ot: Donald sterling

[CA renter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=CA renter]I don’t think most of us are part of any lynch mob. Personally, I agree that the most disgusting part of this story is the mistress and her leaking a very private recorded conversation to the press (either directly, or indirectly).

Clearly, Donald Sterling is no moral icon. He’s a complete dirtbag, as far as I’m concerned, but I agree that private conversations between two people are just that…private.[/quote]

Really? I’m shocked you feel this way. The most disgusting part is not Sterling’s outrageously dickish behavior, but rather that someone brought it to the public’s attention?

For what it’s worth, the woman who made the recordings has denied that she ever had an intimate relationship with Sterling, and that she was not the one who released the recordings.[/quote]

Other posters pretty much covered why I feel this way. What Sterling said might have been offensive, but lots of people say offensive things about others in the privacy of their own homes. Have you honestly never said anything about “bitches” or “gold diggers” or used some other derogatory words in reference to other groups of people in private conversations? Many people would be equally offended by that.

What he said was his business, and it’s between him and his mistress. If he were to *act* on his beliefs and victimize people in some way (and I think he has done this in the past), then that is another issue.

IMO, he said what he did because he knows that his mistress is using him for access to rich, black athletes who make Sterling look like the ugly, old fool that he is. He knew that, and was apparently okay with it. It was when she flaunted it publicly on social media that he lost it because his (probably equally old and very rich and powerful) friends were calling him about it.

Personally, I don’t have problems with people who have different beliefs than I do, and their private conversations and opinions are their business. We do not have the right to tell people what they must think or believe, nor should we ever think that we have the right to do that. If they *act* in a way that negatively affect others, then that’s a different story. Just my opinion.

[paramount]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=paramount]
Is there any evidence that he discriminated against his employees while on the clock?[/quote]

Yes. Both against his employees and his tenants.[/quote]

Please elaborate….

Also, I’m hearing this might be a case of extortion.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]
IMO, he said what he did because he knows that his mistress is using him for access to rich, black athletes who make Sterling look like the ugly, old fool that he is. He knew that, and was apparently okay with it. It was when she flaunted it publicly on social media that he lost it because his (probably equally old and very rich and powerful) friends were calling him about it.

[/quote]

Not much evidence that she’s his mistress. Both say their relationship has never been intimate. The wife, in her lawsuit, isn’t claiming it. If she was his mistress, do you think he’d be ok with sleeping with other men? His friends are calling him out about what? That his assistant socializes with black men? And that’s what he cares about?

I don’t get why anyone would think that her behavior is worse than his. Misogyny at its worst. Nothing but slut shaming.

[spdrun]

IF she released a tape of a angry conversation that was not meant for public consumption, she was pretty damn bad.

BTW, both have an interest in denying that she was his mistress. He doesn’t want to add a divorce case to his tsuris. She can take the moral high ground if she was just his assistant.

The argument does not sound like a discussion between people that only had a professional relationship.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=SK in CV] Nothing but slut shaming.[/quote]

I agree.

Let’s just take Stiviano at her word.

What matters is that Sterling said what he said; and his business partners are exercising their right to disassociate themselves from him. That’s all there is to it.

[CA renter]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=CA renter]
IMO, he said what he did because he knows that his mistress is using him for access to rich, black athletes who make Sterling look like the ugly, old fool that he is. He knew that, and was apparently okay with it. It was when she flaunted it publicly on social media that he lost it because his (probably equally old and very rich and powerful) friends were calling him about it.

[/quote]

Not much evidence that she’s his mistress. Both say their relationship has never been intimate. The wife, in her lawsuit, isn’t claiming it. If she was his mistress, do you think he’d be ok with sleeping with other men? His friends are calling him out about what? That his assistant socializes with black men? And that’s what he cares about?

I don’t get why anyone would think that her behavior is worse than his. Misogyny at its worst. Nothing but slut shaming.[/quote]

This has nothing to do with slut shaming. I’m guessing you haven’t heard the recording. Listen to it, and then tell me that this wasn’t a disagreement between two people who had an intimate relationship.

He’s probably realistic about her sleeping with other men. Clearly, he’s not going to satisfy a young woman who likes to live life in the fast lane. It sounds like he’s fine with that, perhaps because he’s married (probably doesn’t plan on getting divorced for family and business reasons) and knows he’s not going to have a serious, long-term relationship with Stivano. But he clearly had a relationship with her that went well beyond a professional relationship.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZh6WGbZUvA

Whatever you think of his personal beliefs — and remember where he’s coming from, generationally and demographically — the point is that people have a right to their own thoughts and opinions, and they have the right to not be recorded (especially without consent) and not have these very personal conversations broadcast to the public in ways that can cause serious damage to them and their business. Based only on the contents of the recorded conversation, it certainly sounds to me like she was setting him up.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]
Whatever you think of his personal beliefs — and remember where he’s coming from, generationally and demographically — the point is that people have a right to their own thoughts and opinions,[/quote]

Full stop. Yes they do. That includes both the public, the fans, and the other NBA owners.

[quote=CA renter]and they have the right to not be recorded (especially without consent) and not have these very personal conversations broadcast to the public in ways that can cause serious damage to them and their business.[/quote]

Generally, I agree. But apparently that’s not what happened here. Sterling knew his conversations were being recorded. And at least at this point, there’s no evidence that the woman in the conversations released those recordings.

And beyond that, irrespective of how the information became public, would you do business with a bald-faced racist? Is that something you’d want to know? Or would you argue that you should never have been made privy to the information, and you therefore have no problem doing business with that racist? Remember, he’s not the nameless owner of a business, he’s the very public owner.

[quote=CA renter]Based only on the contents of the recorded conversation, it certainly sounds to me like she was setting him up.[/quote]

I have listened to the conversation, and I do think that there was more to the relationship than a simple employer/employee relationship. She has described their relationship as a father/daughter relationship. (I strongly suspect he wanted something else, but reluctantly acknowledged that was never going to happen. That may just be the dirty old man in me talking.) It doesn’t sound to me like she was setting him up. She boldly called him on his racism.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]

Whatever you think of his personal beliefs — and remember where he’s coming from, generationally and demographically [/quote]

And one more thing. I know where’s he’s coming from, generationally and demographically. And he’s still carrying attitudes that “where he’s coming from” would be an excuse a southerner would use in 1965. But he’s lived in California or his whole life. This isn’t 1990, and we’re talking about marriage equality. This is 2014. Fifty years AFTER the Civil Rights Act. 47 years AFTER Loving v. Virginia. Sterling wasn’t an old man when those things happened. He was a young man. So “where he’s coming from, generationally and demographically” is an appalling defense of racist.

[no_such_reality]

That’s one creepy tape, the whole way around. I can’t imagine the other supposed 45 minutes makes anyone look good either.

honey,sweetie, have some juice

[CA renter]

SK, let me put it this way: I have no doubt that probably 90% of the people I’ve dealt with in life — and will deal with in the future — have thought or said things in private conversations that I (or others) would have found offensive. If we all tried to avoid those who have different opinions and beliefs than we do, we would all be hunkered down in single room cabins deep in the woods…far away from anybody else.

What someone thinks or says in a private conversation is their business. How they treat me is my business. How they treat others could certainly influence my feelings about them. But what they *think,* as long as those thoughts don’t manifest themselves in a way that can truly harm others, is entirely their business.

Is he a racist? Probably. Just the same as there are many sexists and misogynists out there. Do we have the right to control their thoughts or tell them what they must believe? No, absolutely not.

[SK in CV]

[quote=CA renter]
Is he a racist? Probably. Just the same as there are many sexists and misogynists out there. Do we have the right to control their thoughts or tell them what they must believe? No, absolutely not.[/quote]

Nobody has tried to control his thoughts. But that doesn’t mean that everyone has to ignore what he said either. His partner owners don’t want to do business with him. His employees don’t want to work for him. His sponsors don’t want to work with him. He can think the way he wants. And it has ramifications. It really isn’t any more complicated than that.

[scaredyclassic]

I don’t buy chick fil-a but not because their Ceo says douch e bag crap but because the chicken has weird petrol based preservstives. But I think I’d be well within my rights not to eat their alleged chicken simply because the CeO is a human dick who says and thinks things that rub me the wrong way and I could not be accused of controlling his thoughts.

Even tho his stupid chicken actually tastes ok. Screw them.

[Anonymous]

[quote=SK in CV]I really just don’t understand the sympathy for the guy.[/quote]

I really just don’t understand why you think anyone here has expressed sympathy for the guy.

[SK in CV]

[quote=harvey][quote=SK in CV]I really just don’t understand the sympathy for the guy.[/quote]

I really just don’t understand why you think anyone here has expressed sympathy for the guy.[/quote]

At least 3 people have in this thread. And that doesn’t count the arguments that the woman’s behavior was worse than Sterling’s.

[SK in CV]

[quote=paramount][quote=SK in CV][quote=paramount]
Is there any evidence that he discriminated against his employees while on the clock?[/quote]

Yes. Both against his employees and his tenants.[/quote]

Please elaborate….

Also, I’m hearing this might be a case of extortion.[/quote]

He’s been sued by the federal government at least twice for housing discrimination. In one of those cases he settled for over $2.5 million.

He has been sued by a former employee for racial discrimination.

[Author]

Posts