Oops Chris

[dispute]

"It's good that people are talking"

Yeah, people with the same opinions are agreeing with each other and arguing with people that don't. Good talk.

 

[Stevi_Tigers]

And? What is your point?

Are you implying the guy/woman who was in control of the twitter account at that moment reflects the whole of channel 10, and the media?

I'm saying it has been overblown. should he have done it no but its hardly a hanging offense

 

[RegHickeyStand]

The media industry have a hand in this too. They purposefully hire very attractive women to interview young make athletes (most of whom have limited maturity) to sell their product. A blow up like this must be great for their ratings.

And no, I'm not blaming the attractive young women, I'm pointing at the execs. And no, I'm not saying they are incompetent, but the ratio of very attractive women in those spot is about 100 to zero.

 

[ManWithNoName]

I'm saying it has been overblown. should he have done it no but its hardly a hanging offense

Nobody's saying it is.

 

[ManWithNoName]

Yeah, people with the same opinions are agreeing with each other and arguing with people that don't. Good talk.

You've just described humanity. What's your point exactly?

 

[Juddy88]

I'm saying it has been overblown. should he have done it no but its hardly a hanging offense

Where has anyone implied it's a hanging offense? Or are you just using hyperbole?

 

[imadodgyumpire]

There's no strength in attempting to demonise Chris. While it's understandable to not respect Chris's words. Failing to acknowledge his intent exaggerates the problem.

blackcat Mark Taylor had 50 sexual partners on the 91 Caribbean tour?

 

[Spitta Andretti]

Your posts have shown you don't think Gayle did anything wrong. You aren't a 'moderate' in this discussion.

Look I didn't mean to exonerate him, I came into this thread unhappy with the way he was being described as a sexist and a misogynist etc. by the media. I then associated every comment against Gayle on here over the last couple of pages as agreeing with the media narrative, I see now I was mistaken in that assumption and I'm sorry for misunderstanding.

And I was also mistaken in overreacting to the media coverage by arguing the complete opposite position that he did nothing wrong in practice.

Actually you'll find that very early on I said that what he did was wrong in principle, that chatting somebody up at work was not the right thing to do because it hinders their ability to do the job well. But in practice I felt that it was hypocritical to make an example out of Gayle for doing something which a hell of a lot of others do and get away with scot free.

 

[Chief]

It isn't as simple as yes and no. Why can't somebody agree that in principle Gayle was wrong in asking her out at the workplace, but disagree with the media hysteria and condemnation of him as some sort of savage, drooling, rapist beast?

No, just a creepy guy.

And also contend that in practice Gayle was not wrong since this sort of thing undeniably happens in other workplace environments without anybody being fined over it, e.g. a customer hitting on a barmaid.

Having known a few people who have worked behind bars, the girls have always mentioned creeps trying to hit on them. None of them have liked it.

 

[Ronnie Baby]

Let me guess, this isn't degrading and humiliating, it's just a simple joke right?

That's crushing.


GO CATTERS!!!!!

 

[Spitta Andretti]

Where has anyone implied it's a hanging offense? Or are you just using hyperbole?

The Guardian, for one. Hyperbole with 'hanging', obviously.

 

[ManWithNoName]

The Guardian, for one. Hyperbole with 'hanging', obviously.

Where.

 

[legend166]

It isn't as simple as yes and no. Why can't somebody agree that in principle Gayle was wrong in asking her out at the workplace, but disagree with the media hysteria and condemnation of him as some sort of savage, drooling, rapist beast? And also contend that in practice Gayle was not wrong since this sort of thing undeniably happens in other workplace environments without anybody being fined over it, e.g. a customer hitting on a barmaid.

He didn't just ask her out in her work place. He did in front of her colleagues, his fellow players and hundreds of thousands of people on TV.

Gayle was an idiot and his actions were inappropriate. The fine would have been the end of it but his apology was woeful. It's amazing the Renegades media person let that happen.

 

[dispute]

You've just described humanity. What's your point exactly?

That it's a pointless excercise all the back and forth. It only really matters how the person directly affected feels not how everyone else thinks that they should feel. If Mel came out and said she didn't care what Chris said would you still say it was inappropriate what he said?

 

[Spitta Andretti]

No, just a creepy guy.

Having known a few people who have worked behind bars, the girls have always mentioned creeps trying to hit on them. None of them have liked it.

I've seen some target him pretty viciously.

I'm not saying they liked it! Of course nobody would like an unwelcome advance. The point is that some of these same people who are getting on Gayle's case are probably those who go chat up barmaids and don't ever face any punishment for their own actions.

 

[STFU Donnie]

It would be pretty funny to see the Renegades go into panic stations if Gayle declared he won't cop the fine, and is instead flying back home. I don't think the Renegades could hold him to his contract, because I don't think he broken any rules to be fined 10k. This whole debacle has 'set off' a rabid Aussie public because they witnessed on live TV a man of color make a pass at one of their own. Not only has a man of privilege, but a man of color. This outrage has shades of Goodes about it, certainly not a great look for Australia.

Actually it would be the perfect forum to state their principles, and then declare that anyone not prepared to follow them is not welcome. Good riddance, in fact.

 

[ManWithNoName]

That it's a pointless excercise all the back and forth. It only really matters how the person directly affected feels not how everyone else thinks that they should feel. If Mel came out and said she didn't care what Chris said would you still say it was inappropriate what he said?

Given the amount of female journalists that have said how typical it is of the industry, how upsetting it is and how sick of it they are. And given how many male journalists have backed them up and said they're right, what's your point exactly?

 

[Spitta Andretti]

He didn't just ask her out in her work place. He did in front of her colleagues, his fellow players and hundreds of thousands of people on TV.

Gayle was an idiot and his actions were inappropriate. The fine would have been the end of it but his apology was woeful. It's amazing the Renegades media person let that happen.

I was unaware he apologised. What did he say?

 

[Juddy88]

The media industry have a hand in this too. They purposefully hire very attractive women to interview young make athletes (most of whom have limited maturity) to sell their product. A blow up like this must be great for their ratings.

And no, I'm not blaming the attractive young women, I'm pointing at the execs. And no, I'm not saying they are incompetent, but the ratio of very attractive women in those spot is about 100 to zero.

Yes but that is a different issue entirely. It's got nothing to do with making inappropriate advances in the work place.

 

[Chief]

Yeah, people with the same opinions are agreeing with each other and arguing with people that don't. Good talk.

And people who just refuse to grow up and join the rest of the human race.

 

[Feerits Elf]

I was unaware he apologised. What did he say?

"Sorry you got offended baby"

 

[imadodgyumpire]

I'm saying it has been overblown. should he have done it no but its hardly a hanging offense

People don't know how to handle suggestive comments. Mel automatically got tense. It would've been more powerful if she could've thought of a quip. As far as all the posters who've demonised Chris, aren't able to rationalise what happened and couldn't see the humour? I can't help them.

 

[Chief]

I was unaware he apologised. What did he say?

www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-05/transcript-chris-gayle-neroli-meadows-melinda-farrell/7068652

 

[Bumpswithagrin]

It isn't as simple as yes and no. Why can't somebody agree that in principle Gayle was wrong in asking her out at the workplace, but disagree with the media hysteria and condemnation of him as some sort of savage, drooling, rapist beast? And also contend that in practice Gayle was not wrong since this sort of thing undeniably happens in other workplace environments without anybody being fined over it, e.g. a customer hitting on a barmaid.

Your analogy is not quite right. It would be akin to another employee of the bar (or the boss) hitting on a barmaid.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

He hasn't been charged but he is paying a penalty. Presumably out of breach of contract, or something. My points, to summarise, are:

- Gayle (IMO) did not sexually harass McLaughlin, he asked one sexually motivated question, got an answer in the negative, and let it go after that. Now I don't know what legally constitutes sexual harassment, but if asking that one question in the workplace environment is enough to qualify as sexual harassment, then there are probably tens or hundreds of thousands of Australians who are guilty of this crime, and probably the majority of them have gone unpunished. It's not a far stretch to assume some of the people who are outraged by Gayle's actions all over the internet are guilty of such a crime themselves.

It is in the realms of sexual harassment. Unwanted sexual advances through comments or contact definitely is, but then we will debate about what constitutes a sexual advance. Does it have to be straight out asking for sex, does it have to convey a request for some kind of physical act or is stating an attraction and requesting a date for drinks enough. I would suggest the latter is environment based. He was at work, she was at work. They have different employers but they were both essentially sub contractors to an event.

- It's unfair to slander Gayle's reputation and call him a misogynist when he did not say anything derogatory or misogynistic; secondarily, when it is not out of the realm of possibility that many of the people calling him that could be guilty of the same crime of making a pass at a member of the opposite sex in the workplace.

Again, it is open to interpretation, not just a blanket definition of hating or mistrusting women. If you consider a woman to be lesser or whose primary function was to satisfy your carnal desires, do you hate or mistrust them? Maybe not. Do you respect them? I'm leaning towards no there. I think we can be splitting hairs.

There is no need to go on about misogyny here, although Gayle apparently has form, as we are probably doing the issue at large a disservice by concentrating on one man.

- If this had happened elsewhere than on the professional cricket field then, in all likelihood, nothing would come of it, since as you say the legal provision does not cover for one simple question.

If it happened at my workplace and the victim complained, plenty would come of it I assure you. Most likely it would be an investigation, counselling and some sort of warning that would be the first peg in establishing a pattern if it happened again.

My mistake. I apologise. You clearly know much more about this than I do. Can we agree then that I am voicing a subjective opinion on what has happened?

I'm up for any discussion that shines light on a subject. I'm not perfect. I have had some unintentionally demeaning views in the past. I probably will again. I have to educate myself to understand why it is an issue. Believe it or not, I do think things are too PC today and it sucks the fun out of life. I just don't think this is one of those occasions.

No, my argument was that you should expect to be humiliated, in general, at least once or twice over a long career. If you are reporting dozens to hundreds of times a year then over a career you will clock up so many screen hours that it would be a statistical anomaly if you did not get humiliated at least once. The only difference between being humiliated in some other way and being asked out, is if you place some sort of special value on being asked out and on sex. I don't place a special value on it, to me, whether you show up on camera drunk or do a nude run like that Today show host, or you get propositioned live on air, it's all the same. But then I have an introverted personality, to me just the idea of going out on nationwide TV is daunting and humiliating even if nothing bad happens, and I can't expect everyone would feel the same about being propositioned being equivalent to some other kind of humiliation.

Harassment has a defined criteria and is decided by a reasonable person test but first and foremost the person decides whether they feel humiliated or not. I have a realisation that I may be assaulted in my line of work but I don't expect to be and I won't be accepting of it if it occurs.

It's also interesting that we don't think Gayle was humiliated also by being rejected on live TV.

Doesn't matter. She didn't humiliate him by responding to inappropriate comments.

We wouldn't feel sorry for the armed robber who got his arse handed to him by the store owner and wound up on World's Dumbest Criminals. Bluntly, Gayle is not deserving of our concern over his humiliation.