I like Sheffield and his "outspokeness"--give me credit for making that word up.

But, to say steroids are something you shoot in your butt and that's the bottom line is stupid.

Sorry, it just is.

Race, Jeter, the Yankees, steroids, homophobia and Sheffield. And I haven't even read it yet.

There's no homophobia in TFA.

Sheffield on a tear isn't that big a piece of news, IMO.

What is NEWSWORTHY (and cruel) is to diss Jeter as not fully black.

It's not like Jeter hasn't had to deal with the inevitable social issues related to having a black father and a white mother: he now has an ex-mate making his ethnicity an issue.

I sort of wonder if Sheffield thinks that Halle Berry is or isn't fully black (her mother being caucasian). Or Alicia Keys or even Barack Obama.

(Perhaps Sheffield never saw that old SNL skit about the pain of being an octoron).

This is just Gary being Gary.

I really got a kick out of the ending of the article:

Near the start of the interview, Kremer asks Sheffield how one man can have so much chaos in his life. "Bad choice of women," he says.

"That's way weak, man," Kremer says. "All the turmoil in your life is because of women?"

"Yeah," he says.

Kremer then asks him whether he takes any responsibility for it. "I picked 'em," he says.

Well, it cracked me up.

Yeah, I guess I should've said "possibly implied homophobia." Was just going for the cheap joke.

I read it. I will give Sheffield this: the guy says what is on his mind. I am a believer in doing it behind closed doors, though. Two things I found interesting:

Near the start of the interview, Kremer asks Sheffield how one man can have so much chaos in his life. "Bad choice of women," he says.

"That's way weak, man," Kremer says. "All the turmoil in your life is because of women?"

"Yeah," he says.

Kremer then asks him whether he takes any responsibility for it. "I picked 'em," he says.

Kremer saying, "That's way weak, man" cracks me up. Call me ageist, classist, sexist and racist
--but having seen her on TV a few times, that strikes a false note with me. Sort of like Keith Olbermann or Mike Tirico saying it. Jim Rome, maybe. Stuart Scott, maybe. Some other female announcers I am not aware of, maybe.

Kremer asked Sheffield whether he believes Torre is a racist. "No. I think it's the way they do things around there. Since I was there I just saw that they run their ship different."

Interesting.

says Derek Jeter “ain’t all the way black,”

Sheff writes for BASN?

If this were a Tuesday, this thread would have 120 comments buy now.

Actually, I will use my massive urban authority to emphatically state that Andrea Kremer has more street cred than Rome and Scott combine.

Jim Rome is "a lame". Stuart Scott is "a lame" and he's "thirsty".

One thing I do know is that Sheffield got "treated by a white girl".

how do they treat them? like submissive latins?

I like Sheffield and his "outspokeness"--give me credit for making that word up.

No.

Actually, I will use my massive urban authority to emphatically state that Andrea Kremer has more street cred than Rome and Scott combine.

Very possible. But Rome and Scott have established on-air personae, albeit maybe false ones, that could talk like that on TV and have it be somewhat in sync with the way they usually talk on TV. When I have seen Kremer, she seems to be going a different way.

Ok, I'll ask the question since Kremer didn't. Is Bernie Williams black?

Damn it, I failed again.

Do I deserve to live?

(In response to #11)

Ok, I'll ask the question since Kremer didn't. Is Bernie Williams black?

Craig Calcaterra will straighten this out for you as soon as he gets here.

Please refrain from using that no talent, jive-talking, crooked-eyed name of Scott with Romey. Boo-yah!

that's WACK!

Sheffield knows he's a troll - he always has a new bit of racial nonsensery saved up conveniently every time the previous dumbassity leaves the headlines.

Future installments of Gary Sheffield's Post-Modern Civil Rights Workshop and Thinkamatorium will include such riveting seminars such as "Jackie Robinson Not a Real Black Guy Because He Danced for Branch Rickey and Smiled for Pictures" and "Dirty Lazy Latinos Are New Tio Samuellos."

Please refrain from using that no talent, jive-talking, crooked-eyed name of Scott with Romey. Boo-yah!

that's WACK!

I find both of them pretty annoying.

If this were a Tuesday, this thread would have 120 comments buy now.

Bivens: Primates treat Friday threads differently

If this were a Tuesday, this thread would have 120 comments buy now.

Well, I am not claar on what I am allowed to speculate about yet.

Damn it, I failed again.

Do I deserve to live?

The word linked in 11 has two n's, so you still get some credit. I can award credit because I'm cut from a different cloth.

If this were a Tuesday, this thread would have 120 comments buy now.

Why, are there D&D;tournaments on Fridays?

This may have been asked before in any other Sheffield thread, but assuming Sheff is correct in what he says, who is the bigger racist? The Yankees organization or Sheffield himself for ALWAYS bringing this #### up. I can see him one day saying somthing like this...

Reporter: "How did you know a slider was coming on the first pitch from that rookie Carlos Gomez?"
Sheff: "I knew nothing about him. But you know, those latinos, they LOVE to throw breaking balls."

Sheff, I get it. MLB exploits blacks, minorities, and any non-whites. Relax already...Gdammit.....

If this were a Tuesday, this thread would have 120 comments buy now.

Why, are there D&D;tournaments on Fridays?

*lmao*

Seriously though, Gary may run his mouth a lot but I don't doubt there's at least a little truth in what he says. Institutionalized racism is a problem in our country in general and in sports in particular. Baseball clubhouses tend to seperate in English and Spanish speaking cliques for instance. I bet if you sift through a lot of Sheff's crap there's an interesting story there.

Damn it, I failed again.

Do I deserve to live?

(In response to #11)

Damn, I suppose it's too late for you to go back & edit your post to read "outspokenosity" or "outspokenalaciousness." "Outspokenhood" might've gotten it done, too.

One thing I do know is that Sheffield got "treated by a white girl".

Props to that.

says Derek Jeter “ain’t all the way black,”


Well, the black part of himself is three steps to his left, so he has some trouble with it.

While we natter away, Sheffield gives the Tigers a lead in the top of the 3rd with a Grand Slam.

While we natter away, Sheffield gives the Tigers a lead in the top of the 3rd with a Grand Slam.

And the Mariners just intentionally walked him to load the bases for ... Magglio Ordoñez. MVP candidate, and they still walk someone to get to him.

Magglio promptly grounded into a double play, validating the strategy.

I bet if you sift through a lot of Sheff's crap there's an interesting story there.

A story of a man with an overwhelming sense of entitlement, I'm guessing.

Let me know when the S1W's are marching outside Yankee Stadium.

Sheff wears his psychopathology on his sleeve.

I like Sheffield and his "outspokeness"--give me credit for making that word up.

I find this amazing. At what point do we weigh what he actually says in his idiotic, paranoid and racist ramblings before it's clear he's just an ass. I don't recall anyone giving Todd Jones the big thumbs up for his outspokeness (nor should they), but somehow this ####### is still worthy of much admiration from some around here.

According to the nukks on BBTN...

The Young Viña said..."You could look it up...everytime he stirs something up...he goes on a hot strek!"

Why, are there D&D;tournaments on Fridays?

I spit Soda .... LMAo

i want to put ty cobb and gary sheffield in a steel cage match.

at what point do we weigh what he actually says in his idiotic, paranoid and racist ramblings before it's clear he's just an ass. I don't recall anyone giving Todd Jones the big thumbs up for his outspokeness (nor should they), but somehow this ####### is still worthy of much admiration from some around here.

I don't really admire or "not admire" Sheffield for his "outspokeness" but I don't see how his saying that Joe Torre treats blacks differently from whites is on the same level as Todd Jones writing "I'm homophobic...It's easy to be scared of something you don't know anything about."

Others might be tired of Sheffield and others constantly raising the topic of institutionalized racism, but it clearly still bothers him, and he was asked the question by Kremer, so I don't have a problem with him saying what's on his mind.

Among other things, I find striking his "denial" of using steroids. "Steroids are something you shoot in your butt". To my mind, that's basically a kind of admission he's done other things he doesn't consider steroids ("I didn't shoot those in my butt!"), but that are PEDs.

Seriously though, Gary may run his mouth a lot but I don't doubt there's at least a little truth in what he says. Institutionalized racism is a problem in our country in general and in sports in particular. Baseball clubhouses tend to seperate in English and Spanish speaking cliques for instance. I bet if you sift through a lot of Sheff's crap there's an interesting story there.

There's a difference between cliques and racism. Personally, I think if you play the racism card, you damn well better back it. Sheffield hasn't here and can't, because he's got nothing.

I find this amazing. At what point do we weigh what he actually says in his idiotic, paranoid and racist ramblings before it's clear he's just an ass. I don't recall anyone giving Todd Jones the big thumbs up for his outspokeness (nor should they), but somehow this ####### is still worthy of much admiration from some around here.

The sad thing is, Jones' column in TSN at least will have the occasional fun story. Best I can tell, the only time Sheffield publicly comments, it is to say divisive nonsense like this.

There's a difference between cliques and racism. Personally, I think if you play the racism card, you damn well better back it. Sheffield hasn't here and can't, because he's got nothing.

This is the most constant anti-science argument on this site. The idea that you can't hypothesize something because you don't have data at the time is strange to me. Surely JUST hypothesizing something proves nothing, but until we do testing, it's as worthy as any other, and historical data certainly supports the possibility of non-overt, non-intentional, racial based differences in treatment.

Which, incidentally, before you played the "racism card" card was where I thought Sheffield was. After all, the only time "racism" is used in the link is in the "controversial survey" that the editors added to the page.

Finally, I'd like some of the posters to give their completely correct analysis on multi-racialism. I always thought it was a complex identity issue that many folks grapple with, but in order to attack Sheffield's perspective on it, people here must have some kind of awesome understanding of it.

This is the most constant anti-science argument on this site. The idea that you can't hypothesize something because you don't have data at the time is strange to me.

What an utterly dishonest and inane characterization of what the poster said. I agree with your concerns about language like "racism card", but if you're interested in getting at what the poster said, why not take it as something like: If you're going to accuse someone of racial bias, you ought to have some evidence. Is that objectionable? Apparently you think so. I don't. I support that view. In this case, if Sheffield is going to accuse Torre of treating him unfairly b/c he's black, he bears the brunt of showing this (and he has accused Torre of this, according to the article). Do you disagree? Do you instead think it's merely "scientific" hypothesizing: "Hmmm... I speculate Joe Torre treats blacks unfairly. Now, let's go find some evidence that either proves or disproves my theory." Is that how science works?

Finally, I'd like some of the posters to give their completely correct analysis on multi-racialism. I always thought it was a complex identity issue that many folks grapple with, but in order to attack Sheffield's perspective on it, people here must have some kind of awesome understanding of it.

Why don't you level this kind of critique at Sheffield who so blithely dismisses Jeter as not black? Remind me: when people were slamming Rocker for his idiotic comments, were you defending them as scientific hypotheses about open questions concerning race, sexual preference, and income distribution? Sometimes aren't stupid inflammatory comments merely stupid inflammatory comments?

Does that mean discussing race is unimportant? Of course not.

Did you read the article? Kremer says that the Yankees' most prominent player is black. Sheffield asks "Who?" and Kremer says Jeter.

How do you argue that Sheffield is the one hastily defining Jeter's ethnicity? Sheffield had his own opinion on Jeter's ethnicity, which he was not sharing and then Kremer defined Jeter's ethnicity and then Sheffield voiced his opinion.

Unless Kremer is Jeter's mom, I don't see why it's Sheffield's fault.

Don't get me wrong--all things being equal, I think that Jeter is African American. But as I said, it's a complex issue. You can't tell me that skin tone is no longer an issue in the African American community.

It'd be great if the entire society just said, "Derek, it's your identity, why don't you decide?" But that's not the reality.

Why don't you level this kind of critique at Sheffield who so blithely dismisses Jeter as not black? Remind me: when people were slamming Rocker for his idiotic comments, were you defending them as scientific hypotheses about open questions concerning race, sexual preference, and income distribution? Sometimes aren't stupid inflammatory comments merely stupid inflammatory comments?

Oh god, John Rocker victim of America's double standards against white bigots. This argument never gets old, and always ignores the issue of value judgments obvious in Rocker's statements. Remind me, was Sheffield saying that he didn't want to live in NY because Jeter's mom is white? Or are you referring to Jeter saying that some Yankees' management might not be completely free of aversive racism?

If that's the case, that's an even scarier connection to draw.

What an utterly dishonest and inane characterization of what the poster said. I agree with your concerns about language like "racism card", but if you're interested in getting at what the poster said, why not take it as something like: If you're going to accuse someone of racial bias, you ought to have some evidence. Is that objectionable?

We have this same discussion every 2 months and you always insult me, and always magically forget my perspective, and then when I clarify it, you chastise me for not using the words you want me to so you don't forget it. After the tenth time, it just comes across as you looking for an excuse to be insulting.

I DID read it exactly the way you wanted me to. And yes, I do find it objectionable.

As I've stated literally a dozen times to you, it's problematic that people jump down each other's throats every time the issue of racial bias comes up. If everyone has racial bias, can't we focus on identification and intervention rather than value judgements?

Face it, you are projecting--you are the one who vilifies unintentional racial bias and therefore are unwilling to acknowledge that it is present in siutations in which you identify with the subject.

Remind me, was Sheffield saying that he didn't want to live in NY because Jeter's mom is white?

No, he's trashing the Yankees because of some amorphous "racist" treatment he accuses them of, without a shred of evidence to back it up.

And when a glaring counter-example is laid at his feet (Jeter), he dismisses that by saying "Jeter isn't really black".

How ###### up is that? Sheffield actually captured himself quite nicely. He's basically said he can't keep himself from saying stupid #### and gets in trouble all the time for it. So why would we give this man any credibility at all?

Not coming here.

Hey, I'm not saying that Sheffield is some visionary. I'm just saying "splinter" "plank"!

Notice how when I asked for others' definitions, they just ignored me and attacked the argument.

How do you argue that Sheffield is the one hastily defining Jeter's ethnicity?

Didn't say that, did I?

Don't get me wrong--all things being equal, I think that Jeter is African American.

LOL. "All things being equal?"

So, after Sheffield accuses the organization of being racist, Kremer says, "Wait: the most prominent guy on the team is black" (being "scientific" and all you ought to appreciate testing his hypothesis), and you think she's in the wrong? Sheffield of course replies, "No he ain't" and "He's b and w" and that's "of no significance." And again, she's the problem and Torre and the Yankees have to defend themselves against Sheffield's accusations. They bear the burden of proof. Nice.

Face it, you are projecting--you are the one who vilifies unintentional racial bias and therefore are unwilling to acknowledge that it is present in siutations in which you identify with the subject.

I don't understand what you're saying here.

You can't tell me that skin tone is no longer an issue in the African American community.

Did I?

What definitions, E-X?

This argument never gets old, and always ignores the issue of value judgments obvious in Rocker's statements.

As your replies show, there are value judgments in all these classifications. Rocker merely drew conclusions that were so obviously objectionable you couldn't miss them. But there are value judgments in your classifications, in your nominalist "classify yourself" notion, in Sheffield's "He ain't black" and so on. And Sheffield's conclusions are plain: Jeter isn't "valued" as black the way the not much more black Sheffield is. Derek's "Joe's a good man" Sheffield clearly believes is either Uncle Tomish, or coming from Derek's mother's side of the family, or some such nonsense. The notion a man is judged by his actions, his character, is completely absent from this kind of analysis.

My Rocker reference was not to defend Rocker but to wonder why Rocker's comments are not another "scientific" hypothesis; iow, why you're not consistent on this. These were just stupid, accusatory claims by Sheffield. They're not constructive in any way, they accuse a real human being who, by all accounts, is a good man despite not knowing how to develop middle relief, and they also run counter to the notion that men ought to confront other men with their problems, not go through the press.

let's not forget that Sheffield's "Jeter's not all black" comment might have as much to do with class as with race. Jeter grew up in a comfortable middle-class family in Kalamazoo. Sheffield grew up in a tough part of inner-city Tampa.

I'm not saying Sheff's comments are worth anything, but its worth mentioning

African-American players who were with the Yankees during Sheffield's 2004-06 tenure were Jeter, Kenny Lofton, Homer Bush, Tony Clark, Tom Gordon, Tony Womack, Matt Lawton, Shawn Chacon and Kevin Thompson.

I would hope that the Yankees would have treated most of these players differently. They stank.

I guess that besides Jeter, Sheff does not count Bernie Williams, Cano, Sierra, Rivera, or Contreras as "black"

Tom Gordon

Well that explains everything. How could you watch Torre run Gordon into the ground for two years and not think it was slave labor!

Yo Sheff
What up Kells
Wanna introduce you to this girl, I think I really love this girl
Yeah
Man she so fine
Straight up dawg
She stand about 5’4” coka cola red bone
Damn
She only trust 100% blacks, say “DeLeon” tattoo on her ankle
Plus she’s making pesos
got a crib on Bee street right on 17th street
And I call her “TT”
Wait a minute hold on dog. Did she get peed on?
Yep
Love to hate whitey?
Yep
Not that good looking?
Man?
Lets you video tape her?
Yep
Sing gospel?
Yep
Man I can’t believe this chick… damn
Tell me whats wrong dawg, what the hell you damnin about
I'm your homie so just say whats on your mind
Man I didn’t know that you were talking bout her
So man your telling me you know her
Do I know her? like a pastor know his word

Chorus:
We messing with the same girl same girl
How could the love of my life, and my wife be the
Same girl same girl
Man I can’t believe that we’ve been messing with the
Same girl same girl
Thought she someone that I can trust
but she’s been doubling up with us
S , K , man we’ve been messing with the same girl

et's not forget that Sheffield's "Jeter's not all black" comment might have as much to do with class as with race. Jeter grew up in a comfortable middle-class family in Kalamazoo. Sheffield grew up in a tough part of inner-city Tampa.

Sheffield's kind of rude - aren't the definitions of race already vague and arbitrary as it is, without injecting how a person's raised? Do we really want people at the U.S. Census Bureau to kill themselves? Hell, I don't even know what Hispanic means anymore.

It's the complement of "Herpanic".

What this country really needs is for everyone to be issued an ID card that breaks down your race by percentage points. We can then spend the next 50 years arguing whether "authentically black" requires you to be 6.25%, 12.5%, 25%, 50% or 75% certified African American, only now we'll be able to back our case up with the sort of precision numbers that would put amateur statfreaks like Forman to shame. We can also affix percentages to accents in order to keep out the phony blacks like Ortiz and Soriano.

And in case we need to get us some equipment to measure all this, I think the DAR has plenty of leftover race testing machines stored somewhere in the basement of Constitution Hall. They're into purity, too, and I'm sure they'll be glad to help out.

You know, Andy, I was thinking something similar myself as I mowed the lawn, how once again you find people on the opposite ends of an issue agreeing on something fundamental. In this issue, the people on the right and left apparently are in agreement that the notion of race needs to be measured, and while they may disagree about what counts for black or Jewish, they seem to agree that some amount does, and some amount does not.

Ok, I'll ask the question since Kremer didn't. Is Bernie Williams black?

Craig Calcaterra will straighten this out for you as soon as he gets here.

Actually, Robinred,if you're referring to our conversation from a couple of weeks ago, I think you mean CC Sabathia will straighten this out for us. He's the one who criticized people for believing Carlos Delgado and and Jose Reyes were black. My point was that regardless of what race and/or ethnicity they consider themselves to be, if you knew nothing about them and saw them on the street most people would think they were black, the powers that be in 1947 would have considered them to be black, and therefore they too are heirs to Jackie Robinson's legacy and beneficiaries of his breaking the color barrier.

But nice try.

No, JC, I was merely applying your logic. I have no problem with Kremer asking the question. I just don't understand how Sheffield can be blamed for interjecting Jeter's race into the conversation when it was clearly Kremer who did so.

The definitions I was asking for were how you define African American. Obviously from a biological perspective, it's unimportant, but for those actual living in this actual society, it can take a huge significance.

If you have a problem with Sheffield using the press, sure. I agree 100% that people should deal with their grievances direct--not through the press.

I fail to see why that makes the racial issues so much more atrocious.

Of course their are value judgements in my statements. Are you really trying to argue that the value judgment of "people should be allowed to construct their own identity" is the same as in "People of this color, sexual orientation, or national origin are repulsive"?

Looking for patterns is fun, but "All people make value judgments, including you!" is not a compelling argument for Sheffield=Rocker.

That being said, I accept some responsibility. Re-reading my first post on the subject (not the joke one), I can see how you might have seen it as a vindication of Sheffield.

It's not. I don't approve of Sheffield's statements. I just don't think the problem is that he honestly give his opinion on Jeter's ethnicity, nor that he brings up the issue of race. It's that he attacks a guy in the media rather than dealing with it to his face.

The fact that people want to make it all about race and as an argument that people should not be allowed to accuse others of racism, I also don't approve of that.

As I've said many times, I weather accusations of racism relatively frequently, and it's really not the death sentence people make it out to be. But hey, that's one of the hazards of privilege in an area--it makes you weaker.

Derek Jeter “ain’t all the way black,”

I just had a horrible thought. After his baseball career, Gary Sheffield will have his own show on FOX: “Black Eye For The Beige Guy.” He’ll find a less-than-black kid (in Sheff‘s opinion) and teach him how to be black. He’s go through his CD’s, teach him how to dress and talk black, pick out a house in a proper black neighborhood to live in. If he’s the product of mixed racial marriage (say black woman, white man), they’ll do the father up as well; teach him Hip Hop, how to talk street, give him an afro and dress him up like Snoop Dog etc.

That way, anybody with any kind of African/Black Latin heritage can learn to become truly black (read: Sheffield's definition of black).

Best Regards

John

BTW: check out Yahoo's MLB front page. The fantasy baseball section lists Sheffield as being 97% owned.

Heh.

(Yes, I know what that means.)

Best Regards

John

Gary Sheffield will have his own show on FOX: “Black Eye For The Beige Guy.”

Do you think JC and I can be celebrity judges?

Sheffield will soon tell us how the Yankees rigged Matt Lawton's drug test to get him suspended.

Presumably Sheffield will also declare David Ortiz to not be "all the way black"

Do you think JC and I can be celebrity judges?

Sure, but I want Wok there as well.

Best Regards

John

The definitions of race are perfectly outlined by Monique in "Domino."

Since it was eminently needed, Mark Grace is now discussing Sheffield on Fox.

"I guess that besides Jeter, Sheff does not count Bernie Williams, Cano, Sierra, Rivera, or Contreras as "black""

The quote said "African-American", not "black". Cano is Dominican, Williams and Sierra are Puerto Rican, Rivera is Panamanian, and Contreras is Cuban. As such, the only "-American" they are is "non-American", at least by birth.

Sheffield clearly believes is either Uncle Tomish, or coming from Derek's mother's side of the family, or some such nonsense.

Kremer missed the obvious follow-up question to Sheff: "Who's more of a Tom, Jeter or the Latinos in the Tiger clubhouse?"

I just had a horrible thought. After his baseball career, Gary Sheffield will have his own show on FOX: “Black Eye For The Beige Guy.” He’ll find a less-than-black kid (in Sheff‘s opinion) and teach him how to be black. He’s go through his CD’s, teach him how to dress and talk black, pick out a house in a proper black neighborhood to live in. If he’s the product of mixed racial marriage (say black woman, white man), they’ll do the father up as well; teach him Hip Hop, how to talk street, give him an afro and dress him up like Snoop Dog etc.

That way, anybody with any kind of African/Black Latin heritage can learn to become truly black (read: Sheffield's definition of black).

Priceless. And I say this as someone who saw Sheffield as merely trying to give an honest answer, even if I find the whole concept of racial authenticity more than a bit bogus / creepy / amusing, depending on the particulars and the context.

Do you think JC and I can be celebrity judges?

Sure, but I want Wok there as well.

Wok definitely gets to be Chief Justice, unless we can resurrect Pigmeat Markham. Wok is our Poet Laureate of Racial Reconciliation.

The quote said "African-American", not "black". Cano is Dominican, Williams and Sierra are Puerto Rican, Rivera is Panamanian, and Contreras is Cuban. As such, the only "-American" they are is "non-American", at least by birth.

Either tell that to the Latin Americans and Caribbean Americans, or start referring to Sheffield as an African-United Statesian. Of course if you're black yourself you can just call him a splib.

Puerto Rica isn't in America?

In this issue, the people on the right and left apparently are in agreement that the notion of race needs to be measured, and while they may disagree about what counts for black or Jewish, they seem to agree that some amount does, and some amount does not.

If I recall the debate on affirmative action correctly, it isn't the right that thinks race needs to be measured.

Don't get me wrong--all things being equal, I think that Jeter is African American.

Because of the fried chicken and watermelon and stuff?

Don't get me wrong--all things being equal, I think that Jeter is African American.

Because of the fried chicken and watermelon and stuff?

Nah, you're confusing African Americans with Cablinasians. Fuzzy says it's those Cablinasians who're into fried chicken.

In my mind, Sheffield does equal Rocker. They're both racists, and by racist I mean people who do racist things, and do so repeatedly. Anyone who claims Jeter isn't "black enough" is a racist, as "black enough" can only mean something like "black enough to count" in whatever the person thinks counts. (And, as I said in reply to Andy's post, this is just the flipside of the lynchmob's "Jeter's just black enough!" claim to count for special extra-judicial treatment.) It's reifying race, using that reification to make a priori discriminatory judgments immune to one's experiences with the person. Sure, Rocker's particularly disgusting and I have no interest in hanging with him, but neither do I have interest in hanging with Sheffield, either. Both their views are repugnant and should be identified as such. Hiding them behind claims that they're scientific hypothesizing is enabling at the minimum.

And just to make clear, I wasn't defending their statements as equivalent (though I'm not backing off the claim that they're both racists), again I was merely trying to point out how inane your initial comment about "science" was. Sheffield wasn't "hypothesizing" that Torre and the Yankees treats blacks differently; he was asserting it, and when confronted by evidence that seemed to the contrary, he resorted to the racist's oldest game: reclassification of people to buttress racist ideology ("Oh, Jeter? That half-a-cracker ain't black, so that doesn't count in Torre's favor.") I'm just surprised Sheffield didn't follow it up with a condemnation of race-mixing.

I hate to say this, because I think Sheffield is a bonehead, but I have a very smart friend who is a Yankees fan and he has told me for years that the Yankees did not want black players who were in any way outspoken or "thuggy" on the team.

I'm going to get my beige butt in trouble for diving in here, but most of you just don't get it and never will.

Eraser-X points out where you miss the mark -- (Race) was a complex identity issue that many folks grapple with, but in order to attack Sheffield's perspective on it, people here must have some kind of awesome understanding of it.

What has Jeter ever said on the issue? Nothing that I remember. That's really where Sheffield is hitting him -- he's the company man who comes apologizing for the boss. That right there is the issue, and you can't tell me you don't see it.

And it really has nothing to do with some percentage of African identity, but how you self-identify. That's what none of you get in criticizing the admittedly controversial comments by Sheffield but those by a guy like Sabathia. It's a cultural thing more than anything else.

I really don't know why I bothered to jump into this mess again. Before you accuse Sheffield of talking out of his ass, you should take a good hard look at where your comments are coming from and if you have even a smidgen of Sheffield's experience or have had to spend even one minute of your life dealing with the issue of your racial/ethnic identity.

Sorry if any of that hurts some feelings, but the race discussions around here make me wanna holler.

Well, we've already established in previous threads that you are the one who is interested in labelling people as "racist" or "non-racist" and I think it's not very worthwhile to do so, so I guess this is just the natural outgrowth of us agreeing to disagree.

("Oh, Jeter? That half-a-cracker ain't black, so that doesn't count in Torre's favor.")

Intellectual dishonesty. Sheffield was arguing that the treatment of Jeter might be different and supporting his belief. That's quite different from condemning race-mixing and slinging slurs.

So JC, do you think mixed Asian Americans and Asian Americans are treated equivalently by mainstream America?

If so, then it's simply a situation that you are providing arguments guided by a lack of familiarity with the social reality involved. That's fine--we all do that sometimes. If not, you are being inconsistent.

What has Jeter ever said on the issue? Nothing that I remember. That's really where Sheffield is hitting him -- he's the company man who comes apologizing for the boss. That right there is the issue, and you can't tell me you don't see it.

Not only can I see it, but I can see that it's the white part of Jeter doing that.

So JC, do you think mixed Asian Americans and Asian Americans are treated equivalently by mainstream America?

Enough with the "I'm Asian, therefore I'm black" thang already.

If so, then it's simply a situation that you are providing arguments guided by a lack of familiarity with the social reality involved.

Only three posts before the old "lack of familiarity" card is played.

But Baudib, isn't the same true for their white/Latino/Asian players as well? Which Yankees player of the last 10 years has been a controversial figure? Giambi's controversial because of PEDs, not because of Iverson-esque or flamboyant behavior. A-Rod's got The Contract and is a social klutz to whom few people, outside of maybe those with Asperger's Syndrome or other social disorders, can easily relate. Plus he's had some ugly playoff runs. So who else might hold the title for most outrageous post-1995 Yankee, non-Sheff edition? Hideki Irabu? Paul O'Neill for smashing water coolers? Jimmy Leyritz? Clemens? Probably Strawberry, who's black by any reasonable definition. And IIRC, he always had complementary things to say about Torre. By comparison, Jeter, Posada, Williams, Rivera, Tino, Matsui, Pettitte, Girardi, etc., have always been seen as focus-on-the-ballfield types.

I think it's pretty clear that the Yankees prefer players who shut the hell up and focus on baseball, regardless of color or ethnicity.

Happy Base Ball

Nah, you're confusing African Americans with Cablinasians. Fuzzy says it's those Cablinasians who're into fried chicken.

You're right, I should have stuck with "Because of his large Johnson?"

Probably Strawberry, who's black by any reasonable definition.

I was starting to wonder there, what with Darryl being able to stay out of prison for over 30 years and all. Now, though, you're right ... black by any reasonable definition.

In my mind, Sheffield does equal Rocker. They're both racists, and by racist I mean people who do racist things, and do so repeatedly. Anyone who claims Jeter isn't "black enough" is a racist, as "black enough" can only mean something like "black enough to count" in whatever the person thinks counts. (And, as I said in reply to Andy's post, this is just the flipside of the lynchmob's "Jeter's just black enough!" claim to count for special extra-judicial treatment.) It's reifying race, using that reification to make a priori discriminatory judgments immune to one's experiences with the person. Sure, Rocker's particularly disgusting and I have no interest in hanging with him, but neither do I have interest in hanging with Sheffield, either. Both their views are repugnant and should be identified as such. Hiding them behind claims that they're scientific hypothesizing is enabling at the minimum.

And just to make clear, I wasn't defending their statements as equivalent (though I'm not backing off the claim that they're both racists), again I was merely trying to point out how inane your initial comment about "science" was. Sheffield wasn't "hypothesizing" that Torre and the Yankees treats blacks differently; he was asserting it, and when confronted by evidence that seemed to the contrary, he resorted to the racist's oldest game: reclassification of people to buttress racist ideology ("Oh, Jeter? That half-a-cracker ain't black, so that doesn't count in Torre's favor.") I'm just surprised Sheffield didn't follow it up with a condemnation of race-mixing.

I wanted to quote that in full context before saying why I respectfully disagree with it, since I hate people who cut up my posts just to play "gotcha" with one sentence.

I can't see Sheffield's comment as "racist" by any stretch of the imagination, unless you mean it in a literal sense. I know I'll get everyone on my back for saying this, but it's been my experience in many situations that comments often perceived as "racist" if you strip them of context are far more nuanced in reality.

I say that because I've known scores of blacks who over the years have used "whitey," "fay," "grey," "honky," "cracker" and even (my personal favorite) "you people" on many occasions in front of me and other whites, and yet their worldview is 90% reality and 10% prejudice (I don't think anyone's much below 10% on that score). They deal with the whole immensely contradictory racial puzzle every day of their lives, they know what they're up against and yet also what they're no longer up against, and their use of these not-so-pretty words seems to me no more than their reaction to life in all its complexity. In context they're neither racist nor nasty, only human.

And to flip the coin, I've also known scores of whites who throw around the N-word, and yet in terms of how they live are about as far from John Rocker as you can get. I know I'll get slammed for saying that, but it's how I see it. In their minds they make clear distinctions between blacks who act in stereotyped fashion, and all other blacks, just as the blacks I've know who sometimes throw around "whitey" make an equally clear distinction between whites who act like "whitey" and whites who act like human beings.

In both cases these are certainly not evil people, and in most all of the specific cases I'd be very reluctant to call them racists. I've spent many a night arguing with them and telling them they're nuts, but that's more because I'm trying to get at what underlies their particular POV than because I feel any compulsion to drive a stake through their language.

Look, we all deal with the hand we've got, and we're all trying to make sense of the world around us, and that includes (for us 'Americans') nearly 500 years of deliberate racism, semi-racism, unconscious racism, anti-racism, and all of its consequences. I've been trying my best to make sense of it all for nearly 60 years and I don't feel I'm even close to figuring it out. If you don't like what Sheffield said, call him on it by all means (and IMO his quoted opinions range from semi-screwy to borderline slanderous), but I don't see how sticking him into the "racist" category does anything to advance the discussion.

Enough with the "I'm Asian, therefore I'm black" thang already.

I'm not. Unless you were trying to be funny, in which case, it was.

I simply live in an environment where I spent 70%+ of my time with African American youth.

Only three posts before the old "lack of familiarity" card is played.

Well, feel free to demonstrate your empathy :P

That was a fair shot, Blanks. I wrote that poorly. My point on the Strawberry comment was:

1) Other than Sheffield, Strawberry is probably the most controversial Yankee of the past fifteen years.*

2) Strawberry is very dark-skinned, U.S.-born, and from an inner-city, non-affluent background and thus can't be considered a non-black by culture/birthplace-based categorizations.

3) Strawberry has always been complementary of Torre's and the Yankees' treatment of him. Therefore ...

4) In the argument that the Yankees treat black players, or specifically black players with "baggage" (or whatever) differently or less respectfully, Strawberry is a data point against.

5) Other than Sheff, the Yankees really haven't had an outspoken/flamboyant/loudmouth player of any color since Reggie (Leyritz possibly being another exception), which speaks to baudib's point about the Yankees' avoiding blacks with outspoken or "thuggy" reputations; the Yankees have avoided (or seem to have tried to avoid) ALL players with such reputations.

I did not mean to equate Strawberry's off-field troubles with his being "black by any reasonable definition".

Happy Base Ball

*Come to think of it, Steve Howe should be on the controversial-Yankees list, although going more deeply into that starts to move this thread away from where it's been.

You know who treated black players differently?

Confederates.

This is the most constant anti-science argument on this site. The idea that you can't hypothesize something because you don't have data at the time is strange to me. Surely JUST hypothesizing something proves nothing, but until we do testing, it's as worthy as any other, and historical data certainly supports the possibility of non-overt, non-intentional, racial based differences in treatment.

But if we were being "scientific" about it, wouldn't we demand evidence from Sheffield, instead of just assuming that his dismissal of the Yankee management as racist is automatically valid? Should we also assume Latinos are gullible and stupid because Sheffield implied as much?

What this country really needs is for everyone to be issued an ID card that breaks down your race by percentage points. We can then spend the next 50 years arguing whether "authentically black" requires you to be 6.25%, 12.5%, 25%, 50% or 75%

Well, maybe all we need to do is force everyone to carry a brown paper bag with them. Then we can do like the black fraternities and sororities used to do, hold it up to the skin upon request and if you're lighter, you're OK but you're darker, you're out the door.

can't see Sheffield's comment as "racist" by any stretch of the imagination, unless you mean it in a literal sense. I know I'll get everyone on my back for saying this, but it's been my experience in many situations that comments often perceived as "racist" if you strip them of context are far more nuanced in reality.

I don't see it as racist at all either. I've always had an affinity for people who tell it like it is.

Even if it isn't that way.

Well, maybe all we need to do is force everyone to carry a brown paper bag with them. Then we can do like the black fraternities and sororities used to do, hold it up to the skin upon request and if you're lighter, you're OK but you're darker, you're out the door.

Maybe full-cover burkas are the way to go.

But if we were being "scientific" about it, wouldn't we demand evidence from Sheffield, instead of just assuming that his dismissal of the Yankee management as racist is automatically valid? Should we also assume Latinos are gullible and stupid because Sheffield implied as much?

No need to hold him to scientific proof. If his conscience truly tells Sheff what he says it does, he ought to speak out as loud as he can and we ought to listen.

I can think of two Yankee players who were somewhat conterversial, Polonia who had some unsavory and well documented off field activities and Justice who I seem to remeber actually got served with court papers while in uniform and on the playing field.

Why? What if Sheffield's conscience demanded he say that 2 and 2 really equal nine? Ought we to listen to him then? What if he said that dinosaurs were a hoax? Or that Canadians are really space aliens who are only biding their time before launching an Armageddon-level assault on humankind?

Do we listen to him then?

Sheffield has an inalienable right to speak. And when his speech is unsupported statements on politically- and emotionally-charged subjects, we have a right to hold him in disdain until/unless he or others can back his case with real evidence.

Happy Base Ball

Or that Canadians are really space aliens who are only biding their time before launching an Armageddon-level assault on humankind?

Do we listen to him then?

I'd say he knows too much.

I'm going to get my beige butt in trouble for diving in here, but most of you just don't get it and never will.

Johnny B. Wong is really Token from South Park?

Give the guy a break, he's just trying to be a good role model for Elijah Dukes. He called him last week and said, "Look Elijah, if you're really desperate for attention, don't threaten to kill a bunch of 10 year olds at your wife's school, think big! Call out the New York Yankees and Latin American baseball players. Next on the docket, Willie Mays, the U.S. Senate, and hybrid cars."

"aint all the way Black"

Seriously, what is the big deal about this? If I say to a Halfie friend 'You aint all the way Asian", they're not going to go "YOU NON-INCLUSIVE RACIST BASTARD" (well, they know i'm a non-inclusive racist bastard), they're going to go "yeah, of cours ei'm not all the way Asian, my dad/mom is White!"

Brattain's Idea for Greatest TV Show Ever

At the end of every show, the judges and participants should all sit down together, have a meal of Rice, Fried Chicken, and Watermelon to discuss what they've learned from each other, and general banter.

I was goign to say we could do steroids together, but I wouldn't want to upset the BTF crowd.

I've got to cool down a little before I post on this issue. "Most of you" wasn't fair. Andy's comments above were right on target with me, esp. the last part. I'm not interested in labeling anyone a racist or pushing them off into some little category based upon their ethnicity. And he was spot on talking about how some people can avoid race and some have no choice but to face it every day.

So I'll hit the guy whose gotten in my craw instead of avoiding naming him.

JC/DC made me mad back on the Wagner thread not because of his opinion, but because he all but warned me "to be careful what I say". And I didn't come close to saying or even implying that Billy Wagner was somehow racist for calling out Reyes and Randolph in the paper, just that there could be an underlying racial tension that caused him to speak out in the press instead of behind closed doors, and I later stated that such tension could be laid at the door of Mets management and not Wagner or Lo Duca.

But I then come across "Mr. Be Careful What You Say" and he out-and-out calls Gary Sheffield a racist. I mean, WTF?! He throws John Rocker into it to dilute the accusation, but let's face it -- he's got it in for Sheffield, not Rocker. Rocker is not in this discussion. And I wouldn't even call Rocker a racist, though his comments were ignorant.

Worse is the ignorance that pretends it knows all the lines and has some kind of universal knowledge and ability that it clearly doesn't possess. And arrogant. JC, if you just drop that load and talk a little more 'face-to-face', give a little more credit to those you disagree with, I'll bet we'll come a lot closer to having a conversation than a confrontation. I won't pretend to know you based upon a few comments on a message board, but those comments have irked me. Ball is in your court how you want to respond.

Gary Sheffield is no diplomat, he doesn't try to make his comments acceptable to the mainstream, but he is speaking from his direct experience. He's not making some abstract comment about race, not some stereotypical comments about race like say Dusty Baker, but from direct experience with the Yankees and Torre and Jeter, how he sees Black players like himself being treated differently. And I'll bet his perception of Jeter is more based upon Jeter's privileged status than his racial makeup. I have no comment upon Jeter, but I think it's fair to say Sheffield knows Jeter a lot better than any of us.

I do think it's funny neither Torre nor Jeter will touch Sheffield's comments. I don't really blame them -- they are in a no-win position to respond.

I've alluded to my own racial issues elsewhere but I'll make it even more clear -- my dad was Black, identified as such, but had white and Indian ancestory as well. His family was originally from Florida, the northern part that's ironically the most Southern. He tried to get away from the whole racial thing as much as possible by moving West, but it's not so easy in America to just be a man and ignore race.

As for me, I don't really think of myself as Black for several reasons -- my dad and mom split when I was young and I absorbed more of my identity from her -- and she was more cosmopolitan than ethnic-identified. On her side, there's Chinese and Irish and German.

My experience has been that Black Americans don't take me as one of their own because I have never lived as a Black American and I don't look typically Black. I love Black American culture, but I've still lived my life at a remove from its fundamental experience.

Finally, I like SouthPark, but I'm no Token.

Do you instead think it's merely "scientific" hypothesizing: "Hmmm... I speculate Joe Torre treats blacks unfairly. Now, let's go find some evidence that either proves or disproves my theory." Is that how science works?

Its my understanding that Torre said, "No comment", and if memory serves that is an admission of guilt.
Or does that argument only work when it is convenient. I bet that is it .. ;)