Stephen A. Smith catching hell on twitter right now from his own Colleague at ESPN

[Hiphoplives4eva]

Speaking of celebrating women whooping up on men, check out the cover of Lucky magazine for August:

 

[mozichrome]

why the hell would we care about a cover of lucky magazine
wtf is luck magazine

and folks saying they dislike SAS but hang on his every word. folks gonna be right back watching FT monday

 

[jilla82]

man fukk yall and this c00n labeling shyt. You nikkas be the same dudes that get on here and them whenever they say shyt you agree with ...you do the same shyt with Whitlock or any other public black pundit.

they dont realize they are just as bad as these feminist they complain about.
Same over reaction to everything.

 

[mrken12]

Speaking of celebrating women whooping up on men, check out the cover of Lucky magazine for August:

Where was Chris Breezy's cover though?

 

[mrken12]

Looks like that butter biscuit supply is about to run short. They've turned on him.

Here's an article about SAS and check out the picture they used with it.

http://deadspin.com/stephen-a-smith-leaving-espn-radio-for-siriusxm-mad-do-1611513383

 

[Davin Black]

Looks like that butter biscuit supply is about to run short. They've turned on him.

Here's an article about SAS and check out the picture they used with it.

http://deadspin.com/stephen-a-smith-leaving-espn-radio-for-siriusxm-mad-do-1611513383

TBF, Deadspin hates First Take and everyone associated with that show.Pretty sure when they heard what he said the whole office was like

 

[Piff Perkins]

You equate women with children then have the nerve to paint anybody who may disagree with you as having a warped view of women That's rich.

What you're saying is a bunch of bullshyt. Women are not children and while they're not physically as strong as men on average but they certainly are physical threats. Nobody is above an asswhipping and sayin that a woman can't do anything to provoke a fight with a man except for getting physical herself is problematic. It really amazes me that so many women buy into that flawed way of thinking because it deems women as inferior.

It's a fact that women are not as physically as strong as men on average. That's a biological fact. I'm not going to attack anyone who is not a threat to me, whether it's a woman or a kid or Yung Berg. Unless they have the means of doing bodily harm to me, such as with a weapon.

Look, I've been in situations where chicks have gone apeshyt, I know they can do damage. But I also know they can be restrained, or you can walk away. Nothing gets hurt but your pride. There's no fukking way Ray Rice's little ass fiance would do anything to warrant the retaliation he gave her, end of story. She didn't have a weapon on her, she isn't half a strong as him, she was in an enclosed area where she couldn't grab and use items to attack him, etc.

When I hear "provoke" in relation to female victims of violence, it makes me wonder what other shyt people think. I'd love to hear SAS's views on whether women can be responsible for being raped or sexually assaulted - ie "well she was wearing that sun dress and had a couple drinks."

 

[Rell84shots]

If you havent done it then my bad But i've seen a lot of posters on here do it. They'll be like "I usually don't agree with *insert black pundit name here* but to him for this". Then he'll be back to being a c00n the moment he says something they dont agree with.

-

Gotcha, Me and a lot of posters do the exact opposite and always remember how much shyt these pundits have talked over the years. SAS & Whitlock will never get a pass from me because they've tapped danced for too long.

 

[DirkDizzler]

It's a fact that women are not as physically as strong as men on average. That's a biological fact. I'm not going to attack anyone who is not a threat to me, whether it's a woman or a kid or Yung Berg. Unless they have the means of doing bodily harm to me, such as with a weapon.

Look, I've been in situations where chicks have gone apeshyt, I know they can do damage. But I also know they can be restrained, or you can walk away. Nothing gets hurt but your pride. There's no fukking way Ray Rice's little ass fiance would do anything to warrant the retaliation he gave her, end of story. She didn't have a weapon on her, she isn't half a strong as him, she was in an enclosed area where she couldn't grab and use items to attack him, etc.

When I hear "provoke" in relation to female victims of violence, it makes me wonder what other shyt people think. I'd love to hear SAS's views on whether women can be responsible for being raped or sexually assaulted - ie "well she was wearing that sun dress and had a couple drinks."

Dat false equivalency

 

[Davin Black]

Gotcha, Me and a lot of posters do the exact opposite and always remember how much shyt these pundits have talked over the years. SAS & Whitlock will never get a pass from me because they've tapped danced for too long.

Add Mike Wilbon to that list, breh. All of them are mouthbreathers of the highest order

 

[philmonroe]

It's a fact that women are not as physically as strong as men on average. That's a biological fact. I'm not going to attack anyone who is not a threat to me, whether it's a woman or a kid or Yung Berg. Unless they have the means of doing bodily harm to me, such as with a weapon.

Look, I've been in situations where chicks have gone apeshyt, I know they can do damage. But I also know they can be restrained, or you can walk away. Nothing gets hurt but your pride. There's no fukking way Ray Rice's little ass fiance would do anything to warrant the retaliation he gave her, end of story. She didn't have a weapon on her, she isn't half a strong as him, she was in an enclosed area where she couldn't grab and use items to attack him, etc.

When I hear "provoke" in relation to female victims of violence, it makes me wonder what other shyt people think. I'd love to hear SAS's views on whether women can be responsible for being raped or sexually assaulted - ie "well she was wearing that sun dress and had a couple drinks."

When you hear "provoke" you just seem to sound like the rest of the idiots that know damn well what somebody talking about but want to play stupid for whatever reason. This that new age no accountability shyt going on nowadays.

 

[mrken12]

Dat false equivalency

Why must every discussion that has to do with women being accountable somehow go into the extreme examples of rape?

 

[philmonroe]

Why must every discussion that has to do with women being accountable somehow go into the extreme examples of rape?

They can't help that feeling it runs in their blood something crazy

 

[Davin Black]

When you hear "provoke" you just seem to sound like the rest of the idiots that know damn well what somebody talking about but want to play stupid for whatever reason. This that new age no accountability shyt going on nowadays.

Nah, I'm with @Piff Perkins on this one.

Short of threatening your life or the life of someone else in the vicinity, or proof that you are mentally imbalanced in some way, there is nothing that a woman can do to you that justifies beating her. IDGAF if she insults your family, your friends, your kids, your pipegame, whatever - if she's using words and your response results in her being bruised and/or bloodied, you have no excuse. It's easy as fukk to restrain a weaponless woman without causing serious harm.

I won't front and say I don't understand the desire to beat the shyt out of a woman who's pissing you off - that's natural. But to act on it in situations that aren't threatening your life are completely unnecessary.

 

[Gravity]

It's a fact that women are not as physically as strong as men on average. That's a biological fact. I'm not going to attack anyone who is not a threat to me, whether it's a woman or a kid or Yung Berg. Unless they have the means of doing bodily harm to me, such as with a weapon.

Look, I've been in situations where chicks have gone apeshyt, I know they can do damage. But I also know they can be restrained, or you can walk away. Nothing gets hurt but your pride. There's no fukking way Ray Rice's little ass fiance would do anything to warrant the retaliation he gave her, end of story. She didn't have a weapon on her, she isn't half a strong as him, she was in an enclosed area where she couldn't grab and use items to attack him, etc.

When I hear "provoke" in relation to female victims of violence, it makes me wonder what other shyt people think. I'd love to hear SAS's views on whether women can be responsible for being raped or sexually assaulted - ie "well she was wearing that sun dress and had a couple drinks."

My post wasn't about defending Ray Rice. I don't know what happened in that elevator and I don't really care. The woman has decided to stay with Rice so I don't know why people are trying to cape for her though.

My issue is with your overall mentality which perpetuate a double standard when it comes to violence regarding men and women. I don't have a problem if you have a "I won't put my hands on you unless you put your hands on me 1st" policy as long as it's applied across the board to me and women equally. If you're saying that nobody should be able to provoke a physical response unless they get physical 1st then cool. I dont agree(nobody is forever above an ass whipping) but i can respect that. I can't respect the double standard that says that men have this responsibility to never put their hands on women while aren't to be held to that same standard. When I hear people pretend as if woman can't provoke situations that lead to them being hurt or abused I tend to that they are ignorant and naive.