>>SFH is one of those people in the sport
>for whom the first name alone suffices.<<
Hold on - that was not the issue back then. The issue was 'rudeness'. It was I who was scolded for a first name allusion (don't remember who, but I would NOT have used it if there were any room for confusion). I seem to see a gh/pc double standard.
>there was a no first name policy around
If there's a
>"policy" it's not to confuse people. SFH is one of those people in the sport
>for whom the first name alone suffices.
I think that this is a pretty big complement. It is interesting that I never thought of her sometimes more successful competitorher as Regina.
I wonder if we are seeing the passing of the SPASH star baton from one generation to the next (Chris Solinsky, who one the NCAA 3000 and was 3rd in the 5000 is also a graduate of the Stevens Point Area high school).
>>>SFH is one of those people in the sport
>for whom the first name alone
Hold on - that was not the issue back then. The issue was
>'rudeness'. It was I who was scolded for a first name allusion (don't remember
>who, but I would NOT have used it if there were any room for confusion). I seem
>to see a gh/pc double standard.>>
No, that was a sexism complaint on my part. The usage of first names for woman while in a comparable setting using last names for men. Treating women like little girls not deserving of respect. That was my bitch (and will remain so).
>How about a list of first name people?
Marion, Maurice, Stacy, etc.>>
Clearly, having a somewhat distinctive first name helps. Prime example is that Alan Webb has had far more success and notoriety than Gabe Jennings, but he remains "Webb" whereas Jennings is universally "Gabe."
edited so it makes sense!
Last edited by gh on Sat Apr 02, 2005 1:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
>>No, that was a sexism>complaint on my part. The usage of first names for woman while in a comparable>setting using last names for men. Treating women like little girls not>deserving of respect. That was my bitch (and will remain so).<<
This will not stand! Obviously I'm going to have to sic LawDude on a certain unnamed individual on this board, who persists on attempting to paint me with a broad brush of sexism. Thrice has he slapped with this gauntlet of dishonor, forcing me to defend myself.
Accusation #1: In response to the query, 'with whom would you like to share a lunch', my obvious answer, for equally obvious reasons, was: Ms. Stacy Dragila. I was immediately chastised for my unseemly deportment and my post deleted. There are so many reasons why that would be a pleasurable encounter, but none involve a tryst at the NoTell Motel!
Conclusion: That dog won't hunt. (As a matter of fact, it prefers to sit at home with its puppies)
Accusation #2: I posted the observation that Isinbayeva did not have the stereotypical androgynized body of most female elites. Whereas most (obviously not all) world-class women are either born with the straight-line waist-hip physique, or, through intensive training have 'filled in' their waistline with muscle, Isin seemed to retain the hourglass shape. My comment contained zero evaluative remarks (I don't prefer one type over the other - I admire fit physiques, male or female!). My comment was no more or less 'sexist' than remarking upon Jason Smoot's body-type this winter, which is mesomorphic to the extreme.
Conclusion: This shoe don't fit.
Accusation #3: In a thread title I referred to a female athlete by here FIRST NAME (gasp!). I, of course, have done the same for countless males, whose single name readily identifies them to track fans. But again, I was singled out for my sexism.
Conclusion: This pot don't hold water.
Ergo, I hereby issue a C&D order to the unnamed individual who has issued these statements, despite my undisguised and unrepentent admiration for said individual and his myriad (of) (letsrun joke) contributions.
Were I of Freudian persuasion (remembering that I do indeed have a degree in psychology from Farm U), I would suspect some latent transference issues at play here, but I prefer NOT to judge in this circumstance. Let's just say that such accusations do not sit lightly with someone who coaches and teaches a population of 50% representation of the Fairer Sex (and yes, sorry, but I think females are inherently more pleasant to look at than males - my bad!)
Anyone who think gh's or tafnut using a first name is sexist...huh? I see it more as a sign of respect.
What interests me more is where track and field falls in the "eye candy" aspect of women's sports. On a 1 to 10 scale (with women's fencing being a 1, ice dancing a 10), where does track rate in comparison to other, especially those seen on TV, women's sports?
The sports themselves also seem to be big promoters of using "cute" and "sexy" to sell the sport to the public.
Personally, I think track is pretty middle fo the road:
and I thought folks calling me paulthefan was a sign of my international acclaim... little did I know there was lust in their eyes. As for the list Id swap 9 and 10... and we can only hope that Womens (over the age of 26) Track uniforms get skimpier and the LPGA's more dowdy....
I would probably turn down Dragila for coffee, .. Isin (or the russian redhead PVer) Id walk a mile to breath the air they expel.
Last edited by paulthefan on Sun Apr 03, 2005 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
thanks for the support, but I have no idea what your scale represents - how 'pretty' the women look on TV? I wouldn't have ranked ice dancing anywhere. While Beach Volleyball is the media's T&A sport du jour, I hosestly believe that track has the most attractive men and women of any sport and the current mode of uniform leaves little to the imagination, so it would be #1 in my list of sports of 'people to watch.' I have always thought gymnasts have the best developed bodes (body-building is grotesque), but they don't usually have the long fluid lines that are usually deemed most aesthetically pleasing (to today's media standards).
As for the invite - it wouldn't be proffered, so no temptation there!
I'd call my scale the "cute and sexy" scale as developed by the promoters of the sport. There are no ugly out of porportion girls in ice dancing and the emphasis on skimpy costume and make-up/hair is as much a part of the scoring as the non-jumping "dance." Beach Volleyball, as tafnut says, is pure T&A but doesn't exclude "ugly" or "chunky" from competition.
I developed the scale with about 30 seconds of thought, mainly to show that track is pretty moderate, especially if you include the field events. However, as with most things in life, having talent and being attractive (Suzy) leads to more popularity than just having talent.
how dare you discuss womans bodies in a manner to suggest that there is a differance that matters to anyone except the emotional disturbed sex lunatic. you make me sick. i dont even notice anything about nothin which makes me better than you horrible, sick, sickos. you can have your meat market as i only see the inner beauty of all livin things.
>>> Obviously I'm going to have to sic LawDude on a certain unnamed individual on this board, who persists on attempting to paint me with a broad brush of sexism. Thrice has he slapped with this gauntlet of dishonor, forcing me to defend myself.<
Sorry, tafnut, but I think I'm going to pass on this one.
Pego, Actually, swimming is about the only sport to go down the scale with all the bug eyed googles, caps, and full body armour wetsuit stuff. The Olympics looked like a Seahunt re-run. On the men's side, they are showing alot of plumbers crack in the new type of suits.
Fahion and "cuteness" have always been part of tennis, though Serena takes it to a extreme that I can live without:
My scale was more along the lines of how the promoters of the sport use "looks" to sell the sport, with the obvious fencing (body and face covered) at "1", etc. What did you write that was sexist ?
What bothers me the most is the inclusion on the Olympics of things like ice dancing and synchronized swimming (yes both very athletic and difficult) which hae a built in "cuteness" bias in the scoring. You have to have a certain build and look to compete in either sport. Again, while beach VB is pure (according o tafnut) T&A, "ugly" is not an condition that would cause one to be excluded if one could play the game.