Allen Iverson controversy?
 

Greetings Sisterfriends (and silent brotherfriends). It has been a while since I have started a post, but I just wanted to see what you guys thought of the whole Allen Iverson album controversy.

Is it a controversy, or do you think that they are just making too much out of it?

What do you think about them comparing him to John Rocker?

Do you think he should have been suspended, or that the NBA commissioner even had the rights to do so (if he chose)?

Speak up!!

------------------
'Cause I'm a woman,
Phenomenally
Phenomenal Woman
That's me

Maya Angelou

Onesavvydiva..Could you enlighten me as to what the controversary is over. I'm completely ignorant of what is going on?

SO AM I....WHAT "HAPPENED" THIS TIME?

Greetings again,

Well, maybe I am just soo much of a B-ball fan that I hear all the news. Anyway, Allen Iverson has recorded a rap album, and many are saying the the lyrics are "gay-bashing" and "violent". There was an entire show of BET Tonight about this, and there was a special on ESPN.

Basically, he has people rioting the album, and the games, and the album hasn't even been released. One woman, I think her name is C. Delores Tucker, has pronounced it 'gangster rap', and he has many people condeming him on his choice of lyrics. There are people saying that if he wants to rap, he should wait until the off season, or decide to do one or the other(rap or play ball). There are a lot of people looking to the NBA for some sort of response, and the NBA commisioner was in talks with Iverson, and Commissioner was even thinking of suspending him.

There were commentators who were compating this to the John Rocker controversy. Iverson was getting a lot of criticism for choosing to release the album in the midst of NBA season. The last thing that I heard was that he, Iverson, had been in talks with the NBA Commissioner, and some gay rights groups and such, and he said that he was able to see where they were coming from and he hoped that they could respect his freedom of speech. The last broadcast that I saw said nothing about whether or not Iverson was going to change his lyrics, or postpone his release date. I think the Commissioner decided against suspending Iverson.

If I am missing any details, someone feel free to expound on this.

Thanks onesavvydiva.. Now, I can respond intelligently http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif.. Actually, if Allen did make his album and it is supposedly gay bashing or so called gangster rap, I still feel he has his freedom of Speech rights. He still has his First Amendment protection. And so what if it came out during basketball season, can he not do two things at once? That's ridiculous. Why should he be suspended. That has nothing to do with the NBA. People are always making albums and are always saying things that may offend one. But hey, if it offends you, don't listen. We have the right to free speech and we have the right not to listen. I think if Iverson is suspended from the NBA because of his album then he is being deprived of his Constitutional Right. I mean, the KKK still has freedom of speech. So, if they can get it, then most definitely Allen should be allowed his rights as well. I may not agree with some of the things that are said in rap or any other forum for that matter, but I also have the choice to not listen. Moreover, if we are to condemn Allen and regulate his personal choice of free speech, then everyone else must be regulated as well. And that is specifically what the First Amendment protects.....

I agree with you, Lil' bit, Allen has his right for Freedom of Speech... but do you think that the content of his album would be appropiate for all the young children who admire him for his game in basketball? I know some children do see Allen Iverson as a role model, and I can imagine the NBA would view his album negatively as well (for their own reasons, of course).

Peace and Blessings.

SORORS...

ISN'T C. DELORES TUCKER A SOROR? I THINK SO...SHE AND TIPPER GORE I REMEMBER BACK IN THE DAY STARTED UP THAT PARENTAL ADVISORY LABELING CAMPAIGN...

I agree in freedom of speech. However if you slightly condemned John Rocker for his words, you can't support Iverson. I feel that a lot of times we as Blacks look the other way when our own people make discriminatory or racial comments. We often laugh. I know many of you have gone to a comedy show where our own comedians have said something offensive. But as soon as a White person says something slightly offensive, we cry foul. Remember when Ross Perot referred to us as "YOU PEOPLE"? Think about and let it marinate in your mind.

Peace

------------------
KAPPA ALPHA PSI FRATERNITY, INC.
SPR 97
XI LAMBDA

Hi Resplendent_Maria.. I do believe that the content may be inappropriate for young children. Yes, I totally agree with that. However, I also believe that although he may be viewed as a role model, our parents or caretakers need to be the role model as well and they should be the one censoring the music, not the government. I may not necessarily agree with what he says or what others say, however, I do believe in the First Amendment and I do believe in Freedom of Speech and I know that content based speech can not be regulated, with few exceptions. I respect that and I embrace that. But I do agree that certain things are not appropriate for young individuals and I do agree that things may offend others. But I believe that if we regulate his speech, then we should regulate all speech. And that is not what I want to happen. I don't think we can be selective about who to regulate and who not to regulate because then that brings up different individuals opinions, morals, etc. And we all have different opinions. Therefore I do not feel that the NBA should regulate this speech, even if they really feel that they should. But unless they have "compelling state interest" they must first survive the Strict Scrutiny test that Case law and the State law state, then they can not regulate this type of speech. I guess my argument is more of a Constitutional argument as opposed to what we as individuals feel our role should be, or another's role should be.

Sisters,

It is my understanding that the Commissioner stated that Iverson has the right to release the recording if he likes. However, he does not have a right to play in the NBA - - - this is a privilege. Furthermore, from what I understand the issue is that players are governed by a code of ethics (for lack of a better word) and this act of gay bashing violates this code that is specified in players contracts. I only listened to bits and pieces of the conversation but this is my understanding.

Thanks Professor for that information. I was unaware that the Commissioner said Iverson has the right to release the album. I was also unaware that what Iverson was doing was in someway violating their code of ethics. I understand tha playing in the NBA is not a right. However, my question is: How can the NBA's code of ethics outweigh one's Constitutional Rights. If a State Law and a Constitutional Right are in conflict, the Constitution trumps. But there are other issues such as Contract issues and therefore, seeing as though he may have signed a contract which forbids some things. But again, thanks Professor for this info...
Skee ya........

Greetings all,
I am absolutely loving the opinionated convo!! Anyway, I just wanted to add this question to the conversation.

What do you think about them NOT wanting him to wear his NBA jersey on the cover? I can somewhat understand both sides of this coin. On one hand, they (the NBA) don't want us(the consumer, fans) to think that they condone any of the lyrics that Iverson puts out there.
Just as if ya'll may participate in a voter registration drive with your respective GLO's, but when you start supporting a PARTICULAR candidate over the other, you have to withdraw from wearing para, or using that org's name, and act as an individual, so as not to portray that you are speaking for that entire group.

On the other hand, what about Jay-Z or Master P, etc. What about when they wear an NBA or NFL jersey while they spit less than politcally correct lyrics...should they (NBA or NFL), be able to say, "I don't like or agree with what you are saying, so we'd like it if you refrain from wearing our logo". Understood, these are just "regular" citizens, but isn't Iverson just that when "off the clock".

I kind of understand the whole 'code of ethics' deal, although I am not well-versed in its contents, but that doesn't take away his freedom of speech does it?

Nupe4Life and Professor, you know I always enjoy and look forward to comments from you both...good points.

I remember what John Rocker said, but what context did he say it in again, could someone refresh my memory please? Was it like and interview or what?

Anyway, like I said earlier, I know this is kinda out the blue, off the wall, but I just wanted to get everyone's viewpoint on it. Diva


------------------
'Cause I'm a woman,
Phenomenally
Phenomenal Woman
That's me

Maya Angelou

[This message has been edited by onesavvydiva (edited October 16, 2000).]

LIL'BIT,
I do agree with you when you stated that parents do need to take on the responsibility of trying to censor what their young children listen to. But I see the NBA thinking that since Allen Iverson is a representative of their organization, then he should not be doing this album which seems to be offensive to others. I'm sure if it weren't such a controversy, the NBA would care less.

NUPE4LIFE,
I like that statement you posted. I am taking a Black Psychology class where there are only three white students out of 35 black students. If there is ANY theories that has the slightest bit of negativity made by the white students, people will be upset and contradict that statement, even if it has relevance. We as a people need to evaluate our actions and statements we say.

Peace and Blessings

[This message has been edited by Resplendent_Maria (edited October 16, 2000).]

Two things: Allen Iversons lyrics are not homophobic or anti-gay. The controversial lyric refers to a person who was convicted of stalking Iverson and sending him death threats vis e-mail. He basically tells the guy to stop hiding behind the computer "like a faggot and be man enough to pull the trigger" It is a simple revenge fantasy. The problem lies in the fact that A. I, is employed by a league that is marketed on public image and the league has a right to regulate its employees. A.I.s free speech is diminished only in the fact that it affects his employer and he is an agent thereof. If it causes people to protest or boycott his employer, then the employer can take action. Reggie White was fired by CBS for making remarks viewed as anti-gay, even though they were based on his religious beliefs and not hateful. Employers don't want that headache in these politically correct times.

I think that they need to leave Iverson alone. Like it was stated earlier, if he were not an NBA player, than it would not be an issue. When Shaq did his album, no one wanted to come down on him, so why bother Iverson? Okay, his lyrics may be controversial-so what??? That is what he chooses to say. They do all that trash-talkin on the courts, so why can't he record an album expressing his opinions? I know that he is looked up to as a role model, but then so is Master P,who also uses these kinds of lyrics, the only difference being that Iverson chose to establish a basketball career first. What if he would've chosen to start a record deal first,(like Master P) then play for the NBA-what would they have to say then?

As far as he being suspended, I think that whatever he does off of the court is his business. He hasn't harmed anyone, so what is the problem? It seems to me that the press/media just want to make a big deal out of it just because he's famous-that gives them even more reason to be against Iverson.

Classy_Diva5

So true, so true......Let me ask the "Leave Allen alone" crowd....what did you think of John Rocker's remarks and his 'punishment'?

Hello once again Sorors, Frat, and Sisterfriends.. I agree that the NBA see's AI as a representative of that league. And I do agree that any organization has rules and regulations that one should abide. However, an organizations regulations may not usurp the Constitution. If one is fired from a position, they can not technically be fired for something they constitutionally have a right to do. Generally, although we may know the "real" reason for a person being fired, the reason will be framed in a way where Constitutional Rights are not violated. In this day and age, there are so many things that are controversal that it is understandable why an organization would want to regulate certain behaviors, actions, and speech.. However, individuals still have that 1st Amendment Protection. Moreover, these are always going to be issues that will never completely be fixed because there are so many opinions as to what "really" constitutes free speech and what is speech that can sometimes be regulated, such as hate speech..... Just my .08...

I can't speak on all organizations, but I do know that in several organizations I belong to, including AKA, one may not just say and do whatever one wants, under the banner of the organization. So, if Allen Iverson wants to trade off his NBA fame to market his rap CD, he must abide by the codes of conduct set forth by the organization, or risk censure by the group.

For example, I can't set out a sign in my work cubicle that states "God hates (fill in the blank)" or something like that, because I work for a private entity with rules and regulations that prohibit that type of speech. I could go post that in my car, but if it's on company property, they have the right to tell me to take it down.

If I wanted to pose nude for Playboy in my AKA paraphenalia, you can rest assured that Soror Norma White and the rest of the Directorate would have something to say about it! Why? Because when I promised to uphold AKA, I agreed to certain rules of behavior, and even if they weren't specifically named during the time I made the promise, I'm sure that the organization would point to the "spirit of the law" when reprimanding me for my behavior. Of course, Allen I. is free to challenge the NBA in a court of law, but the NBA is also free to relieve him of his duties of employment.

The difference between Mr. Iverson embarking on a rap career now as opposed to before he became a basketball star is that 1.) He is using his NBA noteriety to increase the success of his rap pursuits and 2.) The NBA would have the right not to employ him in the first place if he were already a rap star whose lyrics the league found offensive. They don't HAVE to give him a job, just because he's talented (see any connections, sorors?), if they find his character to be unsavory.

Now of course, most of this (about character) meansnothing to the league and other sports entities, because they could give a rat's butt about character, except as it pertains to making money.

DoggyStyle: I can't see how Reggie White's speech could be anti-gay yet not hateful...if remarks or behavior are "anti-something," doesn't that dictate that it's hateful, offensive, rude?

All: People can say/do what they want, but that doesn't mean that other individuals or organizations have to accept/put up with it!

[This message has been edited by Discogoddess (edited October 17, 2000).]

Well said Discogoddess!!! http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/smile.gif

Peace Love and Progression,
B.N.

------------------
"We must combine the toughness of the serpent with the softness of the
dove, a tough mind with a tender heart."

-- Martin Luther King, Jr.

"If I wanted to pose nude for Playboy in my AKA paraphenalia, . . ."

Sister Discogoddess:

If you have any personal pictures that you want to share P L E A S E hit me back (lol)!

***Slapping Professor's hands!***

DOWN BOY!!!! http://www.greekchat.com/forums/ubb/biggrin.gif

DISCOGODDESS: just for clarification, Reggie Whites' remarks were seen as anti-gay by activists and the political correct crowd when he was giving a faith-based speech (he is a pastor) to a public audience. They really were not because he was actually speaking on forgiveness and compassion. But the rest of your post was right on point. Professor, I got the pics and that ivy leaf didn't leave much to the imagination!!! lol

LOL @ Professor!

I thought it would be appropriate to bring this to the top (SEARCHING). With all the hype going on with the finals and all.

Boy, look at how one's persona or "image" can "change", so to speak in less than ONE year!

OH BOY!