12/13/2006
Joey Porter Issues "Apology" for "Fag" Slur
Pittsburgh Steeler Joey Porter issued an apology after practice on Tuesday for calling Cleveland tight end Kellen Winslow, Jr. a "fag" in comments to media outlets after a game last Thursday.
"You know, that was probably a poor choice of words. So if I offended anybody, I apologize for that...I don't know ... I guess because how we used that word freely, me growing up using that word, I didn't think anything of it. Like I said, I apologize to anyone I may have offended. I didn't mean to offend anybody but Kellen Winslow. That's pretty much that. I don't want to put any more into it...Whatever I say is going to be on an extra level anyway. But like I said, I didn't think it was that big of a deal when I said it anyway. So it's over with it."
Porter just doesn't get it. Would Michael Richards use of the N-word been any less offensive if he had insisted he only meant it for one person in his audience?
And apparently coach Bill Cowher and teammate Deshea Townsend don't get it either:
"On Monday, Steelers coach Bill Cowher called Porter's homosexual reference 'inappropriate,' but suggested that Porter wasn't necessarily attacking anyone's sexual preference. Steelers cornerback Deshea Townsend agrees. 'That's how the game goes,' Townsend said. 'Joey was just expressing his opinion after someone cheap-shotted one of our guys. Joey was just standing up for one of his teammates.'"
Since when does the word "fag" not attack anyone's sexual preference?
A fine from the NFL has not yet been issued.
You may have missed...
Pittsburgh Steeler Joey Porter Calls Opponent a Fag [tr]
Posted 9:35 AM EST by Andy Towle in Football (American), Gay Slurs, Joey Porter, News, Sports | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Zeke,
All you have to do is scroll up this very page and read the REAL JOCK.COM ad. You don't have to click on it, Boo. The word is right there in your face. So it doesn't MATTER what they do.
Posted by: soulbrotha | Dec 13, 2006 12:25:14 PM
Pangzi, stop right there.
So you think that Black Americans with poor speaking habits are homophobic? So that must mean you believe the reverse is true. Well-spoken white Americans are pro-gay? The only time that you or Andre will ever get a "break" is when you take an active step toward reversing your ignorance.
Posted by: soulbrotha | Dec 13, 2006 12:31:36 PM
Oooooooo, Andre. You are such a big man. Telling people to go "fuck themselves." Wow. I'm scared of you now. Anything else your small mind wants to share? Come on buddy. We are all waiting.
Posted by: James | Dec 13, 2006 12:52:13 PM
Soulbrotha, Thanks for bringing the advertorial hypocrisy to my attention. I agree with you that running an ad with that language is hypocritical on our part and I've requested that it be changed. I should have noticed it sooner.
Additionally, I don't have time to monitor every single comment that is placed on this site, so I appreciate it when readers bring offensive comments to my attention. Although I try to allow everyone to have a voice here, I do reserve the right to ban those who leave personally offensive or off-topic comments, or comments simply meant to insult others and create flame wars.
Posted by: andy | Dec 13, 2006 12:58:57 PM
Straight men are always the last to figure everything out. Nice apology? NFL boy.
Posted by: Bill | Dec 13, 2006 1:04:04 PM
I would have to agree with Andre you really have to look hard for that diamond in the rough.
Posted by: M | Dec 13, 2006 1:29:11 PM
Regarding the REALJOCK website...I don't get what the problem is...there is nothing offensive in the ad in the upper right hand portion of this page...and when I clicked on the ad and went to the site, the word 'faggot' was nowhere to be seen...could someone please enlighten me why the REALJOCK website is offensive?
Posted by: peterparker | Dec 13, 2006 1:55:25 PM
Andy, thank you for responding and taking action. I understand that you don't have time to monitor all comments, so what would be a better way to contact you? That would help reduce alot of posts and frustration.
I'm not sure if that last comment is directed at me or not, but if so, I don't think I am guilty of any of those things. I've seen much worse posted on this site. But it is your blog and you can make whatever decisions you deem necessary.
Posted by: soulbrotha | Dec 13, 2006 1:59:51 PM
PeterParker, the offensive word has just been removed. That's why you don't see it.
Posted by: soulbrotha | Dec 13, 2006 2:03:00 PM
....whew! that took a lot of work...thanks soulbrotha for noticing me shouting out REAL JOCK...and of course Andy, (you are too cute and smart as hell to boot...) i guess those "FIT FAGGOTS" will have to find some other site to visit...lol
Posted by: yeahisaidit | Dec 13, 2006 2:08:40 PM
I missed it too SoulBrotha.
I'm glad it's been taken care of and I'm glad you pointed it out, although I wish you had done so without accusing Andy of being hypocritical rather than giving him the benefit of the doubt that he missed it just like many of us did.
Posted by: Zeke | Dec 13, 2006 2:10:12 PM
PeterParker, the language in the ad was changed at our request. RealJock has also let me know that the language in the ad was not meant to offend.
Soulbrotha, the last part of my prior comment was not directed at you. And the best way to get in touch is via the "send a tip" link in the right sidebar.
As I said, I hope that the comment areas can provide a forum for constructive discussion rather than flame wars. Thank you all for participating.
Posted by: andy | Dec 13, 2006 2:10:26 PM
Soulbrotha-
I would like to defend my position.
While I think that statistics are not usually the best guide when determining our core set of beliefs or morality, I do believe that they are applicable when trying to decide the liklihood that someone I meet may react negatively to my homosexuality. So, I'd like to introduce a few statisics:
With education, religious views, and age held constant, black men are %14 more likely than white men to say a)that homosexual relations are always wrong, and b)that AIDS might be God's punishment for immoral sexual behavior. Overall, nearly 75% of blacks say that homosexuality is wrong. (Lewis, Gregory. "Black White Differences in Attitudes toward Homosexuality." Public Opinion Quarterly, Spring2003, Vol. 67 Issue 1, p59, 20p).
Now, consider this: Education and Religiousity are two of the best predictors of homophobia (along with age, and interaction gay people). If un-clear speaking can be assumed to be, at least in part, a predictor of lower education, then I am completely justified in assuming that Black men who don't speak clearly are more likely to be homophobic.
I know that society teaches us to ignore differences along racial lines, but until we are free to recognize and discuss these differences, there's very little hope of any positive change happening.
Posted by: pangzi | Dec 13, 2006 2:15:21 PM
Thanks for the heads up SOULBROTHA...by the time I checked out the realjock.com website, and then composed and posted, Andy had responded to your complaint...but thanks for letting me know why I wasn't seeing anything offensive.
Posted by: peterparker | Dec 13, 2006 2:20:35 PM
After going back to the original "Porter" discussion from yesterday, I realized that SoulBrotha has been pointing out the problem with the ad repeatedly since yesterday. I don't think he realized that Andy wasn't seeing his complaints and therefore he was becoming increasingly frustrated with what seemed like hypocrisy from Andy.
This was a big misunderstanding.
As Andy said before, the best way to bring something to his attention is through the ">send a tip" link.
SoulBrotha, thanks again for catching the offensive ad and giving Andy an opportunity to fix the problem.
Posted by: Zeke | Dec 13, 2006 2:35:46 PM
Pangzi,
While we are on the topic of "racial differences" could you explain this to me" according to Pew Research blacks are more likely than whites to want gays included in anti-hate crime laws.
Posted by: James | Dec 13, 2006 2:36:46 PM
BOOK CRITICAL OF AFRICAN AMERICANS WHO USE THE N-WORD
Los Angeles, CA., 11/28/06 - Author H. Lewis Smith has written a thought provoking, culturally divided book that will not only spark heated conversation, but can also bring about real change. The N-word is often used in the African American community amongst each other and is generally not a problem when spoken by another African American. However, once the word is used by a Caucasian person, it brings on other effects. The question is "who can use the word and why?" Smith believes it is a word that should be BURIED!!!!
The book is written in a manner that all can understand. The points are well-taken and the wording is easy to follow. There are quotes from great people in our history including Martin Luther King, Jr., Harriet Tubman, James Baldwin and many, many others. Smith has mixed history with honesty, love with life, education with effects. This is a great book for educators, parents, managers, professionals, newsmen, and anyone else wanting an in-depth look at the N-word, the effects and the solutions. A MUST READ!!!!
To learn more about Bury that Sucka, please visit http://www.burythatsucka.com
Posted by: H. Lewis Smith | Dec 13, 2006 2:37:12 PM
I think we've reached our black professional athlete quota for the week eh?
Oh wait that's right I'm still waiting for shoe to drop on the New Jersey Nets homo.
Posted by: NOT FOR YOU | Dec 13, 2006 2:39:37 PM
The Realjock ad must have been changed because I don't see the "F" word.
Posted by: mark m | Dec 13, 2006 3:06:44 PM
Thank you Andy, Zeke & PeterParker!
It's nice to know that I am being heard and supported. I love you, man!
Pangzi,
I will withhold comment until you respond to James.
Posted by: soulbrotha | Dec 13, 2006 3:08:55 PM
Soulbrotha,
I got into this tempest a little too late. Didnt read the other thread till now, plus I NEVER read the ads on the side (ssshhhh, don't tell Andy).
Count me as as someone who also hates it when gays use Queer and Fag. I don't buy the whole "we're reclaiming the word" bullshit.
Posted by: mark m | Dec 13, 2006 3:30:44 PM
Hi Mark M,
Don't worry, your secret's safe with me. ;)
Posted by: soulbrotha | Dec 13, 2006 3:48:30 PM
James--
Yes, I've heard that, and I don't doubt that it's true. I would imagine that the willingness to support anti-hate crime legislation is linked to that fact that black americans are also the victims of hate-crimes, whereas white americans usually don't have to deal with it. However, that statistic doesn't invalidate the statistics from my last post. How about this: blacks are more likely than whites to support criminalization of homosexual relations. (same study I cited before). It seems to me that support for hate-crime inclusion is the exception, not the rule.
Posted by: pangzi | Dec 13, 2006 3:59:39 PM
Pangzi,
Do you have a link to the FULL DOCUMENT that you are citing? Or are using excerpts/quotes?
Posted by: soulbrotha | Dec 13, 2006 4:29:21 PM
Pangzi,
The two greatest groups of homophobes--the two with the most power in this country to direct American public opinion--are the GOP and Evangelicals.
Both are overwhelmingly the province of White Males.
They slur gays daily. They give marching orders to millions who, in turn, vote to prevent us from marrying, among other things.
You write, "Blacks are more likely than whites to support criminalization of homosexual relations."
Was it blacks who drove the criminalization of homosexual relations in Texas and elsewhere for decades?
You're handy with statistics. How about some substance. Tell us all about the black organizations that forced courts to criminalize homosexual acts until the Lawrence decision. You'll have to fabricate it. There are none.
You can pick and choose statistics to drive your theory that blacks somehow are more homophobic than whites, but when looked at rationally, the fact is: it is whites, especially white men, who institutionalize homophobia.
I suspect you are racist. You don't like black people. Black men frighten you.
You can take homophobia from straight white males because, in your view, they are above you on the totem pole of influence.
But when it comes to homophobia from straight black men, you are deeply offended (even though it's the exact homophobic act) because you assume you are superior to them. That's why you bring up the issue of education and dialect. How dare those monkeys look down on fags! He's so uneducated! That's what is fueling your race-directed outrage and your use of cod statistics.
But if it came from a straight white male, well, you're so used to bowing and scraping to your life-long superiors that you don't have the same level of outrage as when it comes from a straight black man.
And you certainly don't feel the need to bring out cod statistics on education and homophobia from whites.
Football players of all races throw the fag word around daily. That Porter is black has no import here.
If he were white, what parallel to 'gee what if someone used the N word' would there be? Blacks have no special obligation to be less homophobic than whites.
I sometimes think that gay white males who struggle not to be racist (and fail) get extra mad when it's a black person who is homophobic because they think, 'gee, I struggle not to be racist, why can't they do the same for me?'
So dumb. I guess the one good thing to get out of your comments is that racists are as stupid and illogical as homophobes.
And by illogical, I mean the discrepancy others have pointed out: "So you think that Black Americans with poor speaking habits are homophobic? So that must mean you believe the reverse is true. Well-spoken white Americans are pro-gay."
How exactly does your theory hold up when it comes to homophobia from the GOP and Evangelicals?
Posted by: SGR | Dec 13, 2006 4:33:06 PM