Keith Hernandez lambasting women in the dugout

[Ontarioguy]

At first I wasn't going to put this in the CE forum, but this story is even getting coverage on Sports Radio, here in Montreal.

Saturday night Keith Hernandez voiced his displeasure upon seeing Mike Piazza who had homered for the Padres, exchange a high-five in the dugout with 33-year-old Kelly Calabrese, the Padres' massage therapist.

Here's what he said:
"Who is the girl in the dugout, with the long hair?" Hernandez said. "What's going on here? You have got to be kidding me. Only player personnel in the dugout."

Hernandez found out later in the broadcast that Calabrese was with the Padres training staff.

"I won't say that women belong in the kitchen, but they don't belong in the dugout," Hernandez said.

Then he laughed and said: "You know I am only teasing. I love you gals out there -- always have."

I heard a clip of him offering some pathetic non-apology later on.

Needless to say Bruce Bochy, and Calabrese are not too pleased.

How are the NY press handling this one and how do our female posters feel about Keith's words?

Personally I think it was an idiotic thing for Keith to say. Get with the times, Keith.

[Chelle]

Well, Keith always was behind the times. I may be ahead of them...but I was shocked people even thought about that anymore. Not sure what the issue is...if she's a good trainer..who cares.

I can't believe he said "gals"

[Captain Cold Nose]

My first major in college was Sports Medicine. There were as many, if not more, aspiring trainers who were female as there were male. Take a look at any college football sideline and chances are you'll see as many female trainers as male trainers. What Hernandez said was completely ignorant, not to mention idiotic. Seems like that stuff he's puting on his hair to keep it from turning gray has soaked in too deep.

[Ontarioguy]

Seems like that stuff he's puting on his hair to keep it from turning gray has soaked in too deep.
That stuff he put in his nose probably didn't help things either...

[trosmok]

Sadly this is true in many professions; I can't count the number of times my young cousin is mistaken for a nurse when she is actually one of the finest M.D.s in our family. Formerly, female doctors were assumed to be either pediatricians or OB/GYNs, and seldom seen as trauma specialists or surgeons. I guess it just takes time for the dinosaurs to accept the changing climate.

[CuriousBoston]

He should apologize on the air, he should also issue a press release, admitting to being a "dinosaur". He had plenty of people there he could ask, before he said anything. It wouldn't hurt for his boss or the team to make a public apology, either.

So, there is one way for a female to be in a dugout during a baseball game...how long does it take to become a MLB level trainer?

Sigh...

[1905 Giants]

Wow, Keith, you Fool, you just messed your self up for life

[KCGHOST]

Did you ever notice that when someone fails to conform to politically correct behavior how quickly he is flailed for his failing(s) as a human being??

And the flailers will be the first to lament society's rush to P.C. when they happen to agree with the offender?

[1905 Giants]

Did you ever notice that when someone fails to conform to politically correct behavior how quickly he is flailed for his failing(s) as a human being??

And the flailers will be the first to lament society's rush to P.C. when they happen to agree with the offender?

Not me, to me anyone who does something that dumb deserves flailing, myself included

[CuriousBoston]

Did you ever notice that when someone fails to conform to politically correct behavior how quickly he is flailed for his failing(s) as a human being??

And the flailers will be the first to lament society's rush to P.C. when they happen to agree with the offender?

It is not PC. Title Nine, Equal Pay, and genderless job postings are not PC. It is telling that despite the time that has passed since Title Nine, etc., a BBF'r would post such a post. That's sad.

[Go Bravos!!!#1]

Thank god this isn't as bad as what Al Campanis said about black managers to Ted Kopell. That ruined Al's career.

[Mattingly]

A few questions about the female massage therapist (masseuse, as a male is a masseur):

I remember seeing Boomer and the other Padres pictured behind their masseuse. Is this the same individual?

How many ballclubs have a female massage therapist on staff?

Are they generally allowed in the dugout? From what I'd thought, this was only for the players, manager, coaches and the trainer. Many moons ago, Ken Griffey, Jr (long before he was called "Junior") was kicked out of the Yankee dugout by Billy Martin, so I can see certain exceptions being allowed.

Thx. :)

[iPod]

Well, Keith always was behind the times. I may be ahead of them...but I was shocked people even thought about that anymore. Not sure what the issue is...if she's a good trainer..who cares.

I can't believe he said "gals"

Is gal a derogatory term now? I've never in my life heard of that.

[Go Bravos!!!#1]

Not far from politically correct to defend Campanis, I do agree that what he'd said about not having role models would keep blacks from getting into certain places. Some believed he was saying that blacks had no place as quarterbacks, I think he'd said, but I remember the part about role models.



I really think what he said got taken way out of context. People just looked at it for face value and deemed him a racist.

[Mattingly]

Sadly this is true in many professions; I can't count the number of times my young cousin is mistaken for a nurse when she is actually one of the finest M.D.s in our family. Formerly, female doctors were assumed to be either pediatricians or OB/GYNs, and seldom seen as trauma specialists or surgeons. I guess it just takes time for the dinosaurs to accept the changing climate.
It's true amongst baseball fans also. One very knowledgeable forumer on another board used a male-sounding name (I'll call her "Chris"), but when directly asked, said she was "Christine", not "Christopher", as many had presumed she was. She didn't want people considering her a less serious baseball fan than others because of her gender. Sad state, but she wasn't alone.

I've known a few attorneys that have been quite accomplished, but sometimes because of their gender, may have been overlooked. Sometimes I wonder if the so-called "alpha male", which I believe is the "lead dog" type of thing, gets all of the credit.

It's good when women go outside of the fields in which they are often employed. Heck, they can do Chuck Yeager's job for all I care, as long as they enjoy it and do it well. Now if only guys like Keith could just realize this.

Perhaps the next time he's at a corporate meeting and sees a group of executives, a few of whom are female, he'll have to decency to avoid asking, "Whose girlfriends or wives are you ladies?"

[Imapotato]

Did you ever notice that when someone fails to conform to politically correct behavior how quickly he is flailed for his failing(s) as a human being??

And the flailers will be the first to lament society's rush to P.C. when they happen to agree with the offender?


I agree...and I agree with Hernandez...his MAIN point was what the heck is this non uniform personnel doing in the dugout.

And what is she doing anyway, that she has to be in the dugout...they need to stay in the clubhouse, it seems she loves attention...I have seen her last year and this year

[Mattingly]

I really think what he said got taken way out of context. People just looked at it for face value and deemed him a racist.
I just took that out, since it wasn't too related here, but you caught me editing. :D

Anyway, with the thing about lack of black managers, we've got two now in Dusty Baker and Frank Robinson, and Ozzie Guillen, a Hispanic, won the last WS.

Lasorda and Don Newcombe have defended Campanis, so even if he was feeling at his lowest before the interview (he was certainly feeling that way afterwards), I would like to think that he was saying there was a lack of role models, which about anyone would need to succeed.

Katie Couric (regardless of whether you like her or not) would be one for women, as who ever considered a woman following in Walter Cronkite's footsteps, especially since he was once the most trusted man in America (from some poll in the '70s).

[Mattingly]

I agree...and I agree with Hernandez...his MAIN point was what the heck is this non uniform personnel doing in the dugout.

And what is she doing anyway, that she has to be in the dugout...they need to stay in the clubhouse, it seems she loves attention...I have seen her last year and this year
How long has she been with the team? Does she smile or wave at the camera, as to getting attention?

[CuriousBoston]

Is gal a derogatory term now? I've never in my life heard of that.
Certain parts of the country, or certain professions. I haven't heard it for years. I consider it derogatory; I would accept it from a very old man, not anyone my age or younger.

[Dasperp]

Are they generally allowed in the dugout? From what I'd thought, this was only for the players, manager, coaches and the trainer. Many moons ago, Ken Griffey, Jr (long before he was called "Junior") was kicked out of the Yankee dugout by Billy Martin, so I can see certain exceptions being allowed

Teams have video specialists and all kinds of training staff in the dugout. And as to his main point being that a massage therapist shouldn't be in the dugout, that clearly was not his point. After finding out that she was permitted to be in the dugout as part of the training staff, he reiterated what he said about about women being in the dugout and said that baseball is a man's game.

[CuriousBoston]

I agree...and I agree with Hernandez...his MAIN point was what the heck is this non uniform personnel doing in the dugout.

And what is she doing anyway, that she has to be in the dugout...they need to stay in the clubhouse, it seems she loves attention...I have seen her last year and this year

It's no skin off your back. The team management has accepted it, the people in the dugout have accepted it. Who are you to say who belongs where?

Why should she stay in the clubhouse, her view restricted by what a tv producer chooses to show?

"it seems she loves attention" Was she turning cartwheels? Going onto the field?

She is part of the Padres staff. . Shouldn't Hernandez have known that?

If she puts a uniform on, would that be acceptable?

This is surreal. I feel like I've been transported back in time.

[rockin500]

paint this as a really gives a hoot. So he sounded like a fool. big deal. deal with it. if you take gal as offensive, thats your own perusal.

[Brownie31]

paint this as a really gives a hoot. So he sounded like a fool. big deal. deal with it. if you take gal as offensive, thats your own perusal.

rockin500:

Exactly. This is just what usually happens in these kind of spats.
First, some loud mouthed wiseacre makes a boorishly clowning remark and then all of the perpetually offended howl in sanctimonious humorlessness!

Never fails!

Brownie31

[Toy Boat]

I personally got a good chuckle out of it and I consider myself a pretty liberal/progressive kind of guy. One of the great things about Keith as a broadcaster is he doesn't hold back his thoughts no matter how un-PC they might be. He has his right to his opinion and I do not think they were out of line. To paraphrase what he said later, "if anyone was offended, get a sense of humor".

[Toy Boat]

That stuff he put in his nose probably didn't help things either...

So let's see, commenting on women in the dugout is disgusting and horrible, but putting a person down for a past problem with drugs is ok? :ughh

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Much ado about nothing.

[Joltin' Joe]

I was watching the game when Piazza hit the no-doubter of a bomb. What a shot off Pedro who was otherwise brilliant.
Anyway, when Hernandez said that, I chuckled and thought to myself, I wonder if anyone is going to make a big deal over this? Nah, I thought. Nobody can be that anal.
Well I guess I was wrong. You can't say anything anymore because some idiot is going to be pissed off. In reality there isn't free speech in our country anymore.

[Joltin' Joe]

How are the NY press handling this one and how do our female posters feel about Keith's words?



It's not even in the news. The only reason I know about it is because I was watching the game. The only other time I've seen it is here.

[Brownie31]

I was watching the game when Piazza hit the no-doubter of a bomb. What a shot off Pedro who was otherwise brilliant.
Anyway, when Hernandez said that, I chuckled and thought to myself, I wonder if anyone is going to make a big deal over this? Nah, I thought. Nobody can be that anal.
Well I guess I was wrong. You can't say anything anymore because some idiot is going to be pissed off. In reality there isn't free speech in our country anymore.

Joltin' Joe: You are so right! Brownie31

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I was watching the game when Piazza hit the no-doubter of a bomb. What a shot off Pedro who was otherwise brilliant.
Anyway, when Hernandez said that, I chuckled and thought to myself, I wonder if anyone is going to make a big deal over this? Nah, I thought. Nobody can be that anal.
Well I guess I was wrong. You can't say anything anymore because some idiot is going to be pissed off. In reality there isn't free speech in our country anymore.

No kiddin'. Is it any wonder our athletes and people of fame are reluctant to show us who they really are; humans. I used to get down on Arod for being such a company man with bland comments that give off a "fake" vibe. But ya know what. Can't blame the guy in this day and age. Can't say anything anymore without someone being offended. I'm usually the last one to bring race into something, but let's say Charles Barkley was at the game and said the exact same thing during a tv interview. Would this even be news, or just Chuck being Chuck. Thought so.

[Brian McKenna]

I agree...and I agree with Hernandez...his MAIN point was what the heck is this non uniform personnel doing in the dugout.



sorry - but that wasn't his main point

[Joltin' Joe]

sorry - but that wasn't his main point

I was watching the game on TV and when Piazza came back into the dugout and they showed his teammates high five-ing him, my eyes were immediately drawn to the good looking chick...sorry, the attractive woman participating in the high fives. And before Hernandez even opened his mouth, my immediate reaction was what the hell is that girl doing in the dugout?? I don't think it was male chauvenistic on my part either. I was genuinely surprised to see a girl in the dugout.

[iPod]

Certain parts of the country, or certain professions. I haven't heard it for years. I consider it derogatory; I would accept it from a very old man, not anyone my age or younger.

That just really, really surprises me, I'm not going to lie. I've always thought of "gal" simply as the female version of "guy", just an informal, slangy way of referring to people, the only difference being that "gal" is sort of losing its following and becoming slightly antiquated. You might be right in that it might be a regional thing. I don't hear "gal" a ton here in California, but I hear it used completely harmlessly enough that it's a familiar word to me. My father, who's only in his 50s, uses it constantly, and he's not sexist at all.

[Biggtone23]

Gal is only a deregoratory (sp) term if you want to make problems and be ultra pc.

There are strict rules about who can and can not be in the dugout. This is the first time I've ever heard of a team massage therapist being in the dugout. I would not call it a necessity I assume she does not give the players messages in the dugout so theres no reason for her to be in there. As opposed to trainers who will actually work on players in the dugout.

[ESPNFan]

Gal is only a deregoratory (sp) term if you want to make problems and be ultra pc.

There are strict rules about who can and can not be in the dugout. This is the first time I've ever heard of a team massage therapist being in the dugout. I would not call it a necessity I assume she does not give the players messages in the dugout so theres no reason for her to be in there. As opposed to trainers who will actually work on players in the dugout.

Gal is derogitory? Does that mean Guy is derogitory?

[CuriousBoston]

This thread was started by a question asking FEMALE BBFr's their opinion.

The majority of responses have run along the lines of so what, "anal", and PC. I have been the only female responder.

The woman has a job working for a MLB baseball team. The point that Hernandez made was: women don't belong employed by MLB except as office staff.

To him, a single woman in the dugout prompted the remark that women "don't belong in baseball".

To him, and those of you that don't get it: women are not in baseball. I learned that as a young child, asking where women played baseball. The response I got was deliberately cruel, hurtful, will never be forgotten.

In the women's baseball forum, I participated in a thread trying to explain the feeling of learning that baseball is not for women. I had to stop posting. People were arguing with me about about an experience they never had, trivializing that experience.

It carries over; I was at many, many, many sites before I found BBF, found I could not post.
I tried posting with a male name, would be respected, then...it was disgusting.

Those of you that get it, and understand, thank you. Those of you that think this is "PC" or "anal", I am not sure what to say.

[Ontarioguy]

So let's see, commenting on women in the dugout is disgusting and horrible, but putting a person down for a past problem with drugs is ok? :ughh

You're absolutely right.

It's hypocritical of me to say that and I apologize for it.

[CuriousBoston]

I was watching the game on TV and when Piazza came back into the dugout and they showed his teammates high five-ing him, my eyes were immediately drawn to the good looking chick...sorry, the attractive woman participating in the high fives. And before Hernandez even opened his mouth, my immediate reaction was what the hell is that girl doing in the dugout?? I don't think it was male chauvenistic on my part either. I was genuinely surprised to see a girl in the dugout.

Girl? She is a 33 year old woman. Do you think posting "good looking chick" is clever? What is the point of your post? To bait me? Perhaps partly your point was females are so rare in dugouts...how did you respond to what he said?

[CuriousBoston]

Joltin' Joe: You are so right! Brownie31

Anal idiot. I didn't know I was an anal idiot. An announcer says that "women don't belong in baseball", meaning they should only be in the office.

Anyone who has a different opinion is an anal idiot.

You do realize the irony of invoking free speech, and using the term anal idiot?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

The woman has a job working for a MLB baseball team. The point that Hernandez made was: women don't belong employed by MLB except as office staff.


No it wasn't, not at all. I was watching the game when he said it. He was surprised like we all were (men) to see a woman in the dugout. He commented that the DUGOUT is no place for a woman. It had nothing to do with what kind of jobs he thought women should have. Don't take an ant hill and turn it into a mountain.


Those of you that get it, and understand, thank you. Those of you that think this is "PC" or "anal", I am not sure what to say.


Curious, I respect your opinion, especially on this issue, because like you said, you were the targeted poster for a reply.

What's really the issue here though? Do you really think Keith Hernandez is sexist, or was he just speaking his mind. As stated before, things HAVE become overly PC in this country. It's gotten so PC that a guy with a show called "Politically Incorrect" gets fired for being exactly that. Now, I don't agree with what Mahr said, but still, that's what the damn show is about.

Another example. Rush Limbaugh gets hired by ESPN to be controversial. To say things that ESPN analysts either can't say, or won't say, even if they thought it. So Rush brings up something about McNabb, and he gets canned and crucified for it. Now again, I don't agree with what he said 100% or how he chose to go about saying it, but the point is, we're TOO PC. It's a joke.

This lady has as much right to be working for a ML team as anybody does. The issue is that she was in the dugout. A place historically occupied by males because that's their profession. If you get offended by the term gal though, wow. That's a bit extreme imo.

[FrenchyLefebvre]

I was watching the game on TV and when Piazza came back into the dugout and they showed his teammates high five-ing him, my eyes were immediately drawn to the good looking chick...sorry, the attractive woman participating in the high fives. And before Hernandez even opened his mouth, my immediate reaction was what the hell is that girl doing in the dugout?? I don't think it was male chauvenistic on my part either. I was genuinely surprised to see a girl in the dugout.


I can see only uniformed personnel (Ok, GUYS) being allowed in the dugout.

Ballplayers can be ballplayers without running the risk of being lambasted over an "offense". And not having to walk on eggshells and be conscious of their every move & eff word in their own dugout. There's enough pressure already during gametime. There are many guys out there who probably do feel very awkward cussing, spitting and "scratching" in a female's presence (and Hernandez is probably one of them). It's natural. (And they would be classified as gentlemen, of course ;>).

In this day & age when people get offended if you sneeze crooked, a female in the dugout could run the risk of being offended with "boys being boys". And, with a dugout being a "workplace", God only knows the "rules" that could be implemented ... "Memo: Cease the cussing and "adjusting", guys!". :p
This lady is probably cool with everything. But what if the next one is "sensitive" to such things?

KH, being a former ballplayer himself, was certainly not out of line, IMO.

PS I'm a gal :>)

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Do you think posting "good looking chick" is clever? What is the point of your post?

Much too sensitive Curious. Next time you watch a commercial during a baseball/basketball/football/hockey game (heck, anything), pay attention to the way sexuality is commonly used to appeal to the male audience. Joltin' is a normal guy. When we see a woman, and if she's good looking, she's a good lookin' chick. What exactly are you offended by? The good lookin' part is a compliment, and the chick part is a slang term for her gender, much like "dude" is for guys.

And by the way, let's say this female employee over-hears a joke in the dugout. Let's say the joke is borderline offensive, but something that is normal for guys to say in a male oriented environment. So let's say she gets offended and a player gets fired or cut. Is that fair?

[CuriousBoston]

No it wasn't, not at all. I was watching the game when he said it. He was surprised like we all were (men) to see a woman in the dugout. He commented that the DUGOUT is no place for a woman. It had nothing to do with what kind of jobs he thought women should have. Don't take an ant hill and turn it into a mountain.




Curious, I respect your opinion, especially on this issue, because like you said, you were the targeted poster for a reply.

What's really the issue here though? Do you really think Keith Hernandez is sexist, or was he just speaking his mind. As stated before, things HAVE become overly PC in this country. It's gotten so PC that a guy with a show called "Politically Incorrect" gets fired for being exactly that. Now, I don't agree with what Mahr said, but still, that's what the damn show is about.

Another example. Rush Limbaugh gets hired by ESPN to be controversial. To say things that ESPN analysts either can't say, or won't say, even if they thought it. So Rush brings up something about McNabb, and he gets canned and crucified for it. Now again, I don't agree with what he said 100% or how he chose to go about saying it, but the point is, we're TOO PC. It's a joke.

This lady has as much right to be working for a ML team as anybody does. The issue is that she was in the dugout. A place historically occupied by males because that's their profession. If you get offended by the term gal though, wow. That's a bit extreme imo.

Yes, he was surprised. Then it was explained to him who she was. Then, he said that women don't belong in baseball.

Gals I rarely comment on; I think it's a regional thing, or maybe the people around me.;)

I miss Mahr; I liked that show.Hernandez was hired to call a ballgame; that he was not aware of a staff member that is apparently starting her second season is curious.

He was not hired to be controversial. After being informed of who she was, he stated, on air, that women don't belong in baseball. THEY ARE NOT IN BASEBALL.

Now the objection by him, and in this thread is multifold: women should not be hired for staff positions in baseball. Women should not be in the dugout, because their sensitive ears might make them complain, getting someone in trouble, or altering behavior by memo.
What a bunch of crap.

[CuriousBoston]

Much too sensitive Curious. Next time you watch a commercial during a baseball/basketball/football/hockey game (heck, anything), pay attention to the way sexuality is commonly used to appeal to the male audience. Joltin' is a normal guy. When we see a woman, and if she's good looking, she's a good lookin' chick. What exactly are you offended by? The good lookin' part is a compliment, and the chick part is a slang term for her gender, much like "dude" is for guys.

And by the way, let's say this female employee over-hears a joke in the dugout. Let's say the joke is borderline offensive, but something that is normal for guys to say in a male oriented environment. So let's say she gets offended and a player gets fired or cut. Is that fair?

You don't think I'm aware of the content of commercials for sports? How insulting is that?

Dude is not comparable to "chick". Not to me. Explaining to a woman how those words compare? That is your opinion. I'm entitled to mine.

You are really, really reaching...do you think if I, or any female BBF'r was in that dugout, we would make an issue of an overheard joke? You are trying to justify that females should not be in the dugout? That's the best you can say?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

You don't think I'm aware of the content of commercials for sports? How insulting is that?

Dude is not comparable to "chick". Not to me. Explaining to a woman how those words compare? That is your opinion. I'm entitled to mine.

You are really, really reaching...do you think if I, or any female BBF'r was in that dugout, we would make an issue of an overheard joke? You are trying to justify that females should not be in the dugout? That's the best you can say?

Trying to explain a male's point of view. Take it or leave it.

And yes, an overheard joke whether in the office or in a dugout could be an issue. I know that all too well, as I was fired because a woman got offended over a magazine any 10 year old can buy.

[ESPNFan]

Yes, he was surprised. Then it was explained to him who she was. Then, he said that women don't belong in baseball.

Gals I rarely comment on; I think it's a regional thing, or maybe the people around me.;)

I miss Mahr; I liked that show.


Ok I just wanted the Gals thing cleared up because I have heard it used by friends both male and female and have said it myself and really didn't want to be offensive. I always thought Gals was just the feminine version of Guys, simply slang.

On Keith Hernandez incident, first off, I'm all for the abolishment of P.C. behavior. It holds us back and keeps us from understanding things in life in favor of generalization and homogenization.

That being said there is P.C. and then there is B.C. as in Neanderthal. Keith needs to get with the past 2000 years and realize that a female trainer is every bit as qualified as a male trainer. She has a job with the team and that job entitles her to be in the dug out. Its a simple as that. All Keith's comments do is make him sound like a prehistoric bonehead.

Oh and Bill Mahr deserved to get canned.

[CuriousBoston]

Ok I just wanted the Gals thing cleared up because I have heard it used by friends both male and female and have said it myself and really didn't want to be offensive. I always thought Gals was just the feminine version of Guys, simply slang.

On Keith Hernandez incident, first off, I'm all for the abolishment of P.C. behavior. It holds us back and keeps us from understanding things in life in favor of generalization and homogenization.

That being said there is P.C. and then there is B.C. as in Neanderthal. Keith needs to get with the past 2000 years and realize that a female trainer is every bit as qualified as a male trainer. She has a job with the team and that job entitles her to be in the dug out. Its a simple as that. All Keith's comments do is make him sound like a prehistoric bonehead.

Oh and Bill Mahr deserved to get canned.

I chased a soon to be mother raccoon off a third floor porch(no stairs, she climbed up...) by playing Rush Limbaugh. :radio

Well, is there any subject we haven't covered in this thread? ;)

[ESPNFan]

I chased a soon to be mother raccoon off a third floor porch(no stairs, she climbed up...) by playing Rush Limbaugh. :radio

Well, is there any subject we haven't covered in this thread? ;)


Mrs. Racoon must be a fine openminded Libertarian like myself ; )

And I can think of a couple topics we haven't touched on yet but do we really want Tom Cruise Jumping all over our Sofas?

[Pghfan987]

Keith Hernandez is a color analyst, I am assuming. He is essentially paid to give his opinion and insight (of course, usually for things happening between the lines.) Keith is entitled to his opinion. He essentially said that women should not be in the dugout. As a former player, he may think that a woman in the dugout could be a distraction. The dugout is a place of work as much as a social gathering. If Keith thinks that having non-essential personnel (those who are not players, coach, and trainers) in the dugout is detrimental to the team, then he has the right to say so.

If you disagree with him, fine- you are also entitled to your opinion. But what Keith said in no way was meant to be hurtful. At worst you might say he is behind the times. I chuckled when I heard what he said. The first thing I thought when I saw the dugout was the same thing- What is that attractive lady doing in the dugout? Is she the new utility infielder? Anyone who has been around baseball knows that women are not often seen in the dugout, so for KH to show surprise is understandable. I don't think he was showing disgust.

[digglahhh]

He was cetainly disgusted. He made it a point to revisit and reiterate his opinion, more crudely, several innings later.

And BTW, those who think you can say what you like, here, apparently only say the things they like you to say...

PC has nothing to do with this. PC is about empty semantics. Its about whining that blacks should be called African Americans, but staying silent about the fact that they are treated like ******* by the cops. PC is a marketing strategy, it has nothing to do with the "product." You can dress up sexism, or mask racism within flowery language, but it doesn't make an iota of difference to the victim, it just obfuscates the infraction in the eyes of the offender...

The point is that Hernandez would not have made a comment, or even NOTICED, the extra staff member if he was a man!

Distraction, please. Your argument is that men can't concentrate on their jobs with a set of breats around...

I work in baseball, and so does my girlfriend, and it there is a lot of sexism. I'll tell you what too, men trying to rationalize and justify it doesn't help in the slightest.

I feel for you CB.

[hiddengem]

I agree...and I agree with Hernandez...his MAIN point was what the heck is this non uniform personnel doing in the dugout.

And what is she doing anyway, that she has to be in the dugout...they need to stay in the clubhouse, it seems she loves attention...I have seen her last year and this year


Are you really this ignorant? "what the heck is this non uniform personnel doing in the dugout"? Really? So are you saying that anybody that is part of the training staff and not in a players uniform should stay in the clubhouse during the game?

Kelly is part of our training staff and is treated just like any other trainer in our organization. She plays a HUGE role in keeping many players on the field and is outstanding at what she does. You don't know her or anything about her, and you make the comment "It seems she loves attention". Save it bro. You are just jeleous that she's in the dugout and you sit in the stands wishing you were in the dugout.

[BadKarma]

Diggs hit on some good points. Bottom line, you can try to dress it up all you want, but Keith made a sexist remark. I think that maybe initially seeing her in the dugout threw him for a loop, he said the first words to enter his mind (which usually are the truest to how you really feel), and then when he realized that he had flubbed it up, tried to make a crude joke out of it. Is it the end of the world because he took the wrong view and said the wrong thing? Not at all. People do it every day. Keith's just happened to be in front of millions of people. I would hope that Keith will come to his senses and make some sort of apology about it, but that's something that his character and conscience will have to decide for him.

CuriousB, I feel for ya. Not sure how a man can really understand the female point of view about this situation (unless they were formerly women). The sadder part is when instead of acknowledging that we can't really understand your point of view, we trivialize it, or ignore it all together. As I have posted before on a different subject: It's not the events themselves, but how we perceive them. How you perceive events is going to be based on your age, sex, race, upbringing, etc. Obviously none of us are going to have the same exact set of circumstances as anybody else, so we will perceive events differently. That doesn't mean that any of us perceived the event wrong, just differently. The mistake we make is assuming that "our" perceptions of the event are the only correct ones, and that anybody else who perceived it differently then us must be wrong.

[Brownie31]

Anal idiot. I didn't know I was an anal idiot. An announcer says that "women don't belong in baseball", meaning they should only be in the office.

Anyone who has a different opinion is an anal idiot.

You do realize the irony of invoking free speech, and using the term anal idiot?

I was saluting the Joltin' Joe's remark in re the loss of free speech in
this country-not that you are an anal idiot.

There is troubling erosion of free speech in this country, especially
for those on the right wing of the political spectrum.

For the record, I support the rights of women to be trainers or any
other position in mlb, even as players if they qualify. For that
matter any other profession up to and including the presidency
of the United States.

What I also support is the right of those who do not agree with
me to express their opinions. Keith Hernandez is a free born
American citizen with the same constitutional rights as, say,
Jane Fonda, Martin Sheen and Barbara Streisand.

Brownie31

[starkeeper]

Technically, wether male or female, this person is not allowed in the dugout.
Head trainer only according to baseball rules. The massage therapist is not allowed in the dugout.

[BadKarma]

An article by AP writer Tim Dahlberg on the subject: here (http://www.adelphia.net/sports/read.php?ps=972&id=12752933)

[wamby]

Are you really this ignorant? "what the heck is this non uniform personnel doing in the dugout"? Really? So are you saying that anybody that is part of the training staff and not in a players uniform should stay in the clubhouse during the game?

Kelly is part of our training staff and is treated just like any other trainer in our organization. She plays a HUGE role in keeping many players on the field and is outstanding at what she does. You don't know her or anything about her, and you make the comment "It seems she loves attention". Save it bro. You are just jeleous that she's in the dugout and you sit in the stands wishing you were in the dugout.

Very interesting. Ripping someone for making an assumption and then making one of your own. Very Interesting.I will stop short of asking if you are this ignorant, however.

[Dasperp]

What I also support is the right of those who do not agree with
me to express their opinions. Keith Hernandez is a free born
American citizen with the same constitutional rights as, say,
Jane Fonda, Martin Sheen and Barbara Streisand

And nobody is saying he should be arrested. Of course he has the right to say it, but we have the right to criticize him for his sexist beliefs and SNY has the right to fire him if they want to for making a stupid, sexist remark that could affect their business. If somebody at work started making racist remarks, i doubt people would say "oh, he has a right to say it". They would be calling for him to be fired, and rightfully so. I would also second Diglaah's point about PCness.

[CuriousBoston]

Thank you, those of you that understand it is not a question of free speech. I don't understand why it is so difficult to understand that a professional, doing her job, after she is noticed, after it is explained to the broadcaster what her career is, that the broadcaster feels comfortable saying "women do not belong in baseball".

Substitute Latino, Asian, with the caveat that she is staff, not a ballplayer. (Or an umpire, but that is another thread.)

Wamby, you do realize that hiddengem is a professional baseball player? I wonder if you have ever, ever, posted a positive post.

[CuriousBoston]

And nobody is saying he should be arrested. Of course he has the right to say it, but we have the right to criticize him for his sexist beliefs and SNY has the right to fire him if they want to for making a stupid, sexist remark that could affect their business. If somebody at work started making racist remarks, i doubt people would say "oh, he has a right to say it". They would be calling for him to be fired, and rightfully so. I would also second Diglaah's point about PCness.

Yes! Exactly.

[CuriousBoston]

Diggs hit on some good points. Bottom line, you can try to dress it up all you want, but Keith made a sexist remark. I think that maybe initially seeing her in the dugout threw him for a loop, he said the first words to enter his mind (which usually are the truest to how you really feel), and then when he realized that he had flubbed it up, tried to make a crude joke out of it. Is it the end of the world because he took the wrong view and said the wrong thing? Not at all. People do it every day. Keith's just happened to be in front of millions of people. I would hope that Keith will come to his senses and make some sort of apology about it, but that's something that his character and conscience will have to decide for him.

CuriousB, I feel for ya. Not sure how a man can really understand the female point of view about this situation (unless they were formerly women). The sadder part is when instead of acknowledging that we can't really understand your point of view, we trivialize it, or ignore it all together. As I have posted before on a different subject: It's not the events themselves, but how we perceive them. How you perceive events is going to be based on your age, sex, race, upbringing, etc. Obviously none of us are going to have the same exact set of circumstances as anybody else, so we will perceive events differently. That doesn't mean that any of us perceived the event wrong, just differently. The mistake we make is assuming that "our" perceptions of the event are the only correct ones, and that anybody else who perceived it differently then us must be wrong.

Or an anal idiot.:confused: Very well said.

[CuriousBoston]

He was cetainly disgusted. He made it a point to revisit and reiterate his opinion, more crudely, several innings later.

And BTW, those who think you can say what you like, here, apparently only say the things they like you to say...

PC has nothing to do with this. PC is about empty semantics. Its about whining that blacks should be called African Americans, but staying silent about the fact that they are treated like ******* by the cops. PC is a marketing strategy, it has nothing to do with the "product." You can dress up sexism, or mask racism within flowery language, but it doesn't make an iota of difference to the victim, it just obfuscates the infraction in the eyes of the offender...

The point is that Hernandez would not have made a comment, or even NOTICED, the extra staff member if he was a man!

Distraction, please. Your argument is that men can't concentrate on their jobs with a set of breats around...

I work in baseball, and so does my girlfriend, and it there is a lot of sexism. I'll tell you what too, men trying to rationalize and justify it doesn't help in the slightest.

I feel for you CB.

Thank you. Another well said and well written post.

[VTSoxFan]

I meant to chime in on this yesterday, but my computer was giving me some trouble. I've read through the thread from stem to stern this morning, and am prepared to comment.

First, the term "gal." It's all in context. Hernandez's use of the word, interpreted through the context of his previous statements and the rest of the sentence in which the term is used, is, um, unfortunate. He could have said "I really do have a lot of respect for women." No, he said "I love you gals out there." There is a world of difference. He didn't show respect; his words only exacerbated the problem.

I am a pragmatist by nature, and I try to be fair, and see things from both sides. I can see how this incident can be perceived as another example of "PC gone mad". It can be perceived that way.... but not by me.

ESPNFan:...there is P.C. and then there is B.C. as in Neanderthal. Keith needs to get with the past 2000 years and realize that a female trainer is every bit as qualified as a male trainer. She has a job with the team and that job entitles her to be in the dug out. Its a simple as that. All Keith's comments do is make him sound like a prehistoric bonehead.

Thank you. Couldn't have said it better myself.

There are those who think women are delicate little things that can't endure the coarse talk that goes on in dugouts. Listen, I've known women who swear like longshoremen (in fact, I've known women to look like longshoremen, but that's beside the point.) Women are not cut in the Victorian mold anymore; though there are those of us who prefer more civil company that is found in the dugout, those who would pursue careers in spots medicine and physical therapy and intend to work with male athletes must naturally expect to be exposed to behavior that a woman like me would find intolerable. I have no doubt that Ms. Calabrese can hold her own. I think that if some player made an insulting remark to her, she'd probably give it back to him in spades, not run to the front office wringing her hands over having been insulted.

Joltin' Joe: I was genuinely surprised to see a girl in the dugout.

I would be too, since "girls" are, by definition, younger than, say, 17 years old. A 33-year-old male is a man, not a boy; a 33-year-old female is a woman.

Bad Karma: The sadder part is when instead of acknowledging that we can't really understand your point of view, we trivialize it, or ignore it all together.

There you have it in a nutshell. Some men get it; others think those of us who are offended are being hypersensitive and "anal." To those of you who do think that way, think about this -- I mean, really think about this. How would you feel if your work, accomplishments, talents, and ability were questioned or outright dismissed because of the way you look? How would you like it if you were told "no, you can't do thus and so job because you're a man." And even if you defied the odds and achieved success in the field you were told to forget about, would you like it if you became on object of derision, and the butt of crude jokes? Think about it. Put some time into looking at it from the other side.

digglahhh: You can dress up sexism, or mask racism within flowery language, but it doesn't make an iota of difference to the victim, it just obfuscates the infraction in the eyes of the offender...

Again I agree. Sometimes the offender is immersed in a lifelong culture of discimination and genuinely doesn't understand that he/she is giving offense. It doesn't make it excusable, or any less hurtful to the object of the discrimination, be it sexism, racism, classism (which I experience every day I go to work). If more people would open up their horizons a bit and see things from another perspective.... ah, but that's the frustrated idealist in me talking.

And finally.... this conversation has strayed MILES from baseball, and so that's all I have to say.

[DODGER DEB]

The NY Daily News has this today on the "Keith" thing....

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/411838p-348301c.html

c.

[efin98]

How about a clear and honest answer to this from the people who actually know- San Diego fans.

Was she out there for a valid reason like an injury to a player that falls into her area of expertise, as a temporary substitute for another trainer etc. There are reasons for people being in the dugout other than to get attention or to watch the game.

And really, next time you are watching a game check out who is actually in the dugout. How many players who are on the DL are in there? How many members of the training staff and other employees like interpreters are in there- there are more than you realize who are in the dugouts.

[CuriousBoston]

How about a clear and honest answer to this from the people who actually know- San Diego fans.

Was she out there for a valid reason like an injury to a player that falls into her area of expertise, as a temporary substitute for another trainer etc. There are reasons for people being in the dugout other than to get attention or to watch the game.

And really, next time you are watching a game check out who is actually in the dugout. How many players who are on the DL are in there? How many members of the training staff and other employees like interpreters are in there- there are more than you realize who are in the dugouts.

Read Dodger Debs linked article, folks...

Edit:this thread was addressed to female posters, to ask us what WE think. It was not addressed to the Padres, or anyone else. However, this is her scond season working for the team, the manager has stated to the effect he has no problems, and supports her.

[trosmok]

How else on earth do we go about changing people's attitudes towards the opposite sex, minorities, or simply people not like us, besides talking about stuff? We lead by example, that's how. Effa Manley is likely twirling in her grave with some of the nonsense that pollutes the airwaves during ballgames. Particularly from sexist morons that haven't learned their freedom of speech is also tied to the right to remain silent, which Keith should probably invoke more often. Gender isn't even an issue with the Padres staff, so why would Hernandez feel the need to pontificate his passe views? He insulted women, one in particular, and couldn't even muster the sack to apologize until two days later, and only after being reprimanded. I know a very, very good H.S. ballplayer that works as a bat girl, in uniform, in the dugout, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if she someday works her way up in the professional ranks as a miidle infielder. She has the talent, and more importantly the dedication to know that she can accomplish whatever she puts her mind to. She has overcome gender based obstacles already, and is barely old enough to legally drive a car. Tell me the times haven't changed over the last two decades because of the words and actions of forward thinking folks. :clapping

[Brownie31]

And nobody is saying he should be arrested. Of course he has the right to say it, but we have the right to criticize him for his sexist beliefs and SNY has the right to fire him if they want to for making a stupid, sexist remark that could affect their business. If somebody at work started making racist remarks, i doubt people would say "oh, he has a right to say it". They would be calling for him to be fired, and rightfully so. I would also second Diglaah's point about PCness.

Dasperp:

Absolutely, SNY has every right to fire him. Just as ABC had every right to
fire Bill Maher back in 2001.

There is a pattern to these episodes. I'll repeat what I posted earlier:

First a loud mouthed wiseacre cuts loose with a boorish and crude
attempt at being funny and then the perpetually offended howl
with sanctimonious and humorless outrage.

Brownie31

[efin98]

Read Dodger Debs linked article, folks....

There isn't anything of substance in there that hasn't already been said here.

This article (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2420288) is more relevant than a media editorial.

See below why.

[efin98]

In case anyone is actually interested in the facts instead of the back and forth posturing:

Hernandez said Sunday that he was sorry if he offended anyone. He also said that baseball's rulebook allowed only the head trainer and assistant trainer in the dugout.

But a Major League Baseball memo previously sent to all clubs said that in addition to the two trainers, one member of the conditioning staff was permitted in the dugout during games. After Hernandez's remarks, MLB called the Padres and verified that, indeed, Calabrese was allowed.

[VTSoxFan]

Dasperp:

Absolutely, SNY has every right to fire him. Just as ABC had every right to
fire Bill Maher back in 2001.

There is a pattern to these episodes. I'll repeat what I posted earlier:

First a loud mouthed wiseacre cuts loose with a boorish and crude
attempt at being funny and then the perpetually offended howl
with sanctimonious and humorless outrage.

Brownie31

Perhaps the Perpetually Offended are that way because they have been, um, perpetually offended.

If someone calls you a name and puts you down, it makes you mad, right? If someone insults someone you care about -- your parents, spouse, friends, children -- wouldn't you react with dismay and anger and a sense of injustice? That's not sanctimony. it's just anger. We shouldn't just shrug it off because the offender is boorish and crude.

[VTSoxFan]

Thanks for that quote, Efin98. That would seem to settle the matter. It's not against the rules for her to be there; the Padres staff and players seem to have no problem with it, and obvioulsy Ms. Calabrese has no problem with it either. So why should anyone else?

[Joltin' Joe]

Girl? She is a 33 year old woman. Do you think posting "good looking chick" is clever? What is the point of your post? To bait me? Perhaps partly your point was females are so rare in dugouts...how did you respond to what he said?


Fair enough questions CB. I will address each and every one.

1) I'm a 42 year old man so a 33 year old woman to me is a girl. Furthermore, I thought she was in her mid 20s. So let's add that she looks great for 33.

2) Posting "good looking chick" was to state a point that my initial reaction was that: 1. I see an attractive woman in the dugout. 2. Hey what is that woman doing in the dugout? My reason for #2 is not that a woman doesn't belong in the dugout but I wonder what she does for the Padres? I don't think this is an unreasonable question as there are very very few women in the MLB business. I then thought it was pretty damn cool that a woman was in the dugout. I made the assumption that she must be a trainer or something. "A good looking chick" is how men talk to each other. It's no secret. Women talk to each other in a certain way too. I was thinking out loud to myself so that is why I inserted "good looking chick" to be brutally honest, not to be "clever" as you assumed.

3) The purpose of my post was that I can't believe people are making a big deal over this in California. It is a non-news over here in the NY Metro area. Hernandez was basically told he is wrong on the air by his partner, & gonna hear it from his wife when he goes home. Hernandez chuckled and sort of acknowledged it and that was the extent of it. Everybody is entitled to their opinions. I don't agree with Hernandez but who cares! Seriously I don't believe that free speech really exists in our country anymore. You can't say anything without pissing someone off anymore. Everybody is so sensitive. Who cares what one person thinks!

4) No I wasn't baiting you. I didn't even know you were a female member until this post.

5) I responded to what he said as 1. Wow Hernandez is so old fashioned. 2. He is a male chauvenist. 3. Not the smartest thing to say on air. 4. I definitely don't agree with him. 5. I think he's going to hear it from his wife when he goes home. 6. I wonder if anyone in the media is going to make a big deal over this?

[Joltin' Joe]

I would be too, since "girls" are, by definition, younger than, say, 17 years old. A 33-year-old male is a man, not a boy; a 33-year-old female is a woman.




What definition is that??

My dictionary says,

girl:

1. A female child or young unmarried woman.
2. Any woman
3. A sweetheart
4. A female servant

Quite frankly, I am left speechless by your post. I don't even know what to say....


I remember years ago at my company, a sweet old lady about 90 years old walked in and couldn't remember her salesperson's name. She was so happy with him the last time that she wanted to deal with him again. When we asked her to describe him, her exact words were " very nice little Italian boy". Well to make a long story short, the salesperson she was referring to was a short Italian guy....who was in his mid 30s.
So are we suppose to pick apart her statement that she said
"little"...made fun of his short stature
"Italian"...ethnic
"boy"...he is twice the boy "limit" of 17

Lighten up people! Stop going out of your way to try to find negativity in people's statements that don't even exist. ;)

[Brownie31]

Perhaps the Perpetually Offended are that way because they have been, um, perpetually offended.

If someone calls you a name and puts you down, it makes you mad, right? If someone insults someone you care about -- your parents, spouse, friends, children -- wouldn't you react with dismay and anger and a sense of injustice? That's not sanctimony. it's just anger. We shouldn't just shrug it off because the offender is boorish and crude.

VTSoxFan:

I am a lifelong (55 years) resident of Alabama. People are constantly
making snide jokes about Alabama and the rest of the South
in the media and elsewhere and have for, oh, about 150 years or so.

Does it upset me? No. I just say to hell with them. They do not look
down on me anymore than I look down on them.

Brownie31

[Rennie Stennett]

My first major in college was Sports Medicine. There were as many, if not more, aspiring trainers who were female as there were male. Take a look at any college football sideline and chances are you'll see as many female trainers as male trainers. What Hernandez said was completely ignorant, not to mention idiotic. Seems like that stuff he's puting on his hair to keep it from turning gray has soaked in too deep.

So those TV commercials that are so corn dog that he does with Clyde Frazier are close to the truth. If you remember, the basic message of their TV spots is do this and get laid. It's funny, this is something he could have passed on and not said, unless this is how he really believes, and then, out it comes. He had to know that this is the same as throwin' gasoline on the campfire. What a knucklehead...

[Mattingly]

What definition is that??

My dictionary says,

girl:

1. A female child or young unmarried woman.
2. Any woman
3. A sweetheart
4. A female servant

Quite frankly, I am left speechless by your post. I don't even know what to say....

I remember years ago at my company, a sweet old lady about 90 years old walked in and couldn't remember her salesperson's name. She was so happy with him the last time that she wanted to deal with him again. When we asked her to describe him, her exact words were " very nice little Italian boy". Well to make a long story short, the salesperson she was referring to was a short Italian guy....who was in his mid 30s.
So are we suppose to pick apart her statement that she said
"little"...made fun of his short stature
"Italian"...ethnic
"boy"...he is twice the boy "limit" of 17

Lighten up people! Stop going out of your way to try to find negativity in people's statements that don't even exist. ;)
I think that what's going on here is that perhaps Keith used the word "gal", which some women may interpret as derogatory, which is likely unbeknownst to Keith. I can see him asking in a friendly tone something like, "So how are you gals doing?"

Not every single time does a man refer to women as "women", and since there are people who see "guys" and "gals" to be separated only by gender, then since "guys" or dudes is often used, so too will "gals". Some will be offended by this, some will not.

While using the word "gals" may not necessarily conjure up high levels of respect for women, some women have been upset over its use. Personally, I've never been upset if guys (or women, ladies, whatever) called me "guy", "dude", "bro".

Sometimes women have been known to take exception to men's/guys'/dudes' terminology when speaking to them. On another board, some women took exception when I'd called them "ladies", as they'd considered that term outdated and led them back to the days when all were expected to be "prim and proper", as if lacking personality. I'd mentioned that there were ladies and there were gents. Didn't work.

I'm guessing that if someone knows the individual woman personally, then they may not be upset over that word usage. Since I've only used Annie's first name as we know each other quite well, I haven't had the need to call her and other women here (including Dodger Deb or CuriousBoston) by anything other than their names or monikers.

People may try asking the women one knows if the term "gal" upsets them, and if so, what would be the preferred name to them. Hopefully, there's more that's acceptable than "women".

[Mattingly]

VTSoxFan:

I am a lifelong (55 years) resident of Alabama. People are constantly
making snide jokes about Alabama and the rest of the South
in the media and elsewhere and have for, oh, about 150 years or so.

Does it upset me? No. I just say to hell with them. They do not look
down on me anymore than I look down on them.

Brownie31
I think that in the case of Alabamans (is that the right word?), that's more about jokes of a certain variety that I won't repeat here. :D I'm sure there are others, but I haven't listened to tons of jokes about them.

If someone on a sports show had asked "How are you hillbillies doin'?", I could understand people getting upset. However, had he said something like, "How are you Southerners doin'?", I'd think there'd be less reason for being upset.

As to her being in the dugout, since MLB itself had to check with the Dodgers as to whether she was OK to be there, then I'm not too sure he was expected to know this.

As to her being a female in the dugout, perhaps he could've waited until the camera were off before asking this. With the way the media is, and unless you're on a cable channel broadcasting for paid subscribers, some people do get upset with many comments. That's the world we live in.

[west coast orange and black]

brownie31: There is a pattern to these episodes.

First a loud mouthed wiseacre cuts loose with a boorish and crude attempt at being funny and then the perpetually offended howl with sanctimonious and humorless outrage.

vtsoxfan (annie) has not displayed a predispostion for being perpetually offended. in fact, she has displayed patience and grace and has rolled with the punches here at bb-f time after time.
she is deserving of respect, so let's give it to her.

the very fact that annie is a woman automatically puts her in a vantage point that about 99% or whatever of us members are not. we oughtta be thankful that we the collective can hear it firsthand from whichever bb-f member has insight, even if it is inherent in nature, of a particular subject or situation. disagreeing is ok, but the namecalling is bush and absolutely uncalled for.

there is no rule that dictates that humor must be included in a retort. there is no need to expect or demand that of another.

lastly, calling annie hypocritically pious deserves an apology. one that is honest. one that need not include humor.

[Joltin' Joe]

I think that what's going on here is that perhaps Keith used the word "gal", which some women may interpret as derogatory, which is likely unbeknownst to Keith. I can see him asking in a friendly tone something like, "So how are you gals doing?"



Mattingly, this one had nothing to do with Hernandez. This was in response to a post by another member stating that I should not refer to the Massage Therapist as a girl because she is over 17(33 I'm told she is).

[Mattingly]

Mattingly, this one had nothing to do with Hernandez. This was in response to a post by another member stating that I should not refer to the Massage Therapist as a girl because she is over 17(33 I'm told she is).
So you're saying that a female adult of 33 years can be referred to as a "girl", since that's acceptable?

What should a male adult of 33 years be referred to as, that's equally acceptable?

[Joltin' Joe]

So you're saying that a female adult of 33 years can be referred to as a "girl", since that's acceptable?

What should a male adult of 33 years be referred to as, that's equally acceptable?

1. I don't think it's derogatory. Depending on how it's used. Like I posted before, why do people try to look for negativity where there is no negative intention. Why do some people always assume the negative?

2. Guy would probably be the most equivalent. A word I don't think is offensive at all. Others would be Dude, Bro, Bloke(Brit), Hey 'Man!, Fella, Bud & even Boy(as per my post about the 90 year old lady).

So I should call my girlfriend, womanfriend??

[CuriousBoston]

I think that what's going on here is that perhaps Keith used the word "gal", which some women may interpret as derogatory, which is likely unbeknownst to Keith. I can see him asking in a friendly tone something like, "So how are you gals doing?"

Not every single time does a man refer to women as "women", and since there are people who see "guys" and "gals" to be separated only by gender, then since "guys" or dudes is often used, so too will "gals". Some will be offended by this, some will not.

While using the word "gals" may not necessarily conjure up high levels of respect for women, some women have been upset over its use. Personally, I've never been upset if guys (or women, ladies, whatever) called me "guy", "dude", "bro".

Sometimes women have been known to take exception to men's/guys'/dudes' terminology when speaking to them. On another board, some women took exception when I'd called them "ladies", as they'd considered that term outdated and led them back to the days when all were expected to be "prim and proper", as if lacking personality. I'd mentioned that there were ladies and there were gents. Didn't work.

I'm guessing that if someone knows the individual woman personally, then they may not be upset over that word usage. Since I've only used Annie's first name as we know each other quite well, I haven't had the need to call her and other women here (including Dodger Deb or CuriousBoston) by anything other than their names or monikers.

People may try asking the women one knows if the term "gal" upsets them, and if so, what would be the preferred name to them. Hopefully, there's more that's acceptable than "women".

It is my personal belief that a "girl" is too young to make babies. Men in the dugout are not called boys. I will refer to rookies as kids. This seems to be a commonly used expression. The word chick refers to something small, minimal brain, needing taking care of.

It is a good idea to ask what each individual wants. It's polite to call the person by the name they prefer. That is the point...after a person has asked you not to refer to them by whatever, you don't argue. You don't quote the dictionary. To do so is rude.

Matt, you may refer to me as Your Royal Highness, of course while prostrating yourself at my feet.:clapping

Matt, of course the reference to rudeness does not apply to you. I wish to keep my name private, so CB, female, or woman works for me. Sometimes people call me lady (I don't consider myself a lady), but I don't object. I will not permit people, male or female, to call me girl or chick. I will make exceptions for older people.

[Mattingly]

1. I don't think it's derogatory. Depending on how it's used. Like I posted before, why do people try to look for negativity where there is no negative intention. Why do some people always assume the negative?
Without knowing Keith Hernandez (by way of having watched his broadcasts often), I can't say for a fact that he's had no negative intentions. Had this been--to pick a name out of the air--Tom Seaver, who's also broadcast games for the Mets, I also couldn't know his intentions.

If a person I know says this, then I can look at how he's treated women in general. If a positive image comes out, that's in his favor. If he's treated women as idiots, used words like "bimbo" or openly questioned their intelligence, that's obviously not in his favor.

As to assuming the negative, people have what I consider to be "long memories", in that if they were called "girls", "boys" or something, that may have been used in a negative way. That may be a reason why forumers like CB don't like being called "chicks" or "girls", since it was like lessening them.

I personally have anothing against the term "gals", but others may not be similarly enthused.
2. Guy would probably be the most equivalent. A word I don't think is offensive at all. Others would be Dude, Bro, Bloke(Brit), Hey 'Man!, Fella, Bud & even Boy(as per my post about the 90 year old lady).
What about boy? If a woman were called a "girl", why wouldn't a man be called a "boy"? Just playing devil's advocate here.

You'd given an example of a 90-y.o. woman using the term "boy", but to some, the word boy has negative connotations (some of which were racial), so that's one reason that common term isn't used. Still, there's the term "homeboy", or in the wartimes of the past where soldiers were called "our boys", even though they were all grown men.

People have used these terms forever, and now some don't like these terms. Seems like a generation gap, as the woman you'd mentioned was 90, and some of the younger generation wouldn't have necessarily called him "boy" if he was in his 30s.
So I should call my girlfriend, womanfriend??
That's like making up new words. If you were to refer to her as "your girl", few would argue (that I know of, anyway). However, when referring to someone else, particularly one you don't know, then that may not go over as well.

Just ask the offended individual what they'd like to be referred to as and do that, making sure that they also know how you'd like to be referred to as.

[CuriousBoston]

1. I don't think it's derogatory. Depending on how it's used. Like I posted before, why do people try to look for negativity where there is no negative intention. Why do some people always assume the negative?

2. Guy would probably be the most equivalent. A word I don't think is offensive at all. Others would be Dude, Bro, Bloke(Brit), Hey 'Man!, Fella, Bud & even Boy(as per my post about the 90 year old lady).

So I should call my girlfriend, womanfriend??

If a BBF female objects to the term, accept it. If your girlfriend is okay with girlfriend or whatever, that is her call. Think whatever you like, but when another person has informed you they find a form of address offensive, the best response is: Okay, what would you prefer?

I don't understand the disagreement here. The thread started with a request for the opinions of female posters. We post. We are referred to as anal idiots...I still haven't received an apology for that; if it wasn't directed at me, who was it directed to? Many of my questions were ignored.

We are not newbies on this board. We are adult women. We have all experienced sexism. All adult women can vividly remember specific incidents.

The treatment of the women who responded to this thread has disappointed me. I am very glad that some of you understand, I am disappointed that most of you don't. The name calling, the dismissal of female opinions (requested!!!) is flat out rude.

Mods....possible to give 24 hours for apologies, tthen close the thread?

[Joltin' Joe]

It is a good idea to ask what each individual wants. It's polite to call the person by the name they prefer. That is the point...after a person has asked you not to refer to them by whatever, you don't argue. You don't quote the dictionary. To do so is rude.



1. I agree with your first two sentence.

2. You never asked me not to call you a girl. If you did, I would gladly oblige. As a matter of fact, I never specifically called you anything.

3. You were pushing your definition of a "girl" down my throat. I quoted the dictionary to counter. What you did is just as rude as what I did, which IMO neither one of us was rude.

4. This is going to be a circular argument based only on opinions not cold facts or stats. I have no malintent or any disrespect for anyone and I don't think you do either. Let's just agree to disagree. If we ever meet however, you can be assured that I would not call you a girl. :)

[Mattingly]

It is my personal belief that a "girl" is too young to make babies. Men in the dugout are not called boys. I will refer to rookies as kids. This seems to be a commonly used expression. The word chick refers to something small, minimal brain, needing taking care of.
Actually, the first sentence is debatable if you've ever spent any time around NYC, unfortunately.

As to men in the dugout being referred to as "boys", that's been around for awhile. I've met baseball fans who are male and have asked, "How are the boys doin'?" and they were referring to the Yankees, none of whom (not even Robinson Cano) are under 18.

I've known a 20-y.o. woman who referred to Cano as a "kid", but someone joked that while she'd called him "kid", that he was in fact older than she was. Everyone laughed at the irony. Still, Wang is also referred to as "kid", as he's a youngster also. Someone on the Yankee forum (who'd lived in Asia for 20 years) had objected to that a few months ago, as he'd somehow thought it was a racial reference.

For "chick", I'd say that term has passed its usefulness as to broadcast TV. If on premium cable and it's some "roasting" thing of the Henny Youngman or Don Rickles variety, then that's something else, I'd believe. On regular TV or regular cable channels, I'm not too sure that's a wise idea to use that word.
It is a good idea to ask what each individual wants. It's polite to call the person by the name they prefer. That is the point...after a person has asked you not to refer to them by whatever, you don't argue. You don't quote the dictionary. To do so is rude.
I presume you'd wanted bold + italics for "That", since you'd had those codes there, so I've put them around the word for you.

As to asking the person how they want to be referred to, I'd agree. In fact, I think that Side B should be for both parties asking how they'd want to be referred to, so it doesn't look like one of these 1-way streets re the respect thing.

I've been taken to task by women when I'd used the words "ladies" or "madam", so at times, I've known people who've been very sensitive. By this, I'm not referring to everyone who's been offended as being overly sensitive.
Matt, you may refer to me as Your Royal Highness, of course while prostrating yourself at my feet.:clapping
Uhmmmmmmmmm, should I get fresh-cut flowers and have strong men carry you on the throne, Your Royal Highness? :D :p
Matt, of course the reference to rudeness does not apply to you. I wish to keep my name private, so CB, female, or woman works for me. Sometimes people call me lady (I don't consider myself a lady), but I don't object. I will not permit people, male or female, to call me girl or chick. I will make exceptions for older people.
CB, female or woman. Geez, the whole time I was referring to you as just another Beantowner. I'll have to expand my dictionary sometime. :laugh

As to lady, I've never undertood the objection to this, and several women on another baseball forum (I'd made sure to ask the ones who were very responsible in their posts, whether about baseball or life in general) had objected tot his, and most didn't.

This thread, like a few others re social stuff, has gotten well away from baseball, so hopefully, it won't go on forever. Anyway, hope I've cleared up a few things here. :)

[Mattingly]

Mods....possible to give 24 hours for apologies, tthen close the thread?
Yourself and Joe may try going over each other's points and be honest with one another.

After that, I can't get into every single social issue, even though I'll admit I've brought out a few myself.

I presume this thread won't get 200 replies anytime soon, so hopefully, as mentioned in my last post, it'll die eventually.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Yourself and Joe may try going over each other's points and be honest with one another.

After that, I can't get into every single social issue, even though I'll admit I've brought out a few myself.

I presume this thread won't get 200 replies anytime soon, so hopefully, as mentioned in my last post, it'll die eventually.
At the very least, if this thread is to live on, it must be brought back to the topic at hand. Personal issues between members should never get aired out in a public forum.

[RuthMayBond]

It is not PC. Title Nine [is] are not PC.Don't be too sure. BTW, what is your opinion of men reporters in WNBA locker rooms?

[Mattingly]

At the very least, if this thread is to live on, it must be brought back to the topic at hand. Personal issues between members should never get aired out in a public forum.
I was about to write that they should PM each other. Now that you've actually voiced this, that may be the best solution.

Now let's get back to Keith Hernandez and his expressed views.

[JohnGelnarFan]

Al Campanis and Jimmy The Greek also came to my mind,when I heard the story. They replayed it on "Mike and Mike In The Morning" on ESPN2 and both were very upset by his turn of the century attitude. I realize that the playing field has a brotherly bonding between the players but I'll bet they all appreciate what she has contributed to their well being. She also is a teammate.




Thank god this isn't as bad as what Al Campanis said about black managers to Ted Kopell. That ruined Al's career.

[Mattingly]

Al Campanis and Jimmy The Greek also came to my mind,when I heard the story. They replayed it on "Mike and Mike In The Morning" on ESPN2 and both were very upset by his turn of the century attitude. I realize that the playing field has a brotherly bonding between the players but I'll bet they all appreciate what she has contributed to their well being. She also is a teammate.
I agree with most of your post (I'll avoid the Campanis and Jimmy the Greek thing, however), but what I can't understand is why you say she's a teammate.

If the manager isn't a teammate, then how is a masseuse, who's a member of the training staff, a teammate?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

CuriousB, I feel for ya. Not sure how a man can really understand the female point of view about this situation (unless they were formerly women).

Nor can a woman really understand the male point of view about this situation (unless they were formerly a man).

[Joltin' Joe]

I have fully complied with the rules and etiquettes of this board.
These are my opinions and I have just as much to state them as another member.
Since when is one mandated to apologize to another member if their opinion differs from theirs? As a matter of fact, publicly chastising another member and demanding an apology for difference in opinion is certianly not within the etiquette of this board.
I see nothing derogatory in any of my posts. The only one possibly is when I refered to the San Diego Press as anal.

I do see that certain member's demand to "accept it" and demand for an apology within 24 hours and then close the thread, is shall I say, quite arrogant?

I can flip this around and say that I meant nothing derogatory by saying "girl"(which I didn't) and you have insulted me by twisting my intentions and I demand an apology. I am also insulted that you tell me my definiton is wrong and your definition is the final word. This is the way it is so "accept it". Of course I would never say something like that.

I will apologize if I insulted anyone as that was not my intention. I however will not apologize for doing anything wrong as I have not.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Nor can a woman really understand the male point of view about this situation (unless they were formerly a man).
But the men aren't being told they shouldn't be in a certain place, qualified or not. What about the human perspective?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Well, just so you all know, I'm offended when you type the words "the" or "and," so please don't do that anymore. Also, could you refer to me as "sir." Thanks.

What Hernandez said wasn't the smartest thing, given the sensitivity level of our society. Seems though, there are people or "groups" who instead of actually being offended, are looking for ways they can become offended through insinuations, assumptions about the intent of the words. If the term "gal" offends a woman, then this country truly has no hope imo. Lighten up and remove the chip.

[Chelle]

Boy am I sorry I mentioned the whole "gal" thing to begin with.

As a 33 year old person of the female gender....I am considered a girl by my father, a woman by my boyfriend, a chick by the man on the street....

As a business professional I find "gal" to be insulting, but my 85 year old great Uncle from south Florida always asks if me and my gal friends are going out to dinner when I talk to him on the phone.

When I made the original post, I only meant that I though Keith H. was more "with the times" then to use the term. I thought it was outdated...

As to the massage therapist in the dugout...women or men....whatever the rules state should be should be the regulation. I don't see the need to have a massage therapist in the dugout (man or woman).....but if a male one can be there...so can a "gal" one.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

But the men aren't being told they shouldn't be in a certain place, qualified or not. What about the human perspective?

One guy states his opinion and the world is on the fritz? Wow, are we in trouble. The point is, while men may not fully understand how something could genuinely offend a woman...women also may not fully understand that man's intentions behind his words, or his true feelings. It goes both ways.

[Mattingly]

I have fully complied with the rules and etiquettes of this board.
These are my opinions and I have just as much to state them as another member.
Since when is one mandated to apologize to another member if their opinion differs from theirs? As a matter of fact, publicly chastising another member and demanding an apology for difference in opinion is certianly not within the etiquette of this board.
I see nothing derogatory in any of my posts. The only one possibly is when I refered to the San Diego Press as anal.

I do see that certain member's demand to "accept it" and demand for an apology within 24 hours and then close the thread, is shall I say, quite arrogant?

I can flip this around and say that I meant nothing derogatory by saying "girl"(which I didn't) and you have insulted me by twisting my intentions and I demand an apology. I am also insulted that you tell me my definiton is wrong and your definition is the final word. This is the way it is so "accept it". Of course I would never say something like that.

I will apologize if I insulted anyone as that was not my intention. I however will not apologize for doing anything wrong as I have not.
Why not PM CB and see if you two can work things out privately?

Thanks.

[Joltin' Joe]

But the men aren't being told they shouldn't be in a certain place, qualified or not. What about the human perspective?

That's not exactly true either Captain. Of course not to the extent that women(see I adjusted) have to put up with but gender prejudice goes both ways. I know male nurses that are looked at funny as well as joked on. I know a guy(man?) that is heterosexual, married with kids but is a hair dresser and people always make assumption about his sexual orientation.

[Brownie31]

I think that in the case of Alabamans (is that the right word?), that's more about jokes of a certain variety that I won't repeat here. :D I'm sure there are others, but I haven't listened to tons of jokes about them.

If someone on a sports show had asked "How are you hillbillies doin'?", I could understand people getting upset. However, had he said something like, "How are you Southerners doin'?", I'd think there'd be less reason for being upset.

As to her being in the dugout, since MLB itself had to check with the Dodgers as to whether she was OK to be there, then I'm not too sure he was expected to know this.

As to her being a female in the dugout, perhaps he could've waited until the camera were off before asking this. With the way the media is, and unless you're on a cable channel broadcasting for paid subscribers, some people do get upset with many comments. That's the world we live in.

Mattingly:

Most of the comments/jokes about the South are the usual: redneck, hillbilly,
inbred, racist ku kluxer, etc. Some are even funny, but it is the double standard
that can be irksome.

As my earlier post said, I have no problem with women in the dugout
or anywhere else in professional baseball and Keith Hernandez should
never be confused with Einstein. There should have been a reaction
to his comments, but in my opinion it should have been more like this:

"To hell with you Hernandez. She's in this dugout and she'll stay in
this dugout and there will be more like her in dugouts-not less. So
learn to like it, bub!"

This, in my opinion, would be better than whining and demanding
apologies.

Anyway, thanks for listening to me and considering my viewpoint.
Oh, and by the way, most say Alabamian but Alabaman is OK too.

Brownie31

[Captain Cold Nose]

That's not exactly true either Captain. Of course not to the extent that women(see I adjusted) have to put up with but gender prejudice goes both ways. I know male nurses that are looked at funny as well as joked on. I know a guy(man?) that is heterosexual, married with kids but is a hair dresser and people always make assumption about his sexual orientation.
I was only talking about this circumstance, the one that is the topic of the thread. I most certainly will not deny it goes both ways. I went to school at a college with a prominent nursing program, so I know they get unfortunately ridiculed.
Again, it's the human perspective. If they're qualified, they're qualified. No matter the gender.

[Chelle]

That's not exactly true either Captain. Of course not to the extent that women(see I adjusted) have to put up with but gender prejudice goes both ways. I know male nurses that are looked at funny as well as joked on. I know a guy(man?) that is heterosexual, married with kids but is a hair dresser and people always make assumption about his sexual orientation.

Well, I know that I'm going to get a lot of responses for this *sigh* but...

Are you kidding? Women are still making .77 to the $1.00. The fact that we are discussing if we can have women in the dugout, as opposed to if we should have massage personal in the dugout...just shows you the gender bias. What if there was male massage therepy staff in the dugout? I think a poster asked that before....this wouldn't even have come up.

Let's focus in on the issue. Is the position qualified to be in the dugout. If not, then she's not. Keith may have zeroed in on her....um, womenness...but it's time to focus on getting all not esential staff out of the dugout. Regardless of gender.

[trosmok]

Boy am I sorry I mentioned the whole "gal" thing to begin with.


Just who are you calling "boy"? The brothers don't like that one little bit.:grouchy


Nah!:D ;) I'm just yanking the chains a wee bit. :laugh

I rather enjoy the dynamic of this thread, and it proves some of the most educated people still don't have the sense to admit when they are wrong. I think a lot of the sexist tags also depend on the tone. If someone said "Fetch me a beer, boy, it would be far different than referring to my teammates and myself as "The boys of summer." Just like playing the dozens, if you really were ranking someone's momma, instead of just in jest, you'd be lucky to escape with all of your blood still inside you.

[DODGER DEB]

AP has just posted this updated commentary on the "Keith thing"...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12472430/

BTW, I am curious to know just how Keith's new wife (he got married a few months ago), reacted to his comments!

c.

[Mattingly]

I'm curious, how often has the Padres' massage therapist been in the dugout?

How many teams have a massage therapist in the dugout during games?

Do they give massages to the players in the dugout during the game?

I haven't even heard of any massage therapists being in the dugout before, so this is a new thing to me.

[Chelle]

I rather enjoy the dynamic of this thread, and it proves some of the most educated people still don't have the sense to admit when they are wrong.

That's why I love coming to this forum so much. We will never agree on everything, except that we love baseball. Nothing I love more then a good ole (that's for the southerner on the board) fashioned friendly disagreement.

By the way, didn't you know? I'm a woman. I'm never wrong. :D

[wamby]

Wamby, you do realize that hiddengem is a professional baseball player? I wonder if you have ever, ever, posted a positive post.

I know that hiddengem is a professional ballplayer. Even though he is I will post if I disagree with him. Just because he is a ballplayer doesn't mean he should get a free pass.

I have never, never, ever posted a positive post.

[DODGER DEB]

I'm curious, how often has the Padres' massage therapist been in the dugout?

How many teams have a massage therapist in the dugout during games?

Do they give massages to the players in the dugout during the game?

I haven't even heard of any massage therapists being in the dugout before, so this is a new thing to me.


A week or so ago, while watching a METS game with Pedro pitching, I saw Pedro actually having his foot being massaged between innings. He didn't even have to take off his own shoe, they did that for him, too!

[wamby]

I have fully complied with the rules and etiquettes of this board.
These are my opinions and I have just as much to state them as another member.
Since when is one mandated to apologize to another member if their opinion differs from theirs? As a matter of fact, publicly chastising another member and demanding an apology for difference in opinion is certianly not within the etiquette of this board.
I see nothing derogatory in any of my posts. The only one possibly is when I refered to the San Diego Press as anal.

I do see that certain member's demand to "accept it" and demand for an apology within 24 hours and then close the thread, is shall I say, quite arrogant?

I can flip this around and say that I meant nothing derogatory by saying "girl"(which I didn't) and you have insulted me by twisting my intentions and I demand an apology. I am also insulted that you tell me my definiton is wrong and your definition is the final word. This is the way it is so "accept it". Of course I would never say something like that.

I will apologize if I insulted anyone as that was not my intention. I however will not apologize for doing anything wrong as I have not.

That certain member demanded an apology from me, on at least one occassion, for stating my opinion.

I asked my wife about the girl/gal issue. My wife just rolled her eyes about it.

[Joltin' Joe]

Let's focus in on the issue. Is the position qualified to be in the dugout. If not, then she's not. Keith may have zeroed in on her....um, womenness...but it's time to focus on getting all not esential staff out of the dugout. Regardless of gender.

IMO, it should be up to the field manager. I'd say that any member of the organization that the field manager feels can contribute positively in the dugout should be allowed in. Whether it be a trainer, physician, or a massage therapist. Of course manager's discretion is required.

[SoxSon]

Dasperp:

Absolutely, SNY has every right to fire him. Just as ABC had every right to
fire Bill Maher back in 2001.

There is a pattern to these episodes. I'll repeat what I posted earlier:

First a loud mouthed wiseacre cuts loose with a boorish and crude
attempt at being funny and then the perpetually offended howl
with sanctimonious and humorless outrage.

Brownie31

I did want to point out that Maher's show was called Politically Incorrect. It could go without saying that controversial items were on the menu with that show, and ABC looked a bit hypocritical for firing Maher for providing them. That's the very reason that people watched Maher.
In the case of Hernandez, he's being paid to provide sports commentary on a baseball game. He crossed out of sports commentary and into social commentary. People tune into a ballgame to see a ballgame, not explore gender issues.
It seems to me that comparing these two situations is troublesome, regardless of what one's personal views are.

[RuthMayBond]

I have never, never, ever posted a positive post.My suspicions are correct :laugh

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Well, I know that I'm going to get a lot of responses for this *sigh* but...

Are you kidding? Women are still making .77 to the $1.00.

Do you have figures that show this is the case when

A) They both have the same experience

B) They both have been there the same amount of time

C) They both put in the same quality of work

D) They both have the exact same duties

E) They both put in the same amount of hours


Really, overall there is a reason why men make more than women. Men generally do jobs that are more demanding and/or more dangerous, and men generally possess better physical production traits; thus requiring higher pay. If a woman was willing to do construction, and had the physical abilities/output of a man, there's no reason why she shouldn't make as much.

Gender is only an issue if we're talking about our abilities. A female flagger who directs traffic will make the same as a man, all things being equal, because it's a job that pretty much anyone can do. It goes both ways though. A woman who has great business sense and personal relation traits, will make more than a man who doesn't do so well with people. Her production will be higher, and she'll be more valuable to the company. Wouldn't hurt to quit focusing on gender, and instead focus on what makes us valuable assets to companies.

I know guys who work in office environments, and women make just as much as they do. The catch; some of the women often take time off for "personal" reasons and don't put in the same hours. And these women will be the first to ask a man to replace the water cooler jug, as if they're not capable. Did someone say "equality?"

What about the secretary who sits at a front desk and answers phones in between her chat time on Yahoo, or her phone conversations with her girlfriends. I used to deliver packages for a living, and I can honestly tell you, most of the secretaries I dealt with were clearly hired for their good looks. They weren't personable or professional. Just attractive. Now THAT'S something to be offended about.

[RuthMayBond]

Do you have figures that show this is the case when

A) They both have the same experience

B) They both have been there the same amount of time

C) They both put in the same quality of work

D) They both have the exact same duties

E) They both put in the same amount of hours


Really, overall there is a reason why men make more than women. Men generally do jobs that are more demanding and/or more dangerous, and men generally possess better physical production traits; thus requiring higher pay. If a woman was willing to do construction, and had the physical abilities/output of a man, there's no reason why she shouldn't make as much.

Gender is only an issue if we're talking about our abilities. A female flagger who directs traffic will make the same as a man, all things being equal, because it's a job that pretty much anyone can do. It goes both ways though. A woman who has great business sense and personal relation traits, will make more than a man who doesn't do so well with people. Her production will be higher, and she'll be more valuable to the company. Wouldn't hurt to quit focusing on gender, and instead focus on what makes us valuable assets to companies.

I know guys who work in office environments, and women make just as much as they do. The catch; some of the women often take time off for "personal" reasons and don't put in the same hours. And these women will be the first to ask a man to replace the water cooler jug, as if they're not capable. Did someone say "equality?"

What about the secretary who sits at a front desk and answers phones in between her chat time on Yahoo, or her phone conversations with her girlfriends. I used to deliver packages for a living, and I can honestly tell you, most of the secretaries I dealt with were clearly hired for their good looks. They weren't personable or professional. Just attractive. Now THAT'S something to be offended about.My understanding is that the prize money for women's tennis is MORE than the prize money for men's tennis, I wonder about skating?

[#1SportsFan]

SNY is not going to fire Hernandez, especially since he apoligized.

[Mattingly]

A week or so ago, while watching a METS game with Pedro pitching, I saw Pedro actually having his foot being massaged between innings. He didn't even have to take off his own shoe, they did that for him, too!
I hadn't even noticed these things. One of the problems is that if you're watching on the TV, my only shots of Pedro would be him making fun of the opposing pitcher when he's not playing. Between innings up until right after the pitcher has thrown off the mound before the inning actually starts, we've got commercial breaks. I figure that unless you're right up there near the dugouts themselves, one may not even be aware of this stuff.

I've known of getting clothed massages. At a gym in Brooklyn Heights that I once belonged to, they gave clothed "chair massages", which some companies also treated their employees to occasionally. People would be leaned forward a bit in a chair and their backs were massaged.

I could understand his ankle, but never gotten a foot massage with the shoes on. Perhaps the tops of his feet, given that Pedro's special Nike shoe is that soft.

Gotta run. :)

[Brownie31]

I did want to point out that Maher's show was called Politically Incorrect. It could go without saying that controversial items were on the menu with that show, and ABC looked a bit hypocritical for firing Maher for providing them. That's the very reason that people watched Maher.
In the case of Hernandez, he's being paid to provide sports commentary on a baseball game. He crossed out of sports commentary and into social commentary. People tune into a ballgame to see a ballgame, not explore gender issues.
It seems to me that comparing these two situations is troublesome, regardless of what one's personal views are.

SoxSon:

What I was pointing out was that a broadcast network
has a right to discharge an announcer. Of course, the two cases
are not identical. No two rarely are.

Hernandez was not "into social commentary" in the strict sense
as he was commenting on a baseball related matter. In truth,
the lines get blurred quite often. Does the name George F. Will
come to mind?

Brownie31

[CuriousBoston]

Don't be too sure. BTW, what is your opinion of men reporters in WNBA locker rooms?
I have no idea what the policy is. Same policy as the MBA. I would assume that the women have a place to dress, or can be in robes, then after the interviews are over, all reporters should leave. Female reporters should not have an advantage over males; any player, male or female, should have the privacy they want.

[SoxSon]

SoxSon:

What I was pointing out was that a broadcast network
has a right to discharge an announcer. Of course, the two cases
are not identical. No two rarely are.

Hernandez was not "into social commentary" in the strict sense
as he was commenting on a baseball related matter. In truth,
the lines get blurred quite often. Does the name George F. Will
come to mind?

Brownie31

I hear you, Brownie31. The two basic situations are different...we agree.

I'm not sure, though, that Hernandez was really commenting on a baseball matter. Peripherally, ok. But it wasn't his opinion of a baseball-related matter that got so many people upset. It was his opinion on gender, and that opinion was meant to extend well beyond the playing field (or the dugout, in this case). He himself extended the discussion beyond baseball, I'd say, and into the realm of social commentary. As you say, the lines are blurred a lot in the world. (Being an op-ed columnist, however, George Will's blurring of lines doesn't seem so surprising.) :)

[CuriousBoston]

That's why I love coming to this forum so much. We will never agree on everything, except that we love baseball. Nothing I love more then a good ole (that's for the southerner on the board) fashioned friendly disagreement.

By the way, didn't you know? I'm a woman. I'm never wrong. :D
:waving Exactly. If the males would just learn this simple fact, the world would run much smoother.

[CuriousBoston]

AP has just posted this updated commentary on the "Keith thing"...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12472430/

BTW, I am curious to know just how Keith's new wife (he got married a few months ago), reacted to his comments!

c.

Married? Shiver. Let's hope he doesn't breed.

[Brownie31]

I hear you, Brownie31. The two basic situations are different...we agree.

I'm not sure, though, that Hernandez was really commenting on a baseball matter. Peripherally, ok. But it wasn't his opinion of a baseball-related matter that got so many people upset. It was his opinion on gender, and that opinion was meant to extend well beyond the playing field (or the dugout, in this case). He himself extended the discussion beyond baseball, I'd say, and into the realm of social commentary. As you say, the lines are blurred a lot in the world. (Being an op-ed columnist, however, George Will's blurring of lines doesn't seem so surprising.) :)

SoxSon:

It was definitely peripheral and not well thought out. As I posted
earlier, few would confuse Keith Hernandez with Albert Einstein!

Brownie31

[Brownie31]

Married? Shiver. Let's hope he doesn't breed.

CuriousBoston:

On this point, we are in total agreement!

Brownie31

[CuriousBoston]

Well, I know that I'm going to get a lot of responses for this *sigh* but...

Are you kidding? Women are still making .77 to the $1.00. The fact that we are discussing if we can have women in the dugout, as opposed to if we should have massage personal in the dugout...just shows you the gender bias. What if there was male massage therepy staff in the dugout? I think a poster asked that before....this wouldn't even have come up.

Let's focus in on the issue. Is the position qualified to be in the dugout. If not, then she's not. Keith may have zeroed in on her....um, womenness...but it's time to focus on getting all not esential staff out of the dugout. Regardless of gender.


Hee hee...I just read one response....predictable. Women take more time off; well, who takes the children or parents to the MD appts? Which gender is more likely to be abandoned with children? Which gender is less likely to be financially secure? ...Because they were running a house, not receiving a paycheck, their social security benefits will be smaller. It is fact that women make less, all other things being equal. Check the govt. stats.

Don't talk about more physically dangerous, or requiring more physical activity. That is taken into consideration. If your job description doesn't call for lifting the water jug, don't. Instruct whoever to call the appropriate person.

That a few hundred female athletes make more than their male counterparts, (if they do) is a thimble of people compared to the rest of us.

At least in the USA, the women are not sent out in the fields before the animals graze, or the field is tilled, to test for landmines.

Chelle, you like to open cans of worms ? :waving You are not a NYY fan, are you?

[CuriousBoston]

Do you have figures that show this is the case when

A) They both have the same experience

B) They both have been there the same amount of time

C) They both put in the same quality of work

D) They both have the exact same duties

E) They both put in the same amount of hours


Really, overall there is a reason why men make more than women. Men generally do jobs that are more demanding and/or more dangerous, and men generally possess better physical production traits; thus requiring higher pay. If a woman was willing to do construction, and had the physical abilities/output of a man, there's no reason why she shouldn't make as much.

Gender is only an issue if we're talking about our abilities. A female flagger who directs traffic will make the same as a man, all things being equal, because it's a job that pretty much anyone can do. It goes both ways though. A woman who has great business sense and personal relation traits, will make more than a man who doesn't do so well with people. Her production will be higher, and she'll be more valuable to the company. Wouldn't hurt to quit focusing on gender, and instead focus on what makes us valuable assets to companies.

I know guys who work in office environments, and women make just as much as they do. The catch; some of the women often take time off for "personal" reasons and don't put in the same hours. And these women will be the first to ask a man to replace the water cooler jug, as if they're not capable. Did someone say "equality?"

What about the secretary who sits at a front desk and answers phones in between her chat time on Yahoo, or her phone conversations with her girlfriends. I used to deliver packages for a living, and I can honestly tell you, most of the secretaries I dealt with were clearly hired for their good looks. They weren't personable or professional. Just attractive. Now THAT'S something to be offended about.


The government tracks it. They do make allowances for because females stay home with sick children, elderly parents, are more likely to be abandoned with children. Less in social security and pensions, because females are off the clock running a household. Time your family for a week; see how much time wife spends running house vs how much you do. Even when the woman works outside the home, she routinely puts in many more hours running the house than the husband does.

[SoxSon]

The government tracks it. They do make allowances for because females stay home with sick children, elderly parents, are more likely to be abandoned with children. Less in social security and pensions, because females are off the clock running a household. Time your family for a week; see how much time wife spends running house vs how much you do. Even when the woman works outside the home, she routinely puts in many more hours running the house than the husband does.


Hi, CB. Here's a link to some relevant info from the Department of Labor:
http://www.dol.gov/wb/factsheets/Qf-laborforce-05.htm

It seems the discrepancy in pay between genders grows as the workers get older. In other words, younger women are more likely to be closer in pay to their male counterparts (not equal, but closer) than older women.

[riverfrontier]

i'd demand an apology for those broad, blanket statements that offend men, but i get the feeling nobody would take it as a joke. so i'll jump to the front of the mob for a second. let's fire hernandez, replace him with a woman, then lobby to have prayer removed from the dugout.

[Pghfan987]

I am going to make a few references to other quotes, as I am too lazy/ don't know how to put multiple quotes in my post, so I am going to paraphrase. Forgive me if I take anything out of context.

If you don't agree with Keith, ok. But this is one guy's opinion, and he has a right to say it. Comparing what KH said to a racist comment is a terrible analogy. He was not teaching hate. Maybe he has a different view on the role of women, so disagree with him. I agree with you on this point, Joltin Joe. I completely agreed with your 5-points post.

Hey guys/girls: (edit: I wrote this honestly without meaning any offense or joke, so I will leave it in) why are you becoming so upset just because someone expressed an opinion different from yours? He is a color analyist: he is paid to express his opinion. Unless he expresses something that is offensive or substantially insensitive, there is absolutely no reason to even consider firing him. Are you kidding me? With all the immoral things that are going on in this country, with all the things that we could fire an announcer for, we are going to fire him because he expressed surprise that he saw a "gal" in the dugout? Because he was unaware that she was allowed in the dugout? Come on, people. I am not insensitve, I just realize that, in the grand scheme of things, KH's comments are of very little importance.

CuriousBoston: I understand that you are upset, and that this is an issue that is of particular importance to you. But to ask the moderators to "allow 24 hours for apologies and then shut down the thread", you are being every bit as closed-minded as KH is. I love this forum because I enjoy debating baseball topics with some of the best and most knowledgable fans in baseball. I never expect everyone to agree with me. Please do not assume that you are "right" and I am "wrong": we are all entitled to our opinions, and to express them, as long as they are not horribly offensive.

I don't see how the terms girls/gals/ladies/women should be at all offensive. We need to look at the intentions behind the person using these terms, and I would say that the overwhelming majority of men who call females these terms mean no offense. Aren't baseball players called the "Boys of Summer"? In fact, a band played a song by that very title a few years ago at the All-Star game. Gals is the equivalent to boys or guys.

There are things that are just infinitely more important in our country and around the world than symantics to get mad about.

[Sean Casey]

People need to grow up and stop being so sensitive. By no means am I a Keith Hernandez, but i also don't think that his remarks should be taken so sensitively. He made a joke. Get over it.

[Imapotato]

It's no skin off your back. The team management has accepted it, the people in the dugout have accepted it. Who are you to say who belongs where?

Why should she stay in the clubhouse, her view restricted by what a tv producer chooses to show?

"it seems she loves attention" Was she turning cartwheels? Going onto the field?

She is part of the Padres staff. . Shouldn't Hernandez have known that?

If she puts a uniform on, would that be acceptable?

This is surreal. I feel like I've been transported back in time.


If she was the team doctor, or team trainer, or batgirl, yea she can be in the dugout..but she is a MASSAGE THERAPIST...name me one MALE therapist that is allowed in the dugout?

There are rules, and she and the Padres are breaking them...

[RuthMayBond]

I have no idea what the policy is. Same policy as the MBA. I would assume that the women have a place to dress, or can be in robes, then after the interviews are over, all reporters should leave. Female reporters should not have an advantage over males; any player, male or female, should have the privacy they want.I'm not sure female reporters wanted to give male players the same privacy

[Imapotato]

Another thing...and this is NOT PC

If I am in the dugout, I am thinking about the P...or my next AB...or the game

An attractive woman walks by...I am not thinking about those things anymore :)

Hey...told it was not PC

[Sultan_1895-1948]

The government tracks it. They do make allowances for because females stay home with sick children, elderly parents, are more likely to be abandoned with children. Less in social security and pensions, because females are off the clock running a household. Time your family for a week; see how much time wife spends running house vs how much you do. Even when the woman works outside the home, she routinely puts in many more hours running the house than the husband does.

You avoided the whole point, but that's fine. There's no denying that what women do around the house in terms of kids and maintaining the household is much more difficult and demanding than most give it credit for.

We're discussing two workers though. Two workers, and you claiming that the female makes less. I'm saying if all those A-E criteria are equal, then there's no reason they should make less, and I bet they don't. If you just take a broad glance at the two genders, and their pay; my point was, that of course there will be a difference because males perform more difficult/dangerous jobs in general.

Curious, a little off topic, but how do you feel about women wearing low cut tops, and then complaining that guys are checking out their breasts? Just wonderin'.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Another thing...and this is NOT PC

If I am in the dugout, I am thinking about the P...or my next AB...or the game

An attractive woman walks by...I am not thinking about those things anymore :)

Hey...told it was not PC

Very true. We have very attractive females come to our baseball games and even though they're only in the stands, you can't help but check 'em out from time to time. Very distracting :grouchy ;)

[efin98]

If she was the team doctor, or team trainer, or batgirl, yea she can be in the dugout..but she is a MASSAGE THERAPIST...name me one MALE therapist that is allowed in the dugout?

There are rules, and she and the Padres are breaking them...

Actually, they were following the rules. She is allowed to be in the dugout during the game as one of the two allowed conditioning staff members.

[RuthMayBond]

You Curious, a little off topic, but how do you feel about women wearing low cut tops, and then complaining that guys are checking out their breasts? Just wonderin'.Look up the phrase called "jumping the shark" :ughh :crazy :hp

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Look up the phrase called "jumping the shark" :ughh :crazy :hp

No need to look it up, I'm well aware of it. The guy with the website's name is John Hinz or something like that. It's a phrase that came from a Happy Days episode. Well aware, thanks. Has nothing to do with my question though. This whole thread is about female/male interraction and perceptions.

[BadKarma]

It is? I thought it was about Keith Hernandez making a sexist remark and the OP asking female BBFers what their take on the situation was.

Curious, a little off topic, but how do you feel about women wearing low cut tops, and then complaining that guys are checking out their breasts? Just wonderin'.

Come on man, this is uncalled for. What in the wide world of sports does this have to do with anything that this topic is about. Was Ms Calabrese wearing revealing clothing or something?


Potato- You may have missed it but post #69 contained a quote that MLB had contacted the Padres after this "incident" and did affirm that Ms Calabrese is allowed in the dug out, and therefore not breaking any rules...

[Sultan_1895-1948]

You're right, things get solved by not talking about them. I shouldn't have brought that up. Let's continue on in our perfect society. Men are pigs and women are victims. Done with this thread. For the record, I don't agree with what Hernandez said, but the reaction to it is completely overblown imo.

[BadKarma]

You're right, things get solved by not talking about them. I shouldn't have brought that up. Let's continue on in our perfect society. Men are pigs and women are victims. Done with this thread. For the record, I don't agree with what Hernandez said, but the reaction to it is completely overblown imo.


What "things", exactly, were you trying to help solve by asking how a female member of a baseball forum community felt about women wearing revealing clothing then complaining about men looking at them inappropriately? What does her views on that have to do with the topic at hand? Not sure where the "men are pigs, women are victims" thing came from either. Didn't see anything about that. Keith Hernandez making a loutish statement does not equate to men are pigs.

[riverfrontier]

i couldn't agree with you more sultan. what he said was more a freudian slip than a pre-meditated attack, but that doesn't mean anybody on their high horse will hear it that way. it seems to be a pretty high horse, after all.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Keith Hernandez making a loutish statement does not equate to men are pigs.

Karma, what thread have you been reading? It went from Keith's comments being sexist, to women being offended that a viewer thought of the woman as a "chick" and then the word "gal" became offensive, and then women didn't make as much as men in the workplace, blah, blah. It all stems from women thinking men are pigs, or that we're insensitive toward their feelings. The shirt thing perhaps shouldn't have been asked, but I was curious about her views on that. My guess was, that she'd still blame the guy, but hopefully not. It was a reality check, a gauge, to see how level headed she is, just out of curiosity. Like I said though, probably shouldn't have been asked, so that's my bad.

[ReignInBlood]

Another thing...and this is NOT PC

If I am in the dugout, I am thinking about the P...or my next AB...or the game

An attractive woman walks by...I am not thinking about those things anymore :)

Hey...told it was not PC

I definitely agree, she shouldn't be allowed in the dugout, because aside from being the message therapist (please, what is she supposed to be doing there? giving guys massages after they take a bat or something?), she is a clear distraction. I mean, this whole deal is just because of her! She is clearly a distraction! And yes, I'm a Padres fan!

[hiddengem]

To All:

After checking with my trainer today, Kelly is in a fact as much a part of the Athletic Training staff as any other trainer. She is not a athletic trainer, but is part of their staff (as you know) as deep tissue massage theropist. Therefore she is treated as such. During any given game 3 members of the training staff are allowed in the dugout at any given time wearing proper team attire, which she was.

Since some of you people think you have this whole thing figured out, maybe you could tell me why during every game at some point, the strength trainer is in the dugout? What, are we going to get a few sets of squats in during the 7th inning stretch? Him being in the dugout is the same as the massage theropist in the dugout. Neither one of them will do anything for an injured player, but they are a part of the Atheltic training staff and have every right to be in the dugout.

She did nothing wrong, the team did nothing wrong. This is a dead issue, Hernandez came out the idiot and Kelly came out the true professional.

[Mattingly]

To All:

After checking with my trainer today, Kelly is in a fact as much a part of the Athletic Training staff as any other trainer. She is not a athletic trainer, but is part of their staff (as you know) as deep tissue massage theropist. Therefore she is treated as such. During any given game 3 members of the training staff are allowed in the dugout at any given time wearing proper team attire, which she was.

Since some of you people think you have this whole thing figured out, maybe you could tell me why during every game at some point, the strength trainer is in the dugout? What, are we going to get a few sets of squats in during the 7th inning stretch? Him being in the dugout is the same as the massage theropist in the dugout. Neither one of them will do anything for an injured player, but they are a part of the Atheltic training staff and have every right to be in the dugout.

She did nothing wrong, the team did nothing wrong. This is a dead issue, Hernandez came out the idiot and Kelly came out the true professional.
Does she give massages to players in the dugout? If so, then how often has she done this?

If not, then why is she in the dugout in the first place?

[hiddengem]

I definitely agree, she shouldn't be allowed in the dugout, because aside from being the message therapist (please, what is she supposed to be doing there? giving guys massages after they take a bat or something?), she is a clear distraction. I mean, this whole deal is just because of her! She is clearly a distraction! And yes, I'm a Padres fan!


Are you kidding me with this? You clearly have you head buried in the sand. Do you realize how many times women are picked up out of the stands during the game? Its just part of the game and has been that way for a hundred years.

Kelly is not a distraction at all to us, maybe to you the fan (obviously). But she is treated like any other member of the staff, professionally. She understands who's domain she is in and can handle the heat. And maybe you could give me your first hand experience as to how you know that she is "Clearly a distraction". When last, where you in the dugout with her experiencing this?

[hiddengem]

Does she give massages to players in the dugout? If so, then how often has she done this?

If not, then why is she in the dugout in the first place?

Does our Strength Trainer go through Workouts with us in the dugout? Why is he allowed in the dugout in the first place?

I can guarantee you that she has done more work on players in the dugout or in the tunnel, working out cramps or tight mucles than the strength trainer. There is not one thing a strength trainer can do in the dugout, yet he is there at some point every game.

[hiddengem]

If not, then why is she in the dugout in the first place?

Maybe she feels like watching the game from the dugout rather than on the TV in the clubhouse. Who cares? If the players don't, than don't worry about it. If they had a problem with it, she wouldn't be there.

[Brian McKenna]

I definitely agree, she shouldn't be allowed in the dugout, because aside from being the message therapist (please, what is she supposed to be doing there? giving guys massages after they take a bat or something?), she is a clear distraction. I mean, this whole deal is just because of her! She is clearly a distraction! And yes, I'm a Padres fan!

sorry sir - the whole deal is because of hernandez

it's amazing how many men sitting at their desk typing think that they somehow dictate policy to a major league team - get over it - you have no say - mind your own business - police your own house - and do so with as little misogyny as possible - step up - be men - and assist all the daughters and granddaughters of the world who face this crap everyday

complaints such as hernandez's say volumes about the speaker not the subject - intelligent individuals see this and recognize the shortcomings - don't think they don't - with every word you are viewed differently by family, friends and neighbors - take stock in yourself - see what you are perpetuating - stand up for the world's daughters - if not eventually someone who does will get in your face and all the ill will you harbor towards others will be known and follow your around like a stink

[Mattingly]

Does our Strength Trainer go through Workouts with us in the dugout? Why is he allowed in the dugout in the first place?

I can guarantee you that she has done more work on players in the dugout or in the tunnel, working out cramps or tight mucles than the strength trainer. There is not one thing a strength trainer can do in the dugout, yet he is there at some point every game.
If she works on the players in the dugout, then I'd have no problem with her being there. If she'd never worked on players in the dugout, but instead only did that in the clubhouse, then I'd wonder what her purpose there is.Maybe she feels like watching the game from the dugout rather than on the TV in the clubhouse. Who cares? If the players don't, than don't worry about it. If they had a problem with it, she wouldn't be there.
You have a point that she can be there as part of the team's staff. I guess that everyone doesn't necessarily have to have an "official" purpose there.

As you'd mentioned, if the guys didn't want her there, then she likely wouldn't have been in the dugout. Presuming they were uncomfortable with her personally, I'd say she may not be working there long anyway.

As to the "attractive girl/woman/whatever passing by" thing that people have mentioned recently, I'd say that she's not passing by in the stands; she's there as part of the team's staff. A pretty female passing by is different, as if the players haven't known her by now--especially since she's massaging them when they're wearing a towel--then I can't think of much more to help solve the scenario.

I must admit that I too would've been taken aback to see a woman in the dugout hi-fiving a player who'd just hit a HR. Some things I guess I wouldn't expect to see.

[Captain Cold Nose]

I have to agree with RMB.
This thread has jumped the shark.
Thank you, hiddengem, for once again contributing an insight the great majority of us do not have in general and a deeper understanding of the actual reality behind the whole controversey.

[Joltin' Joe]

I must admit that I too would've been taken aback to see a woman in the dugout hi-fiving a player who'd just hit a HR. Some things I guess I wouldn't expect to see.

I think that's how it all started with Hernandez. It was an element of surprise. Then not being the brightest or the most eloquent speaker, he just babbled on. Listening and watching the game at that exact moment, I can tell that he felt stupid about how the words came out and he regreted it. He tried to remedy the situation by saying I love you gals or something to that effect, which sounded even dumber.

My initial reaction was an element of surprise also. Then it was curiosity as to what her position was with the Padres. At the same time, I thought it was totally awesome that a woman was part of the organization and in the dugout.

[trosmok]

People need to grow up and stop being so sensitive. By no means am I a Keith Hernandez, but i also don't think that his remarks should be taken so sensitively. He made a joke. Get over it.

I must wholeheartedly disagree. It isn't much of a leap for some so-called jokes to reflect deep seated prejudices and hurtful intentions. Earl Butz was simply telling a joke when his true colors leaked out, and it cost him his job, reputation, and legacy as evidenced by the protests to his name being attatched to a university building erected some thirty years since his detestable utterances.

It is our duty to speak out against perceived wrongs, or we are doomed to suffer a repeat of them. Like Rev. Martin Niemoller said: "...and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me....By that time there was no one to speak up for anyone."

Therefore, I will continue to speak in defense of all who are insulted by lame-brained blowhards until I have no breath left, and no fingers to type with. Women are finally being recognized for their contributions to our beloved game; owner/manager Effa Manley was just elected for induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. Yet, there are still elements of neanderthal mentality among the commentators, as well as the members of our fever family that need to be corrected, in order for this world to be a better place for all. :radio

[wamby]

Seeing a woman in a dugout would have surprised me, I think. I would have figured her for a trainer though. I was surprised to hear that the Padres had a massage therapist in the dugout.

I always did wonder why a team would have a strength coach in the dugout during a game, however.

[Mattingly]

Seeing a woman in a dugout would have surprised me, I think. I would have figured her for a trainer though. I was surprised to hear that the Padres had a massage therapist in the dugout.

I always did wonder why a team would have a strength coach in the dugout during a game, however.
I remember having seen a masseuse (female massage therapist) on some magazine cover with Boomer when he'd went to the Padres in 2004. They said she had a strong sense of humor, could untie any knot that came their way. Also knew lots of things about them. Must be like how women talk to their hair stylists about themselves, so guys did the same thing with her, from what I remember reading. No link. The players really praised her work, I must say.

http://sandiego.padres.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/news/article.jsp?ymd=20060423&content_id=1414806&vkey=news_sd&fext=.jsp&c_id=sd (scroll down)
Calabrese is in her third year as the Padres' massage therapist, becoming the team's full-time therapist in 2004. She is believed to be the first female to be employed full-time in a Major League Baseball training room.Must've been her, as she'd started in 2004 when Boomer was there.

In the 2001 WS, the D-backs said that their massage therapist was their miracle cure. How else can you figure out that Randy Johnson both pitched 7 innings in Game 6, then relieved (and won) Game 7.

[dl4060]

So you're saying that a female adult of 33 years can be referred to as a "girl", since that's acceptable?

What should a male adult of 33 years be referred to as, that's equally acceptable?

A guy. I am close to 30 and my friends refer to women in our age group as girls. When someone goes to a club, they ask "were there alot of cute girls?" When girls go to a club they ask "were there alot of cute guys?" I have never known anyone, male or female, to take offense to this type of talk. Maybe at a certain age this will change, but here in California we are pretty progressive, we do not tend to marry early, which leads to people maintaining their youth longer. When people marry and have kids, they enter a new level of maturity. Calling someone a girl or a guy to us is simply stating that they are out having fun, making the most of their youth, not settling down. Frankly all of you who think it is insulting to call a 30-something woman who looks like she is in her mid-twenties a girl live in a very different place then I do. I am thankful everyday I do not live in a place like that. NONE of the girls I know would be insulted by this. They thought of themselves as girls in college, and they think of themselves as girls now. I really hope no one is dumb enough to respond with some type of "they are socially conditioned by a sexist society to behave that way" talk. That type of thinking has a place, but this is not it .

[wamby]

A guy. I am close to 30 and my friends refer to women in our age group as girls. When someone goes to a club, they ask "were there alot of cute girls?" When girls go to a club they ask "were there alot of cute guys?" I have never known anyone, male or female, to take offense to this type of talk.

My wife is 30 years old and alternately refers to herself as a girl or a woman. I think that I do about the same thing. I don't know if there is any cut-off that applies to when you can no longer refer to someone as a girl. Guy seems like a term that can apply to any male of any age.

[Bench 5]

I don't think he should be fired for his remarks. But what he said was plain stupid. If he wants to shoot the bull with his buddies after the game at a bar and say something like that, that's his opinion. But if he says it on TV in front of millions then he's asking for trouble. Yes he's still entitled to his opinion but free speech goes both ways. If someone says something that you disagree with then it's YOUR right to voice displeasure. That's what free speech is all about.

I am as old-fashioned as anyone when it comes to certain things but I have no problem with a woman in the dugout. What's the big deal?

If Hernandez wants to start cleaning up the dugouts where was he when they allowed 3 year old kids in the dugout like Dusty Baker's little boy. Talk about a distraction!! So for Hernandez, it's OK for a 3 year old as long as he's a male but he's got issues with a 33 year old adult woman? Jeeeezz!! And what about the drug dealing personal trainers like Greg Anderson. Why didn't he come out against that a couple years ago? Get those knuckleheads out of the clubhouse before you start bashing women.

[digglahhh]

If she works on the players in the dugout, then I'd have no problem with her being there. If she'd never worked on players in the dugout, but instead only did that in the clubhouse, then I'd wonder what her purpose there is.
You have a point that she can be there as part of the team's staff. I guess that everyone doesn't necessarily have to have an "official" purpose there.


With all due respect, nobody gives a flying fig whether or not you would have a problem with it. The parties' opinions who matter are MLB and the San Diego Padres, not you...or Keith Hernandez...

Do you know how many extra non-essential members of a training staff Keith has seen in the dugout during his days a broadcaster? No, and neither does he...BECAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST ONE HE NOTICED!

[digglahhh]

I think that's how it all started with Hernandez. It was an element of surprise. Then not being the brightest or the most eloquent speaker, he just babbled on. Listening and watching the game at that exact moment, I can tell that he felt stupid about how the words came out and he regreted it. He tried to remedy the situation by saying I love you gals or something to that effect, which sounded even dumber.


But later, he said, verbatim, "I believe this is a man's game"

For those of you who need some help, try substituting "white" for "man,"

[Brownie31]

With all due respect, nobody gives a flying fig whether or not you would have a problem with it. The parties' opinions who matter are MLB and the San Diego Padres, not you...or Keith Hernandez...

Do you know how many extra non-essential members of a training staff Keith has seen in the dugout during his days a broadcaster? No, and neither does he...BECAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST ONE HE NOTICED!

digglahhh:

With all due respect, I, for one, give much more than a flying fig for
the opinions of all of the other posters here on the BBF forums. Yours
included, even when I disagree.

Of course, only MLB and the San Diego Padres opinions matter
officially. That said, however, this is a forum for posting opinions,
none of which officially matter but all of which matter here.

Brownie31

[digglahhh]

Sultan,

Your post #114 is a perfect example of the ingrained sexism in society.

In your hypothetical, you chose male construction workers and women who had better "personal" and "public relations" skills. You could have chosen any example, why did you choose this one?

You didn't, society chose it for you by default, you just didn't scrutinize it.

BTW, women having better "personal skills" is a perfect example of PC using vague language to mask underlying prejudicial ideas.


Oh, and to all who bring up this distraction thing. As a heterosexual man, I am embarrassed.

Let's hope that the next time you lead your children across the street you aren't distracted by a pair of tits!!

[digglahhh]

digglahhh:

With all due respect, I, for one, give much more than a flying fig for
the opinions of all of the other posters here on the BBF forums. Yours
included, even when I disagree.

Of course, only MLB and the San Diego Padres opinions matter
officially. That said, however, this is a forum for posting opinions,
none of which officially matter but all of which matter here.

Brownie31

Brownie, you missed the context.

I meant that Mattingly's opinions about who is or is not "required personnel" in the dugout is irrelevant, he doesn't have any say in those policies.

[CuriousBoston]

Nor can a woman really understand the male point of view about this situation (unless they were formerly a man).

That is true. Since 99%plus of the people at BBF are males, and this thread specifically asked for female opinions, some of the male posters are already understand most females attitudes; others are trying, some are not.

Females understand men better than men understand women, since we live in a male world, where girl babies are still killed, teenage girls private parts are still mutilated, women that have been raped are expected to kill themselves. On the other hand, more females are in new professions for women, learning more about the male world.

Women have always had to know men better than men had to know women; for many, it was a matter of physical and/or fiscal survival. This is less true today, in many parts of the world.

I will not respond to any arguement about the above. For me, it is fact. If you wish to post that you disagree it is fact, fine. Don't ask me to prove any of those points: I'm not going to try to change attitudes, I am stating mine. Thanks.

[CuriousBoston]

I have fully complied with the rules and etiquettes of this board.
These are my opinions and I have just as much to state them as another member.
Since when is one mandated to apologize to another member if their opinion differs from theirs? As a matter of fact, publicly chastising another member and demanding an apology for difference in opinion is certianly not within the etiquette of this board.
I see nothing derogatory in any of my posts. The only one possibly is when I refered to the San Diego Press as anal.

I do see that certain member's demand to "accept it" and demand for an apology within 24 hours and then close the thread, is shall I say, quite arrogant?

I can flip this around and say that I meant nothing derogatory by saying "girl"(which I didn't) and you have insulted me by twisting my intentions and I demand an apology. I am also insulted that you tell me my definiton is wrong and your definition is the final word. This is the way it is so "accept it". Of course I would never say something like that.

I will apologize if I insulted anyone as that was not my intention. I however will not apologize for doing anything wrong as I have not.

I specifically asked who you were referring to; I do not believe I was answered; I have tried to answer all questions posed to me; it will probably be a few days..:atthepc

[digglahhh]

Oh, and watch this guys...

You may have noticed in this thread, I have used the words "******" and "tits"

How come I don't get any flack for it, while some of you get lambasted for using the word "gal?"

This is a good lesson in context. My opinions are known on this site, my beliefs have been iterated. When women recognize that you are not sexist and minorities realize that you are not racist, they react to what you say differently.

You ever notice all the stuff that George Carlin gets away with, that he can make fun of black people and not get in trouble for it, etc. That's because he is vocal about his beliefs and those who might be offended by his material are comfortable with the source from which it comes. You determine, by your own behavior, how strictly you are scrutinized by others.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Sultan,

Your post #114 is a perfect example of the ingrained sexism in society.

In your hypothetical, you chose male construction workers and women who had better "personal" and "public relations" skills. You could have chosen any example, why did you choose this one?

You didn't, society chose it for you by default, you just didn't scrutinize it.

BTW, women having better "personal skills" is a perfect example of PC using vague language to mask underlying prejudicial ideas.


Oh, and to all who bring up this distraction thing. As a heterosexual man, I am embarrassed.

Let's hope that the next time you lead your children across the street you aren't distracted by a pair of tits!!

Nothing about that post was false. There are always exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking it holds up and it's just how it is. Diggs, rather than nitpicking at why I chose certain words, perhaps you should have been paying attention to the underlying point.

[Joltin' Joe]

I specifically asked who you were referring to; I do not believe I was answered

I don't understand your question CB. Who I was referring to, when?

[Elvis]

But later, he said, verbatim, "I believe this is a man's game"

For those of you who need some help, try substituting "white" for "man,"

Try substituting Charles Barkley for Keith Hernandez and this thread wouldn't even exsist.

Why, when two men would say the same kind of things in the exact same context, would the consequences be so different? The same "rules" should apply to both men, but they don't. Unless of course hispanics like Hernandez aren't afforded the same pass on being PC as other minority groups are.

[CuriousBoston]

That's not exactly true either Captain. Of course not to the extent that women(see I adjusted) have to put up with but gender prejudice goes both ways. I know male nurses that are looked at funny as well as joked on. I know a guy(man?) that is heterosexual, married with kids but is a hair dresser and people always make assumption about his sexual orientation.

Who looks at them funny? I had a male nurse mumblty mumblty years ago in the hospital, and another recently. Also treatment by a male nurse (whom I knew from college) in the ER. Who cares?

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Oh, and watch this guys...

You may have noticed in this thread, I have used the words "******" and "tits"

How come I don't get any flack for it, while some of you get lambasted for using the word "gal?"

This is a good lesson in context. My opinions are known on this site, my beliefs have been iterated. When women recognize that you are not sexist and minorities realize that you are not racist, they react to what you say differently.

You ever notice all the stuff that George Carlin gets away with, that he can make fun of black people and not get in trouble for it, etc. That's because he is vocal about his beliefs and those who might be offended by his material are comfortable with the source from which it comes. You determine, by your own behavior, how strictly you are scrutinized by others.

******, tits, ******, tits, ******, tits.....what does that prove. Let's not pretend that any of us on here really know anyone else as people. Sure, we spout off opinions and involve ourselves in interesting banter, but really....can you name the racist people on here? Can you same the sexist people? Do we know what everyone has gone throug in their lives which lead them to form their beliefs? Come on. If the word "gal" is offensive, that says more about the offendee than the "offender" imo.

[digglahhh]

Sultan,

Name those who are sexist?

Those who didn't recognize Hernandez's statement as sexist would be a good start to the "suspicious" list...

Elvis, I actually think that Barkley is an "Uncle Tom" but that's for another thread, and board...

All I can say is that, a double standard is in order when there actually are two standards...

[CuriousBoston]

Just who are you calling "boy"? The brothers don't like that one little bit.:grouchy


Nah!:D ;) I'm just yanking the chains a wee bit. :laugh

I rather enjoy the dynamic of this thread, and it proves some of the most educated people still don't have the sense to admit when they are wrong. I think a lot of the sexist tags also depend on the tone. If someone said "Fetch me a beer, boy, it would be far different than referring to my teammates and myself as "The boys of summer." Just like playing the dozens, if you really were ranking someone's momma, instead of just in jest, you'd be lucky to escape with all of your blood still inside you.

You like dynamic threads, huh? Are you sure that wasn't dynamite? Explosive? Yankee fans and RSox fans playing football, hockey? Let me see. Matt said something about this thread not reaching 200 posts.

???Which team do you root for?

[Joltin' Joe]

Who looks at them funny?

The patients and their visitors. He said that it's not any certain age group. They make stupid comments and ask stupid questions. Someone once asked him if he failed medical school. :rolleyes:

[Joltin' Joe]

Name those who are sexist?

Those who didn't recognize Hernandez's statement as sexist would be a good start to the "suspicious" list...



digglahhh, I don't think there was a single Fever member that didn't think Hernandez's statement was sexist.

[digglahhh]

The patients and their visitors. He said that it's not any certain age group. They make stupid comments and ask stupid questions. Someone once asked him if he failed medical school. :rolleyes:

You do realize that the gender stereotypes that your friend is a victim of were established and propogated by men, right...

Men are not above experiencing the fallout from the ignorance of their own sex.

[CuriousBoston]

Hi, CB. Here's a link to some relevant info from the Department of Labor:
http://www.dol.gov/wb/factsheets/Qf-laborforce-05.htm

It seems the discrepancy in pay between genders grows as the workers get older. In other words, younger women are more likely to be closer in pay to their male counterparts (not equal, but closer) than older women.

Thanks for the link. Yes, that makes sense, the younger women tend to have more educatiom, more work experience, confidence, expectations. Mind, I said tend; there are always exceptions to the rule. Latinas are not doing well at all.

Where is the person who started this thread? I think he has gone to the South Pole.:waving

[digglahhh]

digglahhh, I don't think there was a single Fever member that didn't think Hernandez's statement was sexist.

What then was the motive of those who were saying that the underlying issue was who is or isn't allowed in the dugout if it wasn't to imply that the gender of the trainer wasn't the issue, ie. that Hernandez's comment wasn't sexist, but was intended to question whether or not the Padres were following the stated policy of who can or can't be in the dugout.

What about all the rationalization and explanation of Hernandez's comments?

Let alone the nonsense about the woman as a distraction.

Being sexist and condoning, defending or rationalizing sexism is a distinction without a difference.

[Brownie31]

Brownie, you missed the context.

I meant that Mattingly's opinions about who is or is not "required personnel" in the dugout is irrelevant, he doesn't have any say in those policies.

digglahhh:

I guess I was more concerned with the tone rather than the
context. It was the "nobody gives a flying fig" part that gave
me pause.

As to myself, I am interested in what is happening on the
field-not in the dugout. Perhaps it would be better for
Keith Hernandez to adopt this philosophy.

Brownie31

[CuriousBoston]

I must wholeheartedly disagree. It isn't much of a leap for some so-called jokes to reflect deep seated prejudices and hurtful intentions. Earl Butz was simply telling a joke when his true colors leaked out, and it cost him his job, reputation, and legacy as evidenced by the protests to his name being attatched to a university building erected some thirty years since his detestable utterances.

It is our duty to speak out against perceived wrongs, or we are doomed to suffer a repeat of them. Like Rev. Martin Niemoller said: "...and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me....By that time there was no one to speak up for anyone."

Therefore, I will continue to speak in defense of all who are insulted by lame-brained blowhards until I have no breath left, and no fingers to type with. Women are finally being recognized for their contributions to our beloved game; owner/manager Effa Manley was just elected for induction to the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. Yet, there are still elements of neanderthal mentality among the commentators, as well as the members of our fever family that need to be corrected, in order for this world to be a better place for all. :radio

I already asked what team you support. If it is not the Yankees, and you are not married, I, umm, shoot, I don't have a ring for you...I have a nice 2004 Tshirt, though...

[Joltin' Joe]

You do realize that the gender stereotypes that your friend is a victim of were established and propogated by men, right...

Men are not above experiencing the fallout from the ignorance of their own sex.

No he is a victim of stereotypes established by our society.

[CuriousBoston]

With all due respect, nobody gives a flying fig whether or not you would have a problem with it. The parties' opinions who matter are MLB and the San Diego Padres, not you...or Keith Hernandez...

Do you know how many extra non-essential members of a training staff Keith has seen in the dugout during his days a broadcaster? No, and neither does he...BECAUSE THIS IS THE FIRST ONE HE NOTICED!

I already proposed to trosmok...I suppose it would not be acceptable to propose to you? (At least until I get an answer.):dance

[digglahhh]

Well who establishes those societal stereotypes, Joe?

We have prevalent stereotypes about seemingly all groups except white males, so by the process of elimination, your friend is a victim of stereotypes that were established and propogated by...

[CuriousBoston]

Nothing about that post was false. There are always exceptions to the rule, but generally speaking it holds up and it's just how it is. Diggs, rather than nitpicking at why I chose certain words, perhaps you should have been paying attention to the underlying point.

ARRGGHHHH!

[Joltin' Joe]

What then was the motive of those who were saying that the underlying issue was who is or isn't allowed in the dugout if it wasn't to imply that the gender of the trainer wasn't the issue, ie. that Hernandez's comment wasn't sexist, but was intended to question whether or not the Padres were following the stated policy of who can or can't be in the dugout.

What about all the rationalization and explanation of Hernandez's comments.

Let alone the nonsense about the woman as a distraction.

1. Who besides Hernandez stated that women shouldn't be in the dugout?

2. I believe everyone's general consensus was that what Hernandez said was stupid. I don't believe anyone supported him. Some stated that it was a non-new and too much fuss was made of it. Afterall it was one person making a stupid remark. As we speak, I'm sure some idiot is making a moronic statement on air somewhere.

3. Are you talking about when one of the member stated that if there is a beautiful woman in the stands, he gets momentarily distracted? I would say as a heterosexual male he was being brutally honest. I guess it wasn't the most politically correct thing to say. But does that make him sexist? Because his eyes were drawn to an attractive member of the opposite sex and he momentarily lost his concentration?

[CuriousBoston]

I don't understand your question CB. Who I was referring to, when?

I was not clear to me if you were referring to the local press or responders to this thread.

[digglahhh]

I already proposed to trosmok...I suppose it would not be acceptable to propose to you? (At least until I get an answer.):dance

Great, great, now I'll be accused of adopting my positions on social justice and patriarchy as a ploy to "get chicks.":laugh

Well, my girlfriend might object. I don't suppose that you would be anymore receptive to my opinions that marriage is not only a meaningless and antequated ritual, but rooted in the notion of women as property. That doesn't seem to bother her though, she still wants to get married.

[Joltin' Joe]

Well who establishes those societal stereotypes, Joe?

We have prevalent stereotypes about seemingly all groups except white males, so by the process of elimination, your friend is a victim of stereotypes that were established and propogated by...

Call me dumb but I don't quite understand what you are leading to...

Are you saying that the belief in the US of A that a nurse should be female is to be blamed on white males??

[Joltin' Joe]

I was not clear to me if you were referring to the local press or responders to this thread.

I am still not clear as to what you were referring to. If you are asking about who I thought was anal, then it is the San Diego media and press.

[digglahhh]

1. Who besides Hernandez stated that women shouldn't be in the dugout?

2. I believe everyone's general consensus was that what Hernandez said was stupid. I don't believe anyone supported him. Some stated that it was a non-new and too much fuss was made of it. Afterall it was one person making a stupid remark. As we speak, I'm sure some idiot is making a moronic statement on air somewhere.

3. Are you talking about when one of the member stated that if there is a beautiful woman in the stands, he gets momentarily distracted? I would say as a heterosexual male he was being brutally honest. I guess it wasn't the most politically correct thing to say. But does that make him sexist? Because his eyes were drawn to an attractive member of the opposite sex and he momentarily lost his concentration?

Sure, people make stupid remarks all the time.

When CB, Deb and Annie took offense, Keith's remarks were explained to them, as if they didn't, or couldn't, possibly understand the "real issue" or the intricacies of the male mind (you know, the one that can't function around halter tops). That in and of itself is sexist. The inclination to call any reaction, over-reaction is sexist.

Again, let's hope those who are so easily distracted don't attempt to teach their children to swim around women in bikinis...

[CuriousBoston]

The patients and their visitors. He said that it's not any certain age group. They make stupid comments and ask stupid questions. Someone once asked him if he failed medical school. :rolleyes:
Every person he meets that treats him like that, they are learning; and going home and telling their family and friends, who are also learning. Ignorance is being replaced by knowledge...YES!

[digglahhh]

Words are not offensive Randy, beliefs are and context is.

[digglahhh]

Call me dumb but I don't quite understand what you are leading to...

Are you saying that the belief in the US of A that a nurse should be female is to be blamed on white males??

In short, for the most part, yes.

It is to be blamed on the fact that women were barred (officially or unofficially) from becoming doctors, historically, and the highest rank they were able to achieve was nurse. That led to male doctors and female nurses- the norm. Who held the positions that enabled them with the authority to determine who could and could not become doctors...why, that would be white men.

[Joltin' Joe]

Every person he meets that treats him like that, they are learning; and going home and telling their family and friends, who are also learning. Ignorance is being replaced by knowledge...YES!

Yes very true :)

This just made me think of Meet the Parents...remember Focker was a male nurse and he got abused by Robert DeNiro? :laugh

[CuriousBoston]

Great, great, now I'll be accused of adopting my positions on social justice and patriarchy as a ploy to "get chicks.":laugh

Well, my girlfriend might object. I don't suppose that you would be anymore receptive to my opinions that marriage is not only a meaningless and antequated ritual, but rooted in the notion of women as property. That doesn't seem to bother her though, she still wants to get married.

Oh, expletive. I don't need to be married. If you want to adopt children, though, marriage is a must; it is protection for them. (Says me.) But no children, fine. They can be scary.

[Joltin' Joe]

In short, for the most part, yes.

It is to be blamed on the fact that women were barred (officially or unofficially) from becoming doctors, historically, and the highest rank they were able to achieve was nurse. That led to male doctors and female nurses- the norm. Who held the positions that enabled them with the authority to determine who could and could not become doctors...why, that would be white men.

OK fair statement. But what is the point you are trying to make? That he should suck it up and deal with it because it's the fault of his own kind?

[digglahhh]

OK fair statement. But what is the point you are trying to make? That he should suck it up and deal with it because it's the fault of his own kind?

Oh that's what you meant originally. No, I don't mean that your friend should suck it up and deal, necessarily.

You relayed your anecdote as evidence that gender stereotypes don't only hurt women, but men too. My response was to highlight the difference between the two. Its not really the same thing because the women question didn't, as a group, generate the stereotypes that they are a victim of. Your friend, as a man, is a victim of the ignorance of other men. If he identifies himself as part of the hegemony, he bears some indirect responsibility for the source of his own stereotyping. Only by being vocal about the elimination of gender binaries does he absolve himself of the "guilty by association" label.

If he accepts the male privilege bestowed upon him by society, he must also accept the discriminating treatment he is subject to when he violates the patriarchal order. Just as if a woman accepts the benefits that come with being the "passive" sex (shouldn't have to fight, or work, should be pampered...) they must too accept the stereotyping of them as such and the attitudes that come with them.

I don't know your friend or his general opinions regarding gender issues, so I can't say where he would fit in within this continuim.

[dl4060]

Sure, people make stupid remarks all the time.

When CB, Deb and Annie took offense, Keith's remarks were explained to them, as if they didn't, or couldn't, possibly understand the "real issue" or the intricacies of the male mind (you know, the one that can't function around halter tops). That in and of itself is sexist. The inclination to call any reaction, over-reaction is sexist.

I agree, just as when a women tells me that I cannot possibly understand the intricacies of the female mind, that is also sexist.

As long as you are able to see both sides, I have no problem with that statement. You have a tendency to preach to people who are actually on your side. All this does is alienate and upset people who then become less receptive to your ideas. You often come off with an "oh by the way you are a racist and a sexist, you just do not know it" tone, whether you mean to or not. You did this in the Barry Bonds thread, and to some extent, you are doing it here now. If someone is a sexist, they are not going to listen to you anyway. If someone is not, all you do is upset them. People are much more receptive to things when they are informed, not attacked. I used to yell and bitch about people who drive H2's around Newport Beach as non-environtmentally conscious idiots. This never really got me anywhere. Explaining to someone that driving such a vehicle has negative consequences on the planets' future, and that maybe they will someday see these consequences goes much further to helping them develop than attacking them. The father of a friend of mine recently gave about 20 grand to greenpeace. In the years I have known him he has turned from someone who was environmentally unconscious to someone who wants to make a difference. Seeing his son get sick all the time from surfing has helped open his eyes. He has sought to become more aware of both the consequences of his lifestyle, and what he can do to help. Had his son and I attacked him, which is what his daughter did, we would have gotten nowhere. When you constantly harp on what white males have done to the world you lose the ability to enlighten and educate. I do not think you mean to attack, but that is sometimes how you come off.

There is a difference between EXPLANATION and JUSTIFICATION. I do not have the time to look over the previous posts, but sometimes people explain viewpoints rather than justify them. Someone who has had brutal expieriences with members of a different race or sex may harbor feelings of resentment. These feelings are not justified, even though they can be explained. Sometimes what you perceive to be a justification is actually an explanation. In this case I cannot comment, but ask yourself, is the person in question EXPLAINING Keith's prehistoric attitudes, or justifying them? You may find people are slightly more receptive to your message if you try to find a different way to deliver it.

[digglahhh]

Thanks DL,

I'm aware of what you say about my approach. It seems a common problem that people in my end of the political/ideological specturm have is not in their ideas themselves, but in how we market them. Of course, that's because we reject so many of the marketing strategies that have proven highly effective...ah, a vicious circle.

I actually try to be civil and understanding. To those who show a willingness to hear the point of view that is often silenced, I'm patient and thankful. I will engage in discussion and try not to be judgmental.

But it is annoying when you have spent years studying, earning degrees, writing, and teaching people about sociological topics and everybody and their mother thinks their opinions should be considered on equal footing with yours. Its not that my opinions are right and others' arent, that's not my place to say. What I can do is say that I've read more on these topics than I have on baseball and that I can back up my statements with theoretical and empiricle evidence. Anecdotes don't counter university studies, sorry.

If you think about an antique appraiser, he/she can look through a pile of your junk and notice something valuable from a mile away that you are unaware is anything more than a heap of wood. That is because that person is educated and trained within the field. Things are obviously noticable to that person that are undiscernable to the beholder of the items. That is my situation, so I understand how it sounds when I make these judgments, but it shouldn't be taken that way. If you say you feel fine, but the doctor tells you you are sick, who are you going to believe, and then why wouldn't you attempt to remedy yourself?

[Mattingly]

Amazingly, this thread has reached the 200-post count, as I'd feared. It's taken quite a turn as to opinions, but please keep them civil here, folks.

On a slow day and with little left to offer (that's useful to some, anyway), I'll just offer a Page Two article on a lost Seinfeld episode. Slightly risqué, but not totally crazy.

http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/magazine/new/seinfeld_hernandez.jpg
"I can say anything I want. I'm Keith Hernandez."

'I'm Keith Hernandez' (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/offbase/060426)
SEINFELD: THE MALE CHAUVINIST
[SCENE 1: JERRY'S apartment. JERRY and ELAINE are watching the Mets game.]

JERRY: What's the deal with the old baggy uniforms? The Mets look like they should be playing pepper and calling each other Dizzy and Pee Wee.

"I can say anything I want. I'm Keith Hernandez."ELAINE: Those are their Third-Sunday-of-the-Month-Alternate-Turn-Back-the-Clock-Road uniforms. The vintage soft flannel was found by a Burmese trader on the shelves of a back room at Raffles Hotel. It had been left there by rubber plantation owners while they sat in the long bar watching the sun setting over the British Empire with the last of their citrus-sweetened gin and bitters. The numbers, lettering and piping were then lovingly hand-stitched by an 83-year-old widow of a grand Knight of Malta to endure several seasons of wear.

JERRY: Let me guess. Peterman is supplying uniforms to the Mets.

ELAINE: It's part of his plan to re-emerge from Chapter 11. I'm his sales representative to the National League East. Which reminds me, guess which dark and handsome New York legend I'm meeting for dinner when the team returns from the West Coast?

JERRY: Mr. Met?

ELAINE: Keith Hernandez.

JERRY: Really? I thought you called it off with him when he said you should get breast implants and wear wet tank tops.

ELAINE: Yeah, but we talked when I was at Shea last week for a meeting on the Mets' stirrup socks and we had the most wonderful conversation. I think he's opened himself up to his feminine side in the past couple years. He's really changed.

[We see a shot from the Mets broadcast showing the Padres dugout and hear KEITH HERNANDEZ in the broadcast booth.]

[dl4060]

Thanks DL,

I'm aware of what you say about my approach. It seems a common problem that people in my end of the political/ideological specturm have is not in their ideas themselves, but in how we market them. Of course, that's because we reject so many of the marketing strategies that have proven highly effective...ah, a vicious circle.

I actually try to be civil and understanding. To those who show a willingness to hear the point of view that is often silenced, I'm patient and thankful. I will engage in discussion and try not to be judgmental.

But it is annoying when you have spent years studying, earning degrees, writing, and teaching people about sociological topics and everybody and their mother thinks their opinions should be considered on equal footing with yours. Its not that my opinions are right and others' arent, that's not my place to say. What I can do is say that I've read more on these topics than I have on baseball and that I can back up my statements with theoretical and empiricle evidence. Anecdotes don't counter university studies, sorry.

If you think about an antique appraiser, he/she can look through a pile of your junk and notice something valuable from a mile away that you are unaware is anything more than a heap of wood. That is because that person is educated and trained within the field. Things are obviously noticable to that person that are undiscernable to the beholder of the items. That is my situation, so I understand how it sounds when I make these judgments, but it shouldn't be taken that way. If you say you feel fine, but the doctor tells you you are sick, who are you going to believe, and then why wouldn't you attempt to remedy yourself?


Let me be the first to say you do a much better job than I would in this department. I am working towards a masters in statistics, and to see this butchered in the way that it is in popular culture is excruciating. Hearing reporters who do not understand the difference between causality and correlation makes me not want to watch television. Luckily for me most of the questions are from friends regarding subjects like "dude, if I flip 5 heads in a row the sixth just has to be tails." In your case the issues of your expertise are far more personal and emotional. I can explain the concept of independance of events, but if someone does not get it I do not really care. In your case the subject of your knowledge is far more personal. You also have to condtend with everyone thinking they are an expert on your subject, something that rarely comes up in my field.

[Joltin' Joe]

Oh that's what you meant originally. No, I don't mean that your friend should suck it up and deal, necessarily.

You relayed your anecdote as evidence that gender stereotypes don't only hurt women, but men too. My response was to highlight the difference between the two. Its not really the same thing because the women question didn't, as a group, generate the stereotypes that they are a victim of. Your friend, as a man, is a victim of the ignorance of other men. If he identifies himself as part of the hegemony, he bears some indirect responsibility for the source of his own stereotyping. Only by being vocal about the elimination of gender binaries does he absolve himself of the "guilty by association" label.

If he accepts the male privilege bestowed upon him by society, he must also accept the discriminating treatment he is subject to when he violates the patriarchal order. Just as if a woman accepts the benefits that come with being the "passive" sex (shouldn't have to fight, or work, should be pampered...) they must too accept the stereotyping of them as such and the attitudes that come with them.

I don't know your friend or his general opinions regarding gender issues, so I can't say where he would fit in within this continuim.

I must say digglahhh, I am quite taken back with this post. Not in a bad way mind you but...

You have previously taken an extreme position on the "women's" side. You were so adamant in agreeing with everything they said that you did not see the irony in how sexist that side was in mandating how we should use the words gals or girls in our own lives. I can totally understand if they requested not to be called "girls" or "gals" personally as that is their right and perogative. But to mandate and dictate how we should use the word "girl" in our private lives as well as so arrogantly shoving their defintion as the final word. You were so extreme in their support that you went as far as equating a member looking at an attractive woman in the stands to some totally ridiculous statement about teaching childrens and something about women in bikinis. That was quite a statement. Totally out of line and totally unfathomable that you could even equate the two. Then you went on about how the male nurse's situation is a bi-product of his own "kinds" doing. The own kind being a "white male". Well, the nurse in question, he's from Haiti. So does that exempt him from being held responsible for creating his own dilemma? Since you singled out the white male, I am going to assume you are a white male. I don't know you nor your intentions but it looked so much like you were totally going out of your way to show that you are being politically correct.

Then I see this post. It doesn't even remotely seem like the same person wrote it. This time it looks like you are going out of your way to be diplomatic and please both sides.

I now have no idea where you stand as you have completely blurred the line.

I'm sorry if I have all this interpreted incorrectly but you came over so strong and so extreme in your original position, after that, this post came over like a deflated balloon.

[Baseball Guru]

Amazingly, this thread has reached the 200-post count, as I'd feared. It's taken quite a turn as to opinions, but please keep them civil here, folks.

On a slow day and with little left to offer (that's useful to some, anyway), I'll just offer a Page Two article on a lost Seinfeld episode. Slightly risqué, but not totally crazy.

http://espn-att.starwave.com/i/magazine/new/seinfeld_hernandez.jpg
"I can say anything I want. I'm Keith Hernandez."

'I'm Keith Hernandez' (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/offbase/060426)



Personally I like the magic luggy episode where Jerry demonstrates to Kramer & Newman how impossible it would be for the magic luggy to have come from Keith Hernandez heading in the opposite direction.:D

http://www.stanus.net/visual/seinfeld/images/3_17_1.jpg
:laugh

Jerry: Allow me to reconstruct this if I may for Miss Benes as I've heard this story a number of times. Newman, Kramer, if you'll indulge me. According to your story, Keith passes you and starts walking up the ramp, then you say you were struck on the right temple. The spit then proceeds to ricochet off the temple, striking Newman between the third and forth rib. The spit then came off the rib, turned, and hit Newman in the right wrist, causing him to drop his baseball cap. The spit then splashed off the wrist - pauses in mid air mind you - makes a left turn and lands on Newman's left thigh. That is one magic luggie!

But thats just me:D

[Mattingly]

Personally I like the magic luggy episode where Jerry demonstrates to Kramer & Newman how impossible it would be for the magic luggy to have come from Keith Hernandez heading in the opposite direction.:D

http://www.stanus.net/visual/seinfeld/images/3_17_1.jpg
:laugh


But thats just me:D
I hadn't even realized before that Page 2 article that Keith was even on a Seinfeld episode. I think they'd used some Mets after they'd done many shows about Yankees.

Hopefully, Keith didn't do any storylines with a female massage therapist (or reporter in the clubhouse) back then.

So just how often did Keith do Seinfeld episodes?

[Baseball Guru]

Not sure how many episodes he was in but it wasnt many... I know he played Elaines boyfriend in 1 or 2 shows and then he was in a real short clip on the magic luggy episode and then he was also in the very last episode...

[wamby]

I hadn't even realized before that Page 2 article that Keith was even on a Seinfeld episode. I think they'd used some Mets after they'd done many shows about Yankees.

Hopefully, Keith didn't do any storylines with a female massage therapist (or reporter in the clubhouse) back then.

So just how often did Keith do Seinfeld episodes?

Keith was in one one-hour episode. He became Jerry's new best friend until he asked Jerry to help him move. Jerry didn't think their relationship was strong enough for that so he dumped Keith. Kramer advised Jerry to dump Keith because the next thing that would happen would be Jerry picking up Keith at the airport.

Keith also dated Elaine (who knew nothing about the Mets) but she dumped Keith because he smoked.

If I remember correctly, the real spitter was Roger McDowell. Newman had a great line to Keith: 'Nice game, pretty-boy!' after Keith made a n error to cost the Mets a game that Newman and Kramer had attended.

This one was probably the best of the one-hour Seinfeld's.

[west coast orange and black]

so, not even one -- however limp -- apology for the unkind, untoward, unlovely, unseemly, unjust, unkept, unleashed, unreasonable, unnecessary, unlettered, unfit, unpleasant, unmanly words?

bush.

[CuriousBoston]

It is? I thought it was about Keith Hernandez making a sexist remark and the OP asking female BBFers what their take on the situation was.



Come on man, this is uncalled for. What in the wide world of sports does this have to do with anything that this topic is about. Was Ms Calabrese wearing revealing clothing or something?


Potato- You may have missed it but post #69 contained a quote that MLB had contacted the Padres after this "incident" and did affirm that Ms Calabrese is allowed in the dug out, and therefore not breaking any rules...

Yes, I ignored that the first time around. Are the BBF females to answer for every slut? Those females can cause men a lot of trouble; if you can't suss them out and stay away from them..

As to the guys that can't keep their focus with women around them; don't I know it. There was one researcher that talked to my chest, only and always. He also came up behind you as you worked at the bench;put his hand on your shoulder, when you had both hands full.

I waited until I was past probation, With a great review, then sent him a memo, copy my boss, copy HR, suggesting an eye exam, since his current prescription was defective, was only able to focus, blah, blah. That standing behind people and touching them was dangerous, blah, blah.

Whenever I was in a position to stop that kind of garbage, I did. I knew the guy probably had been doing that for years, got through school because he had male professors, probably all male classes. The women there said they had tried everything, his boss, HR, etc.

It did cause an uproar. Had to be done. I could not work in that situation, especially in a lab. Blood products, radioactives, all sorts of machines, chemicals. He cornered me at my bench, threatened me, would not leave. He was wrestled away. I stood there, very quietly;I did put my safety glasses on. I was very hard just to stand there. I could not do anything that would put it back on me.

That's just one incident in my life.

[Rennie Stennett]

Try substituting Charles Barkley for Keith Hernandez and this thread wouldn't even exsist.


I think Charles Barkley would be cool with the idea of a woman (Massage Therapist) in the dugout.

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/Doomtown7/44fielddreams.jpg

[Joltin' Joe]

That's just one incident in my life.


What was the point of your post? To vent?

Are you trying to equate your experience with a Fever member momentarily glancing over at an attractive women? That is quite a stretch. Let me ask you this. If an extremely attractive man walked by, your eyes wouldn't momemtarily be drawn to him?

Are you equating your incident with anybody on this board that uses the word girl? That's the "crime" I am being asked to apologize for. You seem to have a lot of anger inside you and to me it seems like you are taking it out on any male member of this board that does not agree with you.

I have plenty of negative experiences because I am a racial Minority. But what does the plethora of my negative experiences have anything to do with the people on this board?? Absolutely Nothing!! Am I supposed to take it out on any white male because as another member stated, they are the one's responsible? Rubbish!

And for you demanding an apology for my use of the word "girl"; what gives you the right to assume that I am using it in a negative context? I have posted numerous times that I am not. It is a very generic word, not an offensive one. If another member explained that to me, I would be fine with that. It is not like I am calling YOU a girl. How dare you tell me that I am using it in a negative context! How dare you!!
It is not like I was using a word like N***er, N*zi, N*p, W*p, B**ch or F*g.

I have actually apologized publicly to you that you felt insulted by me using the word girl. I however clearly stated that I have no mal-intentions by using that word. I further stated that since there isn't any mal-intentions on either side(I'm not so sure anymore...), that let's agree to disagree.
Obvioulsly this is not good enough for you.
I am done with this thread. I have no further desire to debate this with someone who is so angry, so extreme in their position that they can only see the negative in the person they are debating with.

My apologies to the mods for derailing this thread so off track.

Let's get back to discussing the game we all love....Baseball! :)

[Mattingly]

Please note that this thread, which has strayed far away from baseball, will be closed within 12 hours. I believe this should be sufficient time for people to post a few things which are somehow baseball-related and in the context to of a massage therapist being in the dugout.

While I can understand that people have very different life experiences, and thus have very different outlooks in life, some of which are also based upon cultural and regional experiences as well, it's really not necessary to focus primarily upon these on a fine baseball forum such as this.

As to wcoab's post #209 here requesting an apology, that was to the two who have taken Annie (VTSoxFan) to task for having posted here. If you have taken her to task publicly, the request was to apologize publicly. Your choices.

Thanks. :)

[trosmok]

I already asked what team you support. If it is not the Yankees, and you are not married, I, umm, shoot, I don't have a ring for you...I have a nice 2004 Tshirt, though...

Thank you CB, that is very flattering. I am happily single, never been married, have no children of my own but have had more than a hand in raising a half dozen in my long life. Hating the Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers, and cheating on your taxes, according to Mike Royko. I was a Dodger fan until they left Brooklyn in my early youth, and finally embraced the Cubs as my team a few years later. Never got used to the lovable loser tag, particularly after '69,:mad: so I hate the Mets nearly as much as the Yanks. VTSoxFan knows the kindred spirit I feel toward the Red Sox, their once long-suffering fans, and although it is tempting to jump into this, at least for the World Series Champs Tshirt,;) I must graciously decline your proposal.:waving

I have many passions besides baseball, and as a dedicated public servant fighting imbecility and demanding equality rank right near the top. I'd also endear myself to a lot of beantowners if I could turn back my age clock about thirty years, strap on the ol' tools of ignorance again, and catch when Wake pitches, but...that's another thread, I guess.:laugh

[wamby]

You are really, really reaching...do you think if I, or any female BBF'r was in that dugout, we would make an issue of an overheard joke? You are trying to justify that females should not be in the dugout? That's the best you can say?

Based on some of your comments in this thread, I am of the opinion that you would make an issue of an overheard joke or comment.

[CuriousBoston]

What was the point of your post? To vent?

Are you trying to equate your experience with a Fever member momentarily glancing over at an attractive women? That is quite a stretch. Let me ask you this. If an extremely attractive man walked by, your eyes wouldn't momemtarily be drawn to him?

Are you equating your incident with anybody on this board that uses the word girl? That's the "crime" I am being asked to apologize for. You seem to have a lot of anger inside you and to me it seems like you are taking it out on any male member of this board that does not agree with you.

I have plenty of negative experiences because I am a racial Minority. But what does the plethora of my negative experiences have anything to do with the people on this board?? Absolutely Nothing!! Am I supposed to take it out on any white male because as another member stated, they are the one's responsible? Rubbish!

And for you demanding an apology for my use of the word "girl"; what gives you the right to assume that I am using it in a negative context? I have posted numerous times that I am not. It is a very generic word, not an offensive one. If another member explained that to me, I would be fine with that. It is not like I am calling YOU a girl. How dare you tell me that I am using it in a negative context! How dare you!!
It is not like I was using a word like ******, Nazi, Nip, Wop, Bitch or Fag.

I have actually apologized publicly to you that you felt insulted by me using the word girl. I however clearly stated that I have no mal-intentions by using that word. I further stated that since there isn't any mal-intentions on either side(I'm not so sure anymore...), that let's agree to disagree.
Obvioulsly this is not good enough for you.
I am done with this thread. I have no further desire to debate this with someone who is so angry, so extreme in their position that they can only see the negative in the person they are debating with.

My apologies to the mods for derailing this thread so off track.

Let's get back to discussing the game we all love....Baseball! :)


A few posts referred to examples of distracted men, or potential examples. I cited an incident that happened to me. I wasn't venting. Venting here would not be appropriate. I tried to be as factual as possible. It was very serious, early in my career, risky. I believe it provides some insight into who I am.

I didn't equate it to anything, anybody; it was an incident that happened to me. You asked if I was referring to a BBF poster, then seemed to answer your own question.

I belive you are reading much more into it. I'm not angry; if I had been angry about my experiences, or anything in this thread, that would be a waste of everybody's time and energy. In my experience, anger does not solve things, you've got to take time, make a plan, then act. Sometimes very slow and subtle, other times fast. A new job, can I afford to lose the job? How much of an energy drain is it? Something on the subway, is it a just a hassle, or am I in danger? Do I try to ignore, get away, confront, then get away? Will the others present help me? Do they realize what is happening?

Of course I would look at him. I did not post that it was wrong for any BBF'r or anybody to look. I did give an example of extreme distraction.

As things happened to me, I tried to problem solve, to come up with the best solution. I have tried, in this thread, to explain my point of view, and to answer questions. It's clear I did not express my views/feelings as well as I should have.

Edit: Anger when Francona, Grady, et al, make/make stupid decisions.

[CuriousBoston]

Thank you CB, that is very flattering. I am happily single, never been married, have no children of my own but have had more than a hand in raising a half dozen in my long life. Hating the Yankees is as American as apple pie, unwed mothers, and cheating on your taxes, according to Mike Royko. I was a Dodger fan until they left Brooklyn in my early youth, and finally embraced the Cubs as my team a few years later. Never got used to the lovable loser tag, particularly after '69,:mad: so I hate the Mets nearly as much as the Yanks. VTSoxFan knows the kindred spirit I feel toward the Red Sox, their once long-suffering fans, and although it is tempting to jump into this, at least for the World Series Champs Tshirt,;) I must graciously decline your proposal.:waving

I have many passions besides baseball, and as a dedicated public servant fighting imbecility and demanding equality rank right near the top. I'd also endear myself to a lot of beantowners if I could turn back my age clock about thirty years, strap on the ol' tools of ignorance again, and catch when Wake pitches, but...that's another thread, I guess.:laugh

Drabbit. Sigh...that was gracious.

[Mattingly]

Ahem.

Did anyone read the part where I'd said that this thread was going to be closed within 12 hours? I could change that easily to "anytime soon" if the continuation of the social issues continues.

Please use PM to discuss any differences of perceptions that you folks may have here. If not, then if you all have an IM, AIM address or anything similar, please use those to contact each other privately.

Thanks.

[VTSoxFan]

My final note in this thread:

I have refrained from posting here since my few of a couple days ago because first of all, the thread had wandered far outside the scope of the boards, and the things I would have posted would only have added to the tangential nature of the thread.

When the women of BBF were asked for thier opinions about Hernandez's comments, I didn't expect that by posting our firmly held opinions we would be met with rebuttals so angrily antithetical to our own. When I posted, I gave my opinion, I greed with some members' posts, I disgreed with others. I did not post in "sanctimonious" anger. I never said anything with intent to attack, denigrate or otherwise disrespect men as a whole. I have no reason to, nor any desire to. Those who know me know that such a thing is the furthest from my mind.

I treat all people with equal respect, until such a time that they show themselves unworthy of that respect. I treat others this way; it's how I myself expect to be treated.

As far as I'm concerned, an apology is neither necessary not expected. I need no apology to validate my beliefs. Those who understand, understand. Those who don't, never will.

Now, this is only one of the many things we can find to drive us all into opposing camps. We're drawn together here by the Game we all love. Back to Baseball, my fellow fans.

[Mattingly]

Very well-said, Annie.

With that, if people insist upon going back to "business as usual" with the arguing, please note that I'll just close it any time I see fit without any warning at all. All people need to do is remember that, when continuing some social gender debate from earlier in this thread.

Thx.

[Joltin' Joe]

A few posts referred to examples of distracted men, or potential examples. I cited an incident that happened to me. I wasn't venting. Venting here would not be appropriate. I tried to be as factual as possible. It was very serious, early in my career, risky. I believe it provides some insight into who I am.

I didn't equate it to anything, anybody; it was an incident that happened to me. You asked if I was referring to a BBF poster, then seemed to answer your own question.

I belive you are reading much more into it. I'm not angry; if I had been angry about my experiences, or anything in this thread, that would be a waste of everybody's time and energy. In my experience, anger does not solve things, you've got to take time, make a plan, then act. Sometimes very slow and subtle, other times fast. A new job, can I afford to lose the job? How much of an energy drain is it? Something on the subway, is it a just a hassle, or am I in danger? Do I try to ignore, get away, confront, then get away? Will the others present help me? Do they realize what is happening?

Of course I would look at him. I did not post that it was wrong for any BBF'r or anybody to look. I did give an example of extreme distraction.

As things happened to me, I tried to problem solve, to come up with the best solution. I have tried, in this thread, to explain my point of view, and to answer questions. It's clear I did not express my views/feelings as well as I should have.

Edit: Anger when Francona, Grady, et al, make/make stupid decisions.


Thank you for taking the time to respond to my post CB, I appreciate it. :)

It seems like thing were blown out of proportion. We may have disagreement in the interpretation of a certain word but I have no issues with you whatsoever; and I hope you feel the same about me.

[digglahhh]

Very well-said, Annie.

With that, if people insist upon going back to "business as usual" with the arguing, please note that I'll just close it any time I see fit without any warning at all. All people need to do is remember that, when continuing some social gender debate from earlier in this thread.

Thx.

Thanks, Thought Police.

God forbid we discuss anything here that is actually, you know...important!

This is a self-contained discussion between civil parties, all of whom participate voluntarily, I don't see the problem. These issues were raised by events that occured during a baseball game. Perhaps some of us see the scope of what is baseball related more broadly than you do, but then again. Unless you are getting PMs from people who want this thread closed, I see no reason why you should take it upon yourself to do so.

You can't talk about the Hernandez situation without getting a feel for where people are coming from and the overall context of the issues. Gender issues exist in baseball, so gender issues are baseball related.

Maybe this is the best way to explain it, its not that discussions about baseball sometimes branch into discussions about society, it is that discussions about society sometimes take the form of baseball...

[digglahhh]

Joe,

I really don't know what to make of your last post to me.

You asked me about some of the comments I made in relation to the situation of one of your friends, how he is supoosed to feel about his experience and so forth. My interpretation of events is a product of who I am and what I believe. The way I look at the world and interpret history, along with my present and personal place within it determines how I feel about events within my life and society. I don't know your friend, I don't know what he should do, how he should feel, etc. That's why I was rather vague, or "diplomatic" as you put it. Your friend will probably direct his frustration toward whoever he believes to be the greatest source thereof. Who he determines as the source, is related to the way he looks at the world, overall.

Regarding girl, gal, etc. The women here were not mandating our use of language. You can use whatever language you want, in "private" as you say. But you are not in private, you are in a discussion with several others and that discussion probably being read by numerous others. Your words will be interpretted individually by each who sees them and they will make of them what they will. So, you can use whatever words you want, and other people can interpret them whatever way they see fit. I don't see your point. What is offensive to some is not to others. Hernandez wasn't in private either, his use of the term gal is open to interpretation. While I agree that the mere use of the term gal, would not be grounds to assume sexism on the part of its user, when coupled with the rest of the comments he made, the context changes a bit, and then everything that's even minorly questionable becomes more suspicious.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

Diggs,

You basically implied that any heterosexual male with a sex drive cannot be a good parent (by your swimming pool comment), and that he is sexist. When you see a good looking woman walking down the street, does she not catch your eye? Are you not human? For Gods sake, let's be honest here and come down from the pedastool. At our baseball games, if we see a very attractive, scantily clad woman in the stands, it gets EVERYONE'S attention. The single guys, the married guys, EVERYONE. Guys will be guys, and the usual comments will be made. Doesn't mean we crumble to our knees and cannot function, it simply makes us normal heterosexual males who are noticing an attractive woman, period. It's pretty clear when someone is being honest on here, and when they're pounding their chest from a hollow mountain.

[The Big C]

I don't want to speak for anyone, but I think the point being made was that noticing said attractive female shouldn't cause you not to function properly, such as when playing baseball.

[CuriousBoston]

Ahem.

Did anyone read the part where I'd said that this thread was going to be closed within 12 hours? I could change that easily to "anytime soon" if the continuation of the social issues continues.

Please use PM to discuss any differences of perceptions that you folks may have here. If not, then if you all have an IM, AIM address or anything similar, please use those to contact each other privately.

Thanks.

I was writing as you posted, did not see your post until mine was already posted.

[CuriousBoston]

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my post CB, I appreciate it. :)

It seems like thing were blown out of proportion. We may have disagreement in the interpretation of a certain word but I have no issues with you whatsoever; and I hope you feel the same about me.

That depends on if you are a NYY fan...or if you think chowda should have red stuff in it...;)

[Mattingly]

Thanks, Thought Police.

God forbid we discuss anything here that is actually, you know...important!

This is a self-contained discussion between civil parties, all of whom participate voluntarily, I don't see the problem. These issues were raised by events that occured during a baseball game. Perhaps some of us see the scope of what is baseball related more broadly than you do, but then again. Unless you are getting PMs from people who want this thread closed, I see no reason why you should take it upon yourself to do so.

You can't talk about the Hernandez situation without getting a feel for where people are coming from and the overall context of the issues. Gender issues exist in baseball, so gender issues are baseball related.

Maybe this is the best way to explain it, its not that discussions about baseball sometimes branch into discussions about society, it is that discussions about society sometimes take the form of baseball...
What makes you think that I'm the only one that's wanted this thread closed? You don't think that others have asked for this also? You have no idea what's going on behind the lines here, as you're not a Mod, so we discuss things amongst each other.

I see more gender issues here that *DON'T* relate to baseball than those that do. If you feel like continuing such discussion, I'm quite sure there are other non-baseball forums for you to continue.

Like several other threads that have strong exclamation points to them, people will tend to look at the societal views of the thing being mentioned, rather than the baseball aspect. From what several of us have seen, it's more societal discussion than anything else. If that's what you wish to discuss, then you don't need an all-baseball forum for this.

Closing.

[DODGER DEB]

From ESPN Magazine today, here is KELLY CALABRESE'S personal story........

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2432750

http://espn-att.starwave.com/photo/2006/0502/mlb_a_kellyc_412.jpg

c.