Giants' Janoris Jenkins tweets insult to fan during practice/ Giants Release Jenkins

[LesBaker]

This is a concept that many people fail to understand.

.

Not a lie!

Well said.

If embracing the teachings and philosophies of Social Justice Warriors like MLK, Gandhi and so many others makes me soft, then I’ll be soft.

The first time I heard that term I was disappointed that someone was using it to attack people that wanted fair treatment.

Does anyone not want social justice?

Anyway I did a little snooping around the internet and discovered that it was actually originally a sort of compliment, or a description.

Les, all those derogatory words have never been used EVER to mean anything other than incensitive slurs. The word retard, in today's culture, means multiple different things, and it didnt start out as a derogatory word. Its was a clinical diagnosis. Which yes, can be used as an insensitive slur.

Well it was awfully nice of Janoris to give his clinical diagnosis free of charge.



It's strange, to me anyway, that a black guy, 31 years of age and from rural Florida which is as racist as anyplace imaginable isn't more in touch with things like this.

...........................................
FYI I like Janoris, but this was a mistake, and he shouldn't have defended it. But I'm not sure he should have been cut for this. Riley Cooper said worse and didn't get cut.

I hope he lands somewhere and continues his career.

IMO if Coughlin was still there he would not have been cut. Coughlin would have probably fined him had a talk with him and then would have moved on. The Giants are a mess.

 

[Soul Surfer]

.

I’ll answer that.
He was the closest thing the Rams had to a shut down corner in the last 15 years.

And he was a good tackler (contrary to popular belief).

Luv me some jackrabbit.

In his first and second year he attempted to be a shutdown corner and was fairly good at it.
Somewhere in his third year he decided he was going to go for pick sixes over being a shutdown corner.
They tried to coach it out of him but by his fourth year you could tell that wasn't going to happen.

So it was goodbye Janoris.

His tacky Twitter handle set it all;
Mrpix6sht.

Not a team player.

 

[Ellard80]

This is a concept that many people fail to understand.

.

Yeah but people can and will be offended by everything and anything... one day its the word retard - one day it's another word.

Yeah -calling an autistic kid a retard, that's some low low shit. But honestly 99% of people won't go there because they will look like pure trash.

But saying that certain words can never be uttered.... I just don't believe in that -

Read some George Orwell - 1984 and others.

 

[Angry Ram]

Does anyone not want social justice?

Most people shouldn't want it.

People get suspended, fired, publicly shamed, etc. etc. for someone getting their feelers hurt.

Social justice is not real justice.

 

[Pancake]

If growing in humanity makes me soft, the I’ll be soft.

If embracing the teachings and philosophies of Social Justice Warriors like MLK, Gandhi and so many others makes me soft, then I’ll be soft.

It still boils down to someone saying, “no one should take offense because *I* don’t take offense.” The lowest common denominator of that amounts to a complete abandonment of our humanity.

I’ll never understand the virtue of defending being less kind to a fellow human being.

At what point do we aspire to lift up everyone such that everyone can exist with humanity and dignity?

Or is the only virtue to devolve society into an emotional Thunderdome?

We either love one another and our actions signify that or we don’t. It’s really as simple as that.

I choose to embrace freedom. Freedom to say and think what ever I want. And I choose to stand against controlling people who would take that away because they think they have a right not to have their feelings hurt.

Doesn't mean I will act like a jerk and say cruel things to people but it's my choice. People have fought in wars for this country and I doubt they were fighting to protect peoples feelings. I believe they fought for our right to be free.

 

[I like Rams]

Since 2012, EVERY SINGLE Seahawks thread has contained someone or multiple people calling Russell Wilson a midget. Not a single person on this board has ever been offended by others calling an average sized human a derogatory name for a little person. If you get offended or find the word retard offensive but have no problem with midget, you should probably stop talking. Or typing in this case.

#midgetlivesmatter

 

[Akrasian]

I choose to embrace freedom. Freedom to say and think what ever I want. And I choose to stand against controlling people who would take that away because they think they have a right not to have their feelings hurt.

Doesn't mean I will act like a jerk and say cruel things to people but it's my choice. People have fought in wars for this country and I doubt they were fighting to protect peoples feelings. I believe they fought for our right to be free.

But you're NOT embracing freedom.

This isn't a case of the government controlling speech. You are coming out against a private business choosing to discipline an employee for gratuitous speech which is blatantly offensive against part of their customer base. The Giants chose to cut a player who was being stupidly offensive, and when given a chance to walk it back doubled down. The NFL is entertainment, and deliberately (and repeatedly) offending a significant part of their audience for ZERO good reason is foolish, and Jenkins should have known better.

Athletes are entertainers. Intentionally upsetting part of the audience is negative. Doubling down on it is even more negative. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about it, and that the non-governmental employers should not have the freedom to protect their brand. And I am not sure why some here think that it's a freedom issue. I suspect most of those would not feel that way in other circumstances. Frankly, those criticizing the Giants on "freedom" grounds show that they do not actually understand the issue.

 

[Mackeyser]

I choose to embrace freedom. Freedom to say and think what ever I want. And I choose to stand against controlling people who would take that away because they think they have a right not to have their feelings hurt.

Doesn't mean I will act like a jerk and say cruel things to people but it's my choice. People have fought in wars for this country and I doubt they were fighting to protect peoples feelings. I believe they fought for our right to be free.

Well, from a civics perspective that's not what freedom means in the American context. Typically, it's meant freedom from tyranny, be that monarchy or tyrannical government. The founding fathers wrote of the people as a more unitary, coherent "citizenry" focusing on attacks of "freedom" external to that group.

Moreover, every single right upon which we are bestowed has limits. Every. Single. One.

You do not have the right to simply declare that you are Sui Juris.

You do not have the right to not participate in the laws of the land, including taxation or recognizing the authority of the government.

You do not have the right to have your rights encroach on the rights of others. Now, where that line is has moved in various directions over time, but no one's rights are supreme.

Also, this argument you make is pretty weak because you make an argument based on a principle and then use your personal experience and/or behavioral inclinations as the bulwark. How does that address the people who want that freedom expressly to hurt or incite actual violence? There are sadly a LOT of people like this.

If freedom truly meant the ability to say whatever we wanted then a) insurrection wouldn't be a crime, b) treasonous speech wouldn't be a crime, c) incitement (to riot or commit violence) wouldn't be a crime... etc.

Also, it is beyond disingenuous to think that it's SOLELY about people getting their feelings hurt. Consistently, around the world, when hateful or hurtful speech has been allowed, encouraged or engaged in by those in authority, serious violence up to and including some pretty horrific deaths against the subject of that speech have increased dramatically. And it doesn't matter what group it is, from indigenous peoples to trans people.

Part of the American aspiration has been protecting the weak. Everything from the Statue of Liberty to the many foreign aid, NGOs and charities speak to that. And historically, once past a landmark, we teach the history of overcoming from the suffragettes to civil rights marchers and more as a positive and that THOSE folks are examples of the best of America.

Freedom is not chaos, unbound by rules or strictures. Rather, it is an ideal that our harmony can be congruous and unfettered by the wanton imprisonment of that ideal by a singular authority governed by nothing more than its own capriciousness.

Also, JJ is a cover corner with scheme discipline issues and diminishing physical attributes. I dunno. I just thought I should include some football in here somewhere...

 

[Mackeyser]

Since 2012, EVERY SINGLE Seahawks thread has contained someone or multiple people calling Russell Wilson a midget. Not a single person on this board has ever been offended by others calling an average sized human a derogatory name for a little person. If you get offended or find the word retard offensive but have no problem with midget, you should probably stop talking. Or typing in this case.

#midgetlivesmatter

I honestly didn't know this. Is it "little person" now? Is that the thing? I mean entire years go by without needing to refer to a little person...now that GoT is over and I always just referred to the man by name (Peter Dinklage, that is).

Cool.

 

[Pancake]

But you're NOT embracing freedom.

This isn't a case of the government controlling speech. You are coming out against a private business choosing to discipline an employee for gratuitous speech which is blatantly offensive against part of their customer base. The Giants chose to cut a player who was being stupidly offensive, and when given a chance to walk it back doubled down. The NFL is entertainment, and deliberately (and repeatedly) offending a significant part of their audience for ZERO good reason is foolish, and Jenkins should have known better.

Athletes are entertainers. Intentionally upsetting part of the audience is negative. Doubling down on it is even more negative. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about it, and that the non-governmental employers should not have the freedom to protect their brand. And I am not sure why some here think that it's a freedom issue. I suspect most of those would not feel that way in other circumstances. Frankly, those criticizing the Giants on "freedom" grounds show that they do not actually understand the issue.

So do you think he is on the clock 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Is there any time at all when he can say what he wants without potentialy losing his job?

 

[Pancake]

Well, from a civics perspective that's not what freedom means in the American context. Typically, it's meant freedom from tyranny, be that monarchy or tyrannical government. The founding fathers wrote of the people as a more unitary, coherent "citizenry" focusing on attacks of "freedom" external to that group.

Moreover, every single right upon which we are bestowed has limits. Every. Single. One.

You do not have the right to simply declare that you are Sui Juris.

You do not have the right to not participate in the laws of the land, including taxation or recognizing the authority of the government.

You do not have the right to have your rights encroach on the rights of others. Now, where that line is has moved in various directions over time, but no one's rights are supreme.

Also, this argument you make is pretty weak because you make an argument based on a principle and then use your personal experience and/or behavioral inclinations as the bulwark. How does that address the people who want that freedom expressly to hurt or incite actual violence? There are sadly a LOT of people like this.

If freedom truly meant the ability to say whatever we wanted then a) insurrection wouldn't be a crime, b) treasonous speech wouldn't be a crime, c) incitement (to riot or commit violence) wouldn't be a crime... etc.

Also, it is beyond disingenuous to think that it's SOLELY about people getting their feelings hurt. Consistently, around the world, when hateful or hurtful speech has been allowed, encouraged or engaged in by those in authority, serious violence up to and including some pretty horrific deaths against the subject of that speech have increased dramatically. And it doesn't matter what group it is, from indigenous peoples to trans people.

Part of the American aspiration has been protecting the weak. Everything from the Statue of Liberty to the many foreign aid, NGOs and charities speak to that. And historically, once past a landmark, we teach the history of overcoming from the suffragettes to civil rights marchers and more as a positive and that THOSE folks are examples of the best of America.

Freedom is not chaos, unbound by rules or strictures. Rather, it is an ideal that our harmony can be congruous and unfettered by the wanton imprisonment of that ideal by a singular authority governed by nothing more than its own capriciousness.

Also, JJ is a cover corner with scheme discipline issues and diminishing physical attributes. I dunno. I just thought I should include some football in here somewhere...

That was awesome. As far as my part in all of that I think you make a lot of assumptions from the very small amount I wrote. And you know what I'm never going to be the kind of guy that will put that much effort into expressing my thoughts on an internet forum. I don't care enough and I'm way to lazy.

 

[kurtfaulk]

So do you think he is on the clock 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Is there any time at all when he can say what he wants without potentialy losing his job?

Yeah, when he's not posting a message that the whole world can see.

.

 

[VegasRam]

In his first and second year he attempted to be a shutdown corner and was fairly good at it.
Somewhere in his third year he decided he was going to go for pick sixes over being a shutdown corner.
They tried to coach it out of him but by his fourth year you could tell that wasn't going to happen.

So it was goodbye Janoris.

His tacky Twitter handle set it all;
Mrpix6sht.

Not a team player.

Thanks for the analysis.
He was still our closest thing to a shut down corner at the time Mr SJW.

 

[Ellard80]

you guys make me lol that you think he lost his job because he said that.

That was just the 10000th thing he had done to piss people off.

 

[VegasRam]

But you're NOT embracing freedom.

This isn't a case of the government controlling speech. You are coming out against a private business choosing to discipline an employee for gratuitous speech which is blatantly offensive against part of their customer base. The Giants chose to cut a player who was being stupidly offensive, and when given a chance to walk it back doubled down. The NFL is entertainment, and deliberately (and repeatedly) offending a significant part of their audience for ZERO good reason is foolish, and Jenkins should have known better.

Athletes are entertainers. Intentionally upsetting part of the audience is negative. Doubling down on it is even more negative. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about it, and that the non-governmental employers should not have the freedom to protect their brand. And I am not sure why some here think that it's a freedom issue. I suspect most of those would not feel that way in other circumstances. Frankly, those criticizing the Giants on "freedom" grounds show that they do not actually understand the issue.

Sorry,
1. There is no “issue”,
And
2. We do understand it.

 

[VegasRam]

That was awesome. As far as my part in all of that I think you make a lot of assumptions from the very small amount I wrote. And you know what I'm never going to be the kind of guy that will put that much effort into expressing my thoughts on an internet forum. I don't care enough and I'm way to lazy.

Actually you’re not IMO.
And @Mackeyser crossed the line with his “when those in authority encourage this type of behavior” horseshit.
Nice try Mac. Write a 2000 word essay based on a false premise.
Kinda like what’s happening in DC these days, which scares the fuck out of me.
Except I won’t be here when it all turns to shit. Thank God.

 

[rdlkgliders]

definitely not a smart choice. I see posts calling him an idiot which is similar. I think it is the intent and context that are important as well. In fact if I remember correctly to retard " delay " is actually a very early expression of political correctness replacing the old description of mongoloid idiot
which was the term used on the birth certificate or some formal record prior to the less offensive retardation term. Either way intent and context can turn a lot of terms into derogatory and venomous name calling or shaming.

 

[coconut]

Well, from a civics perspective that's not what freedom means in the American context. Typically, it's meant freedom from tyranny, be that monarchy or tyrannical government. The founding fathers wrote of the people as a more unitary, coherent "citizenry" focusing on attacks of "freedom" external to that group.

Moreover, every single right upon which we are bestowed has limits. Every. Single. One.

You do not have the right to simply declare that you are Sui Juris.

You do not have the right to not participate in the laws of the land, including taxation or recognizing the authority of the government.

You do not have the right to have your rights encroach on the rights of others. Now, where that line is has moved in various directions over time, but no one's rights are supreme.

Also, this argument you make is pretty weak because you make an argument based on a principle and then use your personal experience and/or behavioral inclinations as the bulwark. How does that address the people who want that freedom expressly to hurt or incite actual violence? There are sadly a LOT of people like this.

If freedom truly meant the ability to say whatever we wanted then a) insurrection wouldn't be a crime, b) treasonous speech wouldn't be a crime, c) incitement (to riot or commit violence) wouldn't be a crime... etc.

Also, it is beyond disingenuous to think that it's SOLELY about people getting their feelings hurt. Consistently, around the world, when hateful or hurtful speech has been allowed, encouraged or engaged in by those in authority, serious violence up to and including some pretty horrific deaths against the subject of that speech have increased dramatically. And it doesn't matter what group it is, from indigenous peoples to trans people.

Part of the American aspiration has been protecting the weak. Everything from the Statue of Liberty to the many foreign aid, NGOs and charities speak to that. And historically, once past a landmark, we teach the history of overcoming from the suffragettes to civil rights marchers and more as a positive and that THOSE folks are examples of the best of America.

Freedom is not chaos, unbound by rules or strictures. Rather, it is an ideal that our harmony can be congruous and unfettered by the wanton imprisonment of that ideal by a singular authority governed by nothing more than its own capriciousness.

Also, JJ is a cover corner with scheme discipline issues and diminishing physical attributes. I dunno. I just thought I should include some football in here somewhere...

Nice trope but doesn't address what is at issue, namely our Freedom of Speech and the SJW effort to weaponize words to gain advantage. Freedom unlike authoritarianism is messy. It starts and can end with words. JJ used a word you don't like yet attending an NFL game these days subjects people to many words they won't like. What's next Thought Police?