LOL

The definitions are the definitions.  No need to quote them here I think as we both know what they mean even if we're not 100% according to Webster.  The former is derived from a person's name.  The latter, I haven't a clue of its origins.  In 19th century Ireland people died in boycotts - both land agents/owners and peasants when the military was brought in to pacify them.  Pretty much every time there's a lynching someone dies unless they get very lucky.  Someone other than an Irishman/Anglo-Irishman can be involved in a boycott.  Someone other than a black American/white bigot can be involved in a lynching.  They both have historical contexts and the latter term's history is not uniquely American.

I don't think I get your question.  Hopefully I've answered. 


Nope.  Addressing #1000 doesn't make the other 999 go away either.  It simply consumes resources better served going after the others.

gleek, I suspect we're of like mind on the broad subject.  Racism is evil.  If the word evil doesn't work for you I still think you know what I mean.

We'll probably just have to agree to disagree on whether or not the story at hand rises to a racism context.  I suspect you think so.  I think so too now but only because of the characters who popped up in the days subsequent to the event. 

It's all good.   

Well stated by all parties.  Interesting how time, distance, environment, upbringing, and a plethora of other factors play into what the impact of what we hear and say every day does or does not do to us as individuals, and as a society.

I grew up in the Southeast, and that no doubt lends to my reaction/interpretation of lynch.

It sends practically the same shivers to me as my brother in law's use of the word ****.

I think it's demonstrative, we still have a way to go.

I'll think about the other 999, even though 1k is the hot button for today, and be the change I want to see.   

 

Uh, but aren't you forgetting that Tiger is, in fact, (at least partly) black? Can you seriously say that the suggestion of Tiger's adversaries (99% of whom are white) "lynching" him wouldn't conjure up images in the minds of most Americans of a white lynch mob hanging a black man who whistled at a white woman? In my mind, it's virtually impossible to remove the racist aspect of what that word means.

Exactly. Which is why I gave her a pass and assumed that she was simply ignorant of the meaning of the word or its connotations.

I didn't think it was a racial attack either. It was simply a dumbass thing to say. Whether or not she deserves to be fired for being a dumbass is for somebody else to decide.


Whether or not she COULD HAVE used a better word is a matter of her intelligence or lack thereof. Whether of not she SHOULD HAVE used a better word is clearly obvious.

No, I'm not forgetting Tiger is, in fact, black.  I think this is covered ground.


That's exactly what I'm saying.  Seriously.  But I'm only 42.  Black men hanging for whistling at white women is a bit before my time.  Perhaps it's different for you/others.

You can have your opinion gleek and I'm not challenging it.  I'm not putting words in your mouth or suggesting you should think/feel any way other than you do.  Let's return the favor please.

I'm not trying to change anyone's opinion.  I'm offering mine.  If you think I'm a hypocrite, maybe even an *bunghole*, whatever, that's your opinion and that's fine too.  From threads over the past few years I gather that you have strong feelings on the subject and I shouldn't have engaged.  My bad. 

I think if you'll look back at my comments you'll find they're pretty tame with no implied sarcasm.  You brought that.  I had something strong to say about Al Sharpton and I stand by that.  He's long since lost all credibility in my book.  Excepting that, I repeatedly said that everyone's entitled to their opinion.  I don't think offering mine means I'm trying to change others.  It's a futile exercise and I know that.  Nor do I care what others think.  I thought we were just offering our own views.  We were doing so and you got a bit sarcastic and I asked you to ramp it down.  I'm sorry if I came across as something other than reasonable as I did strive for that.

We can just agree to disagree.  Seems like the best approach.

I really don't know what we're disagreeing about. I don't see this as a debate, unless you want to discuss whether or not Kelly Tilghman should be fired.

Before this thread turned into finger pointing about who's trying to change whose opinion, my line of questioning (to you) was really to figure out how your impression of the word "lynch" is so vastly different than mine. BFBoy explicitly stated that he was influenced by old westerns, and you implied the same with the picture that you posted.

Those movies were way before my time, but I'm aware of their existence and know about some of their plot devices. Yes, I know lynchings may have been depicted therein. Whether or not they were depicted as racially motivated acts, I don't know. I hate *goshdarn* westerns, so I avoid them if I can. Being younger than you are, I'm even farther removed from the Civil Rights Movement and the last cases of systematic lynchings of blacks by racist whites. But I don't live in a box, so I'm exposed to memories of this country's past. Whether it's through news articles/editorials, documentaries on the History Channel, or (semi-)fictionalized Hollywood films like Mississippi Burning, I've come to know the historical implications of the image of a "colored person" being "lynched in a back alley". Perhaps you can give a clue about how you might have been insulated from the same. That's really all that I was wondering.

As far as "my strong feelings about this subject" are concerned, I'm not going to pretend that I know if hearing whatever Kelly Tilghman said causes pain to blacks because of the memories it may have conjured up. Maybe it doesn't at all, but I will acknowledge that others just might have a bit more perspective on the subject than I do. I've never walked in another man's shoes. I don't care to walk in another man's shoes. But it is within my capacity to imagine that those shoes could be uncomfortable, and if he bitches and moans about how painful they are, I don't tell him to suck it up and worry about something else. That's just the way I roll, I guess.