hyperetic
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 5349
Location: Fayetteville
Back to top |
 Posted: 12/16/18 11:10 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
I responded under the ad and received some as expected responses. I wanted to share the exchanges. I'll warn you up front the thread's a little long:
| Quote: |
Me:
The majority of the comments here represent why what Adidas is trying to do is important.
Chris Bassett:
How is that? This comment seems to avoid adding to the discussion while smearing "the majority of the" commenters.
Me:
Chris Bassett Well Chris, I thought my point was fairly clear. Did you read a good sample of the comments? The misogynistic attitudes displayed in a majority of the comments at the time I posted demeaned, devalued, discouraged, maligned women's sports. One of the things Addidas is trying to do with this campaign is to counteract that. Smearing, I think, would be the case if what I said wasn't true or if I had misinterpreted what was said. I didn't.
Ben Ramsden:
Tony Boyd want real equality and not special treatment. Just make it sports. Anyone good enough makes the team. That’s equality.
Ben Ramsden:
Yeah, if you are into identity politics. I guess adidas wants us to hate each other!
Me:
Ben Ramsden Not sure of your point here. Historically, men have kept women and girls off the playing field in Western culture for generations. Told them muscles were unsightly and unfeminine. When the ideals started to change and women were finally allowed to compete, they weren't taken seriously, to a certain extent, still aren't (evidenced in the comments). So basically the deck has been stacked against them for awhile. So now they've been thrown a proverbial bone and it's held against them because they don't perform like the men you exalt so much. What women want is not special treatment, but fair treatment and that equality you speak of. As far as I know, the best players are picked for teams, mens and womens. Or are you saying women competing against men directly in all sports? With the deck stacked as it is? The resistance to that has been and still is massive. Case in point, why is it such a big deal for girls to play on high school football teams, qualified though they may be? Chauvinism. Until you can rid the system of that and misogyny, it would never be fair or equal. And yes a few exceptions have made it on the field but not as many as there could have been.
Me:
Ben Ramsden Nah on the contrary, they want us to embrace each other's talents and abilities without lessening one based solely on their gender.
David Daniels:
Tony Boyd they’re just being PC and trying to sell more sports equipment while not being boycotted and bullied by the feminazis!!
Me:
David Daniels Well I agree with the part about it not being totally selfless and an attempt to raise their product profile to sell more products. That's just good business. However, calling it merely PC and a move to keep from getting boycotted disparages the cause the campaign is aimed at. Addidas has been out of the limelight for decades. Women's groups prolly hadn't even noticed them. Hell, protests would prolly raise their profile even higher. And the term "feminazis" would seem to indicate you don't give much creedence to issues that affect women.
Chris Bassett:
Tony Boyd you can subvert conversation by throwing out the word "misogyny", but in reality most of these people are just making rather obvious observations that women are not physically suited to compete with men in sports, and that this puts them at an extreme disadvantage in offering a sport that is as exciting to watch, much less to pay to watch. They're also a bit underwhelmed that Adidas would posit the idea that women are somehow disadvantaged in, what, getting into sports, competing in sports, getting paid like men in sports? I'm not sure, and I don't think Adidas made clear what their "obstacles" might be. Girls in my area have every opportunity to compete, both against one another and, in some cases, even against boys - that is, until the boys are so much bigger and stronger that it simply becomes dangerous. It is not misogyny to recognize differences that biologically disadvantage women in the arena of sports. It used to be called science - that is, until people like you decided that science was misogynistic and needed to give way to political correctness and willful blindness.
Chris Bassett:
Tony Boyd And Tony, let me translate David for you: "Feminazis" doesn't mean he doesn't "give much creedence (sic) to issues that affect women." but rather that there are people out there in the radical, liberal, feminist crowd, who truly want to show that women are better than men, without the concern that feminism used to show for merely espousing the virtues of women as, well, women. But your assumption about his use of the term continues your willingness to be combative about the issue rather than speak cogently and honestly about it.
Me:
Chris Bassett Hmmm... odd choice of word "combative". Which specific part(s) of my responses in this discussion at best, debate at most been "combative". My disagreeing with you doesn't mean I'm being "combative". Your experience with the term "feminazi" may reflect your perception of it. My experience with the term reflects my perception of it. Where I have experienced it, it was used as a disparaging insult. (When has anything associated with Nazis been good?) In my opinion, any women who are advocating the idea that women are superior to men are a fringe element just like the larger fringe element of men that advocate the idea that men are inherently superior to women and they have the political, economic, and social power to normalize it in society.
Todd Heath:
Tony Boyd and what about the other comments that are rational and factual, just ignore them you have an agenda. If you don't talk about or take into consideration the opinions, Are you trying to put a round shape into a square hole.
Me:
Todd Heath well Todd that wave flows both ways. (And if you recall I expressly stated that I was referring to the majority of the comments at the time of my post, not all). Now to your point, I have taken the points into consideration a large number of years even before I got into this discussion. Which specific factual points are you referring to and I will address them directly?
Chris Bassett:
Ah, so your experience of the word combative represents your experience with it and mine with mine. So all is relative, and your comment is right in your world, but my comment is right in no discernibly good world. Gotcha. I am suddenly feeling just like I am debating a Liberal. My friend, if you cannot see the passive aggressive nature of your comments, especially the first one, then I cannot help you. The bottom line is that Adidas is positing a non-issue, and people are responding, perhaps in ways you don't like, with common sense thoughts about very real differences between men and women. If you offer a product that fewer people want, THAT is the obstacle. You cannot force people to want it. I'm sure, however, you agreed that the Feds forcing every American to buy a product that most of them don't want was perfectly fair, so we will likely never come to agreement. Next time, though, try not using ad hominem attacks right up front and instead explaining exactly why you think people should change their beliefs and preferences about sports, or perhaps why you think the government should step in and make people pay for sports they don't like.
Me:
Chris Bassett yeah you hit the nail on the head with the liberal thing and the we won't agree thing cuz you're a Conservative thing. The rest not so much. My original statement did not expressly explain why it was stated because of it's obviousness. Whether you agreed with me or not, you knew what my point was, which is why you've invested so much time in trying to chastise me. And that thing that you didn't expressly explain but "passively aggressively" alluded to "Feds forcing every American to buy a product that MOST(?) of them don't want..." Is unfactual, Conservative speak and is no different than requiring folks to do anything that protects their health. Wouldn't be a problem though if it was... universal! (See what I did there?) But I digress. This is about equality and fairness for women in sports. If you can't see that, then it appears you're part of the problem.
Chris Bassett:
No, Tony. I was merely trying to get you to actually add to the conversation. I see now that was too much to ask.
Me:
Chris Bassett I think I added about as much as anyone else. Did you read the subsequent posts? Anyway, we're probably wasting each other's time. Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays.
Michael Stevens:
Tony Boyd you trying to get laid? You obviously have no understanding of what this is about. I don't put down women in sports, but watching Wnba or softball is not my cup of tea. Do like them in track
Me:
Michael Stevens Niiiice, how long did it take you to come to that conclusion? So let me get this straight, the only reason a male would support women in sports is because he wants to get laid? So let me guess the only reason you like track is because of the really athletic bods and tight unis? No sir, my interest in women's sports doesn't rest on sexuality. The WNBA is a favorite of mine because I'm a basketball fan. Ball is life. And yeah I do know what this is about. I wonder though, you have female family members right? Any of them participate in sports? Do you feel it's okay for guys to discount their hard work and dedication because they're not "sexy enough" or "not as good as men"? It's great that you don't put down women in sports. So many men do. If you don't like women's sports, well that is your right. What's not a man's right is to actively oppose equality and fairness for women in sports. By the way, did you actually watch a few WNBA games/women's softball games before reaching your conclusion? I'm not a big fan of softball either but it has nothing to do with gender. I don't like baseball either. |
|
|
