Thank goodness BB didn't actually touch Sarah Thomas

[Galeb]

Right, those nightmarish days when men ruthlessly oppressed women by working all day and paying for everything.

There are aspects about the feminine movement that get under my skin. Most of the wage inequality numbers they cite are down right misleading when not actually false. Women in well paying, technical professions actually make slightly more than their male counterparts in the US. That said, opinions like the one you just expressed are a far worse offense. Anyone who doesn't understand the fundamental importance of equity within our society has some serious holes in their development.

 

[Kontradiction]

Yikes. This thread needs some levity. Let's all laugh at feminism.

 

[PatsDeb]

As a woman I don't see anything wrong with what he did. Nor do I think it's weird. He actually takes a step back from her when she comes in close (it appears to be able to hear him) and he never touches her. Just pretend for a moment that she is Ed Hoculi. Wouldn't BB do the same to him? He's always doing stuff like that. He's obviously demonstrating either something that occurred on the field, or something that was called wrong. Nothing to see here and I don't see why the league would be looking at anything (other than to up the trumped-up ante against their "favorite" team). If I am that official, I would demand to be treated equally. If Ed Hoculi can be yelled at and demonstrated at by BB, then so can I.

 

[NJPatsfan26]

As a woman I don't see anything wrong with what he did. Nor do I think it's weird. He actually takes a step back from her when she comes in close (it appears to be able to hear him) and he never touches her. Just pretend for a moment that she is Ed Hoculi. Wouldn't BB do the same to him? He's always doing stuff like that. He's obviously demonstrating either something that occurred on the field, or something that was called wrong. Nothing to see here and I don't see why the league would be looking at anything (other than to up the trumped-up ante against their "favorite" team). If I am that official, I would demand to be treated equally. If Ed Hoculi can be yelled at and demonstrated at by BB, then so can I.

A logical well thought response.

Thank you

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

 

[Hoodie]

If nothing else, it avoids nonsensical controversies like this one.

I cling to the old fashion notion that there's nothing wrong with having activities just for boys and activities just for girls but such notions are deemed heresy in this PC culture.

Cling away. Unfortunately, there'll be no one to catch you.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

Right, those nightmarish days when men ruthlessly oppressed women by working all day and paying for everything.

One of the reason men might have been paying is due to the fact that credit card companies would not issue a credit card to single women and if you were married, you had to have your husband co-sign...that's a fact.

Also, women couldn't open up checking accounts in the 50s

There was also no such thing as sexual harassment.. no consequences

Couldn't be raped by your husband.

Most women couldn't get a corporate interview and the reason could be "you are a woman".

Yes, the 50s...where weak men feel strong and strong women are suppressed...

Yes, the glorious 50s where men were men and women were property.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

One of the reason men might have been paying is due to the fact that credit card companies would not issue a credit card to single women and if you were married, you had to have your husband co-sign...that's a fact.

Also, women couldn't open up checking accounts in the 50s

There was also no such thing as sexual harassment.. no consequences

Couldn't be raped by your husband.

Most women couldn't get a corporate interview and the reason could be "you are a woman".

Yes, the 50s...where weak men feel strong and strong women are suppressed...

Yes, the glorious 50s where men were men and women were property.

Not a good thing.
Sounds like these things of yesteryear make you quite mad and, presumably, if anywhere or any government/system today continued to perpetuate these things or much worse, you would be among those to stand up and lead the vocal charge to change it.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

Not a good thing.
Sounds like these things of yesteryear make you quite mad and, presumably, if anywhere or any government/system today continued to perpetuate these things or much worse, you would be among those to stand up and lead the vocal charge to change it.

Having daughters, I would certainly tell them to fight the system. I'm not the marching type but I would have encouraged my daughters to tell them to go to hell as my father's mother did when she sent 3 of her daughters to college in the late 30s.

In terms of the government, I've lived and served in **** holes in the world. I know the difference between the ******** embellishment politics of the privileged who don't know real oppression and those who live with real despair . As imperfect as it is, it's pretty damn good.

 

[sambam94]

One of the reason men might have been paying is due to the fact that credit card companies would not issue a credit card to single women and if you were married, you had to have your husband co-sign...that's a fact.

Also, women couldn't open up checking accounts in the 50s

There was also no such thing as sexual harassment.. no consequences

Couldn't be raped by your husband.

Most women couldn't get a corporate interview and the reason could be "you are a woman".

Yes, the 50s...where weak men feel strong and strong women are suppressed...

Yes, the glorious 50s where men were men and women were property.

yup..at least we evolved unlike most muslim countries

 

[Kontradiction]

yup..at least we evolved unlike most muslim countries

 

[alvinnf]

I honestly don't think BB gives a rats arse what her gender is. The question is whether or not she can adequately do her job. None of the other ref's seem to be very good at it, so at least she is in good company.....

 

[primetime]

There are aspects about the feminine movement that get under my skin. Most of the wage inequality numbers they cite are down right misleading when not actually false. Women in well paying, technical professions actually make slightly more than their male counterparts in the US. That said, opinions like the one you just expressed are a far worse offense. Anyone who doesn't understand the fundamental importance of equity within our society has some serious holes in their development.

They're only "false" in that sense, though. Women are systematically overrepresented relative to the population in low wage work and underrepresented in high wage work. Yes, the smaller sample of high wage worker women may make more on average than the larger sample of high wage men in a given industry, but that is often biased by sample size. And, frankly, the bigger issue is in the low wage service workforce. Women (especially women of color) make up the fast majority of care workers, for instance, who are massively underpaid relative to their importance.

But, of course, different waves of feminism have dealt with this. The first wave was mostly wealthier white women, the second mostly poorer women and women of color. If anything, one issue with the feminist movement is that wealthy white women had money and power so it became about what they wanted, and what they want is not necessarily what every woman considers an urgent need.

 

[Kontradiction]

They're only "false" in that sense, though. Women are systematically overrepresented relative to the population in low wage work and underrepresented in high wage work. Yes, the smaller sample of high wage worker women may make more on average than the larger sample of high wage men in a given industry, but that is often biased by sample size. And, frankly, the bigger issue is in the low wage service workforce. Women (especially women of color) make up the fast majority of care workers, for instance, who are massively underpaid relative to their importance.

But, of course, different waves of feminism have dealt with this. The first wave was mostly wealthier white women, the second mostly poorer women and women of color. If anything, one issue with the feminist movement is that wealthy white women had money and power so it became about what they wanted, and what they want is not necessarily what every woman considers an urgent need.

I have nothing against men and women of equal education working in similar fields getting paid equal wages. My problem with feminism, outside of the fact that most feminists are only feminists when it suits them to be so, is that feminism doesn't seem to be about equality any longer. Instead, it's seemed to advance toward the idea that women should get more privileges than men. I can't support that.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

Having daughters, I would certainly tell them to fight the system. I'm not the marching type but I would have encouraged my daughters to tell them to go to hell as my father's mother did when she sent 3 of her daughters to college in the late 30s.

In terms of the government, I've lived and served in **** holes in the world. I know the difference between the ******** embellishment politics of the privileged who don't know real oppression and those who live with real despair . As imperfect as it is, it's pretty damn good.

Well FnG I tell you what, your response was pretty good. "******** embellishment politics of the privileged who don't know real oppression and those who live with real despair" is a solid statement. Also, Kudos for not falling into the ideological tweak I was hoping to spring.

If the female ref would have had an issue with BB doing what he did then my main concern for female refs would have been confirmed. If the story had gotten traction then I would have been given no choice but to hope no more female refs would make it to the NFL ref ranks. On the other hand if 'special consideration because she is female' can be minimized, I have little problem with her out there performing the same F'd up job her male ref counterparts are.;-). It comes down to the exposed underbelly for those that are just a few steps from the central action being one that can be quite harshly ugly. So if someone a few steps from the action isn't capable of operating within this underbelly (or more important the 'politics of the privileged' doesn't consider it acceptable to operate in it), they have no business.
Yet a few in the MSM, frequently a stalwart of listing dogma, mentioning it as they have is a troubling path. The effect is to coax 'it' to, at some point, a confrontation regardless of it being valid or it being trumped up. With football being a high stakes, jobs and security and reputation and national glory on the line, emotions fly absurdly high. This means it is likely at some point a female ref is going to be videotaped being exposed to the worst side of the underbelly. And while that moment unfolds into a bigger story and likely leads to it being championed as a win for "equality", it will be a made for TV victory and much more of a moment for the "politics of the privileged" to pat themselves on the back than anything else. For almost everyone else including those on the field, we will all have to accommodate them. IMHO that is/would be unacceptable.
For the newby ref? From what I have seen from her so far it's been good. She kinda sucks but that means she fits in quite well with the profession as it is in 2015/overseen by a bunch of friggin scheming idiots.

 

[Galeb]

They're only "false" in that sense, though. Women are systematically overrepresented relative to the population in low wage work and underrepresented in high wage work. Yes, the smaller sample of high wage worker women may make more on average than the larger sample of high wage men in a given industry, but that is often biased by sample size. And, frankly, the bigger issue is in the low wage service workforce. Women (especially women of color) make up the fast majority of care workers, for instance, who are massively underpaid relative to their importance.

But, of course, different waves of feminism have dealt with this. The first wave was mostly wealthier white women, the second mostly poorer women and women of color. If anything, one issue with the feminist movement is that wealthy white women had money and power so it became about what they wanted, and what they want is not necessarily what every woman considers an urgent need.

Since we're talking about hundreds of thousands of highly skilled, technical female workers, claiming too small a sample size is folly. The biggest factor in gender wage inequality is the tendency for people (and employers) to seek careers traditionally associated with their gender roles. Not sure if you intentionally left this info out, but it is critical to understanding the cause of the often exaggerated wage gap between men and women.

I never stated that women as a group make as much as men. I was merely pointing out the deceitful crap that many feminist groups spout. Many feminist groups explicitly state that women make less at the same jobs across all fields in the US. There are certainly feminist groups that don't cite false and/or misleading claims, and actually take offense at the ones who do. Ironically, it was a feminist group that dispelled my illusions about the accuracy of the "commonly accepted" misleading numbers.

All I said in my original post, "Anyone who doesn't understand the fundamental importance of equity within our society has some serious holes in their development."

 

[primetime]

Since we're talking about hundreds of thousands of highly skilled, technical female workers, claiming too small a sample size is folly. The biggest factor in gender wage inequality is the tendency for people (and employers) to seek careers traditionally associated with their gender roles. Not sure if you intentionally left this info out, but it is critical to understanding the cause of the often exaggerated wage gap between men and women.

That's not a sufficient sample size. Look at table 2 in the BLS statistics here, for every occupation with a sample size large enough to compare, women have a lower median weekly earnings than men, no matter the education requirement: http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/highlights-of-womens-earnings-in-2014.pdf

This doesn't even factor in that women are more likely to be part-time, due to caregiving responsibilities, which fall overwhelmingly on women.

Is there a tiny subset of women who are doing better than men in a tiny subset of industries and fields? Sure. But in a labor force of over 157 million, that's not really saying much. Going to disengage from this thread now, because I'd rather talk football than this.

 

[Joker]

. Going to disengage from this thread now, because I'd rather talk football than this.

right...using a classic misogynistic double entendre...you MONSTER!

 

[Tunescribe]

My wife hates two things about the NFL (apart from Goodell and his minions): the "pink" breast cancer "awareness campaign," and the new female ref. She sees both as cynical, inherently contrived marketing-driven pandering to the female demographic. I don't disagree with her in either case.

 

[Galeb]

That's not a sufficient sample size. Look at table 2 in the BLS statistics here, for every occupation with a sample size large enough to compare, women have a lower median weekly earnings than men, no matter the education requirement: http://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/cps/highlights-of-womens-earnings-in-2014.pdf

This doesn't even factor in that women are more likely to be part-time, due to caregiving responsibilities, which fall overwhelmingly on women.

Is there a tiny subset of women who are doing better than men in a tiny subset of industries and fields? Sure. But in a labor force of over 157 million, that's not really saying much. Going to disengage from this thread now, because I'd rather talk football than this.

Your misinterpretation of what I'm saying, failure to acknowledge the biggest factor, dismissal of the fact that at some of the highest paying jobs women make more and your disengagement from the thread betray a desperate grasping at an inaccurate perspective. I understand, I used to believe the propaganda of the ultra feminists. The irony is that the true feminists who strive for genuine equality take offense the the propaganda and view it as part of the problem.

Yes, there is certainly wage inequality and something needs to be done. That said, false and misleading information is not going to help resolve the issue, and in many cases make it worse. Western thought tends to try to treat the symptoms of problems and ignore the source. Peoples' tendency to blindly accept the roles and perspectives that they are prescribed is the root of the problem. Until that is addressed, these types of issues will never truly be solved.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

There are aspects about the feminine movement that get under my skin. Most of the wage inequality numbers they cite are down right misleading when not actually false. Women in well paying, technical professions actually make slightly more than their male counterparts in the US. That said, opinions like the one you just expressed are a far worse offense. Anyone who doesn't understand the fundamental importance of equity within our society has some serious holes in their development.

I understand the difference between "actual" equality and the "doublespeak" version of equality used by the PC crowd.

Most people don't.