Kelly Tilghman Vs. Dana Jacobson: Whose Offensive Words Are Worse?

After viewing a clip of the comment, regarding how up and coming professional golfers should deal with reigning golf king, Tiger Woods, made by Kelly Tilghman, as well as reading a basic outline of the comments made by Dana Jacobson, I must say, it is not fair to try and determine which comment is worse.

I began by looking for a clip of the Kelly Tilghman comment, which was quite hard to find, and then proceeded to view the clip of Tilghman commentary on MySpace TV. I had to watch the clip several times and really think about all the different thoughts it stirred up, and what my motivation for having such thoughts might be. I took into consideration the fact that the public tends to view the actions of women differently than they view similar actions by men. I took into consideration the nature of the sport that Tilghman was commentating. I also took into consideration how recent, high-profile, racial controversies may be shaping my opinion on this piece of footage.

After taking all these things into consideration and really taking the time to try a form an opinion about the footage based solely on what is there, I came to the conclusion that, while it is obvious that Kelly Tilghman was in the wrong with her lynching comment with regard to Tiger Woods, I do not believe that she made this remark with the intention of offending the black community, or anyone else for that matter. Now, I understand that whether or not she intended to hurt feelings she did, but I do think that one has to take into consideration intentions when it comes to judging someone's mistakes. I think everyone can agree that it is far worse when someone commits an offensive act with malice in their heart, than it is when they do it accidentally.

The thing that I think is most important to take note of is how Kelly Tilghman appeared to spit this phrase out with no forethought, which I think speaks volumes about subconscious stereotypes that all probably walk about with everyday. I think Tilghman quick response that mentions lynching with reference to a black man may say a lot about the associations that have been made in our brain, linking races, genders, creeds, etc., etc., with events, characteristics, and even inanimate objects.

The best way to go about dealing with instances such as these two recent instances with Kelly Tilghman and Dana Jacobson, is to try and figure out what you can learn from them. When I say this, I mean, try and figure out what you can learn from these mistakes beyond simply, be extra careful about racial comments when on television.

The incident involving Dana Jacobson was a little more difficult to evaluate because I didn't have a video to go off of, and while I had some quotes, I didn't have a complete transcript of what was said. Without being able to a video of what exactly was said, and how it was said it is a lot harder to try and determine what my reaction to this incident truly is.

I ran my thoughts on this instance through the same checks that I ran my thoughts on the Kelly Tilghman instance. I thought for quite a while about the fact that she was reported to be quite intoxicated at the time that her "speech" was delivered. I also felt it was important to take into consideration that these remarks were made at a Roast, which is usually a night filled with many jokes and otherwise inappropriate comments, after all, comedians definitely say many things on stage that the average civilian would not be able to say without staunch objection.

After thinking about her comments and the nature in which they were reportedly made, I came to the conclusion that I, just like Kelly Tilghman, Dana Jacobson was definitely in the wrong, but I don't think I ever really truly wondered about that. The part that I found especially difficult was determining how much hate, if any, was behind her words.

Some believe that when you are intoxicated what you really think comes out, while others believe the complete opposite, that drinking can often cause us to say things that we don't mean at all. This whole debate makes analyzing the words of Dana Jacobson so much harder than it already is. My gut reaction is to say that Dana Jacobson's offensive words were a more premeditated than Kelly Tilghman's.

Because Dana Jacobson's offensive words appear to be backed with more hate than Kelly Tilghman, it is a little bit harder to turn the whole episode into an educational moment. I think, in order for anyone to use Dana Jacobson's foul as an educational opportunity, they would first have to find out why she said the things she said. Once one knows why she said it, they have essentially found "the problem", and therefore, can go about looking for a solution, or the educational opportunity.

Since both the instance with Kelly Tilghman and the instance with Dana Jacobson are hurtful, especially to a certain group of people, I can't say that one comment is worse than the other, because doing so is to say that one group is more hurt than the other. I can, however, say that one comment seems to come from more of a place of hate, whereas the other appears to be more of an actual accident. While Kelly Tilghman appears to have made an honest mistake, that may be the result of subconscious racial associations that she has made, Dana Jacobson appears to be more motivated by her hatred for one thing or another.

Sources
http://deadspin.com/346537/first-video-of-mike-and-mike-roast-surfaces
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.search&SearchBoxID=SplashHeader&q=kelly+tilghman&t=tvid