498 replies to this topic

[kellygreen]

MileHighClub, on 10 April 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

Finally we have progress.  You have come about as close as you will to acknowledging that Woods is a jerk.  Small victory for common sense and logic.

I see you didn't really read the post you are referring to.

"Tiger Woods is a jerk" is not a FACT....it is an opinion.   One that I do not share, but one that willing to acknowledge that SOME peole can come to after a principled application of their personal values.

My point is that most people who feel the compulsive need to be critical of the man, don't arrive at their hostility in that sort of fashion.

They reached their hostility first...and then worked backwards to find something to rationalize its existence.

[geesecougar2]

geesecougar2, on 10 April 2012 - 12:05 PM, said:

supergolfdude, on 10 April 2012 - 11:03 AM, said:

You're assuming I base my dislike of Woods on his self-proclaimed "transgressions". I do not, entirely.
I have a far greater problem with his abhorrent on-course behavior.

I hold him to the same standard as Nelson, Hogan, Snead, Palmer, Player, Nicklaus and Watson.

And as you reply, don't bother with "Stenson did it", or "Tommy Bolt did it" or "there were no cameras around when Nicklaus was cussing and club-kicking his way around the golf course". You know as well as I do that those arguments hold no water.

To me, Woods is a dirtbag for disrespecting golf this way.

Just so I understand you completely, you think tossing clubs and cursing while playing a game is MORE indicative of one's character than adultery?

I ask this question again because I want to make sure I understand you correctly.

[geesecougar2]

502 to Right, on 10 April 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:

kellygreen, on 10 April 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

Tiger Woods----on MANY levels---embodies the ways in which American culture have changed.   Changes that not everyone likes.  Changes that some people are afraid of.  Changes that some people DEEPLY resent.

Changes for which there are very few safe spaces to publicly vent one's hostility towards.

Why don't you have the guts to just come out and say what you really mean is that you are accusing people of racism?  Because that's EXACTLY what you are implying.

How many times over the past few years has he, and I, and many others, come out and explicitly said that's what's going on here? It's not the only thing, but it's the elephant in the room. And how many times has that resulted in heavy handed moderating?

The issue is real, but it is not something we can talk openly about on this forum.

[kellygreen]

502 to Right, on 10 April 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:

kellygreen, on 10 April 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

Tiger Woods----on MANY levels---embodies the ways in which American culture have changed.   Changes that not everyone likes.  Changes that some people are afraid of.  Changes that some people DEEPLY resent.

Changes for which there are very few safe spaces to publicly vent one's hostility towards.

Why don't you have the guts to just come out and say what you really mean is that you are accusing people of racism?  Because that's EXACTLY what you are implying.

No, that is not what I am implying.  It is what you are INFERRING...and I take no responsiblity for motives that you (erroneously) attribute to me.

I choose my words with precision...and I said EXACTLY what I meant.

The hostility towards Tiger Woods...and especially towards his infidelity...encompasses a WIDE RANGE of reactionary impulses that cover a wide range of hostile reactions to a number of social changes.   I could tick off a half dozen without having to think too hard about it.

I refuse to say anymore because this forum has a specific rule against discussing politics, and I've already had my hand smacked once by a moderator for violating that rule not long after I joined....

...and I try to have the nasty habit of learning from my mistakes.

I will sneak up to that line...but I will not cross it.   Especially after having had it pointed out to me.

[kellygreen]

johnnypro, on 10 April 2012 - 01:10 PM, said:

What....you don't think race is an underlying cause of much of the vitriol hurled at Tiger? Or at President Obama, too, for that matter.

Its one underlying cause for the irrational and compulsive hostility hurled at BOTH men.

But is is not the only underlying cause.  Far from it.

However all the causes are firmly rooted in visceral, identity-level issues.  

Funny and illustrative story.

One author of a book supplemented her income as a writer by giving lectures.  But she to give a lecture at a couple of locations in Canada...but didn't have time to submit the appropriate paperwork for a work visa.   So rather than deal with the potential problems that working could generate without a visa....she decided to give the lectures without accepting any compensation.

At the first location, the woman who was responsible for paying her was so befuddled by her decision, that she took it as a personal insult.   Thinking that the author didn't trust her accounting.

At the second location,  the person who was responsible for paying her accused her of being a socialist.

Neither person could recognize---or accept---the simple truth of what was actually going on.   Because it was just so foreign to their own personal worldview and value system.

Edited by kellygreen, 10 April 2012 - 01:18 PM.

[MileHighClub]

kellygreen, on 10 April 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:

MileHighClub, on 10 April 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

Finally we have progress.  You have come about as close as you will to acknowledging that Woods is a jerk.  Small victory for common sense and logic.

I see you didn't really read the post you are referring to.

"Tiger Woods is a jerk" is not a FACT....it is an opinion.   One that I do not share, but one that willing to acknowledge that SOME peole can come to after a principled application of their personal values.

My point is that most people who feel the compulsive need to be critical of the man, don't arrive at their hostility in that sort of fashion.

They reached their hostility first...and then worked backwards to find something to rationalize its existence.

Are you really like this when you are not on the internet?  ...  I hope that isn't the case.

Edited by Asleep, 10 April 2012 - 01:34 PM.
personal attack, language

[TheDarkOne]

kellygreen, on 10 April 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

Tiger Woods----on MANY levels---embodies the ways in which American culture have changed.   Changes that not everyone likes.  Changes that some people are afraid of.  Changes that some people DEEPLY resent.

Kelly,
I greatly respect the passion you have in your point. However if you expect any of us to either agree or disagree with you...you have to define exactly what you are talking about.
Can you please explain what specifically the changes above you refer to are? It would also be helpful if you could clarify if you are making this accusation against people posting here that oppose your view.
You have talked about this a few times, but you have never been transparent with your thinking.

Also, as I asked last time, do you think you could respond without feeling the need to hurl insults?

[kellygreen]

You mean am I someone who can look behind the curtain and see that there is nothing to the Wizard of Oz but a lot of loud noise and smoke.....?

Pretty much.

Though I pretty much keep my realizations to myself as long people are not taking it out on others.

But when people try to either bully me...or bully someone else in my presence...then they usually get more than they bargained for.

...

My intergrity and principles mean more to me than popularity.

[kellygreen]

TheDarkOne, on 10 April 2012 - 01:22 PM, said:

Kelly,
I greatly respect the passion you have in your point. However if you expect any of us to either agree or disagree with you...you have to define exactly what you are talking about.
Can you please explain what specifically the changes above you refer to are? It would also be helpful if you could clarify if you are making this accusation against people posting here that oppose your view.
You have talked about this a few times, but you have never been transparent with your thinking.

Also, as I asked last time, do you think you could respond without feeling the need to hurl insults?

A black kid from a working-class military family blasts onto the stage of the golf world.  He is fiery.  He is emotional.  He is a fight-you-to-the-death-for-the-change-in-your pocket competitor.  He is head-and-shoulders more talented physically than anyone else around him...and more than anyone who is still alive can remember.    He not only start winning everything in sight...he is high-fiving and fist-pumping his way to destroying all of the game's records.  

Not only that, he starts attracting interest in the game of golf from people who have never before been interested in it.

A game that has a long history of racial, gender, ethnic and class-based exclusion.  A game that sees itself as the embodiment of affluent WASP society, its self-image and its values.   Whose (most recent) ambassador was a man noted for his very introverted, unemotional---arguably aristocratically rigid---- public persona.   A game whose fan base is predominantly white, and tends to be older.  A game whose professionals tend to be predominantly white...and of earlier generations when he burst upon the scene.

Do you THINK there are just a FEW opportunities for culture clash...and identity-level resentment towards a person very different than golf was used to having to deal with as its public face and image....

...and was reshaping the game at every level in his own image?

Just a little bit of resentment?

Edited by kellygreen, 10 April 2012 - 01:36 PM.

[Asleep]

Please be mindful of forum rules when posting, which include but are not limited to these in particular:

Rules

Posting here is a privilege, not a right.

• While debating and discussion is fine, we will not tolerate rudeness, insulting posts, personal attacks, or purposeless inflammatory posts. Our decision is final in these matters.
  
• Please refrain from posting meaningless threads, one word (or short) nonsense posts, or the like.
  
• No foul language. Keep it clean.
  
• Treat others the way you want to be treated. Mutual respect is a key component to preservation of the site's goals.

Thank you.

[johnnypro]

kellygreen, on 10 April 2012 - 01:33 PM, said:

TheDarkOne, on 10 April 2012 - 01:22 PM, said:

Kelly,
I greatly respect the passion you have in your point. However if you expect any of us to either agree or disagree with you...you have to define exactly what you are talking about.
Can you please explain what specifically the changes above you refer to are? It would also be helpful if you could clarify if you are making this accusation against people posting here that oppose your view.
You have talked about this a few times, but you have never been transparent with your thinking.

Also, as I asked last time, do you think you could respond without feeling the need to hurl insults?

A black kid from a working-class military family blasts onto the stage of the golf world.  He is fiery.  He is emotional.  He is a fight-you-to-the-death-for-the-change-in-your pocket competitor.  He is head-and-shoulders more talented physically than anyone else around him...and more than anyone who is still alive can remember.    He not only start winning everything in sight...he is high-fiving and fist-pumping his way to destroying all of the game's records.  

Not only that, he starts attracting interest in the game of golf from people who have never before been interested in it.

A game that has a long history of racial, gender, ethnic and class-based exclusion.  A game that sees itself as the embodiment of affluent WASP society, its self-image and its values.   Whose (most recent) ambassador was a man noted for his very introverted, unemotional---arguably aristocratically rigid---- public persona.   A game whose fan base is predominantly white, and tends to be older.  A game whose professionals tend to be predominantly white...and of earlier generations when he burst upon the scene.

Do you THINK there are just a FEW opportunities for culture clash...and identity-level resentment towards a person very different than golf was used to having to deal with as its public face and image....

...and was reshaping the game at every level in his own image?

Just a little bit of resentment?

+1
Perfectly said.

[tbowles411]

johnnypro, on 10 April 2012 - 02:14 PM, said:

kellygreen, on 10 April 2012 - 01:33 PM, said:

TheDarkOne, on 10 April 2012 - 01:22 PM, said:

Kelly,
I greatly respect the passion you have in your point. However if you expect any of us to either agree or disagree with you...you have to define exactly what you are talking about.
Can you please explain what specifically the changes above you refer to are? It would also be helpful if you could clarify if you are making this accusation against people posting here that oppose your view.
You have talked about this a few times, but you have never been transparent with your thinking.

Also, as I asked last time, do you think you could respond without feeling the need to hurl insults?

A black kid from a working-class military family blasts onto the stage of the golf world.  He is fiery.  He is emotional.  He is a fight-you-to-the-death-for-the-change-in-your pocket competitor.  He is head-and-shoulders more talented physically than anyone else around him...and more than anyone who is still alive can remember.    He not only start winning everything in sight...he is high-fiving and fist-pumping his way to destroying all of the game's records.  

Not only that, he starts attracting interest in the game of golf from people who have never before been interested in it.

A game that has a long history of racial, gender, ethnic and class-based exclusion.  A game that sees itself as the embodiment of affluent WASP society, its self-image and its values.   Whose (most recent) ambassador was a man noted for his very introverted, unemotional---arguably aristocratically rigid---- public persona.   A game whose fan base is predominantly white, and tends to be older.  A game whose professionals tend to be predominantly white...and of earlier generations when he burst upon the scene.

Do you THINK there are just a FEW opportunities for culture clash...and identity-level resentment towards a person very different than golf was used to having to deal with as its public face and image....

...and was reshaping the game at every level in his own image?

Just a little bit of resentment?

+1
Perfectly said.

[approach11]

While there is some truth to what Kelly is saying, I think there is some overstatement in saying that Tiger is treated harshly by the golf world because of its historical ethnic and class make-up.  

The first thing I would note is that this forum, Golfwrx, is very representative of the game of golf and those who play it the most, and Tiger is in fact immensely popular here.  

The other thing I will say is that while golf has historically been race- and class-exclusive, that is really not so much the case anymore.  Except circumstantially - the game is expensive to play.   Again I will point to this forum.  Tiger is very popular on this forum and I imagine it crosses class, race and wealth lines, though impossible to determine.  

I think if you are going to make the case that Tiger is overly criticized or scrutinized (due to his race or upbringing), the only general statement you can accurately make is that bigoted people across America, whether rich or poor, golfer or non-golfer, are likely to dislike Tiger regardless of his success or his personality.  

I don't think you can say "golfers are rich, white and old, and that's why Tiger is criticized".  30 years ago maybe.

It's (still) an America problem, not a golf problem.

Edit, P.S.  I'm a big fan of Tiger the golfer, always have been, but if you can't acknowledge that he is, at the least, "kind of a d--k", you're blind or just too far from objective.  And that's before this Reilly "story" came out.

Edited by approach11, 10 April 2012 - 02:55 PM.

[psd]

Personally speaking, and I try never to speak for others, I always found it quite interesting how blacks took Tiger in as one of their own. He is predominantly Asian, no? And when I look(ed) at Tiger I saw/see someone of mixed race who is predominantly Asian.   Why hasn't (or perhaps he has been) Vijay Singh been embraced by blacks in the same way Tiger Woods has?  Is Tiger a different type of black?

[502 to Right]

kellygreen - your view of the U.S. is dated.  The backlash against Tiger has nothing to do with his race and everything to do with who he is as a person and the wrong choices he has made.  Before his fall from grace he was the most popular athlete in the world--and was paid like it too.  He had the world by the tail.  But when we learned who the real Tiger Woods was, he was shunned.  He has no one to blame but himself.

[Prut]

By all means let's kill the messenger and jump to the defense of the degenerate drug addict, psycho sex maniac who craps on his family, the sport, and everybody with whom he comes in contact.

[CasualLie]

kellygreen, on 10 April 2012 - 01:33 PM, said:

TheDarkOne, on 10 April 2012 - 01:22 PM, said:

Kelly,
I greatly respect the passion you have in your point. However if you expect any of us to either agree or disagree with you...you have to define exactly what you are talking about.
Can you please explain what specifically the changes above you refer to are? It would also be helpful if you could clarify if you are making this accusation against people posting here that oppose your view.
You have talked about this a few times, but you have never been transparent with your thinking.

Also, as I asked last time, do you think you could respond without feeling the need to hurl insults?

A black kid from a working-class military family blasts onto the stage of the golf world.  He is fiery.  He is emotional.  He is a fight-you-to-the-death-for-the-change-in-your pocket competitor.  He is head-and-shoulders more talented physically than anyone else around him...and more than anyone who is still alive can remember.    He not only start winning everything in sight...he is high-fiving and fist-pumping his way to destroying all of the game's records.  

Not only that, he starts attracting interest in the game of golf from people who have never before been interested in it.

A game that has a long history of racial, gender, ethnic and class-based exclusion.  A game that sees itself as the embodiment of affluent WASP society, its self-image and its values.   Whose (most recent) ambassador was a man noted for his very introverted, unemotional---arguably aristocratically rigid---- public persona.   A game whose fan base is predominantly white, and tends to be older.  A game whose professionals tend to be predominantly white...and of earlier generations when he burst upon the scene.

Do you THINK there are just a FEW opportunities for culture clash...and identity-level resentment towards a person very different than golf was used to having to deal with as its public face and image....

...and was reshaping the game at every level in his own image?

Just a little bit of resentment?

Or you could say an overbearing failure of a Father tries to erase his painful memories by getting a new wife and new son who latched onto golf in a way few could ever match.  After thousands of hours of practice and sacrificing all else, including the chance to teach valuable lessons on marriage and family, another family was destroyed in a public spectacle for all to see.  That's not judgment, that's reality.

I know, not as dramatic as the black kid from nowhere who wins the Masters in record fashion, chases a hollowed record held by a white guy, then can't handle the pressure of being someone he's not so the demons come home to roost and all we have now is a circus.

I'll be the first to claim I am a Tiger Woods fan, a big one - as a golfer, as an entertainer.  As a person, Tiger leaves a lot to be desired.  It doesn't mean I have judged him into oblivion.  I hope he breaks Jacks record for my own selfish reasons - I invested/wasted a lot of time watching him golf and it would be a great story to witness.  But on the surface, he sure acts like a jerk.  I am not one to be judgmental for judgment sake; I recognize the importance of society progressing by calling out each other's wrong behavior and then being supportive of change.  Tiger owes me nothing, but he owes himself and society the effort to be the better person he can be.  And while Rick Reilly sure looks like an opportunist with an ill timed story, it doesn't change the fact a family member is suffering and hopefully TW is doing the right thing behind the scenes to help.  

I would say the same thing to anyone black or white.

I get it, Rick Reilly is a jerk too, his editors/management opportunists to make any money any way they can on the backs of any athlete, but that's sports today - all about the money.  If some of us want to put on the rose colored glasses to strip away the money aspect and appreciate the pure athletic feats, that's great.  If others want to put step on a soapbox and use money driven sports as an example to point out societal problems and dance around race issues - that's _____ ah, I won't be so judgmental.

[zenman4711]

matthewsiv, on 03 April 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

Not a good time for Tiger with this being revealed.

Maybe his Foundation is his tax write off!

If I was  worth $500,000,000,I think I would throw my half brother $2,000,000 to help him when he is sick ,whatever the relationship.

Now I will wait to be called a Tiger hater,which I am not.

You know that's how athlete's go broke--spending too much and "helping" out too many people. Not saying his half-brother doesn't need help but there could be more to their history together than anybody knows. Maybe the guy picked on Tiger when he was younger, maybe he abused him--who knows and it's not really anybody's business. I used to read Reilly a long time ago when he wrote for SI and thought he was pretty good back then but lately he's been a whiny crap hack. There's a reason Bill Simmons' bashes him occasionally. Reilly is one of those guys who refuses to believe in his own decline into irrelevance. His writing is no longer insightful or funny and his cultural references are sometimes such a stretch that its painful. Like a 60-year old wearing a baseball hat backwards and riding a skateboard (which I see a lot of being in a beach town). Sad....

[geesecougar2]

502 to Right, on 10 April 2012 - 03:53 PM, said:

I will just say you are wrong in all 3 points you have attempted to make and leave it at that.

Can't argue with that.

Edited by geesecougar2, 10 April 2012 - 04:05 PM.