Isiah’s Argument That Skin Color Makes ‘B-Word’ OK Is Ridiculous

By Drew Sharp
Updated: September 23, 2007

DETROIT — If Isiah Thomas gets a free pass from the black community for his idiocy, then Don Imus should get his job back. This is the double standard that too often blacks believe doesn’t exist.

Thomas admitted in a videotaped court deposition that he believes there’s a distinction when a white man calls a black woman “bitch” as opposed to when a black man uses the derogatory term.

Anucha Browne Sanders, a black woman, is suing Thomas and the New York Knicks over allegations of sexual harassment and unlawful termination. It appears that the “b-word” flew with regularity among Knicks executives and players.

The Knicks’ attorneys have argued during their cross-examination of Sanders that the exact placement of the word when used has a bearing on its meaning, asking her whether it was used in the beginning, middle or end of a sentence.

An insult is an insult. And stupidity is stupidity.

Thomas denies the accusations Sanders levied against him, but my biggest issue with him is how he believes that racial profiling is acceptable for incendiary words.

Would he want anybody calling his daughter a “bitch” in her workplace?

I don’t think so. Imus calling the Rutgers women’s basketball team “nappy-headed hos” not only cost him his national radio gig, but raised awareness as to how black women are negatively stereotyped.

Thomas is doing the same thing if he believes it’s different if the insult comes from a similar skin tone. And if the black community isn’t equally disgusted with Isiah’s attitude, then it’s exposing a hypocrisy that leaves it vulnerable to charges of selective contempt.