- Joined
- Apr 11, 2009
- Messages
- 49,414
- Reaction score
- 7,294
- Points
- 2,244
- Location
- Greensboro, NC
- Military Branch
- Alma Mater
Let's seek agreement on reasonable statements then (although I think you should understand the bold and underlined points are where contention lies). Let's see if we can clearly distill truth from the fog here.
1) The buildup of this story prior to its release, purely on rumor and speculation, was bigger than the actual story. I think that is something arguable. This is not some obvious point, like you are stating; some people simply may not agree and I think that's understandable. For the record, I do agree with that statement. I already posted in this thread; this story is not surprising in many ways. Dan Snyder is a poor leader, and kind of a scummy individual in many ways. He hides from the limelight a lot because I don't really think he knows how to convince people otherwise, and probably like many people he does not see him the way others do. Simple psychology, and I won't digress further. Suffice it to say, though, Dan Snyder running an organization with a major sexual harassment scandal in the NFL doesn't need to be a surprise to anyone, in my opinion either, but I can understand that others may disagree.
2) This behavior is abhorrent, and does not have a place in modern society. I find this thread and a lot of discussions really interesting, because I think they are instructive on some major issues here. Do we understand that societal norms need to evolve sometimes? When we as a society recognize something is wrong, we have a duty to try to fix it in order to simply improve society (since the alternative is to observe behavior that we find morally repugnant). The fact that our opinion as a society evolved is not something to ignore or dismiss as wrong; it is correct for us to reexamine ourselves and seek to improve. It is almost a basic requirement of intellect, to be honest; that is a fact that seems increasingly lost on many people. When we disagree on what is wrong, of course, that is a different issue.
So personally, I feel that is at the crux. Let's put #1 aside for a moment. Do we all agree on #2? No one cares about the past. No one cares about NFL culture when we consider #2 in the context of society as a whole. Some are equating this with the "woke mob" and ascribing the pejorative connotation with pure disdain. I get it. Do you understand what I wrote in #2? You see, the "woke mob" exists in your mind as a pejorative when you disagree that something is wrong. If you agree that something is wrong, that description should not really apply, because at that point, we are seeking to right a wrong together. When you use that label, it definitely sounds like #2 is not in agreement. That type of messaging in your posts is what is causing some wrangling I think on many points. If we come together and clearly state agreement on #2, then I think a lot of problems are solved. I hear some words that sound like #2 is agreed upon, and yet I at the same time hear words that disagree with #2.
Anyway, my 2 cents.
Nicely said. What's problematic is, despite trying to wordsmith around it or provide lip service, some apparently feel the behavior is 'not wrong enough'.
For those folks - I don't get you, and I'm not sure I want to.