Skip to main content

In a victory of sorts, WMMS in Cleveland said earlier today that it has taken disciplinary action against morning show co-host Dominic Dieter for his disgusting advice to a father who thought his daughter might be a lesbian:  "You should get one of your friends to screw your daughter straight."  From the looks of it, Dieter was suspended at least for this morning's edition of "Rover's Morning Glory" and made to apologize.

The station aired a recorded apology from Dieter, who was not on the air for today's broadcast of the morning drive show, which traditionally stretches the boundaries of taste.

"I want to genuinely apologize to anyone who may have been offended by what I said," Dieter told listeners today, according to a transcript sent to GLAAD. "I regret what I did say. My comments were inappropriate. They were inexcusable, and just downright stupid. And I want to make it clear; there was absolutely no intention to promote physical or sexual violence."

"We take matters of this nature very seriously; his comment was thoughtless and unacceptable, and we apologize to those who were offended," said Clear Channel Operations Manager Keith Abrams in an emailed response to a request for comment. "We can assure you the appropriate disciplinary action has been taken, and Dieter has since apologized on air and is fully aware that what he said was unacceptable.

"We also want you to be aware that during Friday's broadcast, he was in fact immediately criticized on-air by the other hosts of the show, and the rest of the segment was dedicated to a productive discussion about the acceptance of all lifestyles," Abrams wrote. "It included call-ins and commentary from members and friends of the gay community. WMMS supports the gay community and again, we deeply apologize."

Weak sauce, I say--about as weak as GLAAD's initial demand that Dieter only be suspended.  Dieter pretty much weakens his apology with the standard "sorry if anyone was offended" business.  It cannot be understated enough--Dieter was calling for child abuse, and needs to be off the air for good.  The only reason I'm not writing the FCC to complain is that Clear Channel at least took action by suspending him and making him apologize on air.

A Change.org petition calling for Dieter to be fired is at over 1,000 signatures.  Keep the pressure on.

Originally posted to Christian Dem in NC on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 02:43 PM PDT.

Also republished by House of LIGHTS, Rape and Domestic Violence, DKOMA, and Street Prophets .

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Yep, "weaksauce" about sums it up. (17+ / 0-)

    Can't think of a better word, actually.

    Like I said in my original diary, I don't think any apology can truly make up for what he said. This wasn't just an off-color joke. If it were just an ill-timed, badly-worded crack, I might be in a more forgiving mood. But this was so much more.

    I'm glad the outrage forced an apology, even if it was poorly delivered. But I'm with you, CD/NC...this dude needs to be off the air.

    Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

    by Chrislove on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 02:48:47 PM PDT

    •  I used to think my girlfriends (14+ / 0-)

      were Lesbians because they were molested.

      In reality they were molested because they were Lesbians.

      My admittedly unscientific poll tells me this is a huge problem.

      Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance.

      by Horace Boothroyd III on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 02:53:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yep. (21+ / 0-)

        Sexual harassment in high school, incl. something that may or may not have been a start of a date rape attempt.

        I know when I come out (still hasn't happened), some people in my family are going to claim I'm a sexually repulsed heteroromantic because of that relationship.

        There are signs going back to early childhood, but those won't count, not when there's a trauma they can 'blame'. I just didn't have a framework for figuring out Oh, That's Not Just Being A Kid With Growing Up To Do Yet, so a lot of that didn't get recognized as what it was at the time.

        Every girl I knew of in my high school who had sexual manipulation or violence used on them by a boyfriend was either not entirely heterosexual or trying to follow an abstinence pledge.

        The message in hindsight was clear: either say yes, or someone WILL say yes for you.

        And that was just what happened to heteroromantics and heterosexuals who wouldn't 'give out'. I had too much of a reputation as a fundie at the time to find out what my lesbian and bi classmates were facing from the guys.

        Prayers and best wishes to those in Japan.

        by Cassandra Waites on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:06:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh, Cassandra, how sad... (5+ / 0-)

          I don't know how old you are.  I came out in the wake of the women's movement: nobody bothered me at all...I was just always a lesbian and in college I came out and got involved with other lesbians and gays.

          Never raped.  Never even threatened.  Occasionally cajoled (c'mon, one-night-stand, yer girlfriend will never know) but...never brutality.

          To make the argument that the media has a left- or right-wing, or a liberal or a conservative bias, is like asking if the problem with Al-Qaeda is do they use too much oil in their hummus. Al Franken

          by Youffraita on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:38:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  i suppose it doesn't need to be said, (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            G2geek, Cassandra Waites

            but that 'c'mon, one-night-stand, yer girlfriend will never know' is disrespectful of your relationship almost, it strikes me, as if it weren't a "real" one.

            how gawdawful.

            Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounding yourself with a-holes - William Gibson.

            by doesnotworkorplaywellwithothers on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:12:57 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I was in high school at the turn of the millennium (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            G2geek

            So that's all relatively recent history.

            (And I really don't know if it was a date rape near-attempt or not, because if it was it never got past the Negotiating A Move To A Less Public Location point.)

            I've been assured several times by certain family members that it would be totally okay if I were a lesbian, because apparently my NOT bonking my (ALSO in the closet, at least as far as my family is concerned) asexual boyfriend is A Sign I'm In The Closet. (Wrong closet.)

            And they really DO need to include Defending Yourself From Someone You Care About lessons in abstinence drives. Sure, there are guys who WILL wait if a heterosexual girl says she isn't ready to consent yet... but there are a WHOLE lot of guys out there who think dinner out gives them sexual privileges, dating for X weeks/months gives them sexual privileges, being an escort to the senior prom gives them sexual privileges... Hell, we had one guy at my senior prom act like he deserved a medal from his date's father for delivering her home still virginal!

            Prayers and best wishes to those in Japan.

            by Cassandra Waites on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:34:46 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  WMMS's former program director (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FarWestGirl, G2geek, JVolvo, Creosote

      (the one who oversaw its long-gone glory years) brought this up in an email to me today:

      Nothing could hurt Clear Channel more than an actual fine from the FCC.  And the negative publicity would also have a good effect.  Clients would be reluctant to advertise.   It's unfortunate that on line esp. Facebook no one has brought up boycotting their sponsors.   That always gets Clear Channel reeling.   That hits them where it hurts and influences them the most.
      So? What's up with that? Hand wringing doesn't change things.

      Take the "Can't(or)" out of Congress. Support E. Wayne Powell in Va-07. http://www.ewaynepowell.com/

      by anastasia p on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 04:58:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Each step is another towards stopping this hate (14+ / 0-)

    speech. It may be a mini victory but it is a step forward instead of total silence on the outrage.  

    Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing.Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1841

    by SallyCat on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:07:07 PM PDT

  •  no apology to the actual (14+ / 0-)

    victims of the comment?

    Only to those who were offended.

    Classy.


    may we not be strangers in the lush province of joy - Charles Wright

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:08:37 PM PDT

  •  Not really fair (7+ / 0-)

    There is a lot more here than "sorry if anyone was offended." there were repeated unequivocal statements it was wrong, even just plain stupid. And of course, it was. That said, do we really want to demand the ultimate (economic) sanction every single time? You might call this "weak sauce," but it seems far more in depth than most apologies we see these days.

    Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

    by dhonig on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:09:46 PM PDT

    •  It's perfectly fair. (12+ / 0-)

      He chose to dilute his apology by including those "non-apology" words that should have had no place in a genuine apology.

      That said, do we really want to demand the ultimate (economic) sanction every single time?
      No, not every single time. As I said above, if it was just an off-color joke, I would be more forgiving. But in the case of advocating the rape of a child? Yes. Yes, nothing but the ultimate sanction will suffice.

      Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

      by Chrislove on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:14:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What non-apology words? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Seneca Doane

        he didn't say "sorry IF anybody was offended." He said "sorry TO anyone who was offended." Who else can he apologize to?

        Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

        by dhonig on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 04:20:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Why can't he just be sorry? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Pandoras Box, luckylizard

          Adding "to anyone who was offended" dilutes the meaning of the whole apology.

          Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

          by Chrislove on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:12:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Only if you're looking for it to (0+ / 0-)

            because otherwise, it doesn't do that, not even a little. You can only apologize to those who are offended. Sorry, but you mis-read what was said at first, and now you're defending your prior position instead of reading the actual words.

            Done with politics for the night? Have a nice glass of wine with Palate Press: The online wine magazine.

            by dhonig on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:14:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I did not misread what was said (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Pandoras Box

              And if you think "screw her straight" implies anything other than force, I have a bridge to sell you. If he meant dinner and a movie, he would have said as much.

              And no, you can just apologize. "To anyone who was offended" seems to relegate those who were offended into a group of crazy, overly sensitive people who need to be appeased. Everyone should have been offended, so the apology should have been to everyone, but especially to the girl he targeted. Whether or not it was his intention to issue a non-apology, I don't know, but words like that have no place in a genuine apology.

              Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

              by Chrislove on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:24:28 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  why can't he just be FIRED? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Chrislove

            He can be as sorry as he wants to be, or not, frankly I don't give a damn either way.

            What matters is that anyone in a public position understands really clearly that advocating or joking about child-molestation or child-rape, or lynching, or assassination of elected officials, etc. etc., is 100% unacceptable with zero exceptions, and in exchange for the upside of high pay and celebrity status, they also take on the downside risk of getting their arses kicked the hell out of that job if they cross the line.  

            And that wasn't a run-on sentence.  

            He can be sorry or not as he goes looking for another job.  

            And he can be damn glad we don't have meaningful hate speech and incitement laws, or he'd be cooling his heels in a cell.  

            "Minus two votes for the Democrat" equals "plus one vote for the Republican." Arithmetic doesn't care about your feelings.

            by G2geek on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 08:31:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  That was my first thought. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Chrislove, Cassandra Waites

            The apologies "to those who were offended" still put the responsibility on the offended, not on the person who did the offensive thing.  Sometimes, fewer words make a bigger impact.  Just using his own words, I've bolded what I think would have done it:

            "I want to genuinely apologize to anyone who may have been offended by what I said," Dieter told listeners today, according to a transcript sent to GLAAD. "I regret what I did say. My comments were inappropriate. They were inexcusable, and just downright stupid. And I want to make it clear; there was absolutely no intention to promote physical or sexual violence."
            Note that I did not include his statement about violence.  You just don't say things like that if there is no violent intent.  Or maybe you do, if you're an irresponsible nutter...

            -7.62, -7.28 "Hold fast to dreams, for if dreams die, life is a broken winged bird that cannot fly." -Langston Hughes

            by luckylizard on Tue May 01, 2012 at 12:42:33 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  I really hate to say this, but he didn't do this (4+ / 0-)

        He did not, at least not unequivocally, "advocate the rape of a child" (unless you're going to conflate violent rape with statutory rape, which is not a leftist thing.)

        His statement was "screw [her until she's] straight."

        One possible translation of that is, as the diarist suggests, "rape [her until she's] straight."

        This is mind-bogglingly offensive.  Nolo contendre, if that was his intent.

        Another possible translation is: "seduce [her until she's] straight."  That is -- momentarily putting aside the issue of her not being an adult -- "have some guy seduce her so that she voluntarily has sex with him and finds out how great heterosexual sex is."

        This is still extremely offensive in many ways.  Additionally, if the person to be seduced is actually strictly gay or lesbian, this won't work.  It's telling in its ignorance and in its self-confident proclamation of the magic of the penis.

        However, it's just not on the same order of offensive as "raped straight."  And if he's saying "just make sure that she experiences the glories of the penis," it is ignorant and offensive and stupid and in this case homophobic, but it is NOT -- NOT -- the same as "advocating the rape of a child."

        Attack him for what he unequivocally did, but not for what he didn't do.

        Democrats must
        Earn the trust
        Of the 99% --
        That's our intent!

        "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky OCcupy!

        by Seneca Doane on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 04:25:52 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  To me (6+ / 0-)

          "Have one of your friends screw her straight" does not conjure images of courting and seduction. It conjures images of having sex with her against her will and showing her how wonderful penises are. Just taking the words that came out of his mouth into consideration, I do not believe he meant seduction.

          Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

          by Chrislove on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:08:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  there would be different words than 'screw' (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Chrislove

            if courtship and seduction were intended.  

            Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounding yourself with a-holes - William Gibson.

            by doesnotworkorplaywellwithothers on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:17:14 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Exactly. (2+ / 0-)

              "Screw" is, by itself, a pretty violent word.

              Homosexuality is found in over 450 species. Homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?

              by Chrislove on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:19:45 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  also, a mechanical word. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Chrislove

                if used at all it should be between lovers of longstanding, it seems to me.

                Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounding yourself with a-holes - William Gibson.

                by doesnotworkorplaywellwithothers on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:25:50 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The issue at hand is not etiquette (0+ / 0-)

                  it's whether he was using the word "screw" to mean "rape"!  I think that you have to give someone the benefit of the doubt there.

                  If he had said, "tie her down," "hold her down," "spike her drink," or anything like that, I'd agree with you.  But he didn't.

                  Democrats must
                  Earn the trust
                  Of the 99% --
                  That's our intent!

                  "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky OCcupy!

                  by Seneca Doane on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 06:26:42 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Seneca... we're talking about a female child here (4+ / 0-)

                    who was kissing a (girl)friend which resulted in advice to her father to have one of his adult friends... older geezer guys his age... screw his daughter straight.

                    Not sure how the hell you are getting off the rails with this one.

                    Daughter kissed a girl ergo

                    advice to dad to get an adult male friend of his and

                    have the adult male screw the underage daughter until

                    girl-kissing teen-daughter is now straight

                    as a result of said screw by older friend of dad's.

                    •  bronte, I'm not defending the homophobia (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      lostboyjim

                      and I'm not defending it from a charge of statutory rape -- if one presumes that he was saying "do this now" as opposed to "at some time in the future."

                      I'm addressing one thing: "did he say that the daughter should be raped?"

                      Let's say that he had said this -- none of which contradicts what he did say:

                      Tell ya what, dude -- wait until she's 18, then hire some good lookin' older guy to go after her with candy and flowers and end up screwin' her for a month -- then she sure won't be some lesbian!  Haw-haw!
                      Would that be offensive?  Yes.

                      Would that be homophobic?  Yes.

                      Would that be misogynistic?  I'd say so.

                      Would that be advocating rape?  No.

                      Advocating rape is a whole different level of evil than even homophobia and misogyny.  Before I accept that someone said it, I want to be sure that they actually said it.  I don't think that you can get there, in this case, without inferences that aren't strictly warranted.

                      Given that we're talking about a campaign here to get someone fired, yes I'm going to make sure that we're actually right about the charge.

                      Democrats must
                      Earn the trust
                      Of the 99% --
                      That's our intent!

                      "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky OCcupy!

                      by Seneca Doane on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 07:54:39 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Seneca... please realize that the word rape (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Chrislove, JVolvo, Avilyn

                        is not even in the mind of many men who do indeed commit rape. But, they don't see their actions as rape.

                        For example, the "virginity tests" done on female protesters in the Middle East by "religious authorities" simply because women had the nerve to speak up for a better future.

                        Any number of men consider those virginity tests normal and the word rape would never cross their minds. But, it is rape.

                        As for your time shift framing of the advice... into the future when the daughter would conveniently be of legal age for an older man to screw her straight... that is a slight of hand to remove the criminality inherent in our cultural and legal system. And it still does not absolve the atrocious advice nor resolve the core issues at the heart of this.

            •  You know, I'm not talking candy and flowers (0+ / 0-)

              when I say "seduction" -- I just mean sweet-talking someone into sex on their own volition.

              I think that you're wrong about the word "screw," and so does Jimmy Buffett.

              Democrats must
              Earn the trust
              Of the 99% --
              That's our intent!

              "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky OCcupy!

              by Seneca Doane on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 06:25:02 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  oh, well, jimmy buffet! (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Pandoras Box, JVolvo

                he's always my go-to guy for elucidation on the delicate dance between the sexes.  not.

                Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not, in fact, just surrounding yourself with a-holes - William Gibson.

                by doesnotworkorplaywellwithothers on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 06:43:30 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  You're engaging in wishful thinking Seneca (4+ / 0-)

                and Jimmy Buffett was talking about grown women and drinking and fun.

                Between adults.

                Consenting adults.

                Not about a young teen who is exploring life and her dad thinks his daughter is doing something wrong.

                So, he asks on friggin' talk radio how to fix her when there is nothing wrong with her.  

                And he's told to get an old guy to screw that child straight.

                It's reprehensible.

                On many levels.

                •  You're right, it's reprehensible on many levels (0+ / 0-)

                  Please read my other comments here.  I've consistently said so.

                  My concern is simply whether -- putting aside her legal inability as a minor to give consent -- the guy was advocating forcible rape.

                  That's different from -- and way beyond -- simply being reprehensible.  You and I don't disagree about it being reprehensible.  But was it advocating forcible rape?

                  (Technically, it was advocating rape, because of statutory rape laws, but society rightly treats statutory rape of a consenting minor (at least beyond a certain age) as being in a different category from violent rape.  I mean advocating forcible rape.)

                  Democrats must
                  Earn the trust
                  Of the 99% --
                  That's our intent!

                  "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky OCcupy!

                  by Seneca Doane on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 08:00:59 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  sigh... how many different angles and variations (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    JVolvo

                    can humanity design with the intent to subjugate women? And always it begins with control of our bodies. Cave-blanketed from head to toe and still even our very eyes are too wicked and "ask for it."

                    Why should it matter whether it was just statutory rape... or violent forcible rape?

                    Or whether the daughter was 15 or 19. The advice was still that the daughter was bad and the father has the right to inflict horrible actions upon her by virtue of his warped sense of morality and presumed right to control experiences affecting her.

                    Medieval and primitive Neanderthal response to a young woman's coming of age and learning the beauty of life. And these men turn it into something very ugly and crush the flowering of her soul.

                    And I know you have your lawyer's hat on with this Seneca.

                    •  You're saying it's homophobic and misogynistic (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      bronte17

                      and aggravated assholery -- and I agree with all that.

                      You're right that I have my lawyer's hat on, but it's not because I want to quibble.  It's because I think that when we start to say that someone has advocating raping a child, it should be the case that that person has really done so.  Guilty of A, B, and C, does not necessarily mean guilty of (even more abominable) D.  Charges should not be thrown around loosely.  We would not, on the evidence at hand, call him a "murderer" (even though young women have been killed in the process of rapes or have killed themselves as a result of them.)  If we did, we would undermine our credibility.  Our collective credibility is important to me.

                      So, yeah, I'm scrupulous about such charges.  So sue me!  ;7)

                      Democrats must
                      Earn the trust
                      Of the 99% --
                      That's our intent!

                      "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky OCcupy!

                      by Seneca Doane on Tue May 01, 2012 at 12:42:44 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

          •  I think that that's what you bring to it (0+ / 0-)

            (and to the extent that the obvious homophobia is pissing you off, no wonder.  He's a complete asshole when it comes to his homophobia.)

            But as a straight guy, I think it can easily be read either way.  I'm not sure what interpretation I'd lean towards.  To me this is a matter of my wanting to get "beyond reasonable doubt" before "convicting" someone of literally one of the worst things one could say -- and trying to get him fired as a result of it.

            "Screw" is just how some people talk.

            Democrats must
            Earn the trust
            Of the 99% --
            That's our intent!

            "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky OCcupy!

            by Seneca Doane on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 06:22:47 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  I agree with you. Yes, there's some waffling, but (10+ / 0-)

      the statements:

      "I regret what I did say. My comments were inappropriate. They were inexcusable, and just downright stupid. And I want to make it clear; there was absolutely no intention to promote physical or sexual violence."
      has none of the qualifying words we see so often.
    •  "I didn't mean what I said" (4+ / 0-)

      is the drill down on the "apology"

      And I want to make it clear; there was absolutely no intention to promote physical or sexual violence.

      This is a common problem:  people say and do offensive, hateful, and injurious things, and then say "but I didn't intend to harm anyone", as if intent therefore mitigates harm, and absolves the offender of the harm.  

      It doesn't.  Harm is harm.  Injury is injury.  And the perpetrating party is responsible.  Intent is irrelevant to harm.  If you truly care about the harm you caused someone else, you subordinate your excuses to listen to and accept responsibility for the harm you caused.  This is what a true apology is.  No fiddling around the edges, no "but, but", no "I didn't intend to harm".  

      And should he lose his job for this? Which is where the issue of intent then becomes functional.  For me, this comment is a major line crosser.  His words directed a criminal act of sexual violence against a specific individual.  He can cry now that he didn't mean it, but he said it.  He lacks professional judgement (he is a paid professional talker), as well as, he is a hateful bigot.  I'd fire him.  There are others who are just as bombastic as he is, but they know when not to cross the line.   A line Rush Limbaugh has also recently come to understand applies even to him.

      "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

      by Uncle Moji on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 04:05:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  But in this case, he probably didn't. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        johnny wurster, muzzleofbees

        Don't forget this was in the context of a morning radio comedy show.  They make jokes about things they don't really mean all the time, which is what almost every comedian does.

        It was a crass and inappropriate joke, to be sure, but I see no reason to believe it was anything other than a joke.  I'm willing to take his apology at face value and say he doesn't deserve to lose his job, since it appears to be sincere.

        •  Rush Limbaugh has a whole career made (0+ / 0-)

          of "comedy" and "entertainment".  He, too, apologized to Sandra Fluke for calling her vile names.  

          I have learned not to make jokes about women at the expense of those women, especially in work environments and over the public airwaves which is where this "joke" took place.  

          "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

          by Uncle Moji on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:26:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Limbaugh is not a comedian, he's a political (0+ / 0-)

            commentator, and that makes a bit of a difference.

            His apology regarding Fluke also was not nearly as good as this one seems to me.  

            But "he has a whole career" is the real difference, you highlight it yourself.  Does this radio guy have a "whole career" of making such comments?  I don't know, but it seems to me that if this is a one-time incident, the best outcome is that he accept the public censure for his joke, learn from it and not repeat it.  If he does something like it again, then there's good cause to call for his firing.

            For now, though, it's pretty dismal public outreach to refuse to accept apologies and wait and see if the offender really changes his tune before calling for his head on a pike.

        •  Doesn't Matter if It Was a "Joke" or Not (0+ / 0-)

          First of all, one wonders if the e-mail actually existed as a legitimate inquiry.  If it did, why on earth would the father ask a drive time jock a question like that?  I think it is just as likely that he made the e-mail up as a setup for his "joke."  Alternately, one of his "fans" could have sent it in to try to elicit an outrageous response.

          So that's the e-mail.  Then you have the response.  It seems to me that he was going for a "Howard Stern moment" but failed miserably since there was no wit whatsoever involved, only insult.  The result was off the scale offensive (but I'm betting that a certain segment of his demographic went "Day-um! Hee! Hee!")

          Then, of course, is the nopology.  Basically, that's WMMS covering its tracks for the FCC.  And the fact that the whole thing hasn't caused much of a stir in the area maybe shows how little this guy matters to the radio audience in general.

          "Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything even remotely true." -- H. Simpson

          by midnight lurker on Tue May 01, 2012 at 10:47:23 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Where did he say "commit sexual violence"? (4+ / 0-)

        He said "screw."  "Screw" doesn't necessarily imply "rape."  People screw consensually also.  If he had said "hold her down and ..." then that would be a clear solicitation to violence.  As it is, it's "arrange for some guy to seduce her."

        What it is, more clearly, is homophobic, because it views lesbianism as something to be avoided or cured.  I don't defend it on those grounds.  I don't blame anyone for being royally pissed off.  But when you say that someone wants to encourage others to commit sexual violence, you should be really sure it's true.

        Democrats must
        Earn the trust
        Of the 99% --
        That's our intent!

        "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky OCcupy!

        by Seneca Doane on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 04:33:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Uh, she is clearly not interested in sex with men (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Pandoras Box

          an interest her father clearly finds disgusting and troublesome.  You seem to imply "screwing" a lesbian by a friend of her father's would be consensual....why?  His daughter has pre-said "No, I don't want to have sex with men" by saying she is a lesbian.  No means no, right?  Did I miss a belief that if a lesbian has sex with a man by whatever means, it makes her want to be straight?  Historically, lesbians are raped by men as a mistaken "antidote" for homosexuality, as punishment for lesbianism, because they are women.  The "get a man to screw a lesbian straight" is hardly new to Dieter.  This is where homophobia and sexism are absolutely linked, and it's linked through a meme that raping a lesbian will make her straight.

          I am very surprised that you really believe that "have one of your friends screw her" means "ahem, arrange for one of your nice manly friends to romance and seduce your lesbian daughter"?  Really?  That's something even the apologizing Dieter isn't claiming!  I don't know what kind of women you have sex with, or daughters or sisters you have, but if you think saying to them "I have a friend I told him I want him to screw you" will be embraced as "seduction" you hang out with very different crowd of women than I do.  Say that to a crowd of lesbian feminists, and see if they go with your translation.  I would get eaten alive.

          "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

          by Uncle Moji on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:15:26 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  She's an adolescent (0+ / 0-)

            Her sexuality may not yet be fixed -- who knows, from the brief description, whether she has an interest in men instead or as well.  (An adolescent interest in kissing other women could be a matter of lesbianism -- or pregnancy avoidance, etc.)

            Regardless, I'm not arguing that this guy isn't homophobic; he is.  I'm not arguing that lesbians haven't been raped through some real or conveniently faked belief that it might make them straight; they have.  I'm saying that what he said is not nearly enough to conclude that he meant rape in this instance.

            By "seduction," I mean the general usage: obtaining sexual relations without force or duress, not necessarily "flowers, dinner and a movie."  Showing a person one wants to have sex with one's rippling abs may technically be "seduction."  (And I'm sure some people here will attest that it sometimes works.)

            Do you think that his advice was "tell your daughter that you're sending someone over the screw her"?  It wasn't.  There was not even anything in the brief statement that suggested that it happen before she turned 18.

            Democrats must
            Earn the trust
            Of the 99% --
            That's our intent!

            "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky OCcupy!

            by Seneca Doane on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 06:39:24 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  i cannot for the LIFE of me understand (0+ / 0-)

              why you are defending this slime

              •  I'm not "defending him" generally (0+ / 0-)

                I'm questioning whether he committed the specific, beyond reprehensible act, of advocating forcible rape, as many people here are asserting too easily for my taste.  This isn't about him, it's about us, and our standards of proof.

                Democrats must
                Earn the trust
                Of the 99% --
                That's our intent!

                "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky OCcupy!

                by Seneca Doane on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 08:03:45 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  So wait until she'd 18 and then send your (0+ / 0-)

                  friends over to screw her?  How is that better?

                  That's your defense?

                  I have ZERO idea why you have placed yourself in this position.  You ARE defending a homophobe, two of them actually, who think it is funny or appropriate or a remedy to suggest men have forced sex with lesbian daughters to make them straight.  

                  I am surprised that you seem unable to recognize how offensive your comments and rationalizations are, and how hard you are working to rationalize "screw your daughter straight" as equal to "Seduction" -  sorry, but by no rational woman standard would your definition of seduction be equal to "screw", and by most rational men standard, you'd be hard pressed to find agreement.  You are making a weird outlier rationalization, that seems out of character for you.  

                  You suggest, as part of your defense of the DJ, that the daughter's sexual orientation may not be fixed.  How do you know that?  Do you think her having sex with a penis will sway her sexual orientation?  Do you think she has not had enough exposure to the joys of heterosexuality to know how wonderful it might be for her to be the straight little girl her father wants her to be?  Really?  Not enough pics of rippling male abs or Brad Pitt or the boys from the vampire movies or overweight middle aged men her father's age?

                  Let me put it this final way, let's say, since you like hypotheticals, that the adult man calling is an angry white father who is disgusted that his teenage daughter has been kissing Filipino or Black or Latino or biracial teenage boys.  He calls a conservative DJ on the air to complain about how disgusting and revolting and slutty his daughter is for not dating white, and the DJ says "Hey buddy, why don't you just get some of your friends to screw her white."

                  I have continued greatest respect for you, SD, but this one slice of you, I just don't get.

                  "Out of Many, One." This is the great promise of our nation -9.75 -6.87

                  by Uncle Moji on Fri May 04, 2012 at 06:28:38 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I know ... it may be better to continue offline (0+ / 0-)

                    Your hypothetical suggests that we're talking at cross-purposes, and we don't actually disagree over much.

                    Democratic Candidate for California State Senate, District 29, running on an Occupy platform. Also Civic Liaison for Occupy Orange County.

                    "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky

                    by Seneca Doane on Sat May 05, 2012 at 10:47:34 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

  •  Another non apology appology. Do they train RW (4+ / 0-)

    to do this?

    Proud Slut...Fear is the Mind Killer

    by boophus on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:22:18 PM PDT

    •  yes as a matter of fact they do (4+ / 0-)

      "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
      Real journalists know that lies do not bring "balance" to truth! (h/t elwior)

      by TrueBlueMajority on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:24:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Is he RW? (0+ / 0-)

      Or is he a shock jock who made a stupid joke on a morning radio show? And it seems pretty sincere to me. What else would you have liked to hear?

      •  When you apologize to those offended it is a false (0+ / 0-)

        apology with the embedded message that some are too sensitive... Kinda like saying "geesh what 's the matter with you, I was just kidding" Uh huh. Perhaps apologizing to victims of pedophilia or rape would be more believable ...otherwise it is merely saying sorry I offended you and expect me in the dark out side your door for your lesson in who has the right to tell you what sexual acts you are to enjoy... namely rape and domination with a dash of brutality.

        Proud Slut...Fear is the Mind Killer

        by boophus on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 08:03:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  not good enough (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Uncle Moji, elwior, Pandoras Box

    "Politics is like driving. To go backward put it in R. To go forward put it in D."
    Real journalists know that lies do not bring "balance" to truth! (h/t elwior)

    by TrueBlueMajority on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:24:28 PM PDT

  •  Y'know, I came out (8+ / 0-)

    a lifetime ago.  And my father probably didn't like it at the time but he got over it.  I never felt that he didn't love me.  And he met all my lovers.

    It is rather horrifying to know that there are people on the air NOW who are even more vile than Anita Bryant was all those years ago.

    When we stopped drinking orange juice to protest her.

    (BTW, I still prefer grapefruit juice.  Anita can keep the orange stuff.)

    To make the argument that the media has a left- or right-wing, or a liberal or a conservative bias, is like asking if the problem with Al-Qaeda is do they use too much oil in their hummus. Al Franken

    by Youffraita on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:33:36 PM PDT

  •  Clear Channel is a prime example of the big (6+ / 0-)

    buisness media that has pretty much killed radio.  Gather 'round, children, and I'll tell you of a time when people used to liste to the radio and here local personalities talk about local events, interview local officials (!) play music, take requests from listeners etc....

    Now, in every city in the nation, you have a GAP/Starbucks/Payless strip mall of "entertainment":

    - canned, robo-DJs playing pop for the ladies
    - canned, robo-DJs playing oldies for the geezers
    - canned, robo-DJs playing the to 10 country songs over and over again
    - a loudmouth morning "zoo" show that appeals to men, 18-36 years old
    - (maybe) an all news station, but probably an all-right wing station
    - an all-sports station
    - (if you're lucky) NPR

    Thank you, Clear Channel.  Raunch sells.  Enjoy your ratings.  The rest of us will simply download podcasts, internet radio, etc...and you will slowly become irrelavant.

    If you live in Cleveland and aren't listening to the last bastion of local, independent, creative radio: COLLEGE RADIO, not to mention the more than decent NPR station, you're simply not doing it right.

    •  My personal favorite: (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Uncle Moji, elwior, Pandoras Box

      http://www.wrti.org/

      Top of the right side gives you the choice of classical or jazz.  I'm listening to jazz right now.

      Disclosure: I'm a contributing member.  Only five bucks per month, but...I'm a contributing member.  And helping to keep jazz and classical alive in the Philadelphia region.

      To make the argument that the media has a left- or right-wing, or a liberal or a conservative bias, is like asking if the problem with Al-Qaeda is do they use too much oil in their hummus. Al Franken

      by Youffraita on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:45:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  "Enjoy" WHAT ratings? (0+ / 0-)

      This station hasn't been a ratings leader in years.

      People say terrestrial radio died because people have so many options for music (and other sonic entertainment) at their fingertips. But I think that is only part of the story. The Clear Channels and other megaconglomerates that ate up most of the country's radio stations in the wake of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 also gave away terrestrial radio's biggest asset: the ability to be local. I remember reading an article in Billboard in the late 90s where an exec of the company that became Clear Channel pooh-poohed the then-nascent satellite and yet-undeployed Internet radio by saying, "We're from your hometown, but you would have no idea where an Internet station is coming from." And AT THAT TIME they were already syndicating programs and generating playlists from a home office, homogenizing stations across the country. So they gave away what they themselves defined as the competitive edge of terrestrial radio.

      Also, N (now) P (oandering to) R (the Right) sucks.

      Take the "Can't(or)" out of Congress. Support E. Wayne Powell in Va-07. http://www.ewaynepowell.com/

      by anastasia p on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:10:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This statement (5+ / 0-)
    there was absolutely no intention to promote physical or sexual violence.
    is clearly untrue: rape is by definition physical and sexual violence.  Why not admit what he did when apologizing?  Otherwise what is he apologizing for?

    ♥ Medicare For All. ♥
    "Our health care system is like a casino. The insurance industry is the House... The House always wins." -- UnaSpenser

    by Chi on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 03:44:32 PM PDT

    •  Sounds to me like he's saying (0+ / 0-)

      the comment was not meant in earnest, that it was a joke, albeit an unfunny and extremely inappropriate one.

      •  yeah - I don't care what he MEANT (0+ / 0-)

        it's what he SAID that was horrible

        •  Sure, I agree it was horrible (0+ / 0-)

          and beyond bounds.

          But comedians make out-of-bounds jokes regularly, and they don't necessarily mean it literally.  It's not acceptable, but I think it's fair to distinguish between the intent of someone who is trying to be shockingly funny versus someone who really means it.  And in that light, I think accepting his ostensibly sincere apology and making sure he doesn't do this again is an appropriate response, as opposed to implacably demanding he be fired.

          •  meh (0+ / 0-)

            I don't give a rat's ass if he gets canned

            I am sick of shock jocks who think they are so fucking hilarious, but what they are really doing is just spewing hatred.

            and then they are just SO surprised that people didn't get the "joke"

            we don't like to take that shit from Republicans when they make outrageous statements and then say "see - those Democrats don't have any sense of humor" and I sure as hell don't care to take it now

            he can say whatever the fuck he wants...from home

  •  So he says... (11+ / 0-)
    And I want to make it clear; there was absolutely no intention to promote physical or sexual violence.
    ...but the problem is that there was.
    •  If he didn't mean it? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      arlene

      Why did he say it?
         Was his brain turned off?

      "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

      by elwior on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 04:32:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Look at the station's website (0+ / 0-)

      The goal is to be crude and offensive. I mean — a separate menu item for pictures of women on toilets? A 'thong of the day" closeup of a woman's butt? This station is the Hooter's of the airwaves.

      Take the "Can't(or)" out of Congress. Support E. Wayne Powell in Va-07. http://www.ewaynepowell.com/

      by anastasia p on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 05:12:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  "those who were offended"? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jayden, Pandoras Box

    I think he may have found the one thing to say that offended everybody.

    So I see only tatters of clearness through a pervading obscurity - Annie Dillard -6.88, -5.33

    by illinifan17 on Mon Apr 30, 2012 at 04:35:42 PM PDT

  •  Isn't (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jayden

    that a crime to advocate that on air?

    •  No. (0+ / 0-)

      I mean, unless you're thinking in a "crimes against decency and good taste" sense. I suppose you could argue that the radio host's statement constituted a threat of bodily harm and/or a criminal conspiracy with the letter-writer, but that's a pretty long shot indeed.

      As long as he didn't say that he was going to rape her, and as long as he refrained from slanderous remarks ("I think you should be raped", while certainly a reprehensible sentiment, doesn't contain a statement of fact and therefore isn't slander), he violated no statutory law. Only the "laws of human decency" kind.

      Having free speech unfortunately means that some people will be free to be assholes. Now, we don't just have to sit there and take it -- the public criticism and pressure brought against this guy is entirely appropriate and makes me happy -- but we can't lock people up just for saying shit we don't like.

      I support torturous regimes! Also, I kick puppies.

      by eataTREE on Tue May 01, 2012 at 09:36:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site