Obituaries/Memorials

[El Barto]

Threatened and bullied are a poor choice of words.  None of that occurred.  Unless you think suggestions are threatening.  A lot of people here seem to be ok with taking things out of context.  All I tried to do is get my point across.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7932771/Journalist-suspended-tweeting-link-story-Kobe-Bryants-rape-case-2003.html

I'd say both terms are pretty apt here.

[TAC]

Wow, that's a crazy story.

[KevShmev]

Is it any wonder why so many women are afraid to come forward when they are sexually assaulted?

I have no idea what happened with the Kobe Bryant encounter in Colorado, but if you are a woman who has been a victim of sexual assault, it must be sickening to see the media going on and on about what a great man Kobe Bryant was. One ESPN employee actually referred to him as an "actual hero" the other day.  I get that his death was tragic, especially given that eight others, including some children, lost their lives as well, but the lack of perspective is astonishing.  I am not saying the media should be yelling rapist at the top of their lungs, but to put him on the pedestal they have in the last 10 days is more than a bit baffling.

[TAC]

Can we just go back to discussing shopping carts?

[The Walrus]

Seriously. Way more fun than trying to argue when is the right time and place to shame the dead

Maybe to a bunch of kids who love basketball, he WAS a hero. Kobe Bryant the Basketball Star was a huge inspiration as a professional player. And I bet a lot of young kids simply don't know about the rape stuff, and when people say 'he was a hero' it doesn't take a whole lot of brain power to infer that they're likely not praising his rape abilities but rather his ability to play the game.

[Dublagent66]

Threatened and bullied are a poor choice of words.  None of that occurred.  Unless you think suggestions are threatening.  A lot of people here seem to be ok with taking things out of context.  All I tried to do is get my point across.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7932771/Journalist-suspended-tweeting-link-story-Kobe-Bryants-rape-case-2003.html

I'd say both terms are pretty apt here.

Oh, well yeah I already know about the journalist.  I thought you were saying that I was threatening and bullying.

[Stadler]

EDIT.  Nothing to see here.

[KevShmev]

Seriously. Way more fun than trying to argue when is the right time and place to shame the dead

Maybe to a bunch of kids who love basketball, he WAS a hero. Kobe Bryant the Basketball Star was a huge inspiration as a professional player. And I bet a lot of young kids simply don't know about the rape stuff, and when people say 'he was a hero' it doesn't take a whole lot of brain power to infer that they're likely not praising his rape abilities but rather his ability to play the game.

Your passive-aggressive swipe aside, maybe if people didn't misuse the word hero on a regular basis, we wouldn't have people calling sports stars heroes in 2020.  Neil Peart's lyrics to Nobody's Hero are more relevant now than ever.

[The Walrus]

Seriously. Way more fun than trying to argue when is the right time and place to shame the dead

Maybe to a bunch of kids who love basketball, he WAS a hero. Kobe Bryant the Basketball Star was a huge inspiration as a professional player. And I bet a lot of young kids simply don't know about the rape stuff, and when people say 'he was a hero' it doesn't take a whole lot of brain power to infer that they're likely not praising his rape abilities but rather his ability to play the game.

Your passive-aggressive swipe aside, maybe if people didn't misuse the word hero on a regular basis, we wouldn't have people calling sports stars heroes in 2020.  Neil Peart's lyrics to Nobody's Hero are more relevant now than ever.

I didn't take a swipe at anybody, and if I wanted to, I wouldn't be passive aggressive about it. My 'shame the dead' remark just goes back to my personal viewpoints.

Not everybody who thinks Kobe Bryant is a hero to them is probably aware of the rape. I'm thinking of younger kids. Perhaps not everybody on the planet has the same breadth of knowledge on a person as we all here do, with our abilities to scan the Internet in 10 seconds and a rapid blast of keystrokes. A lot of grown adults don't even know the very basics of politics or the mainstream news, let's not act like we expect every fan of Kobe Bryant to know about or even care about this (as 'triggering' as that might be to a lot of people, that's the reality - a lot of people like Kobe simply as a basketball star and do not allow the rape incident to cross over into their thoughts of him as an athlete).

Sure, that might read a little callous, but you log off the net and go out into the world and I guarantee you that's a very real description of a lot of people out there.

[Stadler]

I see your point, KTLX.  There are millions of people that are more than willing to look past things when it's convenient for them.   I'm probably one of them, at times (Gene Simmons, though I don't think there's ever been any really credible #MeToo things about him). 

[TAC]

at times (Gene Simmons, though I don't think there's ever been any really credible #MeToo things about him).

Hard to believe. Weinstein apparently didn't own a Polaroid camera.


Think about it. Gene was way ahead of his time, as those pictures are basically the same as Police Body Cams.

[El Barto]

at times (Gene Simmons, though I don't think there's ever been any really credible #MeToo things about him).

Hard to believe. Weinstein apparently didn't own a Polaroid camera.


Think about it. Gene was way ahead of his time, as those pictures are basically the same as Police Body Cams.

Colonel Hogan had them both beat. He was shooting video (as well as tens of thousands of Polaroids) back in the late 60s/early 70s. He was a real pioneer.

[Stadler]

I remember when he died; he was a DJ for the radio station I mention here a lot (the one I used to listen to as a kid).  I didn't understand all of the details then - I was 10 or so - but later went back and read up.  It's a fascinating story. 

[Dublagent66]

The only hero's I know about are the fictional type from cartoons and comic books, and those in real life that actually sacrificed their own lives to save others.  Sports figures don't fall into either of those categories.  However, I can see how some people look up these superstars.  Especially youngsters who are highly impressionable.  They only really know about the good things they see and hear.

As I've said before about the Washington Post journalist, I don't think she deserves to be fired or threatened.  But, being an employee in the mainstream media, she should've known the possibilities of some very harsh and uncalled for backlash.  Or maybe she knew and just decided to do it anyway, regardless.  But Kev is right, the word Hero does get misused a lot.

[Stadler]

The only hero's I know about are the fictional type from cartoons and comic books, and those in real life that actually sacrificed their own lives to save others.  Sports figures don't fall into either of those categories.  However, I can see how some people look up these superstars.  Especially youngsters who are highly impressionable.  They only really know about the good things they see and hear.

As I've said before about the Washington Post journalist, I don't think she deserves to be fired or threatened.  But, being an employee in the mainstream media, she should've known the possibilities of some very harsh and uncalled for backlash.  Or maybe she knew and just decided to do it anyway, regardless.  But Kev is right, the word Hero does get misused a lot.

Why was there ANY backlash to a JOURNALIST for reporting FACTS?   Doesn't that at all give you pause? 

[TAC]

Well, timing obviously.

But what I do t understand is why was she suspended?

[El Barto]

Well, timing obviously.

But what I do t understand is why was she suspended?

Because it's easier to appease the mob than to stand up to it. If you've got a hot-headed customer raising hell in your store you're probably going to tell her whatever she wants to hear just to get her the fuck out, aren't you? Telling her she's wrong will only exasperate the situation. This is no different. The WAPO, like any business, is more interested in not rocking the boat than standing up for principles. My hunch is that they publicly suspended her, and privately worked a deal with her with the understanding that it was only for the PR. Hell, send her and her family to Hawaii for the two weeks she's suspended. That'd be a win for everybody.

[Harmony]

Seriously. Way more fun than trying to argue when is the right time and place to shame the dead

Maybe to a bunch of kids who love basketball, he WAS a hero. Kobe Bryant the Basketball Star was a huge inspiration as a professional player. And I bet a lot of young kids simply don't know about the rape stuff, and when people say 'he was a hero' it doesn't take a whole lot of brain power to infer that they're likely not praising his rape abilities but rather his ability to play the game.

I'm not going to reply to this in a way that's about Kobe Bryant but just in a general way.  Kat, have you ever known someone who has been sexually assaulted?  A lot of people don't, so no big deal if not.  But if you do, check in with them about how they feel when someone famous who has a history of sexual assault/abuse/rape dies and all that gets talked about is what a great person they were.  From my understanding of working with abuse victims, it is almost like having to relive the assault/abuse/rape all over again while people cheer on the abuser/rapist.

Let's take OJ, for example.  I'm quite certain there are people out there who think he was the greatest football player who ever lived.  When he dies, all the good, bad, and ugly is going to get dredged up again.  Now if you are a close relation or friend of Nicole Brown or Ron Goldman, how's it going to feel when people call him the greatest football player to ever play the game?

Yeah, I know I know....'fuck your feelings' and all that goes along with telling others to stop acting like victims.  But I don't think it is at all out of line to at least be honest about the man in a way that doesn't turn him/her into some sort of saint who only deserves praise in their death.  I mean, to victims it is simply pouring salt in the wounds.  And victims are definitely paying attention to all the glorification of KB.  I've talked to some of them.  It's confusing and upsetting and it makes them feel like they are literally worth nothing.  It's just another example of a rich, famous, powerful guy getting off from suffering any real consequence for harm they've done to others while they live with the pain of their own abuse stories every single day of the year.

And if they dare speak up, god help them.  They'll be bullied and harassed into silence by the mob without a second thought.

[The Walrus]

I had a family member who was sexually assaulted. One of my first girlfriends and longest friends was violently sexually assaulted repeatedly around the time we first met. Plenty of other people I know have, unfortunately, gone through it as well. I am not some callous asshole. I know all too well what baggage comes with that kind of attack on someone's body. You misinterpreted my post. Sorry it bothered you. All I'll say. We can PM if you want.

[Harmony]

It didn't bother me at all, Kat.  No worries.  I was just trying to forge an understanding about why not everyone is jumping on the bandwagon of canonizing the man.  Someone much smarter than I once said that perspective is everything.  I'm just sharing one perspective from the side that doesn't usually get a voice.  That's it.

[jammindude]

I have a hard time believing that there is anyone in this world who doesn't know someone who has been sexually assaulted.   In fact, I've known literally hundreds (possibly thousands) of women in my 50 years, and I have yet to meet a single one that DID NOT have a sexual assault story.    So even Harmony's suggestion that there are people out there who don't know someone who has been sexually assaulted is ludicrous.

If you think you don't know a woman who has been sexually assaulted, they just haven't told you about it.   

Every time a study comes out saying something along the lines of 60% of women have been sexually assaulted (I'm just pulling that number out of the air) and people act so shocked at how high that is...I just think to myself "that just means the other 40% didn't want to talk about it."   

[Cool Chris]

I really want to comment on that but we are straying from the topic a bit here.

[axeman90210]

Thought this was a good summary of thoughts on some of what this thread is currently touching on

https://twitter.com/emilylhauser/status/1225226222302613504?s=19

[TAC]

I have a hard time believing that there is anyone in this world who doesn't know someone who has been sexually assaulted.   In fact, I've known literally hundreds (possibly thousands) of women in my 50 years, and I have yet to meet a single one that DID NOT have a sexual assault story.    So even Harmony's suggestion that there are people out there who don't know someone who has been sexually assaulted is ludicrous. 

So you know "possibly thousands" of women that have a sexual assault story? Really?

I'm older than you and I have not met one single person that I am aware has been sexually assaulted.

Apparently Harmony's suggestion is in fact ludicrous.

[hefdaddy42]

I have a hard time believing that there is anyone in this world who doesn't know someone who has been sexually assaulted.   In fact, I've known literally hundreds (possibly thousands) of women in my 50 years, and I have yet to meet a single one that DID NOT have a sexual assault story.    So even Harmony's suggestion that there are people out there who don't know someone who has been sexually assaulted is ludicrous. 

So you know "possibly thousands" of women that have a sexual assault story? Really?

I'm older than you and I have not met one single person that I am aware has been sexually assaulted.

Apparently Harmony's suggestion is in fact ludicrous.

The key phrase in your post is "that I am aware of".

[Adami]

I disagree with Jamminbro that 100% of women have been sexually assaulted, but yes it is much MUCH more than any of us know.

And I agree with Jamminbro that all of us (most likely) know someone who was sexually assaulted, even if we don't know that about them.

[Dublagent66]

The only hero's I know about are the fictional type from cartoons and comic books, and those in real life that actually sacrificed their own lives to save others.  Sports figures don't fall into either of those categories.  However, I can see how some people look up these superstars.  Especially youngsters who are highly impressionable.  They only really know about the good things they see and hear.

As I've said before about the Washington Post journalist, I don't think she deserves to be fired or threatened.  But, being an employee in the mainstream media, she should've known the possibilities of some very harsh and uncalled for backlash.  Or maybe she knew and just decided to do it anyway, regardless.  But Kev is right, the word Hero does get misused a lot.

Why was there ANY backlash to a JOURNALIST for reporting FACTS?   Doesn't that at all give you pause?

Pause for what?  For the way people are?  You're really not aware of how sensitive some people can be?  C'mon.  I'm just acknowledging reality.

[Stadler]

As usual, it's likely somewhere in the middle.   We've had this conversation elsewhere, I think.  For someone who isn't comfortable with the concept of forcing someone to do something they don't want to do, and who is insecure enough that I can't handle the notion that someone might be talking about me that way (yes, that's shallow, but being honest, and it gets me to the right place) the number is to me shockingly high.  I'd say of the women I've had serious relationships with, about half have a story to tell.

I think the celebrity thing skews the conversation though.   Is it really the Kobe's we need to be worried about?   Not that his victims are of no worth, but we - society - seems to want to hear their stories not because their stories are meaningful to us, but because it's KOBE!  I'm not usually a "message" guy - that just seems a rabbit hole of contradictions that just muddy the water - but I think there's  benefit in sending the message that your past doesn't go away just because you win an Oscar, or have cute pics on Instachat of you and your daughter, or you hooped 30,000 points in your career. There are no easy answers, but in cases like this, where there are so many competing interests, I kind of think objective truth is a good place to meet in the middle.

[Stadler]

The only hero's I know about are the fictional type from cartoons and comic books, and those in real life that actually sacrificed their own lives to save others.  Sports figures don't fall into either of those categories.  However, I can see how some people look up these superstars.  Especially youngsters who are highly impressionable.  They only really know about the good things they see and hear.

As I've said before about the Washington Post journalist, I don't think she deserves to be fired or threatened.  But, being an employee in the mainstream media, she should've known the possibilities of some very harsh and uncalled for backlash.  Or maybe she knew and just decided to do it anyway, regardless.  But Kev is right, the word Hero does get misused a lot.

Why was there ANY backlash to a JOURNALIST for reporting FACTS?   Doesn't that at all give you pause?

Pause for what?  For the way people are?  You're really not aware of how sensitive some people can be?  C'mon.  I'm just acknowledging reality.

Of course I know how "sensitive people can be"; have you READ any of my posts? 

I was commenting on the notion that a JOURNALIST - who we (society) ostensibly pay to research and report on FACTS - was chastised and even punished by the bully pulpit for doing just that.   I get yelling at me because I was "insensitive" to a small community with their own grief mechanism, but it's a massive red flag - at least to me - that we're letting some unknown minority subset of the population drive - for subjective, unmeasurable reaons - the reporting of hard facts by our free press.  If you don't want the news - which I also do not quite understand, but whatevs - don't read it, but it's incomprehensible that we're CENSORING NEWS because of the unknown feelings of a minority of our population.

("Minority" meant in the literal sense of the word; I'm not implying anything to do with identity politics, or value or anything like that, just saying that some number less than 160 million people). 

[Dublagent66]

Well, you did ask the question of why is there any backlash.  I just assumed you already knew why.  I guess that brings us back to place and time.  KB's death was breaking news.  His tainted past is old news.  Really old, and a lot of people already know about it.  So, why does anyone need a journalist from the WP sharing old news on social media about a guy who just died, reminding us of what we already know?  Seems rather pointless and unnecessary to me.  The facts are already out there.  If people want to know about a celebrity's past, there are plenty of places for them to go and find it.  They don't need it thrown in their face.  Especially if they are grieving in some way or maybe have forgiven that past mistake.  Having said that, I still think it's wrong to threaten someone who may not have made a tactful decision to post something in that place and time.  This is all just my take on an observation of circumstances.  It is certainly not my intent to judge anyone.

[El Barto]

Well, you did ask the question of why is there any backlash.  I just assumed you already knew why.  I guess that brings us back to place and time.  KB's death was breaking news.  His tainted past is old news.  Really old, and a lot of people already know about it.  So, why does anyone need a journalist from the WP sharing old news on social media about a guy who just died, reminding us of what we already know?  Seems rather pointless and unnecessary to me.  The facts are already out there.  If people want to know about a celebrity's past, there are plenty of places for them to go and find it.  They don't need it thrown in their face.  Especially if they are grieving in some way or maybe have forgiven that past mistake.  Having said that, I still think it's wrong to threaten someone who may not have made a tactful decision to post something in that place and time.  This is all just my take on an observation of circumstances.  It is certainly not my intent to judge anyone.

I didn't now about it.

[hefdaddy42]

The journalist did nothing wrong.  On the contrary, they performed a public service, by doing their job: reporting the facts in order to shed light on current events.  This often involves bringing up old events.

This particular piece of news is as relevant in talking about Kobe's life as is talking about how many championships or MVPs he won.

[Adami]

Well, you did ask the question of why is there any backlash.  I just assumed you already knew why.  I guess that brings us back to place and time.  KB's death was breaking news.  His tainted past is old news.  Really old, and a lot of people already know about it.  So, why does anyone need a journalist from the WP sharing old news on social media about a guy who just died, reminding us of what we already know?  Seems rather pointless and unnecessary to me.  The facts are already out there.  If people want to know about a celebrity's past, there are plenty of places for them to go and find it.  They don't need it thrown in their face.  Especially if they are grieving in some way or maybe have forgiven that past mistake.  Having said that, I still think it's wrong to threaten someone who may not have made a tactful decision to post something in that place and time.  This is all just my take on an observation of circumstances.  It is certainly not my intent to judge anyone.

I didn't now about it.

Nor did I.

[Stadler]

Well, you did ask the question of why is there any backlash.  I just assumed you already knew why.  I guess that brings us back to place and time.  KB's death was breaking news.  His tainted past is old news.  Really old, and a lot of people already know about it.  So, why does anyone need a journalist from the WP sharing old news on social media about a guy who just died, reminding us of what we already know?  Seems rather pointless and unnecessary to me.  The facts are already out there.  If people want to know about a celebrity's past, there are plenty of places for them to go and find it.  They don't need it thrown in their face.  Especially if they are grieving in some way or maybe have forgiven that past mistake.  Having said that, I still think it's wrong to threaten someone who may not have made a tactful decision to post something in that place and time.  This is all just my take on an observation of circumstances.  It is certainly not my intent to judge anyone.

I'll just note that there were people - smart, intelligent, informed people - in this very thread that did not know about it.  If you were going to excise all the information communicated about Kobe in the last month or so that was "widely known", the stories would be about nine seconds long.  His moving from high school to the NBA is older news than the accusations, but we got that.  My GOD! I wish they'd stop throwing that in our face!