"Papa John" Schnatter is out as member of UofL Board Of Trustees

[True blue (and gold)]

I will never say it either. But I do think there is a difference if someone uses it as an epithet or is reporting that someone else said it. There is a difference between someone saying, "Oldgrappler is a dinosaur" and someone saying, "I heard C_W_B and T b (and gold) call og a dinosaur." The first is a statement of the speaker's opinion. The second is a second-hand report of another person using the term.

 

Huge difference between the two. This seems to be why the Chair of the U of L Board of Trustees said he is confident that this did not reflect Schnatter's personal view or values.

 

I do not know what Schnatter actually said but the story I read indicated he was reporting what someone else said and commenting that that person did not face consequences for using the term as an epithet. If so, it does not seem to be fair or honest to report it as if he used the term on his own as an epithet. While you can be angry that he used the term at all, there is a meaningful difference between the two uses.

 

BTW, I had no idea who Schnatter was before this came out or that he owned Papa John's Pizza or that he had anything to do with U of L athletics.

A poor example. The would dinosaur doesn't have nearly the same level of negative connotation. Also, if I say that CWB called you "the d word," nobody will be sure of what that means. Everybody knows what would meant if he had substituted just the letter "n" in my example.

[TheDeuce]

I wish I were surprised by the justifying of his comments.

[Jumper_Dad]

First off Papa John is a first-class dirtball. I'm glad he's off the UofL board and hopefully sooner than later out of both UofL and UK.

 

Everyone knows or should know that the use of that word is like dynamite, you use it at your own peril. In this case, he wasn't calling anyone that word but was still insensitive in using it. Why do we give songwriters, singers, actors, writers, and authors a pass using that word every day? If as we have heard over and over context matters, why do we allow someone to be called that in a movie or in a book? If a screen writer writes the line for an actor to say in a movie or on Netflix/HBO why do they get a pass? If saying the word without directing it at anyone doesn't get a pass that word can never get a pass again in any context and I'm fine with that.

 

A few years ago calling someone a NAZI or comparing them to Hitler was treated in a similar way and those doing so caught swift repercussions...as no one is doing anything today that deserves to be compared to the holocaust and comparing them to Nazis or Hitler diminishes the holocaust and those that died and those that lived through it. However those words are allowed today for some reason.

[oldgrappler]

A poor example. The would dinosaur doesn't have nearly the same level of negative connotation. Also, if I say that CWB called you "the d word," nobody will be sure of what that means. Everybody knows what would meant if he had substituted just the letter "n" in my example.

 

Yet the analogy remains the same. Calling someone a name with the intent of abusing them with a racial slur is not the moral equivalent of pointing out that someone else did so and providing a specific example. Could he or should he have used another way to make the same point? Absolutely! The fact he used the word in a quotation of someone else shows he is extremely rude and insensitive. Actually using it as a racial slur is racist, which is a far worse offense.

 

I wish I were surprised by the justifying of his comments.

 

No one has justified that word.

[John Anthony]

First off Papa John is a first-class dirtball. I'm glad he's off the UofL board and hopefully sooner than later out of both UofL and UK.

 

Everyone knows or should know that the use of that word is like dynamite, you use it at your own peril. In this case, he wasn't calling anyone that word but was still insensitive in using it. Why do we give songwriters, singers, actors, writers, and authors a pass using that word every day? If as we have heard over and over context matters, why do we allow someone to be called that in a movie or in a book? If a screen writer writes the line for an actor to say in a movie or on Netflix/HBO why do they get a pass? If saying the word without directing it at anyone doesn't get a pass that word can never get a pass again in any context and I'm fine with that.

 

A few years ago calling someone a NAZI or comparing them to Hitler was treated in a similar way and those doing so caught swift repercussions...as no one is doing anything today that deserves to be compared to the holocaust and comparing them to Nazis or Hitler diminishes the holocaust and those that died and those that lived through it. However those words are allowed today for some reason.

 

When you overplay something too much it losses it’s value.

[TheDeuce]

When you overplay something too much it losses it’s value.

 

So if people call racist people out too much, people don’t pay attention? :lol2: There’s a solid cop out.

[John Anthony]

So if people call racist people out too much, people don’t pay attention? :lol2: There’s a solid cop out.

 

You can only play a card so many times before it’s burnt.

[TheDeuce]

You can only play a card so many times before it’s burnt.

 

So you're saying you don't care that people are calling out racists because they've been doing it too much... Yikes.

[John Anthony]

So you're saying you don't care that people are calling out racists because they've been doing it too much... Yikes.

 

I was commenting to Jumper and agreeing that calling people a Nazi 10-20 years ago used to be a very harsh claim. Now it means nothing because it’s thrown around so much.

 

You can’t walk around with the card in your hand.

[Colonels_Wear_Blue]

One thing I think white people have difficulty putting into complete perspective when they're involved in discussions like this is the fact that, even with racial slurs existing for white people, there is no slur out there (in North American culture, anyway) that is as demeaning and derogatory as the n-word is to black people. We - white people - really aren't as capable of wrapping our minds around it because, to put it simply, we are not members of a race that was historically imprisoned and enslaved for no other reason than our skin color. We don't get what it's like to have a word slung at you that was created by a different race to be used to demean our own race as slaves. We don't get that, and as much as some white people may say "No, I do understand what it means to black people", they don't. They simply don't because they, as white people, aren't a member of the black race and they just can't understand quite how that feels for a black person to have that word used.

 

It's not unlike the way that you wouldn't tell a cancer patient "I understand how you feel" if you had never had cancer. Or you wouldn't go to a funeral of a murdered child and tell their parents "I understand how you feel" if you, yourself, had never been a parent.

 

I think, additionally, some white people struggle to understand how there is a word out there that is extremely derogatory for them to use towards black people - to the point of it being completely inappropriate for white people to use at all in any circumstance. Yet at the same time, those same black people are able to use that word among themselves. They struggle with that because, again, for we white people don't have an equivalent word like that.

 

There are certain things that people can struggle to fully understand if they can't experience it themselves. The n-word, for some white people, is most definitely one of those things.

[All State Baseball]

UofL President is holding a news conference now saying that "immediately" Papa John's name will be removed from Cardinal Stadium.

[Colonels_Wear_Blue]

Schnatter's name is also going to be removed from UofL's business school.

[bugatti]

Must have been a buyout??? As I understand, UL cannot unilaterally do this. The rights belong to Schnatter.

[Colonels_Wear_Blue]

Must have been a buyout??? As I understand, UL cannot unilaterally do this.

 

That's what my understanding is as well - at least for the stadium, no idea about the business school. I'm guessing you're right.

[Getslow]

Must have been a buyout??? As I understand, UL cannot unilaterally do this. The rights belong to Schnatter.

 

According to the press conference, it was a unilateral decision by the new university president. She called Schnatter to tell him and apparently he was supportive and contrite about what he’d said and the position he put the university in. Time will tell if that holds true but it indicates a positive decisiveness in Dr. Bendapudi that I appreciate.

 

Against my better judgment, I like this new president.