Stoops?

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

tntrex

Sharpshooter
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
3,379
Reaction score
4
Location
Altus
Who exactly were the frat boys threatening? No one was injured on the bus, no one was directly threatened on the bus - in fact, it was a childish chant in a private setting. A chick was injured, homophobic slurs were spoken in a public place, yet one gets to stay, the others are expelled. Sounds like a double standard to me.
Bingo. That was the point of this thread. Bobby is a real dumbass.
 

dennishoddy

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
84,543
Reaction score
61,800
Location
Ponca City Ok
Who exactly were the frat boys threatening? No one was injured on the bus, no one was directly threatened on the bus - in fact, it was a childish chant in a private setting. A chick was injured, homophobic slurs were spoken in a public place, yet one gets to stay, the others are expelled. Sounds like a double standard to me.

My point in another thread where I stated the basketball team should be dismantled, and the students involved in the racial slur using the N word should be expelled.

They did that knowing they wouldn't be expelled as they ride the high road of athletics and white guilt.
 

cjjtulsa

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
7,244
Reaction score
2,335
Location
Oologah
Are people really arguing about which is better (or less worse), racism or hitting women?!?!?

No. I think they're arguing over whether the harshest punishment meted out by the school should have gone to a group of students that didn't do anything illegal, but chanted socially unacceptable slurs, or to an athlete that performed an illegal act after uttering socially unacceptable slurs. Last I checked racist language isn't illegal, but assault is. And he got off light even coupling homophobic slurs with his girl punchin'. Double standard. The basketball team issue is just icing on the cake.
 

Buddhaman

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jun 1, 2010
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,174
Location
Norman
It was a song that referenced hanging someone from a tree. Was it a silly song? Yes. If someone heard it who was black could they have felt threatened? Yes. That was the difference between the SAE morons and the basketball team.
 

cjjtulsa

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
7,244
Reaction score
2,335
Location
Oologah
“There will never be a ****** SAE.
There will never be a ****** SAE.
You can hang ‘em from a tree,
But they’ll never pledge with me.
There will never be a ****** SAE.”

Nothing in that is a direct threat. Nothing. Offensive? Yes. Threatening? No.

The school should have at least taken equal action in the Mixon case as the SAE case, if not moreso (and I'd go with further action, since there was an actual assault involved). The baskeball team I don't care either way, but if they are going to have a "zero tolerance" policy, at least be consistent.
 

bsmith918

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
1,052
Reaction score
7
Location
Edmond
Even though I don't agree with OU kicking the two kids out of school for the song, what Khadeem Lattin said after the game was nowhere near the same. One was meant as racism and the other as a way to greet some teammates. The fraternity kids probably didn't deserve to be removed from campus, but I feel like Mixon was treated appropriately. Both he and the girl involved were equally guilty of really bad judgement. In my opinion, they both played a stupid game and won a stupid prize. It just happened to be that one was a female.
 
Last edited:

YukonGlocker

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jan 5, 2006
Messages
14,868
Reaction score
993
Location
OKC
So the "double standard" discussion moved threads. The standards aren't about individual words; they are about context, intentions, and behaviors. "******" in some contexts is not racist and offensive, and in other contexts it is racist and offensive. See this thread for more discussion about that.

Universities can employ a zero-tolerance policy for anything they want to. It appears that OU is demonstrating a zero-tolerance policy for racist behaviors (which are illegal by the university code of conduct), but not for assault (although I don't know all the details surrounding the assault case). This is their choice. If you don't agree with it, don't support the university (and be sure to express that to the university). UT (e.g., with Strong's leadership) is demonstrating a zero-tolerance policy for violence towards women, of any kind...and Strong booted highly valuable football players that didn't believe it. The societal landscape for the acceptance of prejudicial/discriminatory practices is changing (e.g., by sex, age, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, body type, etc.), and universities are trying to lead the way. If along the way, some institution is demonstrating conflicting policy, write/call/email to them and express it (along with discussing it on places like OSA). Those young folks that are funneling through the universities will be tomorrow's political leaders. If you don't like the way society is changing, now is the time to do something about it.
 
Last edited:

cjjtulsa

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
7,244
Reaction score
2,335
Location
Oologah
So the "double standard" discussion moved threads. The standards aren't about individual words; they are about context, intentions, and behaviors. "******" in some contexts is not racist and offensive, and in other contexts it is racist and offensive.

Would be interesting to see what Boren would do if a couple of white football or basketball players were overheard calling each other "******" or "nigga", or whatever variation of the word might be, in a friendly manner. Would be interesting to see the reaction of minority groups, too. I'm sure the whole "context" argument would go out the window pretty damned quickly.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom