Fans direct racist taunts at Devante Smith-Pelly

[PhillipBlunt]

17 hours ago, Mr.DirtyDangles said:

Impossible with the current level of world education and ignorance.  Maybe in 10000 years......maybe.   Humans love to hate it is our nature to fear difference I doubt it will ever change.

 

We're apes, and apes are territorial. Add in the power of suggestion, especially on young minds who feel disenfranchised, and you have a recipe for disaster.

[PhillipBlunt]

On ‎2‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 7:37 AM, Hairy Kneel said:

I want names!

Why?

[Shift-4]

4 hours ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Any names yet?

West, Nash, Bird, Nowitzki....  

[Hairy Kneel]

2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Why?

Public flogging! See if they have thick skins.

[Undrafted]

14 minutes ago, Hairy Kneel said:

Public flogging! See if they have thick skins.

That is undeniably brilliant Bravo!

[Sweathog]

Definitely racist, definitely a lifetime ban is deserved.

 

Have any of the Hawks players themselves spoken out about this?

[-DLC-]

I want to say this:   HOW we address racism is important.   Racism is based in ignorance and hatred and to address racism with those same things hardly seems productive.  We have to lead by example and be a kinder, gentler world.  

 

Racism deserves a swift and severe response for sure.  However, to name call people, shun people, etc. creates further divides and fuels the hatred and does nothing to break down barriers.  We want to come together, not drive further apart.  So it's important to call out these actions without resorting to the tactics that are based in hatred and division. 

[hammertime]

We talking about basketball?

[PhillipBlunt]

38 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

I want to say is this:   HOW we address racism is important.   Racism is based in ignorance and hatred and to address racism with those same things hardly seems productive.  We have to lead by example and be a kinder, gentler world.  

 

Racism deserves a swift and severe response for sure.  However, to name call people, shun people, etc. creates further divides and fuels the hatred and does nothing to break down barriers.  We want to come together, not drive further apart.  So it's important to call out these actions without resorting to the tactics that are based in hatred and division. 

Very well put, Deb.

[CBH1926]

7 hours ago, debluvscanucks said:

I want to say this:   HOW we address racism is important.   Racism is based in ignorance and hatred and to address racism with those same things hardly seems productive.  We have to lead by example and be a kinder, gentler world.  

 

Racism deserves a swift and severe response for sure.  However, to name call people, shun people, etc. creates further divides and fuels the hatred and does nothing to break down barriers.  We want to come together, not drive further apart.  So it's important to call out these actions without resorting to the tactics that are based in hatred and division. 

When they dox racists to get them fired or get them expelled out of college, it just makes things worse imo.

You have angry, usually uneducated, disenfranchised people who blame their problems on others.

Getting publicly humiliated, getting fired, kicked out of college etc. will just reinforce their beliefs.

Sure If makes anonymous internet users feel good that these “losers” have been outed.

But what happens when one of them decides to take Dylan Roof route?

 

 

[King Heffy]

1 hour ago, CBH1926 said:

When they dox racists to get them fired or get them expelled out of college, it just makes things worse imo.

You have angry, usually uneducated, disenfranchised people who blame their problems on others.

Getting publicly humiliated, getting fired, kicked out of college etc. will just reinforce their beliefs.

Sure If makes anonymous internet users feel good that these “losers” have been outed.

But what happens when one of them decides to take Dylan Roof route?

 

 

Employers have a right to protect their brand and I would be firing these scumbags so fast it would make their heads spin.  Remember the woman who got fired for lifting up her shirt by the penalty box?  I'd have less of an issue patronizing a business that employed her and I'm not even from the group that's offended.  Imagine being a visible minority walking into McDonalds and having one of these pieces of trash waiting to take their order.

 

Don't want your life ruined?  Don't expose yourself as a subhuman piece of garbage for the whole world to see.  Not my problem that they can't at least impersonate respectable people.

[Undrafted]

7 hours ago, debluvscanucks said:

I want to say this:   HOW we address racism is important.   Racism is based in ignorance and hatred and to address racism with those same things hardly seems productive.  We have to lead by example and be a kinder, gentler world.  

 

Racism deserves a swift and severe response for sure.  However, to name call people, shun people, etc. creates further divides and fuels the hatred and does nothing to break down barriers.  We want to come together, not drive further apart.  So it's important to call out these actions without resorting to the tactics that are based in hatred and division. 

I'm sorry, Deb, but the part of your post I've bolded is not entirely correct.  As I said earlier, racism is not that simple.  To really get into it, page-long posts would be needed, so this is a kind of short version:

 

What you said is true of "hard" racists such as the neo-Nazis and white supremacists at Charlotteville--those are the people who are driven by hatred and ignorance.

 

However, the kind of racism reflected with the incident in Chicago with DSP is actually based on something else entirely.  This kind of "soft" racism is a cultural thing that originated from the colonial era of European history during the 17th-19th century.  What we're dealing with and trying to overcome is centuries of cultural inertia and that is what makes fighting this kind of racism the most difficult of all.

 

"Soft" racists don't see themselves as racists since they don't "hate" minorities in the most literal interpretation of the word like hardcore racists do.  But soft racists do object to the erosion of the dominance of white culture and the values that come with it; they resent every barrier that's been broken by minorities (and women and LGBT+, for that matter).  They defend or minimize incidents like this because they feel entitled to push back at those who break barriers and upset the previous status quo.  This is where the "I'm not racist BUT..." stuff comes in: for people like this, there's a "limit" to what minorities should expect in terms of "equality".

 

[-DLC-]

1 hour ago, Undrafted said:

I'm sorry, Deb, but the part of your post I've bolded is not entirely correct.  As I said earlier, racism is not that simple.  To really get into it, page-long posts would be needed, so this is a kind of short version:

 

What you said is true of "hard" racists such as the neo-Nazis and white supremacists at Charlotteville--those are the people who are driven by hatred and ignorance.

 

However, the kind of racism reflected with the incident in Chicago with DSP is actually based on something else entirely.  This kind of "soft" racism is a cultural thing that originated from the colonial era of European history during the 17th-19th century.  What we're dealing with and trying to overcome is centuries of cultural inertia and that is what makes fighting this kind of racism the most difficult of all.

 

"Soft" racists don't see themselves as racists since they don't "hate" minorities in the most literal interpretation of the word like hardcore racists do.  But soft racists do object to the erosion of the dominance of white culture and the values that come with it; they resent every barrier that's been broken by minorities (and women and LGBT+, for that matter).  They defend or minimize incidents like this because they feel entitled to push back at those who break barriers and upset the previous status quo.  This is where the "I'm not racist BUT..." stuff comes in: for people like this, there's a "limit" to what minorities should expect in terms of "equality".

 

That's the "ignorance" part.

[Undrafted]

2 hours ago, debluvscanucks said:

That's the "ignorance" part.

I respectfully disagree with your oversimplification. 

 

"Ignorance" can be overcome with education.  Overcoming deeply ingrained cultural beliefs established over centuries is far more difficult. 

 

Case in point: Lynn Beyak.  In spite of having FN issues explained to her repeatedly by both white and FN people, she unapologetically persists in her wrong-headed beliefs about FN people and residential schools.  That's goes far beyond mere "ignorance".

[Toews]

13 hours ago, debluvscanucks said:

I want to say this:   HOW we address racism is important.   Racism is based in ignorance and hatred and to address racism with those same things hardly seems productive.  We have to lead by example and be a kinder, gentler world.  

 

Racism deserves a swift and severe response for sure.  However, to name call people, shun people, etc. creates further divides and fuels the hatred and does nothing to break down barriers.  We want to come together, not drive further apart.  So it's important to call out these actions without resorting to the tactics that are based in hatred and division. 

I agree with this completely. We need to give people the chance to repent and come to a realization that they have done something wrong. This social media mob driven justice does nothing to bring about meaningful change, it just gives people the satisfaction that they were able to get revenge on the racist in the form of cyber-bullying. People can and have changed their attitudes on race, nobody is born with this sort of hatred. 

 

I believe these individuals were given lifetime bans, which was the solution that I proposed earlier in this thread. Now I wonder if a better solution would have been to work with these individuals and help them see through the eyes of another. Major corporations are already using sensitivity training to help their employees see past their prejudices and to help people better relate to colleagues of different gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation. Banning these people is the easy solution. Helping them get past their prejudices and having them issue a sincere apology to the victim of their actions is much more difficult but it is also confronting the issue instead of just sweeping it under the rug. 

[Toews]

5 hours ago, Undrafted said:

I'm sorry, Deb, but the part of your post I've bolded is not entirely correct.  As I said earlier, racism is not that simple.  To really get into it, page-long posts would be needed, so this is a kind of short version:

 

What you said is true of "hard" racists such as the neo-Nazis and white supremacists at Charlotteville--those are the people who are driven by hatred and ignorance.

 

However, the kind of racism reflected with the incident in Chicago with DSP is actually based on something else entirely.  This kind of "soft" racism is a cultural thing that originated from the colonial era of European history during the 17th-19th century.  What we're dealing with and trying to overcome is centuries of cultural inertia and that is what makes fighting this kind of racism the most difficult of all.

 

"Soft" racists don't see themselves as racists since they don't "hate" minorities in the most literal interpretation of the word like hardcore racists do.  But soft racists do object to the erosion of the dominance of white culture and the values that come with it; they resent every barrier that's been broken by minorities (and women and LGBT+, for that matter).  They defend or minimize incidents like this because they feel entitled to push back at those who break barriers and upset the previous status quo.  This is where the "I'm not racist BUT..." stuff comes in: for people like this, there's a "limit" to what minorities should expect in terms of "equality".,

 

Good post. From personal experience, you are correct that getting people to see this form of racism is very difficult.

[J-23]

On 2/21/2018 at 11:26 AM, hammertime said:

We talking about basketball?

We talking bout practice.

[apollo]

On 2/17/2018 at 9:57 PM, Cramarossa said:

When people ask why we have #HockeyIsForEveryone or claim nobody ever said hockey wasn't for everyone, show them this.

True. Little off topic but one thing I noticed... at 800 Griffiths Way, Formerly GM Place, the last game I went to...  during games they put the rainbow fluorescent lights on the display that rings around the entire ring saying "Hockey is for everyone"...

 

I think it's way too bright and like 6 different neon colours. Both me and my friends agreed it was actually blinding us. They should really tone down the brightness at least. I'm legit serious when I say that's damaging to your retina to look at. 

 

As for DSP... sorry to hear that and hope it didn't affect him. Wouldn't expect anything else from redneck hillbillies in Chicago though

[CBH1926]

23 hours ago, King Heffy said:

Employers have a right to protect their brand and I would be firing these scumbags so fast it would make their heads spin.  Remember the woman who got fired for lifting up her shirt by the penalty box?  I'd have less of an issue patronizing a business that employed her and I'm not even from the group that's offended.  Imagine being a visible minority walking into McDonalds and having one of these pieces of trash waiting to take their order.

 

Don't want your life ruined?  Don't expose yourself as a subhuman piece of garbage for the whole world to see.  Not my problem that they can't at least impersonate respectable people.

Employers do have the right to protect their image indeed, but my post was not about the employers.

Its about internet vigilantism, that is what I was talking about.

 

Look at all the garbage that people post around here, how many would say that in person?

Or how many people use their real names when posting?

 

When you treat people like animals in prisons, guess what, they will act worse once they get out.

I would rather try to educate ignorant people, because that gives you hope that they might change.

 

If you treat them like subhuman piece of garbage, they will act like that.

All that tough approach is good, until the bullets start flying!

 

[Undrafted]

Just wanted to wrap this thread with this good news:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/capitals-insider/wp/2018/02/23/chicago-fans-donate-20000-to-fort-dupont-in-support-of-caps-devante-smith-pelly/

 

Partial quote:

 

Quote

A week after four Chicago Blackhawks fans were ejected from United Center after yelling racist taunts at Washington Capitals forward Devante Smith-Pelly, some good has resulted from the incident.

Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Rosenbloom received an email Monday that suggested Blackhawks fans donate to a charity of Smith-Pelly’s choosing as a sort of civic apology. The author of the email, John Simpson, even offered to put up the first $10,000. After taking this idea to the Capitals, Rosenbloom published a story Tuesday that pointed Tribune readers to Fort Dupont Ice Arena, the cause Smith-Pelly picked. Fort Dupont Director Ty Newberry said Friday that the rink has received $23,000 from 353 donors.

“We are overwhelmed with the support from the hockey community, the people of Chicago, Blackhawks fans and others across the country,” Newberry said in an email. “We are incredibly grateful that Devante Smith-Pelly chose us as his charity; though, we would have preferred that this incident never occurred to begin with. It is great to know that the world is filled with so many more good people than it is bad.”