SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,331
|
Post by SSHoya on Jun 2, 2013 8:42:30 GMT -5
|
|
birdman
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 710
|
Post by birdman on Jun 2, 2013 8:57:00 GMT -5
The fact that it is written by that dull (so bad he was kicked off the NBA show in favor of Bill Simmons), pathetic, know-nothing (his inside info is almost always wrong), hiding-behind-the-Bible-gay-bashing idiot tells em you are probably right. How interesting he is writing a piece on Hibbert consideing that over the last week I've twice head him on radio shows giving Roy a "compliment" by callng him mediocre. He calls Roy mediocre 3-4 times in this story as well. One money quote from his conclusion should satisfy the curiosity of most: What I like least about Broussard's writing - besides the frequently ignored facts in favor of his chosen narrative, the incorrect "sourced" information (as mentioned above), and his shameless star-f@*%ing of ESPN's selected players - is that he writes the way he speaks: in not-English. Exposure to Chris Broussard has gotten me to the point of feeling relief when I see Stephen A. Smith on TV, and that is simply unforgivable. So yeah, the article isn't worth your time, folks. Go Hoyas! Go Roy! Go Pacers!
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Jun 2, 2013 9:42:55 GMT -5
The line about the media didn't seem like a misstep at all. It seemed like a very deliberate, conscious step. He acknowledged that he might get fined, and he still chose to use profanity for emphasis (which sometimes works). And of course, leave it to ESPN to ignore the fact that Roy is right. Also, is "no homo" really a slur? It is, in fact, true that Roy Hibbert is not a homosexual. It's a silly thing to say, kind of immature, and certainly not appropriate for an internationally-televised press conference. But does that phrase or the word "homo" as a shortened version of "homosexual" really rise to the level of a slur? Maybe it does, and I'm behind the times on this one. Finally, just saw Stephen A. on SportsCenter. He had only good things to say about Roy, called him a class individual, and said the profanity/"slur" are out of character and shouldn't be held against him. And I saw another clip with the TNT crew commenting on the profanity. Both Shaq and Charles loved it and said Roy needs to bring that attitude to Game 7.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,328
|
Post by prhoya on Jun 2, 2013 9:51:09 GMT -5
The line about the media didn't seem like a misstep at all. It seemed like a very deliberate, conscious step. He acknowledged that he might get fined, and he still chose to use profanity for emphasis (which sometimes works). And of course, leave it to ESPN to ignore the fact that Roy is right. Expose the media, Roy!
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,328
|
Post by prhoya on Jun 2, 2013 10:21:42 GMT -5
|
|
rockhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,830
|
Post by rockhoya on Jun 2, 2013 10:28:52 GMT -5
"No homo" is not a gay slur....
|
|
jgalt
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,380
|
Post by jgalt on Jun 2, 2013 11:03:23 GMT -5
I agree totally with strummer on this. However, some people may say that "no homo" has negative connotations, in that you are trying to distance your self from being perceived as acting gay as acting gay is a bad thing. Now if someone did read into it like that they need to chill out and stop only reading Jezebel. "No homo", in current culture, is used almost always as an unconscious vocal tick without meaning.
Im more offended that he is still saying that as its something that middle schoolers use, not 26 year old men. The same would go if he had made a "your mom" "joke". In the words of Jerry Seinfeld "I'm not offended as a Jew, I'm offended as a comedian".
Just a total media created "controversy".
|
|
|
Post by hibbertfor3 on Jun 2, 2013 11:05:05 GMT -5
As big of a Roy fan as anyone, hence my handle..... But I refuse to be a complete homer and act like what he said is acceptable. It's simply not. Doesn't make me less of a fan to say it.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,564
|
Post by DanMcQ on Jun 2, 2013 11:21:53 GMT -5
Just a total media created "controversy". Since, as MCIGuy notes, they constructed the narrative that Roy was a bumbling, stumbling tall guy who came out of Georgetown absent any actual basketball skills only to be created by the brilliant Indiana coaching staff, why should this be any different?
|
|
hoyaLS05
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by hoyaLS05 on Jun 2, 2013 11:32:15 GMT -5
However, some people may say that "no homo" has negative connotations, in that you are trying to distance your self from being perceived as acting gay as acting gay is a bad thing. Now if someone did read into it like that they need to chill out and stop only reading Jezebel. "No homo", in current culture, is used almost always as an unconscious vocal tick without meaning. Are you kidding? You honestly believe people use "no homo" just because of the factual questions their previous comment may have raised regarding their sexuality and the perceived need to remind the audience that they are, in fact, attracted to individuals of the opposite sex ... not that there would be anything wrong with it if, on the other hand, they were gay. OF COURSE the reason people say no homo is to distance themselves from being perceived as acting gay. And OF COURSE the reason they do so is because acting gay is perceived by many in society to be a bad thing. "Umm" and "you know what I'm saying" are verbal ticks. "No homo" is not. Now, I agree that, strictly speaking, Roy did not use a "slur." It was more like an "insensitive reference" and it came at a bad time because of all the recent discussion of Jason Collins and gay people in sports. I also agree that while "no homo" does unambiguously reference homosexuality in a negative way, Roy Hibbert did not use it consciously intending to denigrate gay people. I agree that Roy is thoughtful, respectful, and generally well-spoken and that this was a momentarily lapse in judgment. I agree that his apology from this morning should put this story to bed once-and-for-all. I have no doubt Roy will be more thoughtful going forward. Totally agree on all that. But there is also no need to start making excuses for what Roy said.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,564
|
Post by DanMcQ on Jun 2, 2013 11:46:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rustyshackleford on Jun 2, 2013 12:24:14 GMT -5
However, some people may say that "no homo" has negative connotations, in that you are trying to distance your self from being perceived as acting gay as acting gay is a bad thing. Now if someone did read into it like that they need to chill out and stop only reading Jezebel. "No homo", in current culture, is used almost always as an unconscious vocal tick without meaning. Are you kidding? You honestly believe people use "no homo" just because of the factual questions their previous comment may have raised regarding their sexuality and the perceived need to remind the audience that they are, in fact, attracted to individuals of the opposite sex ... not that there would be anything wrong with it if, on the other hand, they were gay. OF COURSE the reason people say no homo is to distance themselves from being perceived as acting gay. And OF COURSE the reason they do so is because acting gay is perceived by many in society to be a bad thing. "Umm" and "you know what I'm saying" are verbal ticks. "No homo" is not. Now, I agree that, strictly speaking, Roy did not use a "slur." It was more like an "insensitive reference" and it came at a bad time because of all the recent discussion of Jason Collins and gay people in sports. I also agree that while "no homo" does unambiguously reference homosexuality in a negative way, Roy Hibbert did not use it consciously intending to denigrate gay people. I agree that Roy is thoughtful, respectful, and generally well-spoken and that this was a momentarily lapse in judgment. I agree that his apology from this morning should put this story to bed once-and-for-all. I have no doubt Roy will be more thoughtful going forward. Totally agree on all that. But there is also no need to start making excuses for what Roy said. I actually do think some people use it without any pejorative connotation but you're absolutely right that it is insensitive because it is taken in an anti-gay way by many. Roy clearly loves the spotlight and has been adept at being a voice for the pacers and hoyas and for building his own resume to do other things (who doesn't want to watch a detlef and roy P&R spinoff?) but if he's going to do that he needs to hold himself to a higher standard in terms of what he says. That doesn't mean he has to censor himself but especially on an issue as sensitive as trying to diminish the homophobia present in a lot of sports he can't use some of the slang that everybody knows is pretty common but can also be taken in a hurtful way. I'm glad he apologized and anybody who follows Roy knows he's likely embarrassed he said it and that he also made such a lame joke. He'll deservedly get a fine and then hopefully carry the Pacers on his back to a game 7 victory.
|
|
|
Post by rustyshackleford on Jun 2, 2013 12:42:54 GMT -5
BTW on the other topic Roy is partially right. I've read some articles where writers are trying to conflate his no homo comments and make him out to be a bad guy while attacking his DPOY claim but they generally come up with these responses:
1) Marc Gasol who won DPOY is on Memphis which isn't a big market team so Roy can't be right 2) George won MIP so clearly writers watched Indiana
I think Roy probably overstates the 'they didn't watch' us criticism but I think there is some merit to it because it's almost like espn and half the sports world is just discovering Roy's dominance in the paint this series when he's been doing it all year - even when he couldn't hit layups for the first half of the year. In terms of those specific criticisms it comes down to the individual nature of those awards and because of the fact Roy didn't come in hyped lazy sportswriters just didn't notice him. Gasol was already well known because his older brother was a star in the league and he had been a prominent player for the Spanish national team. George's MIP has been hard to ignore just because he filled up the stat sheet and fans voted him into the all star team this year. Until these playoffs Roy has been pretty quiet this year and a writer who barely watches pacers game probably never saw how much of an influence he was around the hoop.
The main contributor to Roy not getting the defensive accolades he deserves is probably a combination of not watching him and then not understanding the advanced statistics that actually show how valuable he's been (like that study from the grantland author). It's easy to see and quantify a Paul George dunk or assist but much harder to do so with something like shots altered or shots discouraged in the paint.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jun 2, 2013 13:04:34 GMT -5
At last someone gave a real apology, not one of those "if I offended someone..."
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,331
|
Post by SSHoya on Jun 2, 2013 13:07:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by williambraskyiii on Jun 2, 2013 13:07:41 GMT -5
Roy obviously made a mistake and I think his statement, whether written in his own hand or by Pacers PR, reflects his genuine regret for any harm it caused. I am disappointed more in the juvenile nature of such comments, rather than any perceived homophobic "slur" which I believe to be an overstatement, but, in reality, Roy is new to the NBA spotlight and I know he'll learn from this media-incited firestorm and he'll be more thoughtful in his comments going forward.
Three other thoughts:
1) If the Twitter era has taught us anything, it has taught us that you are on the hook for any mistake you make in the public eye. Any misstep, large or small, will be magnified in a matter of minutes and can turn into a full blown PR crisis in just a few hours. Our society today is nothing if it isn't at the ready with hair-trigger outrage. I'll reiterate that I don't condone Roy's comment and I think we need to be mindful of such types of slang terms and work to remove them from the accepted lexicon, but it is incredible how society has changed in this way.
2) If there is any concern coming out of this firestorm, in my opinion, it is Roy's fragile psyche. I'd hate for all this negative attention to affect his play tomorrow night. His play has been nothing short of transcendent this series and I'd hate for him to get distracted or hung up on it. We know from various reports that he is a sensitive and deliberative guy and I just hope he is focused on Game 7 tomorrow.
3) I think the popularity of this thread answers this question for me, but I find myself rooting REALLY hard for the Pacers this playoffs season. I guess I can't be 100 percent objective given Roy's presence, but I find them to be a very likable team and, despite the offensive inconsistency, a very watchable team. It also helps that Roy has really gone to a whole 'nother level in this series. He's been exceptional to the point that when he's gotten the ball within 8 feet of the basket, you are surprised when he misses. He has also surprised me how dexterously he handles passes in traffic without committing offensive fouls. While he always had soft hands and good touch, I think his footwork and offensive moves have clearly improved significantly since college. His drive for the flush last night at the top of the key reminded me of his move against Dials in 2006 (though that one included a spin-move).
|
|
|
Post by rustyshackleford on Jun 2, 2013 13:21:10 GMT -5
Yeah I think Roy needs to reign in his language or just be more diplomatic when he's criticizing people he disagrees w/ or dislikes. He tends to go overboard when he's criticizing O'brien or writers like this.
I guess the one good thing is that maybe this'll get players to think twice before they use silly slang like that - even guys like Lebron have used it in the past w/o much attention paid to it
|
|
jgalt
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,380
|
Post by jgalt on Jun 2, 2013 14:05:08 GMT -5
OF COURSE the reason people say no homo is to distance themselves from being perceived as acting gay. And OF COURSE the reason they do so is because acting gay is perceived by many in society to be a bad thing. "Umm" and "you know what I'm saying" are verbal ticks. "No homo" is not. . Do you really think that, at that moment, Roy was worried that people would think he is gay for saying he was "stretched out" by the defense? So concerned that he had to think quickly to dispel any perceived homosexuality? Thats very unlikely. Just like "thats what she said" the "joke" and use of this phrase has become complete detached from its original intent. Some people may say it to prevent people from thinking they are gay but most of the time it is used just as some stupid throw away line. Should he have said it? No. But there is no reason that the media should be writing dozens of opinion pieces about it. This isnt Kobe actually using homophobic language with malicious intent. This is someone saying something stupid without malice or even meaning. The other aspect of this is the way that terms such as "gay" or "homo" or the other F word have become unlinked from homosexuality and many people use them only as pejoratives the way you would use idiot or a**hat. They are still offensive and shouldn't be used, but someone's use of them doesnt necessarily make them a homophobe or bigot, it just makes them rude, immature, and moronic.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,564
|
Post by DanMcQ on Jun 2, 2013 14:09:23 GMT -5
At last someone gave a real apology, not one of those "if I offended someone..." +1 Must be his personal character, molded by his education at a fine Jesuit University.
|
|
hoyaLS05
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by hoyaLS05 on Jun 2, 2013 14:16:18 GMT -5
OF COURSE the reason people say no homo is to distance themselves from being perceived as acting gay. And OF COURSE the reason they do so is because acting gay is perceived by many in society to be a bad thing. "Umm" and "you know what I'm saying" are verbal ticks. "No homo" is not. . Do you really think that, at that moment, Roy was worried that people would think he is gay for saying he was "stretched out" by the defense? So concerned that he had to think quickly to dispel any perceived homosexuality? Thats very unlikely. Just like "thats what she said" the "joke" and use of this phrase has become complete detached from its original intent. Some people may say it to prevent people from thinking they are gay but most of the time it is used just as some stupid throw away line. Should he have said it? No. But there is no reason that the media should be writing dozens of opinion pieces about it. This isnt Kobe actually using homophobic language with malicious intent. This is someone saying something stupid without malice or even meaning. The other aspect of this is the way that terms such as "gay" or "homo" or the other F word have become unlinked from homosexuality and many people use them only as pejoratives the way you would use idiot or a**hat. They are still offensive and shouldn't be used, but someone's use of them doesnt necessarily make them a homophobe or bigot, it just makes them rude, immature, and moronic. I did not say Roy was a homophone or bigot. Far from it. You mentioned that "some people may say that 'no homo' has negative connotations" and then seemed to try to refute that. My point was simply that from an objective standpoint, "no homo" clearly has negative connotations about gay people. Now, as I said, I agree that Roy was not trying to evoke them and he was not trying to denigrate gay people. I agree with all of those who believe Roy was just trying to be funny and/or goofy. But I do think it is fair to say that the phrase he used has negative connotations. The reason I make this point is that I do not agree with you that this is "a total media created 'controversy.'" Roy did genuinely mess up. I do fully agree, however, that the media has blown it out of proportion.
|
|