Paula Deen Dumped by Food Network After N-Word Admission

[Pitt87]

Pitt, i didnt mean to suggest she represents anyone or anything. I wasnt trying to make a "bigger" point or something.

Now I'm starting to think you didn't it. A few direct quotes from the article you posted:

This personality type, the host of events characterized by gracious Southern living, if warm-hearted and charitable, is very much implemented in a form of structural racism.

This is nostalgia for a specific period of time. Chauncey DeVega wrote at Daily Kos that “Paula Deen’s nostalgia for Jim and Jane Crow is a yearning for a world that was based upon legal violence and casual cruelty towards black Americans.”

The Deen-style GSL nostalgia harkens back to an even earlier time, before Jim Crow laws existed. She really wanted her brother to have the experience of a “very southern plantation style wedding.” This was a time when Margaret Mitchell’s heroine in Gone With the Wind could angrily address one of her slaves using that word that caused all of Deen’s problems.

One of her particularly delectable dishes is smothered quail, an entree made with sautéed mushrooms, chopped celery, and sour cream. Today you can make the meal in about two hours; historically, the hunting of the quail, the gathering and preparation of all of those ingredients, and the cooking—not to mention the serving and clean-up—would take all day and require a small army of domestic servants. Or, well, slaves.

[Gaucho]

Yes. What I'm saying is I wasn't about to go on a crusade or whatever.

[tifosi77]

You are trying to make a strong statement, but Paula Deen does not even begin to define race relations in America.

The central point of that article - that there is a pervasive undercurrent of racism in Southern culture - is actually pretty much what I've been saying since early in this thread. So while Gaucho may not have intended it as anything larger, I'll take up the mantle. I very much do think that her attitudes - the casualness with which she says certain things - are evidence of that undercurrent. It's not so much that she doesn't think it's racist to hold those views..... it just has never occurred to her (or pretty much anyone else of her generation of Southerners) that there could possibly be anything wrong with things like a "plantation wedding" or saying things like "black people were such an important part of our upbringing".

Dude... Paula Deen is a cooking show host. Not even a good one. Anything she did pales in comparison to Alec Baldwin's vitriol public shaming of a gay reporter a few days ago. People seem to dismiss that fairly easily because "he's just an actor" and "hes and LGBT ally"... please... Lots of people are bigoted. Some people get away with it.

Its really not worth taking up a mantle against Paula Deen's ilk, in your words.

My point isn't really about Paula Deen so much as it is about the white population in the southern U.S., particularly older folks who have a living memory that dates back to before the 1960s. Deen is a data point, nothing more.

Altho I would assert that with $17 million in TV and endorsement contracts, she was rather a good cooking show host, meaning quite successful. (Which is not at all the same as saying she's a good cook.)

Re Baldwin, I don't have a problem with the queen comment; I'm as gay-friendly as a straight dude can be, and I still catch myself using the word 'gay' to describe something as stupid or useless (which is the first definition of the word I ever knew). The queen thing isn't an issue for me, but the "you'd like a foot up your butt" part is uncool. Is that a double-standard? Yeah, probably.

[Pitt87]

Two things that don't make sense, Tif.

You say:

I very much do think that her attitudes - the casualness with which she says certain things - are evidence of that undercurrent.

Then you say:

My point isn't really about Paula Deen so much as it is about the white population in the southern U.S., particularly older folks who have a living memory that dates back to before the 1960s. Deen is a data point, nothing more.

You start at 'undercurrent' and arrive at every white person in the south is a racist?

Then there is this:

It's not so much that she doesn't think it's racist to hold those views.....it just has never occurred to her (or pretty much anyone else of her generation of Southerners) that there could possibly be anything wrong with things like a "plantation wedding" or saying things like "black people were such an important part of our upbringing".

Then:

Re Baldwin, I don't have a problem with the queen comment; I'm as gay-friendly as a straight dude can be, and I still catch myself using the word 'gay' to describe something as stupid or useless (which is the first definition of the word I ever knew). The queen thing isn't an issue for me, but the "you'd like a foot up your butt" part is uncool. Is that a double-standard? Yeah, probably.

Just sayin...

[tifosi77]

You start at 'undercurrent' and arrive at every white person in the south is a racist?

Gracious no, not every white person..... just the overwhelming majority of the ones who are old enough to have a memory of the pre-civil rights era. (And large number of the young ones, too.)

Is that a fair generalization? Well, having been through and lived in the south at various points of my life, I have no personal evidence to the contrary. All of my personal evidence and the anecdotal evidence of nearly every person I know is that there's a reason the confederate flag still flies over state capitol buildings and in state assemblies, and it has precious little to do with honoring the fallen.

[Shyster]

Isn't generalizing a negative characteristic to a large population based only on the race of that population the very definition of racism?

[ExPatriatePen]

Isn't generalizing a negative characteristic to a large population based only on the race of that population the very definition of racism?

Wouldn't that be stereo typing?

To me racism is factoring in someone's ancestry as a factor in a decision making process.

[tifosi77]

It's stereotyping, not racism.

[ExPatriatePen]

It's stereotyping, not racism.

Didn't I just say that? LOL

hello! Is this thing on? (tap tap tap)

[tifosi77]

Dang it, I thought I wrote it "Yeah, that's stereotyping not racism" as in "What ExPat said".

I'm having a tough time with fail posts lately.

[Sarcastic]

This is a fun thread. I just caught up.

[Sarcastic]

btw, is the word "queen" out too now? Let me know 'cuz I don't want to get into trouble.

[Willie Kool]

[Sarcastic]

It's a good thing Baldwin didn't record a video like that or there'd be hell to pay.

[Sarcastic]

Here's another 'queen'. But this queen would shove his boot up your ass if you pissed him off.

[Sarcastic]

Gay rights campaigners are calling on bosses at banking giant Capital One to drop Alec Baldwin as a company spokesman following his homophobic online outburst.

After his Twitter tirade, Baldwin issued an apology to gay rights group GLAAD.

http://wonderwall.msn.com/tv/gay-rights-campaigners-urge-capital-one-to-drop-alec-baldwin-after-gay-slurs-1759910.story

I fail to see where his 'outburst' is homophobic (as written in the article). If you can't call a dude a queen, then what has this world come to. Just for fun, I called my straight friend that and he didn't get offended. He showed me the finger. Maybe now a guy can't call another guy 'B' either (btw, how may times have you heard gay guys call each other 'B' either in real life or on TV?). It feels like any attack, any insult, on a gay person is automatically taken as a bigot-type attack. You take a picture with squinted eyes, you're branded a bigot. Maybe if some in the gay community weren't so sensitive and didn't force-look for bigotry everywhere, we wouldn't be dealing with this nonsense. Or maybe it's these organizations that take money and sometimes find themselves crossing the line (though I'm sure they have more serious cases of real prejudice to deal with). But sometimes a fight is just a fight, like I'll assume was in Baldwin's case. If this guy, being a Hollywood actor, doesn't have gay friends and co-workers, well... that's totally impossible.

I certainly wouldn't have apologized like Baldwin. I'd say the guy in question was a jerk so I told him off. (if in fact he was, I don't know what the argument was about). I don't know how a public figure can argue with a gay person these days. Is it OK to call a guy an a-hole and whatever other true swear words, just not the much softer 'queen' or 'B'? Can one even argue or get in a verbal fight with a gay person at all?

Big mistake that everyone makes is that gay guys are all soft and feminine and need special protection. I suggest getting out and actually meeting some of these guys. Many are masculine, manly, and really like to work out so they have muscles to kick ass if needed.

I have a gay in my family, btw. My step dad's brother. Though, he looks and sounds 100% straight and he's a big dude who could surely punch your lights out. His partner is a bit more feminine.

[Gaucho]

For starters, we all have an a-hole, so while it may not be a nice thing to say, it is completeley undiscriminatory. The better question is why some people can't argue or get in a verbal fight with a gay person without resorting to referencing their sexual preference. Especially when sexuality isn't even the relevant topic. (The same applies to skin color, nationality, religion, etc. The answer is simple: it's an easy target and more often than not it hits right where it hurts.) Also, what makes someone "look and sound 100% straight"?

That said, I didn't think Baldwin's tirade was that bad and I thought an apology should have been enough. Then again, I'm not gay, so what do I know.

[MWB]

Gay rights campaigners are calling on bosses at banking giant Capital One to drop Alec Baldwin as a company spokesman following his homophobic online outburst.

After his Twitter tirade, Baldwin issued an apology to gay rights group GLAAD.

http://wonderwall.msn.com/tv/gay-rights-campaigners-urge-capital-one-to-drop-alec-baldwin-after-gay-slurs-1759910.story

I fail to see where his 'outburst' is homophobic (as written in the article). If you can't call a dude a queen, then what has this world come to. Just for fun, I called my straight friend that and he didn't get offended. He showed me the finger. Maybe now a guy can't call another guy 'B' either (btw, how may times have you heard gay guys call each other 'B' either in real life or on TV?). It feels like any attack, any insult, on a gay person is automatically taken as a bigot-type attack. You take a picture with squinted eyes, you're branded a bigot. Maybe if some in the gay community weren't so sensitive and didn't force-look for bigotry everywhere, we wouldn't be dealing with this nonsense. Or maybe it's these organizations that take money and sometimes find themselves crossing the line (though I'm sure they have more serious cases of real prejudice to deal with). But sometimes a fight is just a fight, like I'll assume was in Baldwin's case. If this guy, being a Hollywood actor, doesn't have gay friends and co-workers, well... that's totally impossible.

I certainly wouldn't have apologized like Baldwin. I'd say the guy in question was a jerk so I told him off. (if in fact he was, I don't know what the argument was about). I don't know how a public figure can argue with a gay person these days. Is it OK to call a guy an a-hole and whatever other true swear words, just not the much softer 'queen' or 'B'? Can one even argue or get in a verbal fight with a gay person at all?

Big mistake that everyone makes is that gay guys are all soft and feminine and need special protection. I suggest getting out and actually meeting some of these guys. Many are masculine, manly, and really like to work out so they have muscles to kick ass if needed.

I have a gay in my family, btw. My step dad's brother. Though, he looks and sounds 100% straight and he's a big dude who could surely punch your lights out. His partner is a bit more feminine.

Sarcastic, your posts are very interesting on this topic. And I say that in all sincerity and not as a dig in any way. I can definitely see that you dislike stereotypes and don't seem like you're a bigoted person. Kind of a live and let live motto, which I get. But sometimes your comments show the same stereotyping that you seem to be against (looks/sounds 100% straight, actor must have gay friends/coworkers, how can you possibly argue with gays).

Everyone is going to deal with words differently. When you know someone and what they are like, you're going to talk to them a certain way. When you're talking to someone you don't know, a lot of people will talk differently to them. Why? Because some people are more sensitive than others. Is that wrong? I'm not really sure why it would be. If you're talking to someone you know, and you know that they find a certain word derogatory or offensive, would you say it to them anyway?

[Sarcastic]

For starters, we all have an a-hole, so while it may not be a nice thing to say, it is completeley undiscriminatory. The better question is why some people can't argue or get in a verbal fight with a gay person without resorting to referencing their sexual preference. Especially when sexuality isn't even the relevant topic. (The same applies to skin color, nationality, religion, etc. The answer is simple: it's an easy target and more often than not it hits right where it hurts.) Also, what makes someone "look and sound 100% straight"?

That said, I didn't think Baldwin's tirade was that bad and I thought an apology should have been enough. Then again, I'm not gay, so what do I know.

My problem with that whole situation is that all Baldwin did was call him a queen and a B. I would have thought if he called him a "repulsive homosexual" then there would be a case of direct homophobia and reason to go after him (unless the guy happened to be gay - a homosexual - it's a description not meant to be offensive, and repulsive as in dirty or filthy or a real perv. or if he liked to eat worms, in which case AGAIN we run into the problem of CONTEXT). I've called my straight guy friends that in a joking manner or what the hell ever manner in the past and it wasn't meant to mean anything. I've been called a B once or twice if I was being a jerk. Who cares. Sometimes, also, a straight guy can be really 'feminine', but now you can't call your girly buddy a queen anymore? This goes way beyond the issue of sexuality.

No. I am not going to live like that. I despise racism and bigotry because that to me spells ignorance and I feel everyone should get an equal opportunity, but I'm not going to walk on eggshells because there are some who happen to be over-sensitive either for real or for monetary reasons (organizations). It is as if we are asked, not asked, forced, to put a muzzle on our mouth because someone, somewhere, may get offended even if what you say isn't meant in a bigoted manner. I say, try a psychologist instead if you have such low self esteem and get offended at everything. It is on you and not on me (not talking to you Gaucho, just in a general sense).

If Baldwin felt he needed to make a personal apology, it should have been to THAT individual and not based on the gay thing, but just based on the level of rudeness. Not to GLAAD and all gay people the world over. That was ridiculous, but I understand the pressure.

Also, what makes someone "look and sound 100% straight"?

You need to go to a gay club once or twice to see the variety of "men" there. Not that I regularly hang out in such places.

[Sarcastic]

Gay rights campaigners are calling on bosses at banking giant Capital One to drop Alec Baldwin as a company spokesman following his homophobic online outburst.

After his Twitter tirade, Baldwin issued an apology to gay rights group GLAAD.

http://wonderwall.msn.com/tv/gay-rights-campaigners-urge-capital-one-to-drop-alec-baldwin-after-gay-slurs-1759910.story

I fail to see where his 'outburst' is homophobic (as written in the article). If you can't call a dude a queen, then what has this world come to. Just for fun, I called my straight friend that and he didn't get offended. He showed me the finger. Maybe now a guy can't call another guy 'B' either (btw, how may times have you heard gay guys call each other 'B' either in real life or on TV?). It feels like any attack, any insult, on a gay person is automatically taken as a bigot-type attack. You take a picture with squinted eyes, you're branded a bigot. Maybe if some in the gay community weren't so sensitive and didn't force-look for bigotry everywhere, we wouldn't be dealing with this nonsense. Or maybe it's these organizations that take money and sometimes find themselves crossing the line (though I'm sure they have more serious cases of real prejudice to deal with). But sometimes a fight is just a fight, like I'll assume was in Baldwin's case. If this guy, being a Hollywood actor, doesn't have gay friends and co-workers, well... that's totally impossible.

I certainly wouldn't have apologized like Baldwin. I'd say the guy in question was a jerk so I told him off. (if in fact he was, I don't know what the argument was about). I don't know how a public figure can argue with a gay person these days. Is it OK to call a guy an a-hole and whatever other true swear words, just not the much softer 'queen' or 'B'? Can one even argue or get in a verbal fight with a gay person at all?

Big mistake that everyone makes is that gay guys are all soft and feminine and need special protection. I suggest getting out and actually meeting some of these guys. Many are masculine, manly, and really like to work out so they have muscles to kick ass if needed.

I have a gay in my family, btw. My step dad's brother. Though, he looks and sounds 100% straight and he's a big dude who could surely punch your lights out. His partner is a bit more feminine.

Sarcastic, your posts are very interesting on this topic. And I say that in all sincerity and not as a dig in any way. I can definitely see that you dislike stereotypes and don't seem like you're a bigoted person. Kind of a live and let live motto, which I get. But sometimes your comments show the same stereotyping that you seem to be against (looks/sounds 100% straight, actor must have gay friends/coworkers, how can you possibly argue with gays).

Everyone is going to deal with words differently. When you know someone and what they are like, you're going to talk to them a certain way. When you're talking to someone you don't know, a lot of people will talk differently to them. Why? Because some people are more sensitive than others. Is that wrong? I'm not really sure why it would be. If you're talking to someone you know, and you know that they find a certain word derogatory or offensive, would you say it to them anyway?

I don't like stereotypes. Everyone is an individual and should be treated as that.

I don't see me being stereotypical in those examples, just descriptive. Point I will make again, is that gay people are often painted with the same brush, a false brush, and THAT creates problems. They do a lot of that themselves recently with all the freaking out about BS, but that seems to be mainly done by the big orgs and the media looking to force the issue and make things larger than they really are (which I feel creates the opposite effect because too much is too much sometimes).

"If you're talking to someone you know, and you know that they find a certain word derogatory or offensive, would you say it to them anyway?"

I have a problem with that too. Not for me personally because I try to be nice most of the time, but in a broad picture. Are we going to seriously sensor speech to the point we force people to be nice to each other? Think about that. What I feel we are being asked is not just to rid ourselves of perfectly normal remarks that may or may not offend certain groups or individuals (something I don't feel should be enforceable), but we are asked to re-shape our thinking. We are told who and what to like - and by that I mean INDIVIDUALS who happen to be different or into something different... like I give a DAMN what turns another person on - and accept that into our lives. Well, what if that individual simply SUCKS.

I think everyone should just chill out and realize that people sometimes fight. And when people fight, they're not nice to each other. Perfectly OK with me, as this has been so since the beginning of mankind.

If we are talking about bigotry that really affects people, we need to talk about job or marriage double standards. The gay community has me on their side all the way on those issues. Not SILLY crap like some guy calling another a 'queen'. It's a WITCH HUNT.

[Gaucho]

Also, what makes someone "look and sound 100% straight"?

You need to go to a gay club once or twice to see the variety of "men" there. Not that I regularly hang out in such places.

Welp, I guess I'd expect gay people in gay clubs to behave in a "gay" sort of way, but most gay people don't even frequent those places and neither do they talk or act in any sort of way that would give their preference away in everyday life. I have several gay friends, not that it matters, and there is nothing out of the ordinary about their appearance.

[MWB]

I don't like stereotypes. Everyone is an individual and should be treated as that.

I don't see me being stereotypical in those examples, just descriptive. Point I will make again, is that gay people are often painted with the same brush, a false brush, and THAT creates problems. They do a lot of that themselves recently with all the freaking out about BS, but that seems to be mainly done by the big orgs and the media looking to force the issue and make things larger than they really are (which I feel creates the opposite effect because too much is too much sometimes).

But those descriptions are stereotypical. You're taking a whole group of people and generalizing about them... painting with a broad brush.

I have a problem with that too. Not for me personally because I try to be nice most of the time, but in a broad picture. Are we going to seriously sensor speech to the point we force people to be nice to each other? Think about that. What I feel we are being asked is not just to rid ourselves of perfectly normal remarks that may or may not offend certain groups or individuals (something I don't feel should be enforceable), but we are asked to re-shape our thinking. We are told who and what to like - and by that I mean INDIVIDUALS who happen to be different or into something different... like I give a DAMN what turns another person on - and accept that into our lives. Well, what if that individual simply SUCKS.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm not suggesting that everyone be nice to each other. What I was asking is that if you know a person is offended by a word, would you still call him that? Say your friend told you, "You know, I really take offense when you call me a b****." For whatever reason, they find it offensive. Would you still call him that?

Also, you seem to take these things that happen to celebrities personally. Who cares what some group's official stance is on what Deen or Baldwin say? Does it really affect how you talk or what you say to your friends? Just because a person in the limelight gets flak for something s/he says doesn't mean it really has anything to do with us littles.

[PensFanInDC]

I guess I have to stop listening to Dire Straits now...darn you Mark Knopfler and your use of the F***** word...

[Gaucho]

There are several good reasons to stop listening to the Dire Straits, but this is not among them.

[PensFanInDC]

There are several good reasons to stop listening to the Dire Straits, but this is not among them.

Woah...hey now...

I thought they were popular in Germany.