|
|
WATCH: Fired, Yo!
|
WATCH: Fired, Yo! |
|
[by Amy Bass] If we have learned nothing else from the Imus debacle, we at least now know what it takes to get America to pay attention to women's basketball. Because seriously: where were all these outraged folks when the Rutgers women's team was making its truly incredible run to the NCAA final? Why hadn't they cheered these women on before they took such umbrage in their defense? Don Imus isn't the first person to make a racist and misogynistic remark in public. But it is tough to find a context for the stupidity that he uttered. The two biggest reference points for what has gone down in the past several days happened almost 20 years ago, and both men involved, like Imus, lost their jobs. In 1987, the LA Dodgers fired vice-president Al Campanis after he told Ted Koppel that there weren't black managers or owners in baseball because they didn't “have some of the necessities” and then theorized that there were no black swimmers because “they don't have the buoyancy.” In 1988, CBS fired Jimmy “the Greek” Snyder when he gave an almost Klan-inspired Civil War history, telling a DCTV reporter that “the black is a better athlete to begin with because he's been bred to be that way….” But equating Imus with Snyder and Campanis, as many have already done, doesn't really work. Imus was not making racist arguments as to why the Rutgers' women were particularly good at basketball or bad at anything else. He trash talked them, plain, simple, and hateful. His case is more comparable to that of former Cincinnati Reds owner Marge Schott, who in 1993 was hit with a huge fine after some of her employees claimed she referred to Dave Parker and Eric Davis as “million dollar niggers” and had spoken of “sneaky goddamn Jews,” as well as espoused the merits of Hitler before he went “too far.” As more people stepped forward, it became hugely obvious: Marge Schott was a racist, homophobic, anti-Semitic person (which is a shame, really, because as the first woman to own a baseball team via purchase, rather than inheritance, she really could have been a player in the women's movement). But Schott, unlike Imus, was not really a public figure (even less so than Campanis, undoubtedly because she was a woman), and her comments, while vile, were made behind closed doors. Besides, who was she really a threat to? As sports activist Harry Edwards once commented, “Marge Schott is not the problem; she is a 64-year old smoker and drinker with a weight problem. That's a problem that's going to take care of itself.” Edwards' point is one to be heeded: no one who knew Schott was ever surprised that she said such things. She was a known racist. A known anti-Semite. A known homophobe. Which is why it was so shocking a few years ago when people were appalled at Rush Limbaugh's comments on ESPN regarding Donovan McNabb. Limbaugh claimed that McNabb was over-hyped in the media because he was black, and after much uproar, he resigned before ESPN could fire him. He stuck to his guns, stating that the media had made a “mountain out of a molehill”. And you know what? He was right. Why on earth was anyone shocked and appalled that Rush Limbaugh – RUSH LIMBAUGH – had made racist remarks in a national forum? Who was actually surprised at what he said? Which brings us back to Don Imus. Don Imus, despite his charity work and the forum that he created for interesting and engaging political debate, is a shock jock. He isn't Howard Stern, as he doesn't focus all that much on tits and ass, but he insults, offends, and badgers on a daily basis. People (although not a single woman that I know – my mother worries that men listen to Imus because he says the things about women that they wish they had the nerve to say) listen(ed) to him. I never did. I was offended, didn't want to hear it, and enjoyed my freedom to change the channel when he came on. I change the channel on all sorts of things: Howard Stern, Hugh Hefner's reality show, just about anything on Spike TV, any and all of the Law & Orders, and Scrubs (I still don't get why people think that show is funny). When I didn't change the channel was during the women's NCAA basketball final. I watched. I cheered for Rutgers, loving their underdog story and hoping for a real miracle to take place. I cheered for Tennessee, loving their mad skills and hoping that they could end their almost decade-long championship drought. A great game, 59-46. And now? Now all of that is gone. And Don Imus, love him or hate him, support him or want him buried, isn't the only one responsible for that. While knee-jerk reactions to his racist comments have ended his career as he currently knows it, I wonder at what cost. We are, according to many, in the age of “new racism.” The Civil Rights period has come and gone, with popular perception remembering its successes and others of us wondering whether progress really exists in our world. America operates without formalized segregation, leading us to spuriously believe that racism is obsolete. Racism, of course, is not obsolete. It lives, absolutely, in the recent words of Don Imus. But the amount of fury and action taken to silence him does nothing to dig out and rupture the codified white supremacist strategies of power that operate at all levels of American society. Racial and economic battles continually take place structurally, socially, politically, and culturally in contemporary society, despite decades of legislation intended to eradicate racist systems and despite black leaders who come forward to defend a basketball team that I wonder if they ever watched. America is not at rest. Civil rights work is not complete. But as in the Marge Schott case, I don't think silencing Don Imus – who all of us already had the power to turn off – is really the solution to the problem. Oh, that it can be that simple. April 29, 2007 |
|
