Josh Donaldson Suspended for Making Racist Comment

Status
Not open for further replies.

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,672
I am not defending him. Donaldson is indeed a boorish fool. There is no possible reading of anything I have written that would suggest a defense of him or his actions.

Sorry if discussing the differences between being a boor and an outright racist is not OK with you or anyone else.

Intent matters in this situation, even if it doesn't matter as much as it does in a murder trial. This is beyond obvious. If MLB was certain about his intent, the penalty would have been more severe.
Is that true? The defense is always “I didn’t mean it that way! That was not my intent!!”

At my workplace two people were recently fired for discussing/making jokes about another employee’s sexual orientation in an open work area. Does intent to harm matter? Or is that something you just don’t do?
 

Doc Zero

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2007
12,435
Sorry if discussing the differences between being a boor and an outright racist is not OK with you or anyone else.

Intent matters in this situation, even if it doesn't matter as much as it does in a murder trial. This is beyond obvious.
Why does it matter? Who does it matter for? If we collectively decide that this was a 2/10 on the Racist Scale and an 8/10 on the Boorish Scale, what should we (or anyone) do with that information?
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
718
Why does it matter? Who does it matter for? If we collectively decide that this was a 2/10 on the Racist Scale and an 8/10 on the Boorish Scale, what should we (or anyone) do with that information?
Do you think that the one game suspension would have been longer had Donaldson called him the N Word? Or less obviously, had said something else that made it crystal clear that his intention was racist?

If the answer is yes, intent matters.

That having been said, we agree that Donaldson is a way high on the idiot scale.
 

Doc Zero

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2007
12,435
It truly seems like this entire conversational cul-de-sac is just a way to launder "what Josh Donaldson did wasn't as bad as everyone says."

Whatever Anderson is, he is no Jackie Robinson
Uh. This is precisely what Josh Donaldson said.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,672
Do you think that the one game suspension would have been longer had Donaldson called him the N Word? Or less obviously, had said something else that made it crystal clear that his intention was racist?

If the answer is yes, intent matters.

That having been said, we agree that Donaldson is a way high on the idiot scale.
I believe most people would think that the N word deserves a greater suspension than saying Jackie. That has nothing to do with intent.

EDIT: I will say that we know there is a growing conversation on how a lot of the rules against personal expression/celebration in the major sports may have an undercurrent of favoring traditional white culture. So, even if the “intent” was to mock Anderson for trying to change those rules or the culture of personal expression in MLB, that’s pretty dicey in and of itself.
 
Last edited:

Doc Zero

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2007
12,435
Do you think that the one game suspension would have been longer had Donaldson called him the N Word? Or less obviously, had said something else that made it crystal clear that his intention was racist?

If the answer is yes, intent matters.
You're not describing intent, you're describing the difference between something that happened and an imaginary scenario you've deemed to be worse.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2007
17,184
Washington
It truly seems like this entire conversational cul-de-sac is just a way to launder "what Josh Donaldson did wasn't as bad as everyone says."
Pretty much. Variations of this same conversation come up around here with some regularity. We saw similar in the Tatum thread the other day.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
718
It truly seems like this entire conversational cul-de-sac is just a way to launder "what Josh Donaldson did wasn't as bad as everyone says."



Uh. This is precisely what Josh Donaldson said.
The difference is that I am not defending Donaldson for saying it. If he thought that, I agree with him. The difference is that I understand that you don't say certain things because they are inflammatory and can be misunderstood.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
718
I believe most people would think that the N word deserves a greater suspension than saying Jackie. That has nothing to do with intent.
That is why I mentioned saying something less than the N Word that would have made his intent obvious.

Hey, if you think that intention is irrelevant and saying something boorish and unthinking is no different that says something that makes clear you are a racist, Godspeed. Agree to disagree,
 

Doc Zero

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2007
12,435
No it isn't. You think Josh Donaldson would have been suspended if he said, "Anderson, you're no Jackie Robinson?"
I think Josh Donaldson finding himself in an altercation and, in the heat of the moment, mockingly referring to Anderson as "Jackie" because of some interview Anderson did three years ago pretty much speaks for itself.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,672
That is why I mentioned saying something less than the N Word that would have made his intent obvious.

Hey, if you think that intention is irrelevant and saying something boorish and unthinking is no different that says something that makes clear you are a racist, Godspeed. Agree to disagree,
Of course that is so far from what I said that there is clearly a communication disconnect.

Certainly in the world intent matters. And I agree that in these situations impact really matters. And I believe that in the context of the workplace there are things you do not say, including calling somebody by a term that could reasonably be construed by others to be race-based - even if you are too dumb to notice or even if it was not your intent. If you do do that, you should expect disciplinary action, and the extent of the discipline may vary depending on what you said or did and the impact it may have had on others...but intent seems to me to be far less of a factor or perhaps no factor.
 

snowmanny

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
15,672
I certainly get the general instinct of many of us to put ourselves in the shoes of the white person and think “what if I said X but it was taken the wrong way” but I learned a lot in this thread from people who emphasized the need to look at this episode from Anderson’s perspective.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
718
Of course that is so far from what I said that there is clearly a communication disconnect.

Certainly in the world intent matters. And I agree that in these situations impact really matters. And I believe that in the context of the workplace there are things you do not say, including calling somebody by a term that could reasonably be construed by others to be race-based - even if you are too dumb to notice or even if it was not your intent. If you do do that, you should expect disciplinary action, and the extent of the discipline may vary depending on what you said or did and the impact it may have had on others...but intent seems to me to be far less of a factor or perhaps no factor.
I've got nothing new to add other than we agree that's less of a factor but I think it begs credulity to say it's not a factor...if MLB was certain, they would have come down harder. That there was some ambiguity between idiot and outright racist gave them the room to make it only one game.
 

Doc Zero

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2007
12,435
The difference is that I am not defending Donaldson for saying it.
Of course you're not. You're just saying that he should've known better than to be wishy-washy about his intent, because in this wild-and-crazy PC world, certain things can't even be talked about without everyone getting all up in arms:

We live in a PC world where certain things can't even be broached. So Donaldson should have known better than to go there.
If he thought that, I agree with him. The difference is that I understand that you don't say certain things because they are inflammatory and can be misunderstood.
"The only thing Donaldson is at fault for here is not knowing that the Culture would come for him. He should have kept his thoughts—which I agree with—to himself, because everyone around him is prone to misunderstand his true intent. The only way he could have possibly have intended to be disrespectful and thoughtless about race is if he had used the N-word."
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
46,776
Hartford, CT
Any statements short of racial slurs or explicitly pejorative characterizations are ‘misunderstood,’ and what Donaldson said wasn’t actually inappropriate, it’s just that everyone gets all pissy/offended because of PC culture. Got it.

It really sucks for Josh Donaldson to live in a world where words have consequences. To compensate we should take great care to remind ourselves that he could’ve said worse things, and characterize his one game suspension as warranted on the basis of idiocy rather than what he said being inherently problematic. That’s a lot more sanitized/comfortable. After all, it could be me someday!
 

Doc Zero

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2007
12,435
there was some ambiguity between idiot and outright racist
This right here is precisely what a lot of us are trying to discuss.

No one is going to tell you that there isn't a spectrum to Saying Bad Shit. No one will disagree with you if you posit that, "saying the N-word would have been worse," or "more racist."

But the sum of your argument, that "intent matters," is only in service of one thing: Josh Donaldson could have been more racist if he wanted to be, and because there's a way to look at this that makes him seem like more of an idiot than a bonafide, capital-R Racist, we're better off talking about it in those terms.

We're better off talking about how, actually, Josh was right about Anderson not being Jackie, but the problem here is that he said it in a "PC world" where "certain things can't even be touched."

All you're doing is creating cartilage between "Josh was just making a baseball point" and "we live in a politically correct world where no one can say what's on their mind." When you tell me that you're not defending him, what you're saying is that you agree with whatever baseball point you assume he was trying to make, but personally, you wouldn't have said what he said, because you understand how the PC world can be.

By framing the discussion this way, and by insisting that others do so as well, you are defending him and the culture that fosters these feelings and impulses. You are saying, essentially, that there are two discussions to be had ("was Josh Donaldson being racist" / "was Josh Donaldson boorish") and neither the twain shall meet. You are arguing that there cannot be any racial connotation whatsoever, unless you consider the response from people like me.
 

Doc Zero

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2007
12,435
I'm tired. I'm so fucking tired. I am sorry for posting as much on this page as I have. If a mod wants to give me a timeout from this thread, please go ahead. I'll try, (like really fucking try )to stay out of it.
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
718
This right here is precisely what a lot of us are trying to discuss.

No one is going to tell you that there isn't a spectrum to Saying Bad Shit. No one will disagree with you if you posit that, "saying the N-word would have been worse," or "more racist."

But the sum of your argument, that "intent matters," is only in service of one thing: Josh Donaldson could have been more racist if he wanted to be, and because there's a way to look at this that makes him seem like more of an idiot than a bonafide, capital-R Racist, we're better off talking about it in those terms.

We're better off talking about how, actually, Josh was right about Anderson not being Jackie, but the problem here is that he said it in a "PC world" where "certain things can't even be touched."

All you're doing is creating cartilage between "Josh was just making a baseball point" and "we live in a politically correct world where no one can say what's on their mind." When you tell me that you're not defending him, what you're saying is that you agree with whatever baseball point you assume he was trying to make, but personally, you wouldn't have said what he said, because you understand how the PC world can be.

By framing the discussion this way, and by insisting that others do so as well, you are defending him and the culture that fosters these feelings and impulses. You are saying, essentially, that there are two discussions to be had ("was Josh Donaldson being racist" / "was Josh Donaldson boorish") and neither the twain shall meet. You are arguing that there cannot be any racial connotation whatsoever, unless you consider the response from people like me.
Sorry, but I am not defending him.

If X is accused of negligent homicide and intentional homicide, I would say that he is a bad man regardless of the reality. And that he is a worse man if it was intentional. That does not mean I am defending him. It means that I see distinctions. He's bad either way.

And you are also wrong that there is no connection whatsoever between boorish and outright racist. The lack of control/self-editing that Donaldson exhibited could be an indication of subtle racism or even hidden actual racism...that is simply less obvious that if Donaldson's comment indicated clear racism. It can be a continuum. And it's still not clear if Donaldon is akin to the intentional murderer, the negligent killer or something in between.

There's a lot of grey here, and I don't see why you need to put me or my position in a neatly defined, defending Donaldson box.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,827
Needham, MA
I've got nothing new to add other than we agree that's less of a factor but I think it begs credulity to say it's not a factor...if MLB was certain, they would have come down harder. That there was some ambiguity between idiot and outright racist gave them the room to make it only one game.
I actually do not agree with the bolded. He's being punished based on what he said, not what he meant or intended. The punishment for the "n" word would be harsher because it's a much worse thing to say, not because it removes any doubt as to his intent. Something else more offensive than what he actually said but less offensive than the "n" word would be punished accordingly.

Marginalized people have had to forever hear about how the racist thing that someone said wasn't meant in a racist way, and therefore it is incumbent on the marginalized person not to be (too) offended by it, and we can't really chastise the person who said the racist thing, because they didn't mean it that way or at least we aren't sure they meant it that way. This is precisely backwards and enables the use of dog whistles for people to say racist shit with plausible deniability. It is better if we said to the speaker "look here's why what you said was racist, and it doesn't really matter whether you meant it that way or not. Apologize and learn from it instead of being defensive."
 

Shaky Walton

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 20, 2019
718
Any statements short of racial slurs or explicitly pejorative characterizations are ‘misunderstood,’ and what Donaldson said wasn’t actually inappropriate, it’s just that everyone gets all pissy/offended because of PC culture. Got it.

It really sucks for Josh Donaldson to live in a world where words have consequences. To compensate we should take great care to remind ourselves that he could’ve said worse things, and characterize his one game suspension as warranted on the basis of idiocy rather than what he said being inherently problematic. That’s a lot more sanitized/comfortable. After all, it could be me someday!
Actually, you're right. People like you overreact and can't be bothered with seeing distinctions when you cross into the possibly racist realm. And when anyone says, wait, his comments might indicate that he's just a fucking idiot and not an outright racist, it must mean that he's being defended. After all, being termed a fucking idiot is what we all aspire to, right?

Yes, MM, there are worse things than what Donaldson said, and admitting that doesn't make us into simpletons or racists. And it's not because I'm worried that I might be in Donaldson's position. I know myself enough to know that I would not go there. That the bells in my head would prevent that. But I can also see differences and relative harm.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.