ESPN suspends Stephen A Smith for a week

[Hey Yo]

Not the first time Stupid A (while employed by ESPN) blamed women for domestic violence on the air.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...1-f0feafdd1394

[JohnFreeman]

"This suspension is a week long can pull up from 30"

[Swaggin916]

Free Stephen A! Misogynists unite!

[JellyBean]

Let me see if I understand Mr. Smith's and some of the logic here in ISH land. If someone, in this case a woman, "provokes" me, I shouldn't "turn the other cheek." Rather, I should pound on the head of the woman who "provoked" me until I render her unconscious. Then, after I've knocked her unconscious, I should drag her lifeless body out of my way so I can exit the elevator on which we were riding together. Finally, after I've persuaded her that it was really her fault that I hit her so hard that I could have killed her, I should be suspended 3 games or fewer than if I had stomped on the helmeted head of an opponent during a football game. Yes, sadly, Mr. Smith and ISH, I think I understand your logic.

[navy]

Let me see if I understand Mr. Smith's and some of the logic here in ISH land. If someone, in this case a woman, "provokes" me, I shouldn't "turn the other cheek." Rather, I should pound on the head of the woman who "provoked" me until I render her unconscious. Then, after I've knocked her unconscious, I should drag her lifeless body out of my way so I can exit the elevator on which we were riding together. Finally, after I've persuaded her that it was really her fault that I hit her so hard that I could have killed her, I should be suspended 3 games or fewer than if I had stomped on the helmeted head of an opponent during a football game. Yes, sadly, Mr. Smith and ISH, I think I understand your logic.

Why are you putting words in his mouth?

He said if a women provokes a man, she should not be surprised if she gets hit. It is never right to hit a women, but how is law enforcement going to stop you from getting hit after the fact? They arent.

How does he imply
A) Men should hit women?
B) Men should not turn the other cheek?


He doesnt. In your quest to find fault you inserted false statements and viewpoints.

[niko]

You're missing the point....nobody is saying Stephen A should be allowed to say whatever the **** he wants without consequence...we're saying that what he said in this instance wasn't bad enough to be suspended over (if even bad at all)...

The company that employed him thought it was therefore it was. The people who aren't offended don't get to decide if punishment is fair, his bosses do. That again, is just normal.

I think the suspension is fair just because he's done this before. He seems to always want to make the point of the victims needing to be responsible. He's just not had the outcry before.

[niko]

Why are you putting words in his mouth?

He said if a women provokes a man, she should not be surprised if she gets hit. It is never right to hit a women, but how is law enforcement going to stop you from getting hit after the fact? They arent.

How does he imply
A) Men should hit women?
B) Men should not turn the other cheek?


He doesnt. In your quest to find fault you inserted false statements and viewpoints.

The thing is, why was this his point? Where did this come from? The Ray Rice discussion was basically IF the suspension of Ray Rice was fair. He turned it into a discussion of victims being at fault, talking about Iverson;s funny anecdote about needing to whack his wife because of a machete, etc. Did any of you listen to him on the radio? He can't help bring it up.

I don't like the victim blaming, it's a convenient way to say the thing that was done wasn't that bad without actually saying it. I'm not saying Ray Rice wasn't wrong. BUT maybe, just maybe, something was done to provoke him?

[3LiftHeatCurse]

The people complaining (feminists) don't even watch ESPN.

If a woman hits a man, don't be shocked if he hits your ass back.

Nobody should be hitting anyone.

[navy]

The thing is, why was this his point? Where did this come from? The Ray Rice discussion was basically IF the suspension of Ray Rice was fair. He turned it into a discussion of victims being at fault, talking about Iverson;s funny anecdote about needing to whack his wife because of a machete, etc. Did any of you listen to him on the radio? He can't help bring it up.

I don't like the victim blaming, it's a convenient way to say the thing that was done wasn't that bad without actually saying it. I'm not saying Ray Rice wasn't wrong. BUT maybe, just maybe, something was done to provoke him?

Because it's a fair point. It is universally agreed that Ray Rice was in the wrong for knocking his wife unconscious, but how can we put the blame totally on him when it is suggested that she was hitting him as well.

This isnt your case of abusive man comes home after a hard day at work and slaps around his wife and kids for the fun of it.

There is blaming the victum for something totally out of her/their control but there is also using common sense and acknowledging that you can put yourself in dangerous situations in which you cannot control the actions of others. This is what is labeled as victim blaming, however it would be silly to dismiss it completely knowing damn well that people are savages.

What Stephen A Smith said was right. If you hit a man, do not be surprised if he hits you back. It is an important lesson women do not seem to know. Nowhere am I implying that it is okay to domestically abuse your partner.

[niko]

Because it's a fair point. It is universally agreed that Ray Rice was in the wrong for knocking his wife unconscious, but how can we put the blame totally on him when it is suggested that she was hitting him as well.

This isnt your case of abusive man comes home after a hard day at work and slaps around his wife and kids for the fun of it.

There is blaming the victum for something totally out of her/their control but there is also using common sense and acknowledging that you can put yourself in dangerous situations in which you cannot control the actions of others. This is what is labeled as victim blaming, however it would be silly to dismiss it completely knowing damn well that people are savages.

All week Stephen A (not one time) shifted the conversation into victim blaming. It's normal for him. He got called for it. Basically, he was 50/50 on the Ray Rice thing in the amount of time he talked about it. It's ridiculous.

Are you naive enough to think Ray Rice at his size and strenght needed to knock her unconcious in order to take care of the situation? Do you think this was the first time he hit her? He went from zero to sixty? People don't do that, they push, they threaten, they slap, then they punch. They aren't happy,nice, then beating down the wife.

If you are that naive then that's not something i can help you with. This particular situation was very ugly, and pretty cut and dried, and Stephen A (moreso because he worships these guys) wanted to give Ray Rice an out at the expense of the victim, and he got caught.

There are definitely cases a man needs to use force and it gets excessive, but they are rare, they are not the rule, and they don't need to be discussed in every domestic abuse situation because it's rare. Bringing up the exception every time you bring up the rule implies the exception is common and not an exception.

[Orlando Magic]

lol, anyone who thinks he should be suspended is an idiot that is only hearing what they want to hear and get outraged about it because... that's what they want to do.

As previously covered, but to reiterate...

1) He emphasized several times that it is never ok to hit a woman.

So where's the confusion? He said it's never ok. Ever. That statement alone should have ended any potential drama with his follow up statement, but...

2) He implied that women have the ability to, and sometimes provoke a man into hitting them.

Is that wrong? No, he's right.

In no way does that EXCUSE the man for hitting the woman, because it's STILL inexcusable and BAD. HOWEVER... the reality of the situation is that we're all humans, we all have faults, and we all screw up.

It should be expected (although not OK whatsoever) that some men will lose their temper when pushed. We are all idiotic, emotional beings. Not all people are going to make completely rational decisions 100% of the time. Some woman verbally berating you repeatedly and or beating on you... well, that's going to be flat out hard to resist retaliating for a lot of guys after a certain threshold is reached.

Doesn't mean it's ok... it just is what it is. It's in our nature.

He was 100% spot on, and you've got a bunch of politically correct assholes that are overly sensitive or they're full of shit and trying to make themselves look good but the reality is they just look like idiots to anyone with a functioning frontal lobe.

[navy]

All week Stephen A (not one time) shifted the conversation into victim blaming. It's normal for him. He got called for it. Basically, he was 50/50 on the Ray Rice thing in the amount of time he talked about it. It's ridiculous.

Are you naive enough to think Ray Rice at his size and strenght needed to knock her unconcious in order to take care of the situation? Do you think this was the first time he hit her? He went from zero to sixty? People don't do that, they push, they threaten, they slap, then they punch. They aren't happy,. nice, beating down the wife.

If you are that naive then that's not something i can help you with. This particular situation was very ugly, and pretty cut and dried, and Stephen A (moreso because he worships these guys) wanted to give Ray Rice an out at the expense of the victim, and he got caught.

Because the entire time it was acknowledged by her and by what we were told that she in fact shared some culpability in the incident. Seeing as we arent so sure what happened 50/50 is a fair amount.

No where did I nor anyone else say Ray Rice was right for knocking her unconscious. No where did I say he shouldnt have just walked away or restrained her, because he was damn sure capable. See this is the problem, instead of acknowledging the clear point I or Steven A Smith was making you and feminist everywhere go about on some extra shit that nobody is saying or agreeing to.

He made a fair point. If a women hits a man, she should not be surprised if he hits her back. This statement does not absolve the man. It is a clear cut warning to women who seem to think that they are safe to attack men and not get hit. This is reality not an ideological world. Men will hit women. It's just the way it is.

[CelticBaller]

Let me see if I understand Mr. Smith's and some of the logic here in ISH land. If someone, in this case a woman, "provokes" me, I shouldn't "turn the other cheek." Rather, I should pound on the head of the woman who "provoked" me until I render her unconscious. Then, after I've knocked her unconscious, I should drag her lifeless body out of my way so I can exit the elevator on which we were riding together. Finally, after I've persuaded her that it was really her fault that I hit her so hard that I could have killed her, I should be suspended 3 games or fewer than if I had stomped on the helmeted head of an opponent during a football game. Yes, sadly, Mr. Smith and ISH, I think I understand your logic.

All wrong, way to misinterpret everything

[longtime lurker]

Why are you putting words in his mouth?

He said if a women provokes a man, she should not be surprised if she gets hit. It is never right to hit a women, but how is law enforcement going to stop you from getting hit after the fact? They arent.

How does he imply
A) Men should hit women?
B) Men should not turn the other cheek?


He doesnt. In your quest to find fault you inserted false statements and viewpoints.

The problem is that the word provoke has a wide range of actions. If he had stopped at the point that a woman shouldn't put her hands on a man and vice versa he would have been good. He would have made a reasonable point, but he more or less said "she was asking for it" when speaking about a situation where a woman got knocked unconscious. There are many ways to provoke someone and not all of them warrant getting knocked the fvck out.

For example: Ray Rice's fiance putting her fingers in his chest does not warrant him punching her out. The response to the action should be measured and Stephen A Smith's words pretty much blame the fiance for an overreaction from Ray Rice.

[Jameerthefear]

It is okay to correct a woman using your hand. It keeps marriages together, and hot food on the table on time everyday. It is the man's God given right to display his dominance.