Remove this Banner Ad

Oops Chris

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
blackcat said:
no, these were others responses. Ask The Old Dark Navy's if these were my posts? I was more nuanced than this. I did invoke Kelli Underwood and Pauline Menczer however, as falling on the wrong side of Mulvey's male gaze. But I never alluded to MM's attractiveness made her a mark for the players.

I DID say that, this is a role that the producers and TV stations fill. Tracy Spicer, and Helen (not Kapalos, someone else...) have mentioned this, and Jessica Rowe and McGuire "bone" would support this position I invoked...
Click to expand...

Right you are those 2 were plugger. So you just went with
- He isnt a rapist
- Its so grey, its cultural
- Heaps of reporters shag sportsmen cause something, something hypersexualised
 
phantom13 said:
You're not saying they should accept it but you are saying they should expect it and not get into the job if they cant handle it... I'm not seeing a huge difference between the two.
Click to expand...

Once again you're twisting what I said.

For a start there is a difference between sexual harassment and a bit of light hearted flirting, the former isn't acceptable but the latter is generally seen as OK unless you're an overly sensitive prude.

Secondly in a male dominated area like professional sport a female sports reporter is likely to cop a bit more attention/flirting than they will otherwise cop in a less male dominated area so if they're easily offended and can't handle it they are probably in the wrong line of work. You and others can complain all you like about how wrong you think it is but that is just the reality of it.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

phantom13 said:
Right you are those 2 were plugger. So you just went with
- He isnt a rapist
- Its so grey, its cultural
- Heaps of reporters shag sportsmen cause something, something hypersexualised
Click to expand...
bullshit mate. I was far more nuanced than that.

people were insinuating Gayle caused some grave faux-pas on the level of a crime. Was I responding in hyperbole? P'raps, or, p'raps I was similarly invoking an absurd reponse/argument, saying Gayle committed no crime but was doorstopped[sic] like this was a crime. When, as I have fleshed out, the guy is an embecile and is unaware of his actions and he speaks a language on multiple different tiers.

If you take away the entirety of my posts in this thread, I fail to see how it will be interpreted as an apologia for Gayle. I am explaining how this contretemps came into being.

This "conversation" could have been had with a myriad of sportsmen over the last decade, none of whom is a foreigner who put his foot in his mouth. Cricketers, footballers,

actually, p'raps the heathens that are Rugby league north of the border, were better at this that us south-Murrayérs[sic]. When Andrew Johns's brother Matthew/Mattie had that fracas(? ppor choice of words) in NZ with his Knights teammates, the Sydneysiders went thru this, p'raps much to the schadenfreude of us AFL fans.
 
Plugger35 said:
Once again you're twisting what I said.

For a start there is a difference between sexual harassment and a bit of light hearted flirting, the former isn't acceptable but the latter is generally seen as OK unless you're an overly sensitive prude.

Secondly in a male dominated area like professional sport a female sports reporter is likely to cop a bit more attention/flirting than they will otherwise cop in a less male dominated area so if they're easily offended and can't handle it they are probably in the wrong line of work. You and others can complain all you like about how wrong you think it is but that is just the reality of it.
Click to expand...
No, no, dig up.
 
skipper kelly said:
Sounds like the best starting point.

Me - Mel has handled herself with class both in the interview and events afterward.

Gayle was cringeworthy.

My suggestion for better enjoyment is put Mel in the commentary box and Howard doing the inane interviews.
Click to expand...
he has competition with Hamish McLachlan, no relation to Mel McLaughlin, see: spelling, he has competition with Hammer aka RompingWins and the interviews with the kids and NAB Auskick
 
Plugger35 said:
Once again you're twisting what I said.

For a start there is a difference between sexual harassment and a bit of light hearted flirting, the former isn't acceptable but the latter is generally seen as OK unless you're an overly sensitive prude.

Secondly in a male dominated area like professional sport a female sports reporter is likely to cop a bit more attention/flirting than they will otherwise cop in a less male dominated area so if they're easily offended and can't handle it they are probably in the wrong line of work. You and others can complain all you like about how wrong you think it is but that is just the reality of it.
Click to expand...

If it was Doctor Chris Brown the vet who propositioned her for a glass of wine and a visit to MONA, sure. But CG was an oaf. He never had to learn a deft facility with women, he never will have to learn neither. He may be taught some public perception management techniques now, but will that change his true character/nature? not on your life
 
RAPPA said:
I think the magnifying glass is less on 'how' she could have responded, but more about the fact that the comments were made in the first place, their substance, and the audacity of Gayle to make them.
Click to expand...
No doubt Gayle should not have made any comment other than what went on out on the field. I'm surprised by the furore and it has detracted from the series itself. The avenues for complaint, and the media’s hyping of every little thing may blind us to what’s really important, the game becomes secondary, or maybe we just like to whinge? Is there something wrong with us? Why do we rush to furious judgment on issues great and small? This BBL has been fantastic and now it's tainted a little because a player billed as the "cricketing playboy" has a crack at a very good looking TV host. It's not the first time this has happened. These days people just tap 140 characters of outrage on Twitter and jolt themselves into irate apoplexy. Does Chris Gayle really care? Not much i reckon as he sits in 3rd place on the 2016 Cricket rich list with average earnings of $7.5 million a year. Does he return to OZ next year? Probably not and it will be the viewer who is the real loser.
 
JackFlash said:
Does Chris Gayle really care? Not much i reckon as he sits in 3rd place on the 2016 Cricket rich list with average earnings of $7.5 million a year. Does he return to OZ next year? Probably not and it will be the viewer who is the real loser.
Click to expand...
he has been pretty inconsistent has he not. he would wanna pull his finger out
 
blackcat said:
he has competition with Hamish McLachlan, no relation to Mel McLaughlin, see: spelling, he has competition with Hammer aka RompingWins and the interviews with the kids and NAB Auskick
Click to expand...

When I see that I ask why.

Hamish and the Auskick kids.
Mark Howard and commentary
Bruce and his cyrils
and finally GW and his throaty Black Caviars.

To keep on topic, MM shits all over this group.
 
Plugger35 said:
Once again you're twisting what I said.

For a start there is a difference between sexual harassment and a bit of light hearted flirting, the former isn't acceptable but the latter is generally seen as OK unless you're an overly sensitive prude.

Secondly in a male dominated area like professional sport a female sports reporter is likely to cop a bit more attention/flirting than they will otherwise cop in a less male dominated area so if they're easily offended and can't handle it they are probably in the wrong line of work. You and others can complain all you like about how wrong you think it is but that is just the reality of it.
Click to expand...

Wow... Purely for the hell of it enlighten us as to what exactly the difference is between light hearted flirting and sexual harassment.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

It's the Adam Goodes debate all over again.

You've got the do-gooders who are desperate to prove to themselves and others that they have a higher set of morals than everyone else.

And then you've got the level headed people who realise that, yes, Gayle should've acted more sensibly on television, but think this whole thing is being blown way out of proportion.
 
The Watermelon - Gayle drawing clearly draws upon a racial link based on it's intent.

It's an easy excuse to hide behind the African American connection. The intent was be funny but at the same time illustrate a dark guy with a watermelon. Whether or not Gayle is from the Caribbean is secondary. Any American viewing the picture who doesn't know the BBL would class it as racist.

Given Gayle is considered a villain at this point in time you can be sure no media will call out the drawing as excuses for the picture will be used and the newspaper will say it had no racial undertones.
 
Ross Titute said:
It's the Adam Goodes debate all over again.

You've got the do-gooders who are desperate to prove to themselves and others that they have a higher set of morals than everyone else.

And then you've got the level headed people who realise that, yes, Gayle should've acted more sensibly on television, but think this whole thing is being blown way out of proportion.
Click to expand...

No this has become about more than the "incident" just as Adam Goodes "incident" also did. The conversation has evolved.
 
blackcat said:
bullshit mate. I was far more nuanced than that.

people were insinuating Gayle caused some grave faux-pas on the level of a crime. Was I responding in hyperbole? P'raps, or, p'raps I was similarly invoking an absurd reponse/argument, saying Gayle committed no crime but was doorstopped[sic] like this was a crime. When, as I have fleshed out, the guy is an embecile and is unaware of his actions and he speaks a language on multiple different tiers.

If you take away the entirety of my posts in this thread, I fail to see how it will be interpreted as an apologia for Gayle. I am explaining how this contretemps came into being.

This "conversation" could have been had with a myriad of sportsmen over the last decade, none of whom is a foreigner who put his foot in his mouth. Cricketers, footballers,

actually, p'raps the heathens that are Rugby league north of the border, were better at this that us south-Murrayérs[sic]. When Andrew Johns's brother Matthew/Mattie had that fracas(? ppor choice of words) in NZ with his Knights teammates, the Sydneysiders went thru this, p'raps much to the schadenfreude of us AFL fans.
Click to expand...

I've gone back and re read a chunk of this thread, it was painful. I got yourself and Plugger confused which i apologise for.

As for this, you are not showing nuance at all, you continue to reference a bunch of unrelated and frankly pointless anecdotes from other incidents that have nothing to do with the way women in sports media are treated. You apologise for Chris by continuing to say "this is what we made him, he shags heaps of birds" or "Mel could have handled it better". If you condemn what he said and understand that women in sports media probably get treated poorly then just say it, otherwise you are an apologist for misogynistic behaviour, there are a million shades of grey and subtleties within those two points but you have shown none on either point.

If im missing the point of your stories about rugby league players please elaborate cause if there is a point that ties into this thread and this discussion i would actually like to know what it is.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Which newspaper published the watermelon/Gayle cartoon?

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
 
phantom13 said:
No this has become about more than the "incident" just as Adam Goodes "incident" also did. The conversation has evolved.
Click to expand...
I'm well aware of the incident. I'm saying that in my travels I have found there to be two distinct groups opposing each other on issues like this one.

The conversation may evolve but it tends to go around in circle, as it always comes back to the same roots.

Group A: They jump at the chance to shoot down someone (even if they are having a laugh), and through all the cards on the table, where it be the race, gender, etc card.

Group B: The more relaxed type, who are more laid back and realise that not every tiny thing every single person says should be taken to the nth degree.
 
Ross Titute said:
I'm well aware of the incident. I'm saying that in my travels I have found there to be two distinct groups opposing each other on issues like this one.

The conversation may evolve but it tends to go around in circle, as it always comes back to the same roots.

Group A: They jump at the chance to shoot down someone (even if they are having a laugh), and through all the cards on the table, where it be the race, gender, etc card.

Group B: The more relaxed type, who are more laid back and realise that not every tiny thing every single person says should be taken to the nth degree.
Click to expand...

Haven't traveled real far then have you mate.
 
Ross Titute said:
Yep, you got me. I believe that Chris Gayle was stupid in his comments, as he should have known that there would have been a serious backlash from the public.
Click to expand...

Even the silly comments in here are providing more mate, seriously just move on. Even the "Boys will be boys" brigade knows you are only going to hurt them here.
 
I'm surprised ACA/Today Tonight type ahow haven't spoken to Mel's husband yet for his opinion on the controversy

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top