Mel Gibson 's racist rant

[funk de fino]

I didn't deny the nastiness of his mouth.
I said what she did was slightly more disgusting.
It was also illegal.

Taping your ex abusing you and threatening you is worse than being a drunken, racist, anti semitic moron?

Ho ho.

 

[Jono]

Yes, but my point is that it is different.

Calling a black person the n-word to their face might just mean that you know how to really be hurtful to them.

I would accept that people do that without being outright racist, simply because using the word has a very specific purpose that is bound to work as intended.

But there is no such excuse in the situation Gibson was in.

Again:

"You will be raped" vs. "You will be raped by a Frenchman".

It does nothing to further enrage the other person - but it speaks volumes about what you think of French people.

I understand what you mean yes. I do still think that there's the image of using black people as an archetypical danger that dwarfs any resent ones of frenchmen. It's as if threats or such comments, made by adding the image of the ghetto gangbanging gangsta, sounds more severe and threating than if you had used french people. I dont think it necessarily means the person using such insults necessarily hates black people. Rather, at this point, I think it might just be that he thinks it invokes a cruler, cruder image from the idea that they are more dangerous in that way, and/or that he knows she thinks that.

The implied answer was: Because you recognize that it builds upon the idea that non-white people are more primitive than civilised white folk.

It means you need to be aware of this idea, realize that it can be hurtful to use *and* it must be the kind of thing you think of when in an argument.

I see it's easy to come up with when you are fighting with a non-white person. in fact, it would be quite unusual if you were ignorant of the possibility.

Yes, of course there has to be a knowledge of contemporarily hurtful polemics.

Again, explain to me why what Gibson said should be especially hurtful. Every possible answer I can come up with means he's a racist.

See, I would not like to get raped. Not at all. But the colour of the rapist really, really, really wouldn't make much of a difference. You would never hear me say the words "I just got raped - but thank god it was a white guy!"

That is true. But as I said, he might just think it makes it sound more gruesome in the context of their city where you'd be at much higher risk being a white girl in such surroundings. This doesn't mean it isn't prejudiced and wrong. But it doesn't tell me he looks at his black friends that way, or that he hates their people. He might not even believe it intellectually, but resort to pop-cultural stereotypes of fear, to make his comment more vividly harsh.

No, not everything. but certainly a lot of things.

Isn't that what losing control means?

I think when we lose control we naturally suffer greater risk of having our frustration ventilated through channels that do not necessarily reflect our heart's core as much as temporary chaos. That's what "saying things we dont mean" means and it's a concept I'd think most to be familiar with. Again, I think it's an unfortunate popular myth that when we lose our temper, control or so, we reflect our essences more honestly. But that's a load of crock, to use as a rule in my opinion.
However, if we continually lose it and also say the same or similar things on several occasions, or vent our anger in a particular verbal attack, then it might certainly be telling of our actual thoughts and/or values.

That does not follow.

People can and do change their minds, after all.

If I ask people to goto hell, I *do* *mean* that. For the moment. I'd be quite happy with their continued existence a few minutes later.

Then it's simply a vented frustration that you attach to a harsh word on the surface, it doesn't necessarily reflect the deep resentment you have in your heart's core for that person does it?

Yes. Now you just have to finally show me why calling other people the N-word should be a consequence of the intent to hurt someone.

Well, I'll take another example. When I was younger I was a singer in a band called "Magic Mushroom". And no, we didn't use any of those. The guitarrist got pissed at the studio technician and told him he hoped he would get raped in the arse by two huge n******. Why did he use the n-word there. Is he a racist. No, I can honestly say he is not. But it was a comment worded that way to make it sound more gruesome, and using the image of large men from a distinctly different group added severity to it. It is from an image of pop-cultural prejudice yes. Mind you, I differentiate between such usage and with actual inherent racism. I don't think P'Diddy is a racist just because he might have said "damn honkies" in a general way. It would be the use of a racial slur yes, usage of available prejudice and slurs that we know are attached to it. But actual racist behaviour would be something notably different in my experience.

There exists, in most western societies I'd gather, in our time an image of the black man (in particular the american ghetto version) as more physically imposing than, for example, your garden variety french guy. And since it's available in the collective consciousness of fearsome imagery, wether you truly believe in them or not, you know it has a better chance of adding severity to the reaction.

Can you rephrase that and elaborate a little? I don't think I follow you ...

I'm thinking about how I should word it otherwise, but I keep using the same variation of what I wrote earlier. Mel using the n-word in private in the context of his insult is less provocative in my view than him insulting his wife.

 

[Fiona]

I understand what you mean yes. I do still think that there's the image of using black people as an archetypical danger that dwarfs any resent ones of frenchmen. It's as if threats or such comments, made by adding the image of the ghetto gangbanging gangsta, sounds more severe and threating than if you had used french people.

That is why it is racist, it seems to me

I dont think it necessarily means the person using such insults necessarily hates black people. Rather, at this point, I think it might just be that he thinks it invokes a cruler, cruder image from the idea that they are more dangerous in that way, and/or that he knows she thinks that.

I bet some of his best friends are black!

<snip>

That is true. But as I said, he might just think it makes it sound more gruesome in the context of their city where you'd be at much higher risk being a white girl in such surroundings.

You got evidence for that? Looks racist to me but perhaps you have studies supporting it?

This doesn't mean it isn't prejudiced and wrong. But it doesn't tell me he looks at his black friends that way, or that he hates their people. He might not even believe it intellectually, but resort to pop-cultural stereotypes of fear, to make his comment more vividly harsh.

See above

<snip>

I'm thinking about how I should word it otherwise, but I keep using the same variation of what I wrote earlier. Mel using the n-word in private in the context of his insult is less provocative in my view than him insulting his wife.

Less or more provocative is not the issue.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Her words have not been discussed. Why? She's not as famous as Mel Gibson. If she say a naughty word, no one (including RadarOnline and TMZ, the sites that broke the story) gives a damn.

The court might care.

 

[plumjam]

Plumjam, are you hinting that if we push the right buttons, you'd end up saying something like this? Nevermind the racism, but threatening to burn down someone's house after you raped them?

Sorry, that all says more about you than it does about this so-called gold digger.

Yes, clearly, if my girlfriend were to wear a mini-skirt I would threaten to burn down her (our) house after I had raped her.

What are you on?

Are you not assuming it was to gather evidence for a court case about custody? For me it is at least as likely it was for a court case about threats and intimidation. Threatening to burn my house down is surely an offence and I would certainly wish to place charges against someone who did that. I cannot see how recording such threats as evidence should be illegal in that context: if it is there does not seem to be many ways to get evidence so you can protect yourself

As I have already asked at least twice, how would such illegaly obtained 'evidence' be admissible in court?
If the police tape phone conversations without an appropriate wiretap warrant then such recordings could not be used in a court case.
She would probably need witnesses, or something in writing, or something recorded/videoed in a public place, where Gibson could reasonably expect that his conversation with her was not private.

Taping your ex abusing you and threatening you is worse than being a drunken, racist, anti semitic moron?

Ho ho.

See rest of thread.

 

[quarky]

Too bad we don't use Martians as our go-to guys for rape wish threats.

I know some crackers that dress like they want to get abducted and probed deeply.

 

[Roboramma]

You got evidence for that? Looks racist to me but perhaps you have studies supporting it?

I'm not sure what he was trying to say: most rapes in America are committed by white men. On the other hand:

African Americans were significantly overrepresented for non-lethal violent crimes in 2008, making up 39% of all arrests.

That's from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States

The numbers for rape aren't as bad, with african americans making up 32% of arrests for rape.

 

[Jono]

That is why it is racist, it seems to me

Well yes the given usage is of the racial context, so in that sense it is racist, But a lot of people use migth've used such commentary without being particulary racist themselves. However we need not go into the terminology and semantics on this note any further, I don't know Mel's ideas but I would be surprised if he'd fit my idea of a man who fundamentally resents black people in general. Either way, we all know what he said was really improper and wrong.

I bet some of his best friends are black!

You got evidence for that? Looks racist to me but perhaps you have studies supporting it?

First of all, I don't really want to get into a debate on this, but let's not mince words, I think most here know or can safely guess that this is true. Not to offend you, but I must voice my bewilderment of why the egalitarian thought-police still, to this day, pretends this is not so. It's uncomfortable sure, and it doesn't sound "nice", true. But it doesn't change that it obviously is so. And with these actualities, additional prejudices are fueled and takes on, sometimes, mythical proportions, hence the pop-cultural imagery that often generalises and exagurates the smoke from the fire, especially in La La Land and not helped by its Hollywood industry that much.

I would think my 19 year old stephdaughter to be a greater risk of physical harm if walking around an area known for violent criminal activity, as opposed to a suburban area that was less known for violent criminal activitiy. This goes without saying for most of us I'm sure. But when we look at the demographics, we do not only discuss the causes for this, but some also pretends that this is not even valid.

In the US, it just so happens that black men are at least 6-7 times more often arrested under the charge of rape than white people (which includes people of latin american origin/ancestry). There are scores of sources on such statistics, which really only highlights what we already know or can safely guess is so. Gary LaFree has written a lot about it, this figure in question and echoed in Anthony Walsh's research, to name a couple of sources.

Less or more provocative is not the issue.

Rasmus wanted me to rephrase what I had earlier stated was, as I saw it, the main issue worth to be really bothered about, i.e his behaviour and comments toward her.

 

[applecorped]

Byrd made a mistake as a kid.

29 is a kid?

"In 1946 or 1947 Byrd wrote a letter to a Grand Wizard stating, "The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia and in every state in the nation."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd#Ku_Klux_Klan

 

[iknownothing]

Are you not assuming it was to gather evidence for a court case about custody? For me it is at least as likely it was for a court case about threats and intimidation. Threatening to burn my house down is surely an offence and I would certainly wish to place charges against someone who did that. I cannot see how recording such threats as evidence should be illegal in that context: if it is there does not seem to be many ways to get evidence so you can protect yourself

Speculation: And I think it's a pretty safe bet this wasn't the first or only time he'd made threats like that. She must have known he was likely to say those sorts of things, and that's why she was recording. In which case, if I were her I'd be recording whether it's admissable or not, just so I could make people aware. Otherwise, if she just says he's been making threats, it's her word against his, and look how quick people are to characterize her as a gold digger. She needs to prove what's going on.

 

[Fiona]

First of all, I don't really want to get into a debate on this, but let's not mince words, I think most here know or can safely guess that this is true. Not to offend you, but I must voice my bewilderment of why the egalitarian thought-police still, to this day, pretends this is not so. It's uncomfortable sure, and it doesn't sound "nice", true. But it doesn't change that it obviously is so. And with these actualities, additional prejudices are fueled and takes on, sometimes, mythical proportions, hence the pop-cultural imagery that often generalises and exagurates the smoke from the fire, especially in La La Land and not helped by its Hollywood industry that much.

I would think my 19 year old stephdaughter to be a greater risk of physical harm if walking around an area known for violent criminal activity, as opposed to a suburban area that was less known for violent criminal activitiy. This goes without saying for most of us I'm sure. But when we look at the demographics, we do not only discuss the causes for this, but some also pretends that this is not even valid.

In the US, it just so happens that black men are at least 6-7 times more often arrested under the charge of rape than white people (which includes people of latin american origin/ancestry). There are scores of sources on such statistics, which really only highlights what we already know or can safely guess is so. Gary LaFree has written a lot about it, this figure in question and echoed in Anthony Walsh's research, to name a couple of sources.

About 81% of rape victims are white; 18% are black; 1% are of other races. (Violence against Women, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1994.)

90% of the us population is white or hispanic.

http://factfinder.census.gov/servle...US&-search_results=01000US&-format=&-_lang=en

Doesn't seem to support your stats: on the face of it white women are underepresented as victims of rape

 

[Fiona]

Speculation: And I think it's a pretty safe bet this wasn't the first or only time he'd made threats like that. She must have known he was likely to say those sorts of things, and that's why she was recording. In which case, if I were her I'd be recording whether it's admissable or not, just so I could make people aware. Otherwise, if she just says he's been making threats, it's her word against his, and look how quick people are to characterize her as a gold digger. She needs to prove what's going on.

Exactly so.

 

[funk de fino]

See rest of thread.

I did. You seemed to back this up with later posts. You did not take back that rather ridiculous assertion I quoted.

Where did the taping take place?

 

[Snail]

There seems to be a lot of blaming her for having an affair with a married man, but little looking down on him for cheating on his wife.

Only one of them was abusing the trust of their spouse.

ETA: Well, earlier on in the thread, there was a lot of that. Seems to have settled down now.

As you were.

 

[sadhatter]

First off, if the judge is letting it be used, then he has made the decision that the tape was obtained in a legal manner.

The concept of clean hands comes into play here. In the same way i could not charge you with theft if you took an ounce of cocaine i had to show the police, one cannot then claim that someone is in the wrong taping a death threat. How else would one go about proving that the other person was doing something illegal? ( and yes, believe it or not death threats are illegal.)

If what she did is wrong then every police force in America needs to be charged with theft due to taking evidence such as guns, drugs, etc.

The context of a situation plays heavily into what is accepted by law, if not then anyone who killed a man in self defense would be behind bars for the rest of their life.

The racism is not the issue ( though it says loads about his character) the death threat is, it is not illegal to be a walking talking phallus, but it is illegal to make death threats ( rape threats i am pretty sure are at least frowned upon. ).

 

[quadraginta]

First off, if the judge is letting it be used, then he has made the decision that the tape was obtained in a legal manner.

<snip>

Do we know that the judge is letting the tapes be used?

I thought all we knew was that they had been made known to the court and he had had them sealed.

 

[sadhatter]

Do we know that the judge is letting the tapes be used?

I thought all we knew was that they had been made known to the court and he had had them sealed.

Could be my mistake, i thought i had read that they were being used against him.

Regardless the point still stands, if someone cannot record a death threat as proof of the death threat, how could one ever prove someone is making death threats? One cannot exactly say " excuse me, mind if i record this so that i can prove you have been threatening me?"

 

[Lisa Simpson]

I don't think the judge has ruled yet if they will be allowed. If the judge declares them inadmissible, she could face felony charges:

Every person who, intentionally and without the consent of
all parties to a confidential communication, by means of any
electronic amplifying or recording device, eavesdrops upon or records
the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried
on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a
telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be
punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars
($2,500), or imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year,
or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment.

The exception is if one person is committing a crime, for example blackmail or death threats.

 

[Morrigan]

Taping your ex abusing you and threatening you is worse than being a drunken, racist, anti semitic moron?

Ho ho.

Yeah, I really can't comprehend the logic here. Don't forget the death and rape threats.

Yes, clearly, if my girlfriend were to wear a mini-skirt I would threaten to burn down her (our) house after I had raped her.

What are you on?

Well, obviously you wouldn't. Yet here you are, saying Mel Gibson did that because he likely had his "buttons pushed". So which is it?

She would probably need witnesses, or something in writing, or something recorded/videoed in a public place, where Gibson could reasonably expect that his conversation with her was not private.

Mel Gibson is an actor who surely knows better than to make violent, racist, misogynist rants in public. But he shows no such shame in private. You're basically saying this woman should have no recourse. Too bad for her, huh? Guess she should just grin and bear it.

See rest of thread.

You addressed nothing, anywhere.

 

[Morrigan]

Could be my mistake, i thought i had read that they were being used against him.

Regardless the point still stands, if someone cannot record a death threat as proof of the death threat, how could one ever prove someone is making death threats? One cannot exactly say " excuse me, mind if i record this so that i can prove you have been threatening me?"

Exactly. But hey, what she did is still worse than what he did!!! Because it's (possibly) illegal!