You’d think it would take a lot of effort to be horrified by Whoopi frickin’ Goldberg, but it turns out it’s easier than you think.
The article goes on to list some more atrocious statements, and then wraps it up with this gem:
Gee, Whoopster, I sure am glad you’ve set your standard higher for us high-falutin’ yankee-folk!
What the hell possesses people to come to the defense of disgusting fucking monsters and absolve them of responsibility for exceptional cruelty because of their “culture?” Is it asinine adolescent moral relativism run amok, or just festering stupidity?
Her statements can hardly be characterized as defending Mr. Vick. She rightly pointed out that he likely didn’t realize the extent to which his actions were illegal/immoral because of his cultural background. What’s wrong with that? Did she say he shouldn’t have been convicted?
I am one of the biggest animal rights supporters on this board, and I think Vick is scum. BUT
If we are going to blame a “culture” for what he did, I would blame the culture of violence that the NFL breeds, as I have heard many others mention. I don’t completely buy this, and I believe that, of course, Vick should be held 100% responsible for his actions.
It’s just that I lived in the south for 22 years, and I never saw ANYONE involved in such activities. I have no idea what this bitch is talking about.
Aside from the multitude of reasons I find Whoopie to be a complete fuckwit, I just want to chime in and say that I was reared in the South (good old TN from age 2 - 18 for the most part) and I never thought of dogfighting as ok. It is not culturally accepted in any part of the South in which I have been. Trust me, I have run around with some seriously fucked up people, and not one of them (even the most rednecked, hillbilly, pot-growing, pipe-bomb building, government hating, moonshining, 4wheeling, trailer living ones) consider dogfighting to be acceptable.
Glad to see Whoopi is up to her old blanket-statement making self. Too bad Vick isn’t white – then she’d be able to talk about what an evil waste of flesh he is, instead of defending his crimes…
And what about prize fighting, for that matter. How do you think creeps like Mike Tyson come to be? I’m not speaking as a pious critic, I love prize-fighting, I will watch film of Muhammed Ali any day of the week. But its a guilty pleasure, and I take no pride in it. But there it is, no?
I didn’t really interpret her statements as meant to condone dogfighting or imply that it was morally acceptable to do. I think she was just trying to say that Vick’s actions were more a result of ignorance that premeditated cruelty.
Personally I think dogfighting is pretty horrible. However, it does tend to be more prevalent among certain cultures and socioeconomic positions. Ever seen Amores Perros? A really good example, right there, of how mundane something like dogfighting can be in a culture filled wtih poverty and violence. It doesn’t make it less horrible–but for me, at least, it makes me less judgmental of the people who do it.
BTW, the film title has often been translated to ‘‘Love’s a Bitch,’’ you might know it better that way. (Not a literal translation.)
No doubt we’ll get a dozen more residents of the South chiming in that everyone they know wouldn’t have condoned this. But that hardly proves anything one way or the other. I lived in Georgia once, and I too didn’t meet anyone that was into dogfighting. But that doesn’t mean I don’t think such a subculture exists.
Do you dispute the existence of a subculture in the South for whom dogfighting is a regular practice that does not carry any particular moral opprobrium among its members?
I am no animal rights activist, but I think the day is coming when things like bullfighting, greyhound racing, circuses, etc. are looked upon as barbarous relics of a bygone era. The reason they aren’t now is purely due to cultural upbringing.
Here is the thing – there may well be a subculture of dogfighting (in the South? I don’t know, the only person I ever knew who had ever been to a dogfight was in Oregon), but that doesn’t mean that just because a person was raised in the South, they should find dogfighting to be less reprehensible than someone raised in NYC.
My issue with this idiot is that she is inclined to make these blanket statements far too often. Like I said, if Vick were white, would she be offering him an out on the basis of “cultural upbringing?” I think not, based on her history.
Looks like they found the right replacement for Rosie, though. Another loudmouthed overexposed known idiot to get loads of page hits and ratings.
Well, there’s also this thing called “The Klan” that exists as a subculture in the South, and its regular practice does not carry any particular moral opprobrium among its members (of the Klan, that is, not “the South”, let’s be clear here)…is Goldberg going to start defending those poor misguided KKK members next?
I didn’t know anyone involved in dog fighting until I moved to Arkansas. I was conversing with a young black male and an older (60s) black male about dog behavior and the younger one casually mentioned that he raised his dogs to fight. I don’t really have any evidence that dog fighting is endemic to the south. There does seem to be a subset of our culture, both white and black oddly enough, that seem to take a certain amount of pride in owning a “masculine” dog that could potentially eat small children. Whether there’s a connection between that and dog fighting is something I’d be interested in finding out.
True. “South” does not equal “dogfighting culture.” But “dogfighting culture which happens to be in the South” does equal “dogfighting culture.” I think the latter was the claim Whoopi was making, and it is perfectly sensible. As to whether Michael Vick was actually a member of that subculture, I don’t know or really care. Whoopi seems to think he is/was, and I don’t think she was out of line.
Maybe, maybe not. But it hardly justifies this pitting that she might have hypothetically treated him differently if he were white.
Wow. Chainsaw, bitch, fuckwit? People seem to really have a lot of pent up aggression towards Ms. Goldberg. I know this is my pit, but I prefer to channel my rage towards people actually fighting dogs, while I tend to only disagree/debate with those who defend or explain others’ actions.
The main issue is that Vick is not from “the South.” He’s from Hampton Roads, Virginia, which is a coastal, metropolitan area that’s entirely “Mid-Atlantic” in identity, culture, etc. I think that there’s some sort of strange idea that Virginia is a “southern” state - sure, if you go way out west toward the Appalachian mountains, it can start to look like Alabama in places, but most of the state feels entirely “Northern,” especially the DC metro area.
Defending and explaining are two different things. You seem to be the type that would jump all over Ron Paul for pointing out that part of the reason Al Qaeda attacked the US was the US presence in Saudi Arabia. That is an explanation, not a defense. We should value explanations and understanding. When you shun these kinds of discussions, you make less progress.
Additionally, animal welfare/rights is quite a bit more controversial and late-coming than human welfare/rights. Everyone knows murder is wrong. Not everyone knows killing animals for entertainment is wrong. That recognition of the animal rights hasn’t reached every nook and cranny of society shouldn’t surprise us, nor should it excuse anyone.
Whoopi Goldberg was relevant for about 20 minutes in the 70s. Her continued presence in any form of film or TV is a complete mystery to me, and I doubt that anyone places any credence in anything she has to say. She was edgy once, but has been a tiresome no-talent hanger-on for 30 years who gets dragged out of the crypt whenever someone is desperate for a ‘black’ face and fake controversy. Michael Vick is a despicable person who thinks ‘finding Jesus’ is going to get him off the hook in some sectors of the gullible public. If dog fighting was part of his upbringing, then somebody needs to bitch-slap his mama.
