Posted on 08/18/2016 12:32:54 PM PDT by Kaslin
My, my, there those feminists go, complaining again. This time the whining concerns supposedly “sexist” Olympics coverage. Their problem?
Many journalists are, we’re told, using different language when talking about female athletes than when speaking of male ones. Oh, the humanity!
There’s the guy who credited a female swimmer’s husband/coach for her success, the talk about a six-foot-three-inch South Korean woman volley ball player’s difficulty finding a boyfriend, and a reporter who called an equestrian rider “blondie.” Putting aside the female teacher who once called me blondie when I was 13, let’s have a reality check. Do you really think sports commentators don’t look for storylines, often infused with frivolity, relating to male athletes? And insofar as the treatment is different, so what? As even über-liberal Bill Maher once observed (I’m paraphrasing), “We have two standards because there are two sexes.” But speaking of standards and differences, let’s get to a quintessential feminist complaint in a recent (very) Lost Angeles Times piece about “sexist Olympics coverage.”
Citing a Cambridge University Press study, writer Julie Makinen tells us, “The research, which analyzed multibillion-word databases of written and spoken English language, found that in general, men are referenced twice as often as women, but when the topic is sports, the ratio is about 3 to 1.” Male athletes earn more money as well, which also irks the feminists.
Of course, this is much like complaining about how heavyweight boxers get more press than lightweights or, speaking of lightweights, like kvetching about Barack Obama getting more exposure than a state legislator from Lakeview. Has Makinen ever heard of “market forces”?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
You’ve been on FR almost as long as I have, about 17 years. This is the best you can do? You can’t even bother to defend your enthusiasm for an example of government overreach? Aren’t you ashamed of yourself?
Beautiful. See, there are many, many reasons for the existence of women’s sports.
Why are you attempting to equate education via degrees, which is the primary job of universities and thus the foundation of educational scholarships designed to help families who would normally not be able to afford to send their child to that school to those educational freebies given to the athletes whose sole purpose is to generate revenues for their football or basketball programs?
You know darn well who these athletes are and the NBA and NFL are filled with them. Their million dollar contracts should be predicated on reimbursing their respective universities for their minor league participation.
Exceptions include women's beach volleyball, and any track and field event which has Michelle Jenneke participating.
athletes whose sole purpose is to generate revenues for their football or basketball programs?
so they were allowed in for the sole purpose of generating revenues for the unversity (according to your theory)...then why in the world would the university, having already profited from these people, demand a back end remuneration upon their receiving employment...? the university’s investment has already paid off...
and you haven’t answered my question...what is the difference between employment received based on athletic ability (a degree in sports, if you like), and that received through academic pursuit...both are offered and highly valued by the university...
Yes I did but you conveniently chose to ignore it. But let's get back on the track of this thread shall we?
Why do you have a problem with Title IX and scholarships to women?
Uhhhh, I don't think a lot of women who like to watch womens' sports have boyfriends, if you know what I mean.
As opposed to A co worker yesterday asked me, tomorrow???
singular or plural
Gee, I don't even want to ask this blowhard what he thinks of Special Olympics or Wheelchair Games.
who...?
As we're finding out with all the drama surrounding the incident with the men's swim team members and the Brazilian police, American men often pay much more attention to these side stories than the actual competitive events.
Next week, American Ninja Warrior starts back up....men and women compete on the same course...
many womens sports are very entertaining, more so than boring mens sports...
$$$!
do you suggest they get abortions?
do you suggest they be on BC their entire lives?..
do you suggest that men should never breed?...
and do you suggest that we just let the muzzies breed us out of existance....
you too can't have it both ways...
either figure out a system where women can work and have children and get fairly compensated OR make sure that all women who have children and stay home get extra SS to make up for the shortfall....
because, there is a cost to carry on civilization with children...
[zipping up flame-retardant suit]
Jobs exist because work needs to be done. Period.
Anything that keeps a person from doing that work will affect their usefulness to their employer.
So women can play with themselves?
Did that come out right?
5.56mm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.