Here's the Hopkins 'White Boy' incident

[Kev]

To be honest,I think you guys are going OTT here.

Hahaha!!! I know you think I am overly sensitive, but my paticular point is, whats good for one should be good for the other... To try to bring race into is just plain tasteless and classless and goes to show money cant buy those things..

Like stated above if Joe said said he would never lose to know N****** or a Blackman it would cause a global outrage. I take it tongue and cheek myself but its amazing the double standard thats exists.

B Hop is an old and boring fighter to watch now. A legend for sure but he throws 10 punches per round max! Constantly muay thai clinching and head butting reminds me of Vale Tudo more than boxing. He needs to sell the fight somehow and that was his card:the race thing. I also think it was done out of desperation. He was trying to get under Joe's skin and it CLEARLY didn't work so he got annoyed. ESPECIALLY when Joe mentioned his losses to JT which were both close fights and NEITHER was a robbery.
Oh and Kessler is a better fighter than almost anyone B Hop has faced.A young,hungry,strong and at the time unbeaten warrior and a natural at the weight:when were any of these words used when defining a B Hop opponent(aside from JT whom he lost to)

I agree Bhop is a snoozer who's anemic punch count and rule breaking is unbearable to watch and is actually a mockery of the lightheavy division, if wasnt affiliated with GBP would have dissapeared to obscurity by now

Calzaghe will beat him quite easily be suprised if Nard wins more than 2-3 rounds, and that Kessler statement made me laugh during the confrontation.... Kessler would desicion him quite easily as well

CC back my man. And dude,I wasn't referring to you in particular when I said things went OTT(I was actully referring to Bilbo and his usual going off topic,talking about random statistics etc.)

I'm just trying to explain the difference between a white man commentating on a black man's colour versus a black man commenting on a white's man colour.

JT Rock immediately interperets Hopkins saying he will not lose to a white man as a statement of black racial superiority over whites. He (JT Rock) only holds this view though because in the past white's actually practised racial superiority over whites and so he assumes that any statement of colour is automatically an exclamation of superiority.

However blacks have never practised racial superiority over whites so Hopkins statement that he will never lose to a white man does not presume racial superiority whatsoever, that's JT Rock ASSUMPTION.

Look at it this way, if a convicted pedophile tells you that he thinks your daughter or little sister is gorgeous you will likely be highly alarmed to say the least.

But if your Nan or doctor tells you, you would just feel proud.

Why the difference? Because of the known pasts and predicted intention's of the people giving the comments.

So, when considering racial relations, if a white man (part of a race that practised EXTENSIVE and BARBARIC racial superiority over black's) says he will not lose to a black man, it will likely be deemed an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority.

However when a black man (part of a race that was BRUTALLY SUBJECATED and ENSLAVED by white's) says he will not lose to a white man he is not making an aggressive and racist statement of racial superiority but rather making a statement of defiance in saying he will not be beaten by a member of the race that historically subjecated his race.

It's a completely different statement of intention altogether.

It's no different to the relationship between a rapist and a past victim. If after repeatedly raping his victim the rapist was finally ordered to stop and anti raping laws were brought in, the future behaviour of the rapist toward the victim would be subject to a greater criticism than the victims future behaviour toward the rapist.

Furthermore any negative statements made by the rapist toward the victim would be regarded as possible threats of repeat behaviour whereas any negative statements made by the victim toward the rapist would hardly be seen as statements of rape intention but rather a sign of longheld resentment and bitterness.

As a Philadelphia street kid, criminal and prisoner Hopkins would have long felt the superior glare of the white man and his statement that he would not lose to a white man was clearly evidence of that resentment still present within him.

Now you can argue that his comments were not needed and in bad taste but you cannot seriously make a claim that they are racist without making that ASSUMPTION yourself based on white's past treatment of black's.