rep. :oops:
But if you have different thoughts re the discussion on that page, that's your call, and I do respect that. I would however humbly suggest that no-one engaged in discussion anywhere on that page is a racist. I don't share your concerns over perception and phrasing things just right. I am more concerned that there not be actual racist comments, and in that regard I am quite satisfied that there aren't. In fact two members in particular engage a particularly robust intellectual discussion, which is worth revisiting. There can be some really good back-and-forth on this board.
I don't think you do GS justice with this comment, "Like when Gravy said minorities should just assimilate to white culture" as I don't believe he actually said that. It requires the actual quote, otherwise it's not right to put those words in his mouth. Although I am happy to stand corrected if the quote does in fact exist.
Meanwhile, I retract my request that you serve up "offending" quotes from the page, including the one above. The fact that you are talking about interpretation etc suggests you don't find anything on that page to actually be, ipso facto racist, so forget about it. I respect you have your opinions, just like the rest of us, and that you are committed to moderating the board in a civil and respectful way.
I do think we need to moderate the board for civility and blatant name-calling and snark, but not for "quality of opinon." It's a somewhat subjective exercise, but it's what mods have to do. And if the response from those being cautioned is "Fuck You", then we mods need to be able to put the offender in the penalty box for a week or a month or whatever, just like a ref in a hockey game. Otherwise why bother if "Fuck You" is an appropriate response.
That can't easily be done right now though, as we have about 20 odd persons with mod or sectional-mod status, including one of our most belligerent members, and I'm not even sure we even have a mod section, as this section here seems like its wideopen. I only noticed that now, so I actually apologize for calling you out Python in the public forums. In the interest of decorum, such call-outs should be done in an actual mods-only section, where Admin can also referee, but I am not sure that that section actually exists.
Anyway, I'm sorry that we lost Grav. I'm not blaming you. He's a big boy. From one rabid Bond fan to another, peace.

Δ

Largo's Shark wrote:

timmer wrote:

That can't easily be done right now though, as we have about 20 odd persons with mod or sectional-mod status, including one of our most belligerent members, and I'm not even sure we even have a mod section, as this section here seems like its wideopen.

The only non-mods who can see it are me, Ambler and his harem. Someone needs to moderate the moderators.

Sooner the better so we can move on or whatever. Steam ahead.

Hawks owner Bruce Levenson to sell team after revealing he wrote racist email

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/hawks-owner-bruce-levenson-to-sell-team-after-revealing-he-wrote-racist-email-155827737.html

The NBA has posted a copy of Bruce Levenson's email on their own website:

http://www.nba.com/hawks/copy-bruce-levensons-email

Why am I uniquely qualified to comment on this? For several reasons:
#1 For 42 years I lived/worked in/around Atlanta. It's my home, more or less.
#2 I used to go to Hawks games back in the early 80's when they were fairly competitive with Dominique Wilkins
#3 This is CLEARLY a reaction to the situation that occurred earlier in the year with Donald Sterling...yet....
#4 The circumstances are completely different. In fact, a lot of the feedback I'm reading right now suggests that people are skeptical of Bruce Levinson's motives for coming forward to the NBA with this information. Is Levenson expecting the kind of payday that Donald Sterling got? Did Levenson snitch on himself in order to get more money? To do a preemptive strike in case someone else tried to leak the email? If he thinks he's getting $2 billion dollars to go away like Sterling got, he'd be sadly mistaken. The Clippers sold for $2 billion because they're in L.A., and assumed to be a team that is on the rise. The Atlanta team is simply not worth $2 billion; they have no stars on the team, and as Levenson's email brings out, there are no immediate prospects for increased sales in concessions, merchandise, tv revenue, etc....due to the income level of the people who ARE actually attending the game.

But what about the actual email itself? Here's an interesting sample from his letter:



"My theory is that the black crowd scared away the whites and there are simply not enough affluent black fans to build a signficant season ticket base. Please dont get me wrong. There was nothing threatening going on in the arean back then. i never felt uncomfortable, but i think southern whites simply were not comfortable being in an arena or at a bar where they were in the minority. On fan sites i would read comments about how dangerous it is around philips yet in our 9 years, i don't know of a mugging or even a pick pocket incident. This was just racist garbage. When I hear some people saying the arena is in the wrong place I think it is code for there are too many blacks at the games."


Interesting. Who exactly IS he throwing under the bus? Doesn't sound like he's blaming the black community.

This is probably what got him in (allegedly) hot water:

"when digging into why our season ticket base is so small, i was told it is because we can't get 35-55 white males and corporations to buy season tixs and they are the primary demo for season tickets around the league. when i pushed further, folks generally shrugged their shoulders.  then i start looking around our arena during games and notice the following:

-- it's 70 pct black
-- the cheerleaders are black
-- the music is hip hop
-- at the bars it's 90 pct black
-- there are few fathers and sons at the games
-- we are doing after game concerts to attract more fans and the concerts are either hip hop or gospel."

Well, I can address at least one of those items: 72% of all black children born are born to single women, and single women of any color are always going to be at a disadvantage as opposed to bringing a child into a stable, 2-parent family. And when you consider how many black men are in jail, prison, probation or on parole, it's no surprise you don't see many father/son combos at the game; they're the nucleus of any good sports demographic. But I digress.

Levenson is DEAD RIGHT that there is an unspoken fear/concern/bias coming from suburban whites about traveling to downtown Atlanta to  do business, go to a sporting event, or any other sort of tourist location, where the perception is that whites will be particular targets of opportunity for black crime because of their color (being white). Whether that concern is legit or not I cannot say; everyone must come to their own reality. But why do we really believe the Atlanta Braves are moving to the suburbs and out of downtown Atlanta in 2017? The place they are current playing in, Turner Field, *WAS* Olympic Stadium when we hosted the 1996 Summer Olympics. You mean the stadium is worthless only 17 years later? The Braves shared Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium with the Falcons for 25 years, and now they're too good for a new stadium they've had to themselves for 17 years?

What Levenson TOTALLY MISSES/IGNORES is a much larger issue in American sports: the cost to the average fan. The fan who doesn't have tickets bought by a corporation. The fan that has to pay 40 dollars to park, 15 dollars for a beer (going rate at the new Levi Stadium outside of San Francisco; home to the 69'ers), 8 dollars for a hot dog, and $105 for a ticket (I spent $105 dollars going to a NASCAR race two weeks ago, and that was without even paying for transportation, parking, concessions, or souvenirs). It's another big reason why people are spending more and more money on BIG SCREEN HD-TVs and watching all manner of sports from their homes, and why television revenue for sports such as NASCAR and football continues to be the biggest single source of income for these sports.

The Braves are actually moving into a smaller stadium if you can believe that. So what will that mean? What it will mean is that the price of each ticket will actually go up to offset the potential lost revenue of having fewer seats, and to help pay for those GINORMOUS players salaries. Once again, the average fan continues to get screwed like a politician's whore.

All of this may have been a moot point if the Falcons and Braves had won any championships/Super Bowls recently. People are willing to pay to see the best. And while they've been competitive the past few years, the Hawks have not. And yet Levenson's most offensive assumption is that people of any color should be expected to support a team of millionaires and billionaires, with whatever piece of scrap disposable income they can come up with, while the team continues to fail year in and year out.

According to 2010 census, Northwest, Southwest, and Southeast Atlanta are 92% black - that's a huge majority. I don't know about the socioeconomic demographics of these areas or of most NBA fans in general. Does it have a strong working class following?

This is a classic thread where good times were had.

Largo's Shark wrote:

According to 2010 census, Northwest, Southwest, and Southeast Atlanta are 92% black - that's a huge majority. I don't know about the socioeconomic demographics of these areas or of most NBA fans in general. Does it have a strong working class following?

No, not really. Atlanta has a decent size upper middle-class and wealthy community, but the demographics for the area around Phillips Arena are mostly lower-middle and low-income black families. Like anyone wanting to diversify their stock portfolio or bank holdings, Levenson wanted to bring in money from a variety of different sources. He can't get the company to make the money HE THINKS IT SHOULD BE MAKING if he always has to rely on poor, low-income people. Again, I ask, why are the Atlanta Braves leaving downtown Atlanta and moving to the suburbs *AND* to a smaller stadium?

A few years ago, Jessie Jackson "partnered" with NASCAR to help do a "minority outreach program" to the black community in an effort to bring more black people to the races:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/motor/nascar/2003-07-28-jackson-support_x.htm

"As NASCAR tries to break out of its Southern roots and become a mainstream sport, officials have become more sensitive about racing's lack of racial diversity. NASCAR has only one black driver (gasp!), Class AA-level Craftsman Truck series driver Bill Lester, racing in its top three national series. Only a handful of teams' crew members and NASCAR's at-track officials are black (shock!). Fans are predominantly white (oh the humanity!), and confederate flags can be seen at some tracks (ouch)."

The context is slightly different, but one can draw useful lessons from both stories. When the "diversity outreach" is aimed at bringing in black consumers, it's a good thing, and n'ary a word is said. When the diversity outreach program is aimed at bringing in more white males, everyone in the media goes absolutely bat-shit insane, and charges of "Racism!" start flying.

Yes, Levenson said 'the kiss cam is too black', and that was dumb on his part. What other color would it be when 90% of your audience is black? The kiss-cam is probably too-straight, as I doubt any gay couples are being shown on it. But Levenson's comments really aren't all that different than what the writer, Chris Jenkins, wrote for USA TODAY, and nobody ever had a problem with that, or similar,articles. What's the difference between openly worrying that the kiss-cam is "too black", and that the stands at a NASCAR event are 'too white'?

One key difference is that Jesse Jackson shook down worked with NASCAR, not because NASCAR needed the money from the black consumer, but because activists such as himself can't stand seeing any event where anybody is enjoying themselves that doesn't include a "person of color". NASCAR was paying Jesse Jackson's RAINBOW/PUSH organization, and got nothing out of it. At least Levenson was looking for a way to keep The Hawks in downtown Atlanta (something the Braves have chosen not to do). Levenson wanted to see more green; Jackson wanted to see more black.

But Jason Whitlock wrote, I think, the best article I've read on this situation. I'm not sure I could add another word to it, so I 'll illegally copy and paste it here:


----------------------------------

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11493472/jason-whitlock-bruce-levenson-atlanta-hawks

Let's start here: Based on his controversial, allegedly racially insensitive internal email, Atlanta Hawks co-owner Bruce Levenson has far more in common with the writer of this column than disgraced Clippers owner Donald Sterling.

Maybe Levenson has some documented, Sterling-like history of racial discrimination that has yet to be revealed. Maybe Levenson swiftly fell on the racial-guilt sword and offered to sell the team because he knows his life history won't survive a hypothetical external investigation led by the media and racial opportunists.

Or maybe -- and this is what I believe -- Levenson is a victim of toxic, internal-ownership dysfunction within the Hawks organization. And maybe the NBA is about to lose a good owner and a good man, one who had the courage to speak out publicly for the removal of Sterling, because few people have the courage to objectively and transparently judge his 2012 email.

NBA legend Kareem Abdul-Jabbar wrote a terrific piece for Time that defended Levenson. I'd like to add my voice. Levenson's email sounded very much like conversations I led with my radio staff in Kansas City years ago when I was trying to make my show more inclusive of white listeners and callers. As the lone black host at two different all-sports stations, black callers and listeners dominated my show. Black advertisers did not. The show was financially supported primarily by white businesses, and the largest demographic for listener growth was white males.

We had the task of maintaining a show that remained relevant with black listeners while being inclusive of white people. At my direction, we made a concerted effort to cultivate white males as regular callers to the show. When it came to on-air contests, radio remotes and special events, we made a special effort to be inclusive of white men. As someone who has an affinity and passion for discussing racial and cultural issues, I made it a point to only discuss those issues when they really mattered and not turn the shows into Malcolm X Unplugged. The music we played going in and out of commercial breaks was closely monitored and was intentionally peppered with the rock music I enjoy (a lot of Bon Jovi). We made it a point to use the contacts/sources I established as a newspaper sports columnist to invite a diverse group of expert guests.

My point: The show was black and highly inclusive and accessible for all people. We wanted to be the Oprah Winfrey of sports talk.

To its credit, radio station management never asked me to do any of these things. We did them because we wanted to compete in the ratings and we wanted to maintain healthy relationships with our advertisers. We accomplished our goals while serving a diverse audience.

If all of my instructions to staff during the seven years I hosted a radio show were written down and examined, I'd sound a lot like Bruce Levenson. Hell, I might sound much worse. The path to inclusion and diversity is not paved with precise, pretty words.

Levenson's email paints him as a man trying to be inclusive while trying to expand his business. In an effort to increase fan support, the Atlanta Braves will be moving to Cobb County, Georgia, the suburbs, in 2016, abandoning Turner Field and downtown Atlanta. It's called "white flight." Levenson was trying to avoid white flight.

I guarantee you the next owner of the Hawks -- regardless of race -- won't care. He'll overpay for the privilege of owning the team, and he'll look to maximize profits by any means necessary. If that means moving to the suburbs at the first possible opportunity, he will do just that. I bet the kiss cam, cheerleaders, season-ticket base and everything else will look much whiter in an Atlanta suburb.

And then the new owner of the Atlanta Hawks will write an email complaining that the cheerleaders, kiss cam, music and season-ticket base are too white, and the media and racial opportunists will applaud the new owner for being a champion of diversity.

Atlanta is Exhibit A in my belief that the marriage between hip-hop and sports is a failure. The NBA and Atlanta are supposed to be the ideal marriage -- a wealthy black city with a huge hip-hop legacy. You'd think the Hawks would have an enormous demand for season tickets. They've qualified for the playoffs seven straight years. But all you hear is the team "stinks" and why Atlantans shouldn't support bad ownership.

Is Levenson a bad owner? I don't think so. I do think he's part of a bad, dysfunctional ownership group.

Two different groups -- one based in Atlanta and one in Washington, D.C. -- share ownership of the Hawks. Levenson is the leader of the most powerful group, the one in our nation's capital. The group in Atlanta launched the internal investigation that resulted in Levenson's demise. Michael Gearon Jr., a member of the Atlanta group, wrote a carefully worded, threatening email to Levenson on June 12 that kicked off this controversy.

Gearon wanted general manager Danny Ferry fired because Ferry did say something racially insensitive during a teleconference with management and the ownership group in June. According to Gearon's email, which was obtained by Atlanta TV station WSB, Ferry described free-agent forward Luol Deng in a racist manner:

"He has a little African in him. Not in a bad way, but he's like a guy who would have a nice store out front but sell you counterfeit stuff out the back."

Gearon's email went on to explain that because he's a "minority partner with no effective say in decision-making" he had no choice but to contact a judge and a lawyer seeking advice on what to do about Ferry's racist description of Deng. Gearon warned Levenson that Ferry's words were likely to be made public and cause all sorts of trouble in the post-Donald Sterling era.

Calling Gearon's email "passive-aggressive" would be erroneous. The email was "aggressive-aggressive" and intended, in my opinion, to put Levenson in an impossible situation. Gearon's email sparked the internal investigation that led to Levenson's two-year-old email.

Hey, maybe Gearon and his Atlanta-based group want to buy the team from Levenson. Maybe the Atlanta-based group will fix all of the Hawks' problems without ever uttering an insensitive word.

Or maybe the Hawks will eventually move to Cobb County, next to the Braves.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Hawks owner Bruce Levenson to sell team after revealing he wrote racist email

Maybe it's just me, but I find it odd to buy a sports team in an area that has a population which is primarily black, and then complain that most of the people who show up to the games are... black? If white and affluent was the kind of fans he wanted to attract, why not buy an NBA team in an area with that demographic?

Clearly, this dog is racist.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ce5_1411187174

Salomé wrote:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Hawks owner Bruce Levenson to sell team after revealing he wrote racist email

Maybe it's just me, but I find it odd to buy a sports team in an area that has a population which is primarily black, and then complain that most of the people who show up to the games are... black? If white and affluent was the kind of fans he wanted to attract, why not buy an NBA team in an area with that demographic?

He's not saying that he doesn't want black people.What he's saying is that they're not bringing enough cash with them.They're not spending as much, and that the people with money are living further out in the suburbs (for reasons of their own)

One comment he made, which I totally, completely disagree with, is that "the whitefans are always up and dancing at the games, and the blacks would just sit aside and watch." Every sporting event I've been to in Atlanta a couple of things happen:the blacks come into the game 10-15 minutes late, but when they do show up, they are loud, they are proud, they are cheering for the team...they are dancing,waving signs, having a generally good time, while the white fans sit back and slow clap with guarded bemusement as they wait for their wine-cooler and cheese platter to be passed along to them in their Arthur Blank skybox.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Salomé wrote:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Hawks owner Bruce Levenson to sell team after revealing he wrote racist email

Maybe it's just me, but I find it odd to buy a sports team in an area that has a population which is primarily black, and then complain that most of the people who show up to the games are... black? If white and affluent was the kind of fans he wanted to attract, why not buy an NBA team in an area with that demographic?

He's not saying that he doesn't want black people.What he's saying is that they're not bringing enough cash with them.They're not spending as much, and that the people with money are living further out in the suburbs (for reasons of their own)

One comment he made, which I totally, completely disagree with, is that "the whitefans are always up and dancing at the games, and the blacks would just sit aside and watch." Every sporting event I've been to in Atlanta a couple of things happen:the blacks come into the game 10-15 minutes late, but when they do show up, they are loud, they are proud, they are cheering for the team...they are dancing,waving signs, having a generally good time, while the white fans sit back and slow clap with guarded bemusement as they wait for their wine-cooler and cheese platter to be passed along to them in their Arthur Blank skybox.

Well yes, but would he not have known about the racial identity as well as the economic realities of his potential fanbase prior to buying the team?

Salomé wrote:

Well yes, but would he not have known about the racial identity as well as the economic realities of his potential fanbase prior to buying the team?

I think they'd been doing better in sales and attendance when they were first bought back in 2004. They weren't great, but they were better. But that's neither here nor there. As the columnist Jason Whitlock wrote: 'Levenson is not a racist. He's a businessman trying to chase the money. And now that he's been forced out, the next set of owners may be not be as patient with staying in downtown Atlanta as Levenson was, and instead might try to move out to the white suburbs the way the Braves are doing.'

Also, be under no delusion, part of this story coming out was a power grab by the minority ownership in Atlanta trying force out the majority ownership based in D.C. The minority owners have so far managed to get Levenson fired and Danny Ferry is on suspension, basically leaving them with the job of running a team no one was going to see in the first place. Their "shock" and "disbelief" at the alleged racially insensitive comments Ferry and Levenson made were about positioning themselves to run the company, not because they truly were sickened by what they heard.

This is racialism, y'all! Straight up, 100 percent, pure racialism! How dare he put on "white face" in order to be Houston Texan defensive linebacker J.J.Watt? So what if it was a tribute to JJ? And JJ happens to be white? That's beside the point.

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/lavar-arrington-i-did-not-use-white-face-jj-watt-halloween-costume-110114

Yes you did, Levar. Yes you did. I was offensive by it. It was insensitive and very, very racism! Okay? Very racism!

He must not have gotten the memo. In 2014 America, you are only allowed to dress up as someone for Halloween that is in your racial/gender/sexuality subgroup.

I hope that the NFL Network takes him off the air for two weeks and sends him to sensitivity training. I feel offensive. I feel violated. I feel disrespected as a white male.

Captain America is now black.

http://marvel.com/news/comics/22895/its_time_for_an_all-new_captain_america

The guy who used to be his buddy, Falcon, has stepped up to be the new Cap.

In MarvelNOW! (latest Marvel comics), Thor is female too.

This will so NOT be incorporated in the Marvel movies.

bitchcraft wrote:

Captain America is now black.

http://marvel.com/news/comics/22895/its_time_for_an_all-new_captain_america

The guy who used to be his buddy, Falcon, has stepped up to be the new Cap.

In MarvelNOW! (latest Marvel comics), Thor is female too.

This will so NOT be incorporated in the Marvel movies.

Hasn't Captain America been black before?

I think we'll see this happen in the Marvel movies, and I'd argue the only reason they did this in the comics is so that they could go this route instead of simply recasting another actor as Steve Rogers.

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

bitchcraft wrote:

Captain America is now black.

http://marvel.com/news/comics/22895/its_time_for_an_all-new_captain_america

The guy who used to be his buddy, Falcon, has stepped up to be the new Cap.

In MarvelNOW! (latest Marvel comics), Thor is female too.

This will so NOT be incorporated in the Marvel movies.

Hasn't Captain America been black before?

You mean this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth:_Red,_White_%26_Black

bitchcraft wrote:

Gravity's Silhouette wrote:

Hasn't Captain America been black before?

You mean this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth:_Red,_White_%26_Black

Yeah, I guess that's what I was thinking of. But there are several superheros that started off white and then had a black version, right? Nick Fury? Green Lantern? Ultimate Spider-Man?

In the Bond universe, we've had a black Felix, a black Moneypenny, and if rumors turn out to be true, a black Blofeld in BOND 24. It's a curious thing the affinity some people in the entertainment industry have for offering up a "black version" of something, as if the original version has less credibility. Do they think black people won't be interested in a movie unless it is specifically an all black cast? Would black people not watch a project if no black person was on the show or in the movie? Did we really need a "black version" of ABOUT LAST NIGHT? A black version of STEEL MAGNOLIAS? CINDERELLA? ANNIE? THE WIZ? KARATE KID (though I have less of a problem with that then some of these others)?

Unless being white is such a crucial part of the character like Shaft being black is, I don't see the issue.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Unless being white is such a crucial part of the character like Shaft being black is, I don't see the issue.

Is being white a crucial part of the character of 007, or could he be played by a black actor?