No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
-
Silent Majority
- Singer-Songwriter Nancy
- Posts: 18757
- Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 8:28pm
- Location: South Londoner in the Midlands.
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
It's so fucking odd to have someone be a consistently brilliant comedian and be so visibly thick.
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116721
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
Or just that brilliance does not ensure having a social conscience. He also subscribes to that “people were tougher in the old days” crap. Like freaking out about inter-racial couples, open homosexuality, or showing a couple sharing a bed on tv. The whole tougher in the old days line is that you could pick on the socially marginalized and get cheered for it.Silent Majority wrote: ↑12 Sep 2018, 12:55pmIt's so fucking odd to have someone be a consistently brilliant comedian and be so visibly thick.
"Ain't no party like an S Club party!'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
-
Silent Majority
- Singer-Songwriter Nancy
- Posts: 18757
- Joined: 10 Nov 2008, 8:28pm
- Location: South Londoner in the Midlands.
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
Yeah. It's that thing that you pointed out to me years ago. The things that make him good and individual are also the things which make him less than admirable in his thinking.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑12 Sep 2018, 1:07pmOr just that brilliance does not ensure having a social conscience. He also subscribes to that “people were tougher in the old days” crap. Like freaking out about inter-racial couples, open homosexuality, or showing a couple sharing a bed on tv. The whole tougher in the old days line is that you could pick on the socially marginalized and get cheered for it.Silent Majority wrote: ↑12 Sep 2018, 12:55pmIt's so fucking odd to have someone be a consistently brilliant comedian and be so visibly thick.
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116721
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
Sigh. We'll always have, you guessed it, Frank Stallone.Silent Majority wrote: ↑12 Sep 2018, 1:08pmYeah. It's that thing that you pointed out to me years ago. The things that make him good and individual are also the things which make him less than admirable in his thinking.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑12 Sep 2018, 1:07pmOr just that brilliance does not ensure having a social conscience. He also subscribes to that “people were tougher in the old days” crap. Like freaking out about inter-racial couples, open homosexuality, or showing a couple sharing a bed on tv. The whole tougher in the old days line is that you could pick on the socially marginalized and get cheered for it.Silent Majority wrote: ↑12 Sep 2018, 12:55pmIt's so fucking odd to have someone be a consistently brilliant comedian and be so visibly thick.
"Ain't no party like an S Club party!'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116721
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
The Republican response is as predictable as it is stomach-churning: She's lying because women lie about this stuff all the time; or it doesn't count because it happened a long time ago, they were under age, people do all kinds of crazy stuff while drunk. On one hand, it's political expediency—they want to get their guy on the SC. But on the other, it's instructive politics. It reinforces an unambiguous opinion of male subjectivity and female utter objectivity, and women better fucking shut up about it because no one will believe you. They always playfully ask, Why didn't she come forward before? But they're immediately asserting why they'd better keep quiet. It's a crude but effective rhetoric of disempowerment, establishing conditions to preclude a victim coming forward and then blame her for not coming forward.
"Ain't no party like an S Club party!'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
Gaslighting Old PartyDr. Medulla wrote: ↑17 Sep 2018, 2:22pmThe Republican response is as predictable as it is stomach-churning: She's lying because women lie about this stuff all the time; or it doesn't count because it happened a long time ago, they were under age, people do all kinds of crazy stuff while drunk. On one hand, it's political expediency—they want to get their guy on the SC. But on the other, it's instructive politics. It reinforces an unambiguous opinion of male subjectivity and female utter objectivity, and women better fucking shut up about it because no one will believe you. They always playfully ask, Why didn't she come forward before? But they're immediately asserting why they'd better keep quiet. It's a crude but effective rhetoric of disempowerment, establishing conditions to preclude a victim coming forward and then blame her for not coming forward.
"Suck our Earth dick, Martians!" —Doc
- 101Walterton
- The Best
- Posts: 21973
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
- Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
Anyone else agree that it is Selina Williams that is being sexist?
- Flex
- Mechano-Man of the Future
- Posts: 35991
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
- Location: The Information Superhighway!
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
No.101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 5:37pmAnyone else agree that it is Selina Williams that is being sexist?
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
- 101Walterton
- The Best
- Posts: 21973
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
- Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
Do you agree with her?Flex wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 7:03pmNo.101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 5:37pmAnyone else agree that it is Selina Williams that is being sexist?
- BostonBeaneater
- Autonomous Insect Cyborg Sentinel
- Posts: 11953
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:24pm
- Location: Between the moon and New York City
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
I have to ask how on Earth she could be considered so?101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 5:37pmAnyone else agree that it is Selina Williams that is being sexist?
- 101Walterton
- The Best
- Posts: 21973
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
- Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
By making an allegation that she was treated unfairly and that she was treated unfairly on the basis that the umpire was a male and was sexist.BostonBeaneater wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:07pmI have to ask how on Earth she could be considered so?101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 5:37pmAnyone else agree that it is Selina Williams that is being sexist?
However she wasn’t treated unfairly and therefore the umpire wasn’t treating her unfairly on the basis she was female (and he was sexist).
Her false accusation therefore was sexist.
- BostonBeaneater
- Autonomous Insect Cyborg Sentinel
- Posts: 11953
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:24pm
- Location: Between the moon and New York City
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
I think the point of it all was this; for time immemorium male player threw grand male hissy fits without repercussions and the reaction was uneven. If it was OK for McEnrow in 1983 then Williams should receive the same treatment.101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:22pmBy making an allegation that she was treated unfairly and that she was treated unfairly on the basis that the umpire was a male and was sexist.BostonBeaneater wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:07pmI have to ask how on Earth she could be considered so?101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 5:37pmAnyone else agree that it is Selina Williams that is being sexist?
However she wasn’t treated unfairly and therefore the umpire wasn’t treating her unfairly on the basis she was female (and he was sexist).
Her false accusation therefore was sexist.
- 101Walterton
- The Best
- Posts: 21973
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
- Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
She was penalised for illegal coaching (admitted by her coach) and correctly dealt with.BostonBeaneater wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:38pmI think the point of it all was this; for time immemorium male player threw grand male hissy fits without repercussions and the reaction was uneven. If it was OK for McEnrow in 1983 then Williams should receive the same treatment.101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:22pmBy making an allegation that she was treated unfairly and that she was treated unfairly on the basis that the umpire was a male and was sexist.BostonBeaneater wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:07pmI have to ask how on Earth she could be considered so?101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 5:37pmAnyone else agree that it is Selina Williams that is being sexist?
However she wasn’t treated unfairly and therefore the umpire wasn’t treating her unfairly on the basis she was female (and he was sexist).
Her false accusation therefore was sexist.
The racket smash was the second violation and also correctly dealt with the same as any male player would have been and is.You can’t compare McEnrow in 83 but you can compare any male player in current times.
- BostonBeaneater
- Autonomous Insect Cyborg Sentinel
- Posts: 11953
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 7:24pm
- Location: Between the moon and New York City
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
Sure, she threw a fit which wasn’t a proudest moment. The illegal coaching rule sounds like some European horseshit you find in F1, futbol, or golf. I think playing field of behavior and expectations is tilted in favor is some and to the detriment of others. This is a big deal here in the States right now. I’m not sure if you’ve noticed but we’re in a bit of a crisis of conscience here.101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 10:00pmShe was penalised for illegal coaching (admitted by her coach) and correctly dealt with.BostonBeaneater wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:38pmI think the point of it all was this; for time immemorium male player threw grand male hissy fits without repercussions and the reaction was uneven. If it was OK for McEnrow in 1983 then Williams should receive the same treatment.101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:22pmBy making an allegation that she was treated unfairly and that she was treated unfairly on the basis that the umpire was a male and was sexist.BostonBeaneater wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:07pmI have to ask how on Earth she could be considered so?101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 5:37pmAnyone else agree that it is Selina Williams that is being sexist?
However she wasn’t treated unfairly and therefore the umpire wasn’t treating her unfairly on the basis she was female (and he was sexist).
Her false accusation therefore was sexist.
The racket smash was the second violation and also correctly dealt with the same as any male player would have been and is.You can’t compare McEnrow in 83 but you can compare any male player in current times.
- 101Walterton
- The Best
- Posts: 21973
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 5:36pm
- Location: Volcanic Rock In The Pacific
Re: No, No, Don't Worry. Sexism is Pretty Much Over.
You can’t dismiss the illegal coaching it is the catalyst of the whole thing. It is against the rules and is punished regardless of whether you are male or female.BostonBeaneater wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 10:46pmSure, she threw a fit which wasn’t a proudest moment. The illegal coaching rule sounds like some European horseshit you find in F1, futbol, or golf. I think playing field of behavior and expectations is tilted in favor is some and to the detriment of others. This is a big deal here in the States right now. I’m not sure if you’ve noticed but we’re in a bit of a crisis of conscience here.101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 10:00pmShe was penalised for illegal coaching (admitted by her coach) and correctly dealt with.BostonBeaneater wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:38pmI think the point of it all was this; for time immemorium male player threw grand male hissy fits without repercussions and the reaction was uneven. If it was OK for McEnrow in 1983 then Williams should receive the same treatment.101Walterton wrote: ↑22 Sep 2018, 9:22pmBy making an allegation that she was treated unfairly and that she was treated unfairly on the basis that the umpire was a male and was sexist.
However she wasn’t treated unfairly and therefore the umpire wasn’t treating her unfairly on the basis she was female (and he was sexist).
Her false accusation therefore was sexist.
The racket smash was the second violation and also correctly dealt with the same as any male player would have been and is.You can’t compare McEnrow in 83 but you can compare any male player in current times.
Williams was not playing well and was struggling.
Her coach ‘illegally’ gave her some advise how to get the upper hand ( details not necessary). It worked (again not relevant) but Williams went 3-1 up. She then had a shocker on her own serve with 2 double faults. As a result she smashed her racket and was penalised as anyone else male or female would have.
Williams claims she was then penalised for calling the umpire a thief. She wasn’t she was penalised for a 2 minute rant at the umpire that ended with her calling the umpire a thief. The umpire abuse was penalised the same as anyone else would be.
She had a bad day, she was frustrated, she lost. It wasn’t sexism and to claim it was is being sexist.
It’s a big deal everywhere which is why it is important to get things right not hide behind it?