• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Ivies cracking down on sexist-lewd comments by athletes

P

PlayerRep

Well-known member
The Ivies have suspended at least 3 teams in the past month for "behavior" similar to the following. I am looking to see if there are some similar football related incidents. Can't imagine there aren't.

"A 2012 document uncovered last month by The Harvard Crimson student newspaper rated the attractiveness of recruits on the women’s soccer team and included lewd comments about them. Members of the men’s soccer team called it their “scouting report” and circulated it online."

This looks likes a serious problem. College guys rating girls. Plus, back in 2012. Great reason to suspend this year's Harvard soccer team.

Princeton just suspended its swimming/diving team for what appears to be similar stuff. Columbia suspended it's wresting team in the last month or so for what appears to be similar stuff. Misogyny.

Good thing egriz isn't in the Ivy league. Don't the Ivies realize that Trump is now going to rule. (Trump graduated from an Ivy, Penn.)
 
Welcome to the buttercup generation. Sure there will be a need for lots of play-doh, coloring books and puppies. Make them run until they puke for a few days and move on.
 
poorgriz said:
HelenaHandBasket said:
What is a "sexist lew"?
Click to expand...

It's sort of like a "Dirty Sanchez", only better.
Click to expand...


giphy.gif
 
From the "comments" section of Washington University's student paper:
Bellanca • a day ago

Yeah, tell me again how women don't discuss the ... dimensions ... of male athletes. How women jocks are in the locker room reading Emily Dickinson to each other and parsing Susan Sontag. How women soccer players don't rank the sexual attractiveness of male athletes. Do tell.

There's no reason any longer to send a boy to college. Neo-marxist feminist psychos have tasked themselves with the reprogramming of half the population.

On the bright side, boys can use the women's locker room if they call themselves girls. Yay.

$65K per year for this. And that's after tax, so it's really $130K.
Click to expand...
http://www.studlife.com/news/national-news/2016/12/16/breaking-mens-soccer-team-suspended-indefinitely-under-investigation/

In my experience at the U, women's comments are generally more explicit these days, and more blatant even in mixed-company, than the guys. Some kind of revel in it as a form of "liberation."

Of course, these days, the difference between "liberation" and "oppression" is entirely a matter of political convenience.
 
PlayerRep said:
"A 2012 document uncovered last month by The Harvard Crimson student newspaper rated the attractiveness of recruits on the women’s soccer team and included lewd comments about them. Members of the men’s soccer team called it their “scouting report” and circulated it online."

This looks likes a serious problem. College guys rating girls. Plus, back in 2012. Great reason to suspend this year's Harvard soccer team.
Click to expand...
Interesting that a current team is suspended for something that happened in 2012.

College, which used to be where you went to experience the world, is now used to hide from it.

A former student was lamenting the other day, where he is at now, "shirts and skins" is no longer allowed on the basketball courts. Women are "oppressed."
Women on campuses are claiming that allowing 20 year old boys to play basketball shirtless oppresses them, and is discriminatory. More and more gyms are requiring shirts at all times. Here's a track coach that got fired when his high school boys ran outside shirtless. People fricken complained.

http://www.athleticbusiness.com/staffing/track-coach-fired-after-boys-run-shirtless.html

"For safety, public health issues, body image, and to protect the facility/equipment, proper exercise attire is required at all times. Participants not wearing appropriate clothing or clothing found to be offensive will be told to adjust as needed or asked to leave the facility
– Shirts: Upper body clothing should fully cover the back, shoulders, and torso. Cutoff t-shirts, cropped tanks, halter-tops, tank tops and sports bras (only) are not permitted.
– Bottoms: Athletic-type apparel is required. Jeans, khakis and pants, with or without buttons, metal zippers, metal rivets, belts and belt loops, are not permitted. Shorts must be long enough to cover the buttocks and groin when exercising or moving." http://web.uri.edu/campusrec/rules-regulations/

Shirts: Intramural Sports requires that all participants wear a shirt in all sports. Males do not have to wear a shirt for Sand Volleyball only. https://www.uww.edu/Documents/recsports/CaptainsHandbook2016-2017(updated8.16).pdf

When people are getting wound up about young males running shirtless in public, people are just getting weird.
ttp://therunningbug.co.uk/debates/debate.aspx?DebateId=101
Click to expand...

Today, your whole team can get suspended for something somebody else wrote, four years ago, about somebody else. And, keep your shirt on.
 
Fifty years ago (that's a half-century, to put it more "dramatically"), when I was finishing up undergraduate school, U.S. colleges were one of the few places where "liberal" thoughts could be expressed. Students marched to protest "the Establishment" (note the capital letter) and, unless the marchers got out of hand, the police simply watched and the more conservative students largely ignored them. (Yes, there were exceptions, and I do recall the smell of tear gas.) :protesst:

The diversity of thought on campus was considered healthy and appropriate. Men and women who were atheists to religious fundamentalists, right-wing to left-wing, socialist to laissez faire capitalist, etc. etc. came to speak on campus and were usually accorded a reasonably respectful hearing. And that included speakers with some pretty extreme rhetoric ... in many different directions. That was in pursuit of stretching the "mental muscles" of the students and in line with the country's notion of "free speech."

But that has all reversed. Now, too many college campuses are bastions of left-wing intolerance and political correctness. Free speech is only allowed if it fits the left/liberal ideology. Others are shouted down or "dis-invited." That is in line, BTW, with the abandonment of "due process." Colleges are now (probably) more diverse in terms of racial labels, sexual orientation, and ethnicity -- and that's a good thing -- but it is clear that there is far less diversity in what you are allowed/expected to think and say.

The only hopeful sign is that some "traditional" aspects of college life are still hanging on -- like sports, and especially football. And even that is eroding as we become (rightly, sad to say) more cynical about "big time" sports programs. But despite the many attacks on college sports -- some of them entirely justified -- such activities provide a vital unifying core for the entire college experience ... something well worth preserving. I just hope we can manage that. :rant:
 
UK prof: Singing a Beach Boys’ tune got me punished for ‘sexual misconduct’

by Buck Ryan December 17, 2016

The University of Kentucky has punished me in a “sexual misconduct” case, in part, for singing a Beach Boys tune covered by Alvin and the Chipmunks.

Under Administrative Regulation 6:1, Discrimination and Harassment, UK’s Title IX coordinator ruled that the song, “California Girls,” included “language of a sexual nature” and was somehow offensive, though no victims were identified.
Click to expand...

Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/opinion/op-ed/article121505232.html#storylink=cpy
 
A small group of us on egriz "follow" a University of Tennessee Law Prof who blogs on constitutional, sport, civil rights, and Title IX issues, Glenn Reynolds.

Here is his USA Today column on the subject.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/12/19/title-ix-federal-bureacracy-campuses-glenn-reynolds-column/95585446/
 
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/uminn-football-coach-thought-hed-be-fired-for-standing-up-for-players-in-rape-case/

Last week, members of the University of Minnesota football team threatened to boycott the team’s bowl game because 10 of their teammates were suspended for an alleged sexual assault even though a police investigation into the claims yielded no charges.

The coach of the team now says he knew his job was on the line when, against the wishes of his administration, he threw his support behind his players who feared their teammates’ constitutional rights were being violated.

“I want everybody to understand, the boycott was around the due process, period,” coach Tracy Claeys told reporters this weekend.

In an interview with WCOO Radio the same day, Claeys recounted talking to his team “all about the different fallouts. One was that we might not be able to play in the bowl game. Two is that we knew there was going to be a group who took the stance that we were being pro-sexual assault, which we’re not. And then I told them there’s a great chance I could lose my job over this.”

The controversy began when the University of Minnesota announced it would suspend 10 players over a sexual assault that allegedly occurred on Sept. 2, in the early hours after the Gophers beat Oregon State.
Click to expand...
Sound familiar?
The Hennepin County Attorney’s office declined to press charges after the Minneapolis Police Department conducted a full investigation, saying there was “insufficient admissible evidence for prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that either force was used or that the victim was physically helpless as defined by law in the sexual encounter.”

One police investigator who reviewed video taken that night described the woman involved as appearing “lucid, alert, somewhat playful and fully conscious,” adding that “at no time [in the videos] does she indicate she is in distress or that the contact is unwelcome or nonconsensual.”

But under Title IX, the standard for discipline is a “preponderance of evidence,” a much less rigid standard than “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” The university announced the suspensions after it conducted its own investigation.

On Friday, KSTP-TV somehow obtained and published the university’s investigation report, which is typically not public under federal law.

In the 82-page report, the alleged victim told University of Minnesota investigators that she was assaulted by as many as 20 men. The university’s report acknowledged “significant gaps” in the woman’s memory of that night; at times she named different attackers and backtracked on details of her testimony. But the Title IX report attributed these inconsistencies to a “very traumatic experience, rather than to a lack of care or truthfulness.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top