Bibby's Boycotting

[GoGoGadget]

And what I'm saying is that this is generation upon generation of conditioning. We would never even know that things were not like this before the fertile crescent because "our history" only begins there. Nothing before that is recorded in history books. Before that we all lived on this earth in tribes where there was no hierachal system, Just because it exists in our society does not make it right. The same way that you say clothes have always mattered.... racism has always mattered in our society but it doesn't make it right.

It's not inherent in human nature, it's inherent in the human nature of our society. The hippie culture is a great exampe of how "we dress" has nothing to do with with appearences or perception.And when I say hippies I don't mean the hippies of the "sixties" in America. It's understandable that we think that this is the only way and it has always mattered, but we been inculcated to do so. Could you imagine if we were actually conditioned to think that nationalism is wrong, where I wouldn't look at you as an American or myself as an Indian, but instead human. do you think this world would be a better place to live in?

There is a vast difference between judging someone's character based on how they dress/how they present themself, and judging someone's character based on race or nationality.

A person doesn't choose their skin tone or country of origin -- it is what it is from birth. But personal style is very much a choice. And it is a choice that is bound by the current societal definition of what is and is not representative of certain interests, behaviors, class levels, tastes, etc.

And, in my opinion, that's actually a good thing. It's a form of personal expression. I like the fact that I can change what I convey to the people I encounter on a given day just by playing around in my closet.

As for the argument as to whether or not the importance of clothing/adornment is inherent to human nature... how wouldn't it be? The fact that similar behaviors have been documented in various cultures for hundreds of years would suggest that it is something that developed organically with civilization and is, therefore, inherent to human nature.

 

[KingKong]

There is a vast difference between judging someone's character based on how they dress/how they present themself, and judging someone's character based on race or nationality.

They are in fact very similar and stem from the same line of thinking; judging people on appearances and therefore stereotyping them. Whether it's a choice or not is completely irrelevant in this context.

A person doesn't choose their skin tone or country of origin -- it is what it is from birth. But personal style is very much a choice. And it is a choice that is bound by the current societal definition of what is and is not representative of certain interests, behaviors, class levels, tastes, etc.

How is it a choice if it is bound by anything? I'm all for personal styles and tastes, but that is exactly what is being taken away from Bibby. That freedom. But hey the NBA is trying to run a business. A business where the majority of the viewers/ fans prefer to see him dressed "professionally". Again they are conditioned by society to feel that way, to perceive that as professional. And ofcourse, we throw around the word "business" as if it were gospel. Business justifies everything, didn't you know? Let's not worry about people's feelings or emotions which is in fact inherent to human exisitence. If we screw over the little guy, it's fine because we can and it's business. It's just another word for selfishness.

And, in my opinion, that's actually a good thing. It's a form of personal expression. I like the fact that I can change what I convey to the people I encounter on a given day just by playing around in my closet.

Again, what if my personal expression were to walk around naked out on the streets. Just because you are allowed to express yourself without restraint, why shouldn't others be?

The fact that similar behaviors have been documented in various cultures for hundreds of years would suggest that it is something that developed organically with civilization and is, therefore, inherent to human nature.

Again you're speaking of civilisation which is really just another word for "society. There was history before civilisation, only we're not taught about it in school because either: it's not recorded or it doesn't help to serve our society.

 

[Roman]

It's not inherent in human nature, it's inherent in the human nature of our society. The hippie culture is a great exampe of how "we dress" has nothing to do with with appearences or perception. And when I say hippies I don't mean the hippies of the "sixties" in America. It's understandable that we think that this is the only way and it has always mattered, but we been inculcated to do so.

You are quite wrong.

It is the nature of the human mind to judge and categorify everything it comes into contact with. It has nothing to do with society and everything to do with the human brain. It's how we survive and evolve. We experience and place it into it's "correct" queue.

Does that mean suits & ties are directly linked? No. But, categorifying a type of appearance as acceptable and unacceptable is completely within the sphere of the human consciousness. You're just speaking from a shaky base and one that you don't have much information about.

As for your misguided notion about appearance not mattering - tribes routinely exiled, killed or maimed children born with defects, be they large or small. All tribes had dress specific to rank within the caste, and dressing out of caste was expressly forbidden.

Please don't confuse what's "fair" and "just" with what is the way the human operates. Please don't take your misguided views and spin them into facts. It's just not the way it works.

Finally, dress code and racism are completely distinct issues. They delve into the same psyche within the human mind, but no one here is making the connection with race and status.

 

[Roman]

How is it a choice if it is bound by anything? I'm all for personal styles and tastes, but that is exactly what is being taken away from Bibby. That freedom. But hey the NBA is trying to run a business. A business where the majority of the viewers/ fans prefer to see him dressed "professionally". Again they are conditioned by society to feel that way, to perceive that as professional. And ofcourse, we throw around the word "business" as if it were gospel. Business justifies everything, didn't you know? Let's not worry about people's feelings or emotions which is in fact inherent to human exisitence. If we screw over the little guy, it's fine because we can and it's business. It's just another word for selfishness.

Oh my god, man, your argument is really thin.

Bibby has all the freedom in the world to walk around however he wishes to dress. He has the "freedom" to quit his current job, put on some loafers and some Fubu and call it an evening. But, when he is in the EMPLOY of another person, he must abide by their rules.

Remember when your mom used to say: "When you live under my roof, you'll follow my rules." ? It's the same concept. Bibby is living under the NBA's roof and being fed by the Sacramento Kings. Until such time as he is not, he must abide by the conditions they set forth.

Among such "freedoms" he has lost: the "freedom" not to participate in community activities, the "freedom" not to commit crimes, etc.

Whether dress and appearance affect the perception of people around you is a biological deal. People cannot help it. It's innate.

Whether a certain style of dress is considered appropriate is a societal thing.

If you cannot discern these two concepts than anything anyone says to you is lost.

 

[tyrant]

everyone knows where tyrant stands on this matter

 

[Roman]

everyone knows where tyrant stands on this matter

I don't.

 

[tyrant]

the nba is a business, but it's also a commerce. contracts, commercial, negotiations. the players really make their own rules. deals, payroll. you name it. its not like an everyday job. the nba doesnt need stern, the nba needs these players.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Then why don't the players go make their own league? They can dress however they want, play on playgrounds and wind up like the And 1 mixtape tour.

Love him or hate him Stern has done wonderful things for professional basketball players and it all stems from the business structure of the league, especially the marketing.