Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Err... Is this sexist?

31 replies

evilhamster · 01/12/2012 09:20

This one

It seems to be quite sexist, or at least biased, not to mention being anti-Paralympics/Paralympian (disablist?) in one of the paragraphs. And I find it hard to believe it's written by a credible journalist at all. Amongstr other things, he seems to be saying that someone (Froch) who's not actually even top in weight band is better than someone like Jessica Ennis who's the best in her sport. Not to mention completely disregarding the fact that it's not Best At Sport, but Sport's Personality of the Year. Or have I just been looking at it wrongly?

Is it just me, or do you think the same?

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
grimbletart · 05/12/2012 11:46

The tennis 5 v 3 sets thingy (which only applies anyway to the 4 slams - not the Masters or any other tournament) is actually more discriminatory against women then equal prize money is against men. It allows men the chance to come back from two sets down, while women who are fit athletes and well able to play 5 sets, do not get that chance. Think how Andy Murray at the American Open lost sets 3 & 4 and came back to win in set 5 (for example).

Also, women tennis players have offered to play 5 sets at the slams and been turned down on the basis that the ATP and WTA schedules are so tight that it would not allow for the extra time needed.

I really think it should not be beyond the wit of the slams to find a way to allow women to play 5 sets.

GalaxyDisaster · 05/12/2012 08:39

Just something I have been pondering...

I never really get the 'women play fewer sets so they should have lower prize money' argument. We don't pay sports people based on how long they are on the track/court. If we did, the earnings of cricketers and tennis players would eclipse that of footballers and 100 m sprinters would be on the breadline. Grin

Original poster
evilhamster · 04/12/2012 20:32

Now it sounds like I have a sexist friend. Basically, men's sport is still seen as the main one for some sports (not others, for instance gymnastics or swimming) and women's are secondary sports almost. Think of how televised the World Cup was and compare that for the women's team...

OP posts:
Original poster
evilhamster · 04/12/2012 20:31

Thanks for the article Xmas Smile Very useful! So a misogynist (according to that) is always sexist, but in this case the article displays his misogyny not his sexism. Or something Xmas Confused Xmas Smile

I think I agree a bit. Although there are many sports (such as the English rugby team complex said) which should be broadcasted, public awareness is so little that although there is a limited number of fans, it's not on the news or on tv and people aren't made aware of it as much. When a friend said she was thinking about getting tickets for Wimbledon (never got them though!) she said she'd ideally get the men's tennis, and if she didn't, she'd go for the women's just for the experience of Wimbledon. It's recognised in some ways, but is often a fall back sport almost for some (not all, obviously) fans.

OP posts:
complexnumber · 04/12/2012 18:10

I think you are probably correct, Smudging when it comes to PRESS coverage. (As opposed to other forms of media)

I was very disappointed by the lack of press coverage of the England's women rugby team victory over NZ, however I do think that the BBC did a very good job with on-line commentary.

Smudging · 04/12/2012 18:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

complexnumber · 04/12/2012 17:51

Sorry, Smudging, you did not state main reason

complexnumber · 04/12/2012 17:48

And he wonders why people aren't as interested in women in sports. Errr perhaps because there are so many male journalists with this backward attitude.

Are you sure that is the main reason? I doubt if it is all due to male journalists.

I think that would be a cop out.

More broadly, I still don't understand why the majority of Daily Mail readers are female.
(sorry, don't have a reference for that right now)

Smudging · 04/12/2012 17:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

madwomanintheattic · 04/12/2012 17:22

I didn't even know who Cark Froch was...

That said, i'm ready to punch Desmond Kayne's lights out after the disparaging 'no woman could ever' stand up to the heat of a proper golf tournament.....

Bwahahahaha.

If do get a knockout, please can I be the SPOTY?

GalaxyDisaster · 04/12/2012 16:59

He wants Sports Personality of the Year to be for the person who can "punch harder, run faster, swim further, throw longer or get more shots across the net". There are plenty of awards for that. They are called Titles, World Records, Medals, etc. According to its T&Cs this award is for "the sportsman or woman whose actions have most captured the public's imagination in 2012."

That allows able bodied and disabled, men and women to compete on an equal footing. And given that we hosted the Olympics and the Paralympics, of course those will feature prominently. The fact that he is sooooo angry that there is an award where being physically bigger and stronger doesn't mean you win really shows him in his true colours.

complexnumber · 04/12/2012 16:27

Isn't there a touch of the 'Ad hominem' about some of the responses to the article?

samandi · 04/12/2012 14:05

From what I can gather he has a bit of a crush on a boxer called Carl Froch.

What a small-minded and repulsive man.

ConsiderCasey · 02/12/2012 23:35

In terms of inspiring personalities, Nicola Adams inspired me more than anyone in the Olympics.

Isn't that part of what the personality award is about?

TheSmallClanger · 02/12/2012 21:45

I agree with Widow.

I haven't heard of the boxer bloke he's bigging up, which sort of proves how wrong he is.

WidowWadman · 02/12/2012 21:43

Sexist and disablist, and overall pretty twattish.

WithTheDude · 01/12/2012 22:57

I like this Guardian Piece on the difference between misogyny and sexism. I think Julie Bindel sums it up best.

Original poster
evilhamster · 01/12/2012 19:32

No, I know you didn't Xmas Smile I've heard sexist used before, obviously, and not misogyny, because unless you grow up with a language, you won't hear and know every (well, most) words. I know it wasn't a dig!

So it is misogynist then?

OP posts:
WinklyVersusTheZombies · 01/12/2012 17:54

Sometimes I look at things that people consider to be sexist/misogynistic and am a bit Hmm

Not this time. That 'article' is outrageously offensive, it completely dismisses the achievements of anyone who isn't an able-bodied man. Disgusting.

HalloweenNameChange · 01/12/2012 17:44

I think withthedude was agreeing with you and saying it's even worse than just sexism.

ashesgirl · 01/12/2012 17:10

Yes, Desmond Kane getting a bit of stick on Twitter about this

WithTheDude · 01/12/2012 16:58

Oh, evilhamster that wasn't meant as a dig at your language skills. I'm sorry. That wasn't my intention:(

I am just so very, very angry at these men pontificating total twaddle and people believing them.

GrrrArghZzzzYaayforall8nights · 01/12/2012 12:16

edam - They have a twitter account @YahooUK which could probably be used.

He does have issues - very misogistic and ableist.

Chunkychicken · 01/12/2012 12:10

That's seriously offensive.

I can (sort of) see the point about Wimbledon where women play fewer sets but equally, I understood that, until relatively recently, they received less prize money too.

I would love to see him go a few rounds with the (feeble) female boxers or other sportswomen he mentions...

edam · 01/12/2012 11:56

I can't see anywhere on the page where you can complain to Yahoo. They wouldn't publish racist nonsense claiming black people can't be sports personalities, I don't see why they think it's OK to publish this.