I am not understanding your first point I guess; the question I pointed out that was not asked was not about his legal penalty, but about the NFL punishment, which the rest of your post seems to suggest you agree was inadequate. I did not suggest that Rice should have requested a longer suspension from the NFL, just that he should have been asked about whether he thinks a 2 week suspension was appropriate. If asked, Rice should have said whatever he believed to be true. As I tried to explain in my initial post, I suspect that the reason the NFL (and Rice himself) think a 2 game suspension was appropriate here was the mitigating effect of his girlfriend's (dare I say "provocative") behavior.
I do disagree with your analysis of what the 2 game suspension means. It is not as if the players demanded in labor negotiations to be punished for pot smoking but not for punching their girlfriends. The marijuana policy is in the CBA because the NFL insisted upon it. The NFL has never insisted on any kind of serious response to domestic violence, this even though it has been documented for decades that there is a serious and persistent problem of NFL players physically assaulting their wives and girlfriends. Football is an extremely violent sport, and it is not at all surprising that it attracts men who are prone to physical violence and have difficulty learning when and how to inhibit that in their off-field behavior. This does not necessarily make them bad people, but it does place a responsibility on the league to make sure its players understand that no matter how violent they are allowed to be on the field (and the recent awareness of the long-term implications of concussions makes on-field violence itself a major concern) violence off the field is not tolerated at all. The NFL has failed spectacularly to live up to this responsibility, and the Rice incident is just one vivid example of that. I will acknowledge the validity of part of your critique, and revise the formulation: The NFL is saying that smoking marijuana twice is twice as bad as punching your girlfriend. I think all fans have a legitimate interest in expecting the NFL (along with its players) to re-think that priority. On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 10:18 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > "I did not hear anyone ask him if he agreed with the apparent stand of > the NFL, that smoking marijuana was a more serious offense than punching a > girlfriend. He did say that he was never going to appeal the punishment, > even if it has been 4 or 6 games." > > See, this is what I don't get (and why I'm not commenting on any other > parts of your message): what are people expecting him to do? If I get > arrested and go before a judge and he gives me some suspended sentence and > puts me on parole for a year, why on earth would I tell the judge "oh, no, > your honor...that's not right. I should do at least a few months of hard > time"????? > > Whatever Ray Rice and his wife did to each other is now over. They > settled it to the satisfaction of the judicial system and (at least as > importantly) they settled it between themselves. We as the public should > be done with Ray Rice, and I couldn't possibly care less about his opinion > on the matter. > > Our attention at this point should be the NFL and Roger Goodell's > "punishment" (air quotes to indicate snarkiness) and anybody who tries to > defend it on its face. It's really pointless to try argue that the 2-game > suspension makes it a less serious offense than marijuana. Nobody gets > suspended for smoking pot, per se...they get suspended for violating the > league's substance abuse policy. And to get any suspension at all, they > have to have already been busted multiple times for violating that policy. > No, the NFL doesn't say that smoking weed is worse than domestic abuse; > the punishments for substance abuse are mandated by the collective > bargaining agreement between the league and the players' union, so the NFL > doesn't hand those suspensions out based on the severity of the crime. You > get busted once, you go to rehab. Twice, you get a 4-game suspension. > Three, and you're out for a year. It's not a commentary on how serious > they consider the problem, especially as compared to other offenses. > > Doug Fields > Tampa, FL > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [TV orNotTV] Ray Rice Press Conference > From: PGage <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, July 31, 2014 12:56 pm > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > Rice gave a 17 minute press conference this morning, to which the > immediate reaction on ESPN was overwhelmingly positive (so far I have seen > two former players almost crying, and a female columnist, both seemed > impressed). > > I was much less so. Rice spent most of the time talking about how the real > victim the night he punched his then girlfriend (now wife) and dragged her > out of an Atlantic City hotel elevator was himself. While he refused to > talk about whatever damage he imposed on her, he talked at great length > about the pain he will now have to suffer living with this, and how much > the thought that his now 2 year old daughter will one day find out about it > on Google (Hint: Ray, you might want to tell her about it before she > googles it). > > He said repeatedly that his wife "can do not wrong" - a phrase which in my > experience is a red flag, since it often marks an overreaction learned "in > counseling" to an initial tendency to blame the victim for the violence. > > An even larger red flag was his reference several times to the Biblical > model of the husband being the head of the family. This is code in > fundamentalist Christianity to a doctrine known as "male headship", which > teaches that women must submit and be subordinate to the absolute authority > of their husband. Many observers believe that this doctrine actually > increases the probability of domestic violence, as men who subscribe to it > tend to believe that it is their right and responsibility to punish both > children and wives (there is little difference in their view between the > two) for any perceived disobedience or imperfection. OTOH, many > fundamentalists are aware of this problem, and have begun trying to counter > it with the message, heard in Rice's comments this morning, that his > responsibility "as a Man" (which means, as the head of and leader of the > family) is to exercise his power and leadership without violence. This of > course is better, but in my observation can lead to troubling kinds of > emotional and psychological manipulation and control. > > I did not hear anyone ask him if he agreed with the apparent stand of the > NFL, that smoking marijuana was a more serious offense than punching a > girlfriend. He did say that he was never going to appeal the punishment, > even if it has been 4 or 6 games. > > Lurking behind this case is the likelihood that the reason Rice was not > convicted of any crime, and not given a more serious penalty from the NFL, > was that his girlfriend/wife took responsibility for the violence, refused > to press charges or testify against him, and told both the court and the > NFL that she has been intoxicated and maybe even initiated the violence by > hitting him. At least twice Rice condemned "domestic violence" in general, > and then specified "especially man on woman violence", which I take as a > remnant of an earlier argument that he made that most of the violence that > night was "woman on man", and that he was just defending himself. > > It may be true that she was behaving badly and started the violence (this > happens fairly often) and it is also true that often it is not true, but > women say it because they have internalized the abuser's propaganda that > the violence was her own fault for being less than perfect. In either case, > Rice's apparent fixation on this is troubling, as it is a less obvious but > still serious attempt to shift responsibility for the violence away from > himself (his repeated and ostentatious explicit taking of responsibility > can be read as more of a principled responsibility, in which he as head of > the family is responsible for all bad actions. His wife can "do no wrong" > because as a subordinate woman in the relationship she is not a responsible > actor). All of this can make repeated violence more likely. > > Ray Rice has a baby face, and comes across as a nice, likable guy - which > he probably is. Popular culture has made "domestic violence" into such a > stigmatized crime that it is difficult to imagine nice, regular men as > perpetrators of it, which is a problem. All kinds of men hit women - some > do it only once, others do it several times a week for years. I was raised > with a strict boys-do-no-hit-girls imperative, which is probably not a bad > rule; a more accurate rule would be that stronger and bigger people should > not his smaller and weaker people. Assuming this really was the first time > Rice hit a woman, he may not be a horrible person; he may really have made > a really bad "mistake", and there may be a good chance that he will never > do it again. > > However nothing I saw this morning reassured me about him, and if the > "counseling" he referred to was some kind of religiously based service > rooted in the fundamentalist assumption that men are the rightful heads of > their families to whom wives owe obedience and submission, then I am much, > much more worried about him. > > > http://espn.go.com/blog/baltimore-ravens/post/_/id/11317/baltimore-ravens-preseason-live > > -- > -- > TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "TV or Not TV" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
