However, let’s give Kogan the benefit of the doubt here. Let’s say he really doesn’t believe that “fag” is a derogatory slur for homosexuals or a bigoted criticism of something perceived as homosexual behavior. It would mean Kogan has an extraordinarily poor grasp of context, history and sociopolitical reality — which incidentally, is entirely plausible in the case of Nate Diaz — but not to a far greater extent than many other Americans. It’s not justifiable, but perhaps it’s a plausible explanation for his ignorance.
Or at least it might have been, until he tweeted this.
However, let’s give Kogan the benefit of the doubt here. Let’s say he really doesn’t believe that “fag” is a derogatory slur for homosexuals or a bigoted criticism of something perceived as homosexual behavior. It would mean Kogan has an extraordinarily poor grasp of context, history and sociopolitical reality — which incidentally, is entirely plausible in the case of Nate Diaz — but not to a far greater extent than many other Americans. It’s not justifiable, but perhaps it’s a plausible explanation for his ignorance.
Or at least it might have been, until he tweeted this. I’m not sure how to construe that use of “fag,” except to assume that he’s calling Jordan Breen and Ariel Helwani’s shoes gay. Which kind of negates his previous excuse, flimsy as it was. It’s certainly not the worst use of the word you’ll ever hear, but it comes at a particularly bad time and it certainly doesn’t do anything to help the image of MMA in the public eye, especially considering Kogan is the manager of a number of prominent fighters.
The next time MMA fighters — or Mike Kogan — think about using “fag” without considering the implications of the word, or pretending to remain ignorant of them, hopefully they’ll remember that it does in fact have a meaning that they may not intend, and decline to use it. And if they intentionally use it as a derogatory term, hopefully someone will remind them to sit down, shut up and educate themselves before hindering the public discourse.
Diaz’s new managerMike Kogan, however, just can’t seem to shut up about it all — and he’s making his client look even worse in the process.
Immediately following Diaz’s tweet, Kogan issued a ridiculous justification to MMA Junkie that showcased a stunning lack of self-awareness.
“Guess what? The word faggot, at least in Northern California, and where Nate is from, means bitch,” Kogan said. “It means you’re a little punk. It has nothing to do with homosexuals at all. So when Nate made the comment that he made, he didn’t make it in reference to homosexuals or calling Caraway a homosexual. He just said it was a bitch move.”
Separating the word “faggot” from its many historical applications for insulting gay people, as Kogan tried to do, is a stretch. But let’s say that it was possible to separate them. We’d still be left with Diaz publicly calling someone a “bitch” — another word commonly used to insinuate homosexuality, and far more often used to insult women — and Kogan defending the usage of that word just as strongly.
Even if we recognize the obvious fact that Diaz’s tweet was insensitive, few people would crucify him simply for using those slurs in a moment of frustration. All we’re asking for is a little reflection, and some recognition of the fact that, though you may not be a bad dude deep down, that was an insensitive thing to say and a sincere apology is warranted. Or, again, to at least shut up about it all.
Kogan seems far too dense to do that. The manager was recently on MMA Fighting’s MMA Hour and went out of his way to insist that both he and Diaz are offering no apologies.
Diaz’s new managerMike Kogan, however, just can’t seem to shut up about it all — and he’s making his client look even worse in the process.
Immediately following Diaz’s tweet, Kogan issued a ridiculous justification to MMA Junkie that showcased a stunning lack of self-awareness.
“Guess what? The word faggot, at least in Northern California, and where Nate is from, means bitch,” Kogan said. “It means you’re a little punk. It has nothing to do with homosexuals at all. So when Nate made the comment that he made, he didn’t make it in reference to homosexuals or calling Caraway a homosexual. He just said it was a bitch move.”
Separating the word “faggot” from its many historical applications for insulting gay people, as Kogan tried to do, is a stretch. But let’s say that it was possible to separate them. We’d still be left with Diaz publicly calling someone a “bitch” — another word commonly used to insinuate homosexuality, and far more often used to insult women — and Kogan defending the usage of that word just as strongly.
Even if we recognize the obvious fact that Diaz’s tweet was insensitive, few people would crucify him simply for using those slurs in a moment of frustration. All we’re asking for is a little reflection, and some recognition of the fact that, though you may not be a bad dude deep down, that was an insensitive thing to say and a sincere apology is warranted. Or, again, to at least shut up about it all.
Kogan seems far too dense to do that. The manager was recently on MMA Fighting’s MMA Hour and went out of his way to insist that both he and Diaz are offering no apologies.
“Nate doesn’t feel remorse for what he said,” Kogan told MMA Fighting.”I don’t feel remorse for what he said. I don’t feel remorse for defending what [Diaz] said or elaborating on what he said. Because it was not a homophobic statement. It was not intended to offend homosexuals. We weren’t even talking about homosexuals. One can debate the multiple uses of this term. We can sit here and debate in the English language, there’s a lot of words that mean a lot of different things, but whatever. As it is, it wasn’t intended to be used the way people tried to twist the way it was being used. So therefore, what does he have to feel bad about?”
Yes, Mike, we can sit here and “debate in the English language,” which makes sense because that’s the language we’re using, and it is true that there are “lots of words that mean a lot of different things.” None of that seems relevant in any way to the discussion at hand, though.
“If we would have made a homophobic statement, or a statement that was clearly intended to insult homosexuals, that’s one thing,” Kogan went on, unbelievably.
“You come out and say, ‘Hey, you know what, I’m really sorry it hurt people. We didn’t mean to do that.’ But to me, and this is just my philosophy, and I’m sure it’s going to be disagreed with by many people. This is how I think, and how Nate thinks. The mere fact that there is a protocol to deal with these crisis situation implies its lack of sincerity.”
Like all of Kogan’s statements, the above one deserves a second read-through, if only for how unintentionally funny it is. Kogan actually says that, if you say something that is “clearly intended to insult homosexuals,” then you should go out and disingenuously apologize for hurting people, lying by saying, “we didn’t mean to do that.”
Kogan misses a couple key points — if you hurt people, it doesn’t matter much if you intended to or not. Also, no one is asking for false apologies from Diaz or, now, Kogan.
Mike, you aren’t waging some continued war against b.s. What folks are hoping for is some recognition that, intended or not, Diaz insulted and hurt people, and some basic consideration of that fact.
You know, because he’s an adult and all.
From his public statements thus far, it seems unlikely that Kogan will change his mind about the need for reflection and apologies. For the sake of Diaz’s career, however, we hope that he changes his approach to managing the public relations of his clients.
Maybe we’re judging Kogan prematurely. Mike, if you want to come here and, “in the English language,” actually discuss these issues with folks willing to ask you serious questions, we’ll welcome it.
If you’re interested in saying something different or better explaining yourself and your client, we’re interested. Because, lashing out at others and not taking responsibility for hurtful actions is kind of a bitch move, you know?
(Y’know, drinking a gallon of buttermilk every morning doesn’t make much sense either, but that never stopped him from doing it. / Photo via Joshua Wood @ MMAValor)
Roy Nelson‘s knockout of Cheick Kongolast weekend marked his third first-round KO victory in a row, and earned Big Country the first three-fight win streak of his UFC career — which means that the UFC has to start treating him like a legitimate heavyweight contender again, rather than a gray-bearded novelty act. So who’s next on Big Country’s menu? Following UFC 159, Dana White suggested that either Mark Hunt or Daniel Cormier could be the next opponent for Nelson, which makes perfect sense if we’re putting together matchups solely based on body type.
Nelson’s camp, however, doesn’t agree with one of those names. According to a report from Ariel Helwani earlier this week, Nelson’s manager Mike Kogan said he’s not interested in a fight against Cormier. “He doesn’t think it makes any sense for Nelson,” Helwani explained on UFC Tonight. Instead, Kogan would prefer Nelson to fight Hunt, Antonio Silva (if he loses to Cain Velasquez at UFC 160), or Junior dos Santos…despite the fact that Dos Santos already slaughtered Nelson back in 2010.
It’s obvious why the Nelson camp would want to avoid a guy like Cormier — he’s incredibly dangerous, but he still doesn’t carry the same name value as the other UFC vets that Kogan mentioned. And let’s face it, Nelson’s odds of beating Hunt or Bigfoot are a lot better than his odds of beating DC. (Let’s just forget Kogan said anything about Dos Santos. That’s a damn suicide mission, and we all know it.) From a managerial perspective, it’s solid advice. Devil’s advocate, though: Cormier is rightly ranked as the #2 contender according to the UFC’s official rankings, and beating him would place Nelson closer to a heavyweight title shot than a win over Hunt or Antonio Silva would.
Personally I think Nelson vs. Cormier makes dollars and sense. See what I did there? DID YOU SEE WHAT I DID THERE, YOU SON-OF-A-BITCH??? Anyway, let us know how you see it in the comments section.
(Y’know, drinking a gallon of buttermilk every morning doesn’t make much sense either, but that never stopped him from doing it. / Photo via Joshua Wood @ MMAValor)
Roy Nelson‘s knockout of Cheick Kongolast weekend marked his third first-round KO victory in a row, and earned Big Country the first three-fight win streak of his UFC career — which means that the UFC has to start treating him like a legitimate heavyweight contender again, rather than a gray-bearded novelty act. So who’s next on Big Country’s menu? Following UFC 159, Dana White suggested that either Mark Hunt or Daniel Cormier could be the next opponent for Nelson, which makes perfect sense if we’re putting together matchups solely based on body type.
Nelson’s camp, however, doesn’t agree with one of those names. According to a report from Ariel Helwani earlier this week, Nelson’s manager Mike Kogan said he’s not interested in a fight against Cormier. “He doesn’t think it makes any sense for Nelson,” Helwani explained on UFC Tonight. Instead, Kogan would prefer Nelson to fight Hunt, Antonio Silva (if he loses to Cain Velasquez at UFC 160), or Junior dos Santos…despite the fact that Dos Santos already slaughtered Nelson back in 2010.
It’s obvious why the Nelson camp would want to avoid a guy like Cormier — he’s incredibly dangerous, but he still doesn’t carry the same name value as the other UFC vets that Kogan mentioned. And let’s face it, Nelson’s odds of beating Hunt or Bigfoot are a lot better than his odds of beating DC. (Let’s just forget Kogan said anything about Dos Santos. That’s a damn suicide mission, and we all know it.) From a managerial perspective, it’s solid advice. Devil’s advocate, though: Cormier is rightly ranked as the #2 contender according to the UFC’s official rankings, and beating him would place Nelson closer to a heavyweight title shot than a win over Hunt or Antonio Silva would.
Personally I think Nelson vs. Cormier makes dollars and sense. See what I did there? DID YOU SEE WHAT I DID THERE, YOU SON-OF-A-BITCH??? Anyway, let us know how you see it in the comments section.
Filed under: MMA Media Watch, K1One of the problems that plagues combat sports broadcasting is that the television announcers are so closely aligned with the promotions whose fights they call that the broadcasters often start to sound like promoters th…
One of the problems that plagues combat sports broadcasting is that the television announcers are so closely aligned with the promotions whose fights they call that the broadcasters often start to sound like promoters themselves. The fans are told that every fight they’re watching is great, even if their two eyes tell them something different.
That’s why Michael Schiavello and Mike Kogan deserve a ton of credit for the way they called the Kazuyuki Miyata vs. Kazuhisa Watanabe K-1 World MAX tournament fight that aired on HDNet Friday.
One of the problems that plagues combat sports broadcasting is that the television announcers are so closely aligned with the promotions whose fights they call that the broadcasters often start to sound like promoters themselves. The fans are told that every fight they’re watching is great, even if their two eyes tell them something different.