Tiger Woods told CBS on Sunday: "As good as I hit it, that's as bad as I putted and it's frustrating, because I felt so in control of my ball from tee to green, and once I got on the green I was a spaz."
I didn't know a thing about it - so how am I to complain. I wonder if this is some ways a good thing though. Is this evidence that the media is finally getting what is offensive? Should they have changed a quote - no, but should they have changed the word and placed it outside the quote - perhaps.
Ahh,whats in a word? 'Spaz',now there's a word the crip community can get it's bite into.
I'm a 50 years old gimp,disabled,handiabled,cripple,crip,
handicap,etc. The word,ain't the issue.
It's the context that matters. Does "spaz"
have a negative defination with the world tody?
Let's not be overly sensitive about a word.
Let us consider the words "gay","tard" "pwned"
Each of these have negative views.
What if Tiger Woods said: I played as a gay tard
and got pwned?
From this side of the pond (GB) the US media look like they have undertaken an Orwellian level of news management.
The story was passed off over here that in the US the term "Spaz" is not seen as offensive. Really?! I think we are all having the wool pulled over our eyes. Hard to tell the Wood from the trees on this one though.
On a related point many of us in GB look to the US as the leading light on disabilty equality. Maybe we have to revise our opinions now.
Everyday people use words casually whcih may offfend someone.
Let's quit being hyper sensitized to every passing comment.
Imagine what your world would be like if everyword you said was
scrutinized by a global press confference?
Besides, Tiger has devoted more hard money to people with
disabilities than most pro sport figurres.
I'm from the UK and have cerebral palsy. My take on it? First, I'm amazed how quickly the US media covered up for him! I;m not hypersensitive - but yup, I take it as an insult. I don't care that Mr Woods donates 'hard money' to disabled charities -just because he forks over wads of cash, it doesn't give him the right to use the 's' word! Or to be arrogant. Just because he's a sportsman and a public figure, doesn't mean he should not have respect, which he clearly does not. And the US press should be ashamed of itself...
Huh. This is honestly the first I've heard of this (which makes sense if the media has been caught altering the quote). I must say, though, that the word "spaz" has been used where I live (the American midwest) for many years to mean a klutz or something similar. So the remark that many people in the US don't see it to be offensive seems like a pretty accurate one from my point of view. I have no trouble seeing where Tiger Woods might use that word casually and have no idea that it would offend others - it certainly wouldn't have occurred to me, and I am generally quite careful about that sort of thing.
NOW, the word "crip" on the other hand, which is used several times in this artcle, would cause a LOT of bad feeling around here for two different reasons - one, from disabled folks and two, from city folks who associate that word with a notorious gang. Whatever newspaper in the US changed the quote should indeed be ashamed - in the meantime, people here should not assume that Mr. Woods is being insensitive and arrogent by using a word that may or may not be offensive where he is from. Especially if the article that does the chiding is using an equally offensive word in response.
Comments
I didn't know a thing about it - so how am I to complain. I wonder if this is some ways a good thing though. Is this evidence that the media is finally getting what is offensive? Should they have changed a quote - no, but should they have changed the word and placed it outside the quote - perhaps.
Posted by: Susan Fitzmaurice | April 12, 2006 10:29 AM
Comments
"Spaz" doesn't hit me as a slur, so yes I am behind the times...
What worries me is the question that has ramifications inside our community and outside too...
Why was it ok for them to change that word? About *any* story, not just ours.
Posted by: imfunnytoo | April 12, 2006 08:34 PM
Comments
Ahh,whats in a word? 'Spaz',now there's a word the crip community can get it's bite into.
I'm a 50 years old gimp,disabled,handiabled,cripple,crip,
handicap,etc. The word,ain't the issue.
It's the context that matters. Does "spaz"
have a negative defination with the world tody?
Let's not be overly sensitive about a word.
Let us consider the words "gay","tard" "pwned"
Each of these have negative views.
What if Tiger Woods said: I played as a gay tard
and got pwned?
Posted by: Harry | April 12, 2006 10:43 PM
Comments
From this side of the pond (GB) the US media look like they have undertaken an Orwellian level of news management.
The story was passed off over here that in the US the term "Spaz" is not seen as offensive. Really?! I think we are all having the wool pulled over our eyes. Hard to tell the Wood from the trees on this one though.
On a related point many of us in GB look to the US as the leading light on disabilty equality. Maybe we have to revise our opinions now.
Posted by: David S | April 13, 2006 07:50 AM
Comments
Davis S. says,
Maybe a decade ago the U.S. was the leading light -- I think you guys have pulled ahead, though. Certainly better on speaking out on public issues!
Posted by: Mary Johnson | April 13, 2006 10:42 AM
Comments
Everyday people use words casually whcih may offfend someone.
Let's quit being hyper sensitized to every passing comment.
Imagine what your world would be like if everyword you said was
scrutinized by a global press confference?
Besides, Tiger has devoted more hard money to people with
disabilities than most pro sport figurres.
Posted by: Ed G | April 13, 2006 06:00 PM
Comments
I'm from the UK and have cerebral palsy. My take on it? First, I'm amazed how quickly the US media covered up for him! I;m not hypersensitive - but yup, I take it as an insult. I don't care that Mr Woods donates 'hard money' to disabled charities -just because he forks over wads of cash, it doesn't give him the right to use the 's' word! Or to be arrogant. Just because he's a sportsman and a public figure, doesn't mean he should not have respect, which he clearly does not. And the US press should be ashamed of itself...
Posted by: jayne turner | April 17, 2006 12:00 PM
Comments
Huh. This is honestly the first I've heard of this (which makes sense if the media has been caught altering the quote). I must say, though, that the word "spaz" has been used where I live (the American midwest) for many years to mean a klutz or something similar. So the remark that many people in the US don't see it to be offensive seems like a pretty accurate one from my point of view. I have no trouble seeing where Tiger Woods might use that word casually and have no idea that it would offend others - it certainly wouldn't have occurred to me, and I am generally quite careful about that sort of thing.
NOW, the word "crip" on the other hand, which is used several times in this artcle, would cause a LOT of bad feeling around here for two different reasons - one, from disabled folks and two, from city folks who associate that word with a notorious gang. Whatever newspaper in the US changed the quote should indeed be ashamed - in the meantime, people here should not assume that Mr. Woods is being insensitive and arrogent by using a word that may or may not be offensive where he is from. Especially if the article that does the chiding is using an equally offensive word in response.
Posted by: Artchick | April 24, 2006 05:58 PM