Matt Millen - still screwing up, or political correctness out of hand?

The Game Room
1

Matt Millen, the cock-eyed jackass who will go down in history as the worst GM ever in the NFL, called Ron Jawarski a pollock (pollack, alternate spellings, etc) during the NFL draft.

The phone lines must have burned at the network, because after a short commercial break, he apologized to the TV audience. His apology was pathetic, and made it worse.

Basically, he said that he and Ron have been friends for a long time and he didn’t mean anything by it. So, he apologized to anyone of Polish heritage who was offended by it. It came off to me as very insincere, and he seemed to be saying that he wouldn’t have apologized unless someone had ***made ***him apologize and we (the viewers) should just get over it, lighten up, and fuck off.

For the most part, I would agree with Millen’s sentiment, except as a politically correct society, ***nothing ***can be ignored. In fact, nothing ***should ***be ignored. It drives me crazy that anything said has to go through the PC filter, and people jump all over any slip, but that’s the world we’ve created.

On the other hand, there seems to be a pecking order on what ethnic group can be insulted and what the ramifications are.

I wonder if Millen would have been immediately suspended or fired if he referred to Tom Jackson as “my nigger!” or Len Berman as “Kike Boy”.

Did anyone else pick up on this slip of the tongue, and have any reaction to it? I was actually surprised that he was forced to apologize, but given the sensitivity of every group and how we’ve all been conditioned to be upset at anything that is said that doesn’t refer to someone as, in this case, a polish-american, I think it was the right call.

Joe DiMaggio’s nickname with the Yankees was Dego. That wouldn’t work now.

Now that I’m thinking about it, to be consistent, I think Millen should be suspended or fired for this. Is it an over-reaction? Absolutely. But I don’t see any difference between this ethnic slur and any other slur out there. If there is a difference, what is it?

Perhaps we should start putting a list together that defines the ethnic “pecking order”, so we all know what the ramifications are. So, if Jawarski happened to be French, Millen could call him a frog with no eyebrows being raised at all. Or a Limey, or a Kraut, Jerry, Gook, slope, nip, wop, mick, etc, etc…

2

Did he really just Jimmy the Greek himself? Fitting.

To answer the question, if it’s cool by Jaws, it’s fine by me, but he should (and pparently did) apologize.

Now can we NEVER bring this guy up ever ever ever again?

3

Eh, people who have recently been the victims of systemized ethnic violence or discrimination are more touchy about it then those whose ancestors were at the bottom of the pecking order further back in time are. Honestly I’m kinda skeptical of people who pretend to be mystified by the reasons for this. Jews and blacks were victims of ethnic violence within living memory, so the fact that you’ll get more angry phone calls if you call someone a nigger or kike then if you call an Irish person a Patty or whatever.

Interestingly, Polack is becoming more of a touchy word in Europe as the expansion of the EU has created a new wave of Polish immigrants. I don’t know if the same effect is driving the phone calls in the US, but it seems possible. Certainly I’ve noticed some racial tensions between the people born here and other Eastern European nationalities in New England (though around here they tend to be Balkans and not Polish).

4

Of course not, they’d use Dago, the spelling most of us Eye-talians use.

5

I’m so politically incorrect I can’t even spell an ethnic slur correctly. :smack:

My apologies to all the Dagos out there! :stuck_out_tongue:

6

Be skeptical all you want. Here in the US, the only group that can claim to be victims, under your definition, are the blacks who suffered through the civil rights movement. That would fall under “living memory”. I don’t remember any fire hoses being turned on Jews.

Do you compare the experience of Jews in the US to that of the African American? That’s insulting to any and all African Americans.

How about Native Americans? I guess since they haven’t been victims of ethnic violence within living memory, they don’t qualify.

You can’t decide who gets to be protected under the political correctness credo. If Italians are offended by dago, then it shouldn’t be used, just like nigger, kike, or redskin (oh, wait).

7

I happened to be flipping channels when this occurred. I hit on Millen almost exactly as he made this comment. I remember thinking, “yeah, that seems fitting for him,” and went right on flipping through the channels while thinking that his comment wouldn’t end well. I didn’t even see an apology.

I’m not the type to take anything like that personally or to be offended by it, but this guy is on TV. It doesn’t matter if he or Jaws thinks it’s offensive, someone will, and being on TV, he has some responsibility to at least try not to offend people. If he doesn’t want that responsibility, chat with friends off camera.

Is he actually employed by ESPN right now? Because I would find it very entertaining to restart the whole “fire Millen!” thing.

8

Matt Millen was a very good football player. That is it. He was ,I guess an OK color commentator for a while. But he did things managing the Lions that will never be matched. He set a level of futility that no expansion team can ever reach.

9

My point isn’t who can claim to be victims, my point is who generally does. And the answer is unsurprisingly, those people who have a recent history of, well, being victims. Plenty of Irish-Americans suffered discrimination during the height of Irish immigration, but very few of their decedents still feel sensitive to anti-Irish slurs, for the obvious reason that time and circumstances have led most of them to forget the discrimination (or at least not feel personally victimized by it). Populations for whom such persecution is still remembered are far more likely to call up angry when someone on the TV uses a slur.

But large number of Jews who suffered persecution in Europe migrated here. And even amongst those who were born here, there was plenty of antisemetic discrimination in the States. I don’t think there is any mystery then why Jews in the US are more sensitive about ethnic slurs then Italians or Poles.

Not gonna bother responding to this, but I’ll quote it just so anyone following the thread can enjoy reading it twice.

I said ethnic violence or discrimination. And from ~1940-1980 Native Americans were involved in their own struggle to get keep the gov’t from breaking up and assimilating the various tribes and reservations (which did occasionally get violent, though not to the scale of the wider Civil Rights movement). And many of the groups that protest the use of the use of terms like “redskins” are ones that were formed to protest the gov’ts post-war Indian termination policy.

But again, that’s my point. I’m not claiming to be able to decide who should be able to be offended, I’m pointing out who is offended. Italians, by and large, aren’t offended by Dago, at least not to the same degree more recent immigrants are offended by slurs, and the reason for this is pretty obvious.

Of course people on TV should probably make a general policy to avoid slurs, but the reason that using the word “Pollack” or “Frog” will get you a slap on the wrist and “Wet-Back” and “Nigger” will see you suspended or fired is obvious.