Oh, and they still fudge the truth of a story to get their digs in on a group of people, in this case...yes, you guessed it...gays.
The story concerned San Francisco 49ers cornerback Chris Cullivers' homophobic remarks on a radio station. In Crank and JJ's version of the story, all Culliver said was that he would feel uncomfortable in the locker room with a gay player and then they railed against the "mind control" efforts of the NFL forcing him into sensitivity training. From Crank and JJ's standpoint, Culliver simply voiced a concern and he shouldn't have to apologize nor attend sensitivity training. Crank and JJ still operate under the mistaken belief that free speech means one can say whatever they want, whenever they want, and where ever they want.
The facts of the story paint a different picture than what Crank and JJ wanted us to believe. The most obvious observation of the interview is it is a testament to the failure of our education system. Culliver can't speak a coherent sentence. The man would be best to keep his mouth shut, play football, and just let fans think he's a smart guy.
What Culliver didn't say was he would be uncomfortable in a locker room with a gay guy. What he did say, no bones about it, is gays don't need to be playing football, at least not on his team.
Lange asked Culliver if any members of the 49ers were homosexual or if he had ever been approached by "gay guys".
"I don't do the gay guys man, I don't do that," Culliver said. "Nah, we ain't got no gay people on the team."
"They gotta get up outta here if they do. Can't be with that sweet stuff. Nah, can't be in the locker room." (source: Global Post)
He went on to say that if a gay guy were playing for the team, he'd be best not to tell anyone until ten years after he retired.
This may come as a surprise to Crank and JJ, but if one is speaking in public on behalf of the company he works for or the audience will associate his comments with the company he works for (in this case, a football team and the NFL), the employee (in this case, the football player) is expected to keep his personal opinion to himself and represent his company in the best possible light. San Francisco 49ers have a nondiscrimination policy and support the gay community, at least that is 49ers' official, public stance.
By no stretch of the imagination can Cullivers' words be interpretted as him saying he would be "uncomfortable" in a locker room with a gay player. He made it very clear there is no room for gay people on his team nor in his locker room.
What cracked me up most about Crank and JJ's glossed over commentary was when JJ stated he'd be uncomfortable with a gay guy in a locker room checking him out, too. What sort of arrogance can one person hold to believe he's all that to be worth staring at in the shower? I'll give you a hint, JJ. You ain't got it, as our unoffical poll of gay men in Baltimore shows.
Yes, their commentary was problematic, if not downright offensive. It perpetuates the myth that gay men are oversexed perverts that they'll check anyone out, even JJ. I can almost guarantee that if Crank, JJ, or anyone else ever showered in a locker room with other guys, odds are good there was a gay guy in there, and no one was staring at anyone.
The military is testament to that. Look how many gay guys have served or were serving before the ban on openly gay members serving was lifted. They all showered with the straight guys, and guess what? They didn't ogle the other guys. Of course, both Crank and JJ shirked their civic duty of serving in the military, but if they were as active in sports as they claim, it's safe to say they most likely showered with at least one gay guy who they didn't know was gay.
Once again, if Crank and JJ had done their homework, they wouldn't have touched this story. WZBH and Great Scott Broadcasting does, after all, have a nondiscriminatory policy. Perpetuating myths in a effort to justify homophobic remarks and keep the gay people separated, you would think, is a violation of that policy.
But, hey, I do give credit to Crank and JJ for at least trying to tone down their anti-gay rhetoric. They still need to join Culliver in a sensitivity class, though.
Shut the fuck up. If you already knew you didn't like listening to them, why did you? And then rant because you still had a problem with how they "entertain". Like anything they say really matters.
ReplyDeleteLike most morning show listeners, you did a bang up job in English class. Look, the principle is simple, although lost on most morning show listeners: we can rant and criticize as easily and as rightfully as the morning show hosts can. If you don't like what we say, why read our rants? Of course, we really don't expect you to respond. Now that you know how we "entertain", we don't expect you to be a loyal reader of our blog and will miss our kind response to you.
ReplyDelete