Well, I guess you've heard about Duane "Dog" Chapman's latest scrape and oddly enough, this one is more threatening than the possibility of his going to Mexican prison (he isn't, by the way - they dropped the charges): this one could literally end his career, not just interrupt it! But interrupt it, it already has.
Dog: The Bounty Hunter has been removed from A&E Network's current schedule, though a spokesperson for the network insists the top-rated show has not been canceled. Dog is the second highest-rated cable network TV show on air (I'm assuming behind The Closer). A&E had already suspended taping of the show following the release of a recording of the star in which he went on a racially-laced invective against his estranged son's girlfriend. The recording was released online by none other than The National Enquirer.
While the recording was shocking, the real story is far more interesting: it turns out that Duane "Dog" Chapman had already received word that his estranged son's girlfriend, a Monique Shinnery, had acquired recording equipment with the express intent of "catching" Chapman using racial invectives on tape and that his son was the one who actually sold the tape to The National Enquirer.
So why did he do it?
Let me back up one hot second: Shinnery's intention wasn't to catch Dog using racial invectives; her intention was to capture him using a specific racial epithet infamous in American language. You know which one; I'm just not going to call it "The X-Word" because that's a tired, clichéd, and stupid alternative to a word the race who claims to be so offended by it uses frequently and without care. Said race also refers to other races with racial epithets on a regular basis and are never - never - taken to task for it! They do this in regular conversation, in popular entertainment, in televised and recorded speeches - they do it all the time in all manner of situations and are never held accountable for their own actions and speech!
But, having said that, no one's saying it excuses Duane "Dog" Chapman's little race-rant. And again, I have to ask: knowing that he was speaking to his estranged son, knowing that his estranged son's girlfriend was of African-American heritage, knowing that she had recording equipment with the express purpose of recording Chapman's use of the word, why did he do it?!
I think this is important to the equation before I get to that, though - this is from his lawyer, Brook Hart: "I don't think he has a hint of racial bias in his makeup. But as a man who grew up in the South, is someone who went to prison, and is a man of the street, I think the N-word is something he hasn't completely avoided [using]...in an endearing way or a street way."
That is so important for every reason she mentioned, as well as for what I said in the paragraph above, as to how black Americans use it so freely and frequently. In some circles, in some situations, for some people, the word actually - honestly - just doesn't carry that much weight as an "ugly" or taboo word. It should - on the one hand - but, on quite the other, wasn't it black Americans themselves who claimed that their use of the word was passable specifically because it took the invective out of it - that allowing the continued use of it in such a manner stripped it of its power to hurt and offend? Of course, the reasoning behind their continued and increasingly frequent use of it has changed at least 304971234097340294379 times, and the primary, mainstream acceptance of the continued use of it now is that it somehow "bonds" people of color.
But, when I say "reasoning," I really mean "excuse" - because that's what it is.
Saying that some people can use this or that word while others cannot is tantamount to saying that some people can use this or that bathroom, while others cannot. It's very, very important that we keep that in mind.
So why did Duane "Dog" Chapman go on a racially-charged rant over the telephone when he knew that he was most likely being taped? Well, I can offer several possibilities (he was trying to provoke the pair into revealing the truth, he simply lost his cool, he didn't expect his son - no matter how estranged - to betray him in such an underhanded manner, or maybe even that this was Chapman's form of the "kiss-off": the final paycheck he intended to give his estranged son before putting him out of his life forever) but the truth is that no one knows except Dog Chapman.
Still, you have to wonder, like me, what in the hell is really going on here?! I mean, this whole thing just doesn't make that much sense. I have a feeling, in the end, that we're going to find out that Dog was set-up by his son and this girlfriend of his specifically so they could make some money at his expense - not to mention a bit of revenge in the process - and Dog is just saying he knew about this beforehand so it doesn't make him look like a dullard. Of course, this proves what Dog has said all along: that Monique Shinnery is a bad person of lax (if any) moral character and that his son sold the tape to The National Enquirer because Dog refused to let him work with them because he was dating Monique Shinnery.
But let's not boil this down to the simple question of whether or not Duane "Dog" Chapman is a racist; I don't think he's anymore racist than any other American - black, white, or otherwise. I could be very wrong, but I really don't think I am; Dog has some racist tendencies and feelings, just like we all do. It doesn't make him a bad man, it makes him a man - that's all; we're all flawed. None of this excuses his speech, but to put things into context, this is what the whole thing's about: his speech; he said a bad word that is in common use throughout the country on an everyday basis in all variety of manners - as a term of racial derision, as a term of endearment, as a descriptive term, etc., etc. That I do not like the word really doesn't matter anymore than whether or not you do; it is in use throughout the country - and possibly the world - on an everyday basis and it's high-time we either got it out in the open and decided what to do with it or quit allowing politically-motivated, socio-ethnic groups and demagogues to use it against only white people, period.
The twisted, double-standard idea that most black Americans have goes like this: white people have been using the word since before blacks were even in America - even though blacks were somehow American slaves before the country was even founded - and now hip-hop "artists" are disempowering it by using it regularly, even though the word was regularly used by both blacks and whites throughout American history. Sound convoluted? It should; it is. It's flawed logic based on historical inaccuracies forwarded by socio-ethnic groups with virulent political agendas and repeated by disenfranchised minorities who are willingly being used as pawns in a misguided attempt to uplift themselves and others of their race.
The simple fact of the matter is that it is just a word and if one race or ethnic group shouldn't use it, then why should any other?
Recent comments
1 hour 41 min ago
6 hours 41 min ago
6 hours 43 min ago
7 hours 9 min ago
7 hours 11 min ago
7 hours 16 min ago
8 hours 42 min ago
8 hours 45 min ago
8 hours 50 min ago
9 hours 5 min ago