White Florida quarterback loses scholarship for using N-word on social media

[Twilight Hue]

Hi, TH,

We had to edit out the variation you used, which is not caught by the language filter because it would also catch an unrelated word. The edit is due to Google's rules that require the forum to filter specific words and also keep the forum PG-rated in order for RF not to lose ad revenue.

We opted to clarify this here so that your post doesn't lose context from the edit.

Feel free to let us know in Site Feedback if you have any questions or suggestions.

Cheers.

OK. Thanks for the heads up.

 

[vulcanlogician]

The downside is that "woke" doesn't really have any consistent set of principles and there's a certain sense of hypocrisy in imposing different sets of rules on people based on race or other immutable conditions.

Actually "woke" DOES have a set of defining principles and ideas behind it. The problem is, internet culture does not.

"Woke" refers specifically to an awareness that social mechanisms often disenfranchise and exploit certain minority groups for the benefit of the status quo.

For example, "ghettos exist to make the lives of middle class whites more convenient." This is basically true (and an ugly truth at that!) and I admire "woke-ism" for taking a stand against such societal states.

The problem is, internet culture doesn't necessarily stand for this kind of idea. Denying this kid a scholarship does nothing to abolish ghettos. BUT! It does make people think they are "fixing racism" by tarring and feathering this kid for singing a song.

I don't know when "woke" became synonymous with "cancel culture"... but in my mind they are two separate enterprises with two sets of goals. As time passes, I think the gulf between the two will become more apparent.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Actually "woke" DOES have a set of defining principles and ideas behind it. The problem is, internet culture does not.

"Woke" refers specifically to an awareness that social mechanisms often disenfranchise and exploit certain minority groups for the benefit of the status quo.

For example, "ghettos exist to make the lives of middle class whites more convenient." This is basically true (and an ugly truth at that!) and I admire "woke-ism" for taking a stand against such societal states.

The problem is, internet culture doesn't necessarily stand for this kind of idea. Denying this kid a scholarship does nothing to abolish ghettos. BUT! It does make people think they are "fixing racism" by tarring and feathering this kid for singing a song.

I don't know when "woke" became synonymous with "cancel culture"... but in my mind they are two separate enterprises with two sets of goals. As time passes, I think the gulf between the two will become more apparent.

How about white replacement theory?

This instance seems to support the concerns such a thing is going on.

 

[vulcanlogician]

How about white replacement theory?

This instance seems to support the concerns such a thing is going on.

What's happening to this kid is wrong. But I don't think it's anything so grand as a "great replacement." Have you considered that this "replacement" crap is just an excuse to justify force against people with ideas you don't like?

Or maybe it is better that I should frame the question like this: "If there is some kind of 'replacement' going on, does that justify the use of force against people who support those ideas?"

As a great thinker once said: "He who fights monsters should see to it that he himself does not become a monster..."

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Do you not understand the difference between singing a song vs an injury.

Yes. What I don't understand is why you would moan and wail about the punishment given in this case when it's the same "punishment" doled out frequently to people who did nothing wrong at all.

Is it only racists who get your sympathy?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The problem is, internet culture doesn't necessarily stand for this kind of idea. Denying this kid a scholarship does nothing to abolish ghettos. BUT! It does make people think they are "fixing racism" by tarring and feathering this kid for singing a song.

Since when is losing a scholarship the equivalent of tarring and feathering?

The entitlement attitude of those who complain about "cancel culture" knows no bounds.

 

[We Never Know]

Since when is losing a scholarship the equivalent of tarring and feathering?

The entitlement attitude of those who complain about "cancel culture" knows no bounds.

Dang! You seem to have taken this on personal level. Any skeletons in your closet?

 

[vulcanlogician]

Since when is losing a scholarship the equivalent of tarring and feathering?

The entitlement attitude of those who complain about "cancel culture" knows no bounds.

It isn't literally a "tarring and feathering." I was employing metaphor.

All I meant was that it's a serious setback for this fellow. And setting this guy back (unless I'm missing something) does little in the effort to abolish ghettos.

Mind you, I'm not so much "complaining about cancel culture" as I am stating a difference between it and what I see as genuine woke ideals.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Or, as Carlin pointed out, it is the intention of the person using those words that matters. In one of the links there was a two second clip of the young man using that word. All you could tell was that he said it and that he was singing. It was impossible to determine his intention.

He probably shouldn’t have posted a video of himself singing it on social media though, eh?

 

[Subduction Zone]

He probably shouldn’t have posted a video of himself singing it on social media though, eh?

Because people overreact?

 

[RestlessSoul]

Because people overreact?

No doubt they do. Hence, when being a ********, it pays not to advertise.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No doubt they do. Hence, when being a ********, it pays not to advertise.

Singing a song one likes is not being an *******. I don't sing on video, I would not want to be charged with assault and battery, but all sorts of young people do. In the very short clip there is no way to judge his intentions.

Watch the George Carlin clip.

 

[RestlessSoul]

Singing a song one likes is not being an *******. I don't sing on video, I would not want to be charged with assault and battery, but all sorts of young people do. In the very short clip there is no way to judge his intentions.

Watch the George Carlin clip.

Where I come from - and while I accept this may not be the case the world over - only arseholes say “******”, song or no song.

I’ll decline the offer to watch George Carlin, thanks.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes. What I don't understand is why you would moan and wail about the punishment given in this case when it's the same "punishment" doled out frequently to people who did nothing wrong at all.

Is it only racists who get your sympathy?

Whataboutism, eh.
You could start a thread about the cases that
concern you, instead of merely claiming their
existence, just to dis posters appalled by this'n.

 

[Stevicus]

Where I come from - and while I accept this may not be the case the world over - only arseholes say “******”, song or no song.

I’ll decline the offer to watch George Carlin, thanks.

What if it's a college professor or student reading from a book out loud and it happens to contain that word? At the very least, people have to hear the word once, if only to be told they're not supposed to say it. So, someone has to say it under some circumstances.

Otherwise, it becomes an exercise in silliness, like the Knights Who Say Ni.

 

[Revoltingest]

What if it's a college professor or student reading from a book out loud and it happens to contain that word? At the very least, people have to hear the word once, if only to be told they're not supposed to say it. So, someone has to say it under some circumstances.

Otherwise, it becomes an exercise in silliness, like the Knights Who Say Ni.

Wesley Crusher on Edo.

 

[RestlessSoul]

What if it's a college professor or student reading from a book out loud and it happens to contain that word? At the very least, people have to hear the word once, if only to be told they're not supposed to say it. So, someone has to say it under some circumstances.

Otherwise, it becomes an exercise in silliness, like the Knights Who Say Ni.

Yeah, we shouldn’t be so scared of a word, that we erase it from the lexicon. But words have power, some more than others; certain words need to be used carefully, and their impact needs to be considered.

That said, young people do stupid things, and hopefully learn from them. The young man in this case seems to have paid a very high price to learn his lesson. I think the dumbest thing he did btw, was posting his dumbness on social media.

 

[F1fan]

There is a lot of folks saying that he lost his scholarship because he sang a song. To my mind that isn't the issue. The issue is he recorded himself singing and he posted it on social media. It is the posting on social media that is the poor judgment. If it was a show tune he might be laughed at but it wouldn't include offensive language. The college wouldn't see that as a red flag of poor judgment, like the song he did post was. Here is an instutution that is going to invest tens of thousands of dollars in a person, and there's an incident that is a red flag. The kid didn't commit murder, he didn't hurt anyone, but he didn't think about what he was doing as he posted to social media, and the school likely wondered what else he might do and post.

Is it a harsh response? You bet. But it is a school and it has its standards and ethics. They can award and deny any scholarship they see fit. As I noted I wouldn't be surprised if the school was open to an appeal.

 

[F1fan]

What if it's a college professor or student reading from a book out loud and it happens to contain that word? At the very least, people have to hear the word once, if only to be told they're not supposed to say it. So, someone has to say it under some circumstances.

Otherwise, it becomes an exercise in silliness, like the Knights Who Say Ni.

This is an issue, like with Mark Twain's books. Would a professor read any of the passages with derogatory terms? I doubt it. It will be in the books, films, works of art, etc.

But this is the point of it being literature, and in a context of history. A class that examines literature from a time where racism was more prevalent and common is important for young peaople to understand. Oddly, this is whast CRT is all about. This context of racism historically allows us to have perspective about social evolution. This is vastly different than a careless act by a white kid trying to look cool to his social media circle.

 

[Stevicus]

Yeah, we shouldn’t be so scared of a word, that we erase it from the lexicon. But words have power, some more than others; certain words need to be used carefully, and their impact needs to be considered.

That said, young people do stupid things, and hopefully learn from them. The young man in this case seems to have paid a very high price to learn his lesson. I think the dumbest thing he did btw, was posting his dumbness on social media.

The thing is, the word itself is used rather frequently - by African-Americans, since they're essentially "allowed" to use it without social repercussions. In my neck of the woods, I've also occasionally heard it spoken by Hispanics and Native Americans, along with other epithets.

I have noticed that its overall usage has dropped considerably since when I was a kid.