- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2024 13:33
|
|
- jyrka
- Jan 21, 2005
-
Potato Count: 2 small potatoes
|
A lot of good arguments from both sides. This is a subject I'm very much interested in. Good find, thanks!
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2015 23:25
|
|
- trem_two
- Oct 22, 2002
-
it is better if you keep saying I'm fat, as I will continue to score goals
-
Fun Shoe
|
Oh how I wish he posted here
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 01:29
|
|
- Byolante
- Mar 23, 2008
-
by Cyrano4747
|
He forgot to append
'Hey that sure is something, what do you call it?'
'The Arristocrats'
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2015 01:30
|
|
- blue footed boobie
- Sep 14, 2012
-
UEFA SUPREMACY
|
lol
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2015 16:53
|
|
- frankenfreak
- Feb 16, 2007
-
I SCORED 85% ON A QUIZ ABOUT MONDAY NIGHT RAW AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS LOUSY TEXT
#bastionboogerbrigade
|
the best thing about the norwich post is that he's like 'lemme use a bit of game theory' and then doesn't use any game theory or bring it up ever again.
The talk about roles and attributes makes it clear the "game" in "game theory" is Football Manager.
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 12:51
|
|
- African AIDS cum
- Feb 29, 2012
-
Welcome back, welcome back, welcome baaaack
|
There are few sporting events I get as excited about as the World Cup. I played soccer in high school, in the NCAA, and for five years post-college, including two glorious years in the Golden Gate Women's League, Premier Division. What the U.S. Men's National Team has accomplished is extraordinary, with a second consecutive appearance in the knock-out round and incredible teamwork and fortitude against four formidable opponents.
Only one thing mars my enjoyment of watching the World Cup, and it's the absence of one small word. Just a tiny qualifier in a statistic that really should be corrected as our men's team continues to gain respect internationally. So I ask the American commentators, please stop announcing that Landon Donovan is the "all-time U.S. leading goal scorer." He is not. With 57 international goals, he's not even in the Top Five.
The all-time U.S. leading goal scorer is Abby Wambach, with 167 goals, followed by Mia Hamm (158), Kristine Lilly (130), Michelle Akers (105) and Tiffeny Milbrett (100). In fact, Abby Wambach is the all-time leading goal scorer in the world, among all soccer players, male or female.
One could argue that the men's game may be a lower scoring game than the women's, with 12 women having 100 or more international goals and only one man (Iran's Ali Daei), or perhaps women's soccer careers simply last longer, allowing them to play more games on the international stage. After all, the U.S. Women's National Team generally goes a lot farther in the Olympics and the World Cup than our men do, and many of their games end in penalty kicks, so of course they would have more opportunities to put points on the board. For a more direct comparison of the statistics, however, consider this: four current or past members of the U.S. Women's National Team are among the top 10 goal scorers in the world (including #1 and #2), whereas our highest scoring male player is #20.
I don't want to take anything away from what Landon Donovan has achieved. It is commendable. But every time he sits there, silently allowing that phrase to be rattled off — "all-time leading U.S. goal scorer" — without pointing out that he is the all-time leading men's goal scorer, it does take away from what Abby Wambach and Mia Hamm have achieved — total world domination.
In sports like tennis and gymnastics, where the U.S. women clearly outstrip their male counterparts, no one talks about the men's statistics without that clarifier. Why is soccer different? Why are almost all other sports different? Why do people consistently claim that Mike Krzyzewski is the winningest coach in college basketball when he is still 115 wins behind Pat Summit, with a significantly lower win percentage (his .763 to her .841)? How hard would it be to simply slip the word "men's" into the conversation, if nothing else, in the interest of accuracy?
The issue of establishing women's achievements as "women's" but allowing the male position to be the assumed baseline goes far beyond sports. When Sonia Sotomayor was being confirmed for the Supreme Court, members of Congress repeatedly asked her (repeatedly) if, as a Latina, she would be able to remain neutral. I don't recall ever in the history of confirmation hearings, anyone asking, "As a white male, do you think you'll be able to remain neutral when deciding issues of law?" Given some recent decisions, maybe they should have!
We have to stop assuming that the male position is objective, unbiased, nonpartisan, with no need to be qualified as male. All one has to do is notice that the (mostly) rich, white men in charge have done nothing to punish the (entirely) rich, white men who crashed our economy — and in fact, took steps to ensure that their financial advantages be maintained — to see that men are anything but objective when it comes to assessing the achievements and crimes of other men, who happen to look exactly like them.
I see it consistently in social media, particularly on LinkedIn, a business-focused site where men are more active in discussions than on other sites. They will state their views and opinions as absolute fact, ignoring the reality that they are only expressing the male opinion. This came up in a recent interaction where some people were talking about how to solve a serious workplace problem and I suggested a group meeting, where it could be addressed most efficiently, with consensus among all involved.
One respondent replied: "No one in the workplace wants more meetings! Absolutely no one! When you suggest holding more meetings, it negates every other thing that comes out of your mouth." Hmm...it negates every other thing I say. Nope, no hyperbole there.
I pointed out to the commenter that just because he doesn't believe a meeting can solve the problem, it doesn't mean no one does. In fact, across all studies, it has been proven that women in the workplace prefer more open communication and collaboration and that this leads to better results for companies. He then told me I was dead wrong and left the conversation.
All of these things are related. The man who insists that "no one wants meetings!" and the Congressman who asks Justice Sotomayor if she can be neutral (as if he is) and the sportscaster who fails to accurately state that Landon Donovan is the all-time leading U.S. men's scorer are all saying the same thing — we are the baseline, and the rest of the world has to conform to us.
It starts with the language we speak. If we are always going to refer to women in the corporate world as "the female CEO of such-and-such company," then we have to say, "the male CEO." Who knows, maybe with that descriptor, the markets will become aware of how often men fail, and stop seeing manhood as a requirement for the job.
The male position is not the neutral position. It has a point of view, the male point of view, which not everyone shares, and which is not always superior. Either clarify everyone or clarify no one, otherwise it sends the message that one group is the norm and the other is a deviation, even when "the other" is more successful in the field.
And next time someone on national TV refers to Landon Donovan as the all-time leading goal scorer for the U.S., it would be great if he displayed some of the dignity and grace we know he possesses and say, "All-time leading men's scorer. There are seven U.S. women higher on the list than me."
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 22:09
|
|
- TheBigAristotle
- Feb 8, 2007
-
I'm tired of hearing about money, money, money, money, money.
I just want to play the game, drink Pepsi, wear Reebok.
-
Grimey Drawer
|
The key is to not read the whole thing but to just dart around looking for words and phrases
"Sonia Sotomayor"
"LinkedIn"
'And next time someone on national TV refers to Landon Donovan as the all-time leading goal scorer for the U.S., it would be great if he displayed some of the dignity and grace we know he possesses and say, "All-time leading men's scorer. There are seven U.S. women higher on the list than me."'
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2015 22:57
|
|
- Dunban
- Jul 4, 2012
-
OH MY GOD GLOVER
|
There are few sporting events I get as excited about as the World Cup. I played soccer in high school, in the NCAA, and for five years post-college, including two glorious years in the Golden Gate Women's League, Premier Division. What the U.S. Men's National Team has accomplished is extraordinary, with a second consecutive appearance in the knock-out round and incredible teamwork and fortitude against four formidable opponents.
Only one thing mars my enjoyment of watching the World Cup, and it's the absence of one small word. Just a tiny qualifier in a statistic that really should be corrected as our men's team continues to gain respect internationally. So I ask the American commentators, please stop announcing that Landon Donovan is the "all-time U.S. leading goal scorer." He is not. With 57 international goals, he's not even in the Top Five.
The all-time U.S. leading goal scorer is Abby Wambach, with 167 goals, followed by Mia Hamm (158), Kristine Lilly (130), Michelle Akers (105) and Tiffeny Milbrett (100). In fact, Abby Wambach is the all-time leading goal scorer in the world, among all soccer players, male or female.
One could argue that the men's game may be a lower scoring game than the women's, with 12 women having 100 or more international goals and only one man (Iran's Ali Daei), or perhaps women's soccer careers simply last longer, allowing them to play more games on the international stage. After all, the U.S. Women's National Team generally goes a lot farther in the Olympics and the World Cup than our men do, and many of their games end in penalty kicks, so of course they would have more opportunities to put points on the board. For a more direct comparison of the statistics, however, consider this: four current or past members of the U.S. Women's National Team are among the top 10 goal scorers in the world (including #1 and #2), whereas our highest scoring male player is #20.
I don't want to take anything away from what Landon Donovan has achieved. It is commendable. But every time he sits there, silently allowing that phrase to be rattled off — "all-time leading U.S. goal scorer" — without pointing out that he is the all-time leading men's goal scorer, it does take away from what Abby Wambach and Mia Hamm have achieved — total world domination.
In sports like tennis and gymnastics, where the U.S. women clearly outstrip their male counterparts, no one talks about the men's statistics without that clarifier. Why is soccer different? Why are almost all other sports different? Why do people consistently claim that Mike Krzyzewski is the winningest coach in college basketball when he is still 115 wins behind Pat Summit, with a significantly lower win percentage (his .763 to her .841)? How hard would it be to simply slip the word "men's" into the conversation, if nothing else, in the interest of accuracy?
The issue of establishing women's achievements as "women's" but allowing the male position to be the assumed baseline goes far beyond sports. When Sonia Sotomayor was being confirmed for the Supreme Court, members of Congress repeatedly asked her (repeatedly) if, as a Latina, she would be able to remain neutral. I don't recall ever in the history of confirmation hearings, anyone asking, "As a white male, do you think you'll be able to remain neutral when deciding issues of law?" Given some recent decisions, maybe they should have!
We have to stop assuming that the male position is objective, unbiased, nonpartisan, with no need to be qualified as male. All one has to do is notice that the (mostly) rich, white men in charge have done nothing to punish the (entirely) rich, white men who crashed our economy — and in fact, took steps to ensure that their financial advantages be maintained — to see that men are anything but objective when it comes to assessing the achievements and crimes of other men, who happen to look exactly like them.
I see it consistently in social media, particularly on LinkedIn, a business-focused site where men are more active in discussions than on other sites. They will state their views and opinions as absolute fact, ignoring the reality that they are only expressing the male opinion. This came up in a recent interaction where some people were talking about how to solve a serious workplace problem and I suggested a group meeting, where it could be addressed most efficiently, with consensus among all involved.
One respondent replied: "No one in the workplace wants more meetings! Absolutely no one! When you suggest holding more meetings, it negates every other thing that comes out of your mouth." Hmm...it negates every other thing I say. Nope, no hyperbole there.
I pointed out to the commenter that just because he doesn't believe a meeting can solve the problem, it doesn't mean no one does. In fact, across all studies, it has been proven that women in the workplace prefer more open communication and collaboration and that this leads to better results for companies. He then told me I was dead wrong and left the conversation.
All of these things are related. The man who insists that "no one wants meetings!" and the Congressman who asks Justice Sotomayor if she can be neutral (as if he is) and the sportscaster who fails to accurately state that Landon Donovan is the all-time leading U.S. men's scorer are all saying the same thing — we are the baseline, and the rest of the world has to conform to us.
It starts with the language we speak. If we are always going to refer to women in the corporate world as "the female CEO of such-and-such company," then we have to say, "the male CEO." Who knows, maybe with that descriptor, the markets will become aware of how often men fail, and stop seeing manhood as a requirement for the job.
The male position is not the neutral position. It has a point of view, the male point of view, which not everyone shares, and which is not always superior. Either clarify everyone or clarify no one, otherwise it sends the message that one group is the norm and the other is a deviation, even when "the other" is more successful in the field.
And next time someone on national TV refers to Landon Donovan as the all-time leading goal scorer for the U.S., it would be great if he displayed some of the dignity and grace we know he possesses and say, "All-time leading men's scorer. There are seven U.S. women higher on the list than me."
Right thread
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 01:48
|
|
- JERFit
- Dec 25, 2007
-
if someone said they'd give me money to play music + not have a job anymore I'd say NO
|
There are few sporting events I get as excited about as the World Cup. I played soccer in high school, in the NCAA, and for five years post-college, including two glorious years in the Golden Gate Women's League, Premier Division. What the U.S. Men's National Team has accomplished is extraordinary, with a second consecutive appearance in the knock-out round and incredible teamwork and fortitude against four formidable opponents.
Only one thing mars my enjoyment of watching the World Cup, and it's the absence of one small word. Just a tiny qualifier in a statistic that really should be corrected as our men's team continues to gain respect internationally. So I ask the American commentators, please stop announcing that Landon Donovan is the "all-time U.S. leading goal scorer." He is not. With 57 international goals, he's not even in the Top Five.
The all-time U.S. leading goal scorer is Abby Wambach, with 167 goals, followed by Mia Hamm (158), Kristine Lilly (130), Michelle Akers (105) and Tiffeny Milbrett (100). In fact, Abby Wambach is the all-time leading goal scorer in the world, among all soccer players, male or female.
One could argue that the men's game may be a lower scoring game than the women's, with 12 women having 100 or more international goals and only one man (Iran's Ali Daei), or perhaps women's soccer careers simply last longer, allowing them to play more games on the international stage. After all, the U.S. Women's National Team generally goes a lot farther in the Olympics and the World Cup than our men do, and many of their games end in penalty kicks, so of course they would have more opportunities to put points on the board. For a more direct comparison of the statistics, however, consider this: four current or past members of the U.S. Women's National Team are among the top 10 goal scorers in the world (including #1 and #2), whereas our highest scoring male player is #20.
I don't want to take anything away from what Landon Donovan has achieved. It is commendable. But every time he sits there, silently allowing that phrase to be rattled off — "all-time leading U.S. goal scorer" — without pointing out that he is the all-time leading men's goal scorer, it does take away from what Abby Wambach and Mia Hamm have achieved — total world domination.
In sports like tennis and gymnastics, where the U.S. women clearly outstrip their male counterparts, no one talks about the men's statistics without that clarifier. Why is soccer different? Why are almost all other sports different? Why do people consistently claim that Mike Krzyzewski is the winningest coach in college basketball when he is still 115 wins behind Pat Summit, with a significantly lower win percentage (his .763 to her .841)? How hard would it be to simply slip the word "men's" into the conversation, if nothing else, in the interest of accuracy?
The issue of establishing women's achievements as "women's" but allowing the male position to be the assumed baseline goes far beyond sports. When Sonia Sotomayor was being confirmed for the Supreme Court, members of Congress repeatedly asked her (repeatedly) if, as a Latina, she would be able to remain neutral. I don't recall ever in the history of confirmation hearings, anyone asking, "As a white male, do you think you'll be able to remain neutral when deciding issues of law?" Given some recent decisions, maybe they should have!
We have to stop assuming that the male position is objective, unbiased, nonpartisan, with no need to be qualified as male. All one has to do is notice that the (mostly) rich, white men in charge have done nothing to punish the (entirely) rich, white men who crashed our economy — and in fact, took steps to ensure that their financial advantages be maintained — to see that men are anything but objective when it comes to assessing the achievements and crimes of other men, who happen to look exactly like them.
I see it consistently in social media, particularly on LinkedIn, a business-focused site where men are more active in discussions than on other sites. They will state their views and opinions as absolute fact, ignoring the reality that they are only expressing the male opinion. This came up in a recent interaction where some people were talking about how to solve a serious workplace problem and I suggested a group meeting, where it could be addressed most efficiently, with consensus among all involved.
One respondent replied: "No one in the workplace wants more meetings! Absolutely no one! When you suggest holding more meetings, it negates every other thing that comes out of your mouth." Hmm...it negates every other thing I say. Nope, no hyperbole there.
I pointed out to the commenter that just because he doesn't believe a meeting can solve the problem, it doesn't mean no one does. In fact, across all studies, it has been proven that women in the workplace prefer more open communication and collaboration and that this leads to better results for companies. He then told me I was dead wrong and left the conversation.
All of these things are related. The man who insists that "no one wants meetings!" and the Congressman who asks Justice Sotomayor if she can be neutral (as if he is) and the sportscaster who fails to accurately state that Landon Donovan is the all-time leading U.S. men's scorer are all saying the same thing — we are the baseline, and the rest of the world has to conform to us.
It starts with the language we speak. If we are always going to refer to women in the corporate world as "the female CEO of such-and-such company," then we have to say, "the male CEO." Who knows, maybe with that descriptor, the markets will become aware of how often men fail, and stop seeing manhood as a requirement for the job.
The male position is not the neutral position. It has a point of view, the male point of view, which not everyone shares, and which is not always superior. Either clarify everyone or clarify no one, otherwise it sends the message that one group is the norm and the other is a deviation, even when "the other" is more successful in the field.
And next time someone on national TV refers to Landon Donovan as the all-time leading goal scorer for the U.S., it would be great if he displayed some of the dignity and grace we know he possesses and say, "All-time leading men's scorer. There are seven U.S. women higher on the list than me."
She's right
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 03:57
|
|
- African AIDS cum
- Feb 29, 2012
-
Welcome back, welcome back, welcome baaaack
|
I'm not in the mood for this poo poo
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 09:31
|
|
- Meat Wagon
- Jul 14, 2004
-
|
Does anyone else think that we should have some sort of music play when we score at home? More teams are doing it now and it always seems to get the crowd going even more. I think it would make our atmosphere even better
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 11:42
|
|
- Syncopated
- Oct 21, 2010
-
|
Left out Zlatan.
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 13:28
|
|
- blue footed boobie
- Sep 14, 2012
-
UEFA SUPREMACY
|
Tbh I'd prefer that he's arrested in office.
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 17:56
|
|
- JFairfax
- Oct 23, 2008
-
by FactsAreUseless
|
guess he's finished shredding everything
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2015 20:44
|
|
- Lenin Riefenstahl
- Sep 18, 2003
-
That's enough! Out of here, you tubs of beer!
|
Hahahaha right thread. But also she's right about stuff and sexism is bad. Womens World Cup ftw
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 01:17
|
|
- lmaoboy1998
- Oct 23, 2013
-
|
Hahahaha right thread. But also she's right about stuff and sexism is bad. Womens World Cup ftw
Nah it's like organising a special swim competition just for black people or a long jump for midgets. It's not empowering, it's patronising. Just make it legal for women to compete in men's football competitions. They'd fail for the most part, but you might at least get some hairy genderfreak tearing up the lower leagues occasionally, which would be more cool to watch than the WWC.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 08:00
|
|
- sassassin
- Apr 3, 2010
-
by Azathoth
|
Nah it's like organising a special swim competition just for black people or a long jump for midgets. It's not empowering, it's patronising. Just make it legal for women to compete in men's football competitions. They'd fail for the most part, but you might at least get some hairy genderfreak tearing up the lower leagues occasionally, which would be more cool to watch than the WWC.
The best national women's teams in the world get dominated by local u15s sides.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 08:55
|
|
- Mickolution
- Oct 1, 2005
-
Ballers...I put numbers on the boards
|
Nah it's like organising a special swim competition just for black people or a long jump for midgets. It's not empowering, it's patronising. Just make it legal for women to compete in men's football competitions. They'd fail for the most part, but you might at least get some hairy genderfreak tearing up the lower leagues occasionally, which would be more cool to watch than the WWC.
Where's this from?
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 11:21
|
|
- African AIDS cum
- Feb 29, 2012
-
Welcome back, welcome back, welcome baaaack
|
Nah it's like organising a special swim competition just for black people or a long jump for midgets. It's not empowering, it's patronising. Just make it legal for women to compete in men's football competitions. They'd fail for the most part, but you might at least get some hairy genderfreak tearing up the lower leagues occasionally, which would be more cool to watch than the WWC.
Equal pay for women! but give us seperate competitions! Get it straight ladies
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:03
|
|
- Lord of Garbagemen
- Jan 28, 2014
-
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
|
Get the gently caress out of here
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:10
|
|
- sassassin
- Apr 3, 2010
-
by Azathoth
|
There are plenty of women who could easily handle playing lower end of Championship or a lot higher though. If you think they can't then you don't know much about the women's game or have really outdated views.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:33
|
|
- African AIDS cum
- Feb 29, 2012
-
Welcome back, welcome back, welcome baaaack
|
There are plenty of women who could easily handle playing lower end of Championship or a lot higher though. If you think they can't then you don't know much about the women's game or have really outdated views.
lol where did you find this one?
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:41
|
|
- Lord of Garbagemen
- Jan 28, 2014
-
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
|
There are plenty of women who could easily handle playing lower end of Championship or a lot higher though. If you think they can't then you don't know much about the women's game or have really outdated views.
Right thread, but please remember source your quotes
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:41
|
|
- a very nice paella
- Oct 12, 2012
-
Kapitalism
|
There are plenty of women who could easily handle playing lower end of Championship or a lot higher though. If you think they can't then you don't know much about the women's game or have really outdated views.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/europe/3093147.stm
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 16:59
|
|
- oliwan
- Jul 20, 2005
-
by Nyc_Tattoo
|
Perugia president Luciano Gaucci posted:
"She is very beautiful, and has a great figure. I can assure you that as a player, she's very good."
mmm yes, italy.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 17:20
|
|
- The Big Taff Man
- Nov 22, 2005
-
Official Manchester United Posting Partner 2015/16
-
Fan of Britches
|
lol where did you find this one?
Its from a forum discussion about adding women to Football Manager lol
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 17:25
|
|
- stickyfngrdboy
- Oct 21, 2010
-
|
Amazing
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2015 20:27
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2024 13:33
|
|
- THATCHER BRAINWASH
- Mar 28, 2015
-
by Cowcaster
|
There are few sporting events I get as excited about as the World Cup. I played soccer in high school, in the NCAA, and for five years post-college, including two glorious years in the Golden Gate Women's League, Premier Division. What the U.S. Men's National Team has accomplished is extraordinary, with a second consecutive appearance in the knock-out round and incredible teamwork and fortitude against four formidable opponents.
Only one thing mars my enjoyment of watching the World Cup, and it's the absence of one small word. Just a tiny qualifier in a statistic that really should be corrected as our men's team continues to gain respect internationally. So I ask the American commentators, please stop announcing that Landon Donovan is the "all-time U.S. leading goal scorer." He is not. With 57 international goals, he's not even in the Top Five.
The all-time U.S. leading goal scorer is Abby Wambach, with 167 goals, followed by Mia Hamm (158), Kristine Lilly (130), Michelle Akers (105) and Tiffeny Milbrett (100). In fact, Abby Wambach is the all-time leading goal scorer in the world, among all soccer players, male or female.
One could argue that the men's game may be a lower scoring game than the women's, with 12 women having 100 or more international goals and only one man (Iran's Ali Daei), or perhaps women's soccer careers simply last longer, allowing them to play more games on the international stage. After all, the U.S. Women's National Team generally goes a lot farther in the Olympics and the World Cup than our men do, and many of their games end in penalty kicks, so of course they would have more opportunities to put points on the board. For a more direct comparison of the statistics, however, consider this: four current or past members of the U.S. Women's National Team are among the top 10 goal scorers in the world (including #1 and #2), whereas our highest scoring male player is #20.
I don't want to take anything away from what Landon Donovan has achieved. It is commendable. But every time he sits there, silently allowing that phrase to be rattled off — "all-time leading U.S. goal scorer" — without pointing out that he is the all-time leading men's goal scorer, it does take away from what Abby Wambach and Mia Hamm have achieved — total world domination.
In sports like tennis and gymnastics, where the U.S. women clearly outstrip their male counterparts, no one talks about the men's statistics without that clarifier. Why is soccer different? Why are almost all other sports different? Why do people consistently claim that Mike Krzyzewski is the winningest coach in college basketball when he is still 115 wins behind Pat Summit, with a significantly lower win percentage (his .763 to her .841)? How hard would it be to simply slip the word "men's" into the conversation, if nothing else, in the interest of accuracy?
The issue of establishing women's achievements as "women's" but allowing the male position to be the assumed baseline goes far beyond sports. When Sonia Sotomayor was being confirmed for the Supreme Court, members of Congress repeatedly asked her (repeatedly) if, as a Latina, she would be able to remain neutral. I don't recall ever in the history of confirmation hearings, anyone asking, "As a white male, do you think you'll be able to remain neutral when deciding issues of law?" Given some recent decisions, maybe they should have!
We have to stop assuming that the male position is objective, unbiased, nonpartisan, with no need to be qualified as male. All one has to do is notice that the (mostly) rich, white men in charge have done nothing to punish the (entirely) rich, white men who crashed our economy — and in fact, took steps to ensure that their financial advantages be maintained — to see that men are anything but objective when it comes to assessing the achievements and crimes of other men, who happen to look exactly like them.
I see it consistently in social media, particularly on LinkedIn, a business-focused site where men are more active in discussions than on other sites. They will state their views and opinions as absolute fact, ignoring the reality that they are only expressing the male opinion. This came up in a recent interaction where some people were talking about how to solve a serious workplace problem and I suggested a group meeting, where it could be addressed most efficiently, with consensus among all involved.
One respondent replied: "No one in the workplace wants more meetings! Absolutely no one! When you suggest holding more meetings, it negates every other thing that comes out of your mouth." Hmm...it negates every other thing I say. Nope, no hyperbole there.
I pointed out to the commenter that just because he doesn't believe a meeting can solve the problem, it doesn't mean no one does. In fact, across all studies, it has been proven that women in the workplace prefer more open communication and collaboration and that this leads to better results for companies. He then told me I was dead wrong and left the conversation.
All of these things are related. The man who insists that "no one wants meetings!" and the Congressman who asks Justice Sotomayor if she can be neutral (as if he is) and the sportscaster who fails to accurately state that Landon Donovan is the all-time leading U.S. men's scorer are all saying the same thing — we are the baseline, and the rest of the world has to conform to us.
It starts with the language we speak. If we are always going to refer to women in the corporate world as "the female CEO of such-and-such company," then we have to say, "the male CEO." Who knows, maybe with that descriptor, the markets will become aware of how often men fail, and stop seeing manhood as a requirement for the job.
The male position is not the neutral position. It has a point of view, the male point of view, which not everyone shares, and which is not always superior. Either clarify everyone or clarify no one, otherwise it sends the message that one group is the norm and the other is a deviation, even when "the other" is more successful in the field.
And next time someone on national TV refers to Landon Donovan as the all-time leading goal scorer for the U.S., it would be great if he displayed some of the dignity and grace we know he possesses and say, "All-time leading men's scorer. There are seven U.S. women higher on the list than me."
100% correct, sorry that some brain damaged MRA types here are getting huffy about this
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2015 13:13
|
|