Meeka Claxton Calls Out Basketball Wives Over Boycott

Who doesn’t remember the season 3 episode of Basketball Wives when Tami Roman unleashed a wrath onto newcomer Meeka Claxton. The scene ended with producers and cameramen pulling Tami off of Meeka at a nightclub in Rome. Similar to season four’s attack in Tahiti between Meeka’s replacement Kesha Nichols and Tami, Meeka left the Rome immediately following. Unlike Tahiti however, Meeka was mocked and received little sympathy from viewers despite Tami being on full bully mode. Not surprisingly, Meeka isn’t feeling the out pour of sympathy towards Kesha and the call for Tami’s head.

The former Basketball Wives star decided to voice her disdain for all to read – check it below:

“Am I mad? No, more like I’m disappointed.

When I was attacked everyone thought it was funny. No one thought her actions were disgraceful. As a matter of fact the very same ladies (for lack of a better word) that are “hurt” by the backlash, joked about me being attacked. They laughed and even called me names for taking a stand against her.

I thought pressing charges was wack? Oooooh, I get it…it’s wack when it’s not you!

They all (except Royce) stood behind her, co-signing her actions. But now you want everyone to believe you want balance? As much as their hypocrisy bothers me, I expect it because now their actions threaten their money. So, I knew the crocodile tears weren’t far behind.

What really hurts me are all of the talk show hosts and journalists that are suddenly disturbed by what they are seeing. Taking stands, boycotting, signing petitions etc…Isn’t this what I contacted all of you about last year? I asked for your support, none of which I received. But now it’s a problem? So, it was ok for me to be physically assaulted? Where was all of this “Call To Action” last year? Am I less of a human being?”

The Basketball Wives petition on change.org has since received nearly thirty thousand signatures a slew of celebrity backers including Star Jones and Nicki Minaj. So does Meeka have a right to be angry?

Back to top