Monday, August 06, 2012

Andrew Brown at the Daily Telegraph is a SEXIST WANKER

Andrew Brown, a sensible little chap over at the Daily Telegraph, was having a jolly good time watching the birds on the telly do their precious little Olympic lady-like things, when he came across a phenomenon so unnatural, so depraved, that he upset his tea across the bedsit carpet in horror.

It was women... fighting. Like the lads do!  (And not at all like how strumpets "wrestle," in matching bra-and-knicker sets, in that video he hides from Mum by writing, on the VHS box, "Cagney & Lacey, season 4.")

It may help you to understand his point of view, as you read further, if you can envision the author, so here:

Because I really don't want to get this guy any additional reads, I'll just repost entirely, since it's SHORT, SMALL, and STUPID.
Watching Gemma Gibbons gaining Britain’s first judo medal in 12 years, I found myself wondering: is women fighting each other violently a perfectly wholesome spectator sport? This wasn't a bit of pretend wrestling. Gemma and her American opponent, Kayla Harrison, were properly grappling with each other, throwing each other with full force onto the mat. They both showed pure, naked, fierce, animalistic aggression of a sort that one doesn't naturally associate with women – or girls for that matter. Quite honestly my initial reaction was one of shock. I felt rather as I would if I'd bumped into two drunken women bashing ten bells out of each other outside a Yates Wine Lodge on a Friday night – a bit unsettled. The photographs of the judo women will be all over the papers tomorrow, because they're dramatic and sensational.
With those judo contestants – and I realise this will probably sound appallingly sexist – I couldn't help wondering about their soft limbs battered black and blue with bruises. Would it bother me to see one of my own daughters savagely attacking another woman on a judo mat for people's entertainment? I'm really not sure. Possibly. On the other hand I might be proud of her skill. I know full well that, as a bloke, it's none of my business, but it's what I thought and felt. After a few minutes I'd got used to it. But, then, you can get used to anything, can't you?
1.  Merely acknowledging your sexism hardly makes it acceptable.

2.  Your appalled horror at the prospect of women as strong, aggressive, even violent competitors is pure sexism.  Your poor daughters!!  I imagine they're penned up with a governess, wearing Victorian gowns, tatting lace and fainting regularly.

3.  You're a total boob if you think Olympic-level judo (or hell, even whitebelt judo) has anything in common with a drunken brawl.  And you're living under a rock if you didn't know that "pure, naked, fierce, animalistic aggression" is very much associated with women.  And girls, for that matter.  (How exactly did you reproduce, Mr. Brown?  How can anyone with daughters doubt that women have the same or greater potential for aggressive fighting that men have?)

Fighting is womanly.
Attacking is womanly.
Bruises are womanly.
Savage glee after victory is womanly.

And I tell you-- Gemma's and Kayla's limbs are anything but soft.  Unlike your own lily-white delicate limbs, you lily-livered sexist piece of crap.

Andy might secretly visit professional dominatrixes to fulfill his itch for discipline-- or I'd fantasize about Ronda Rousey kicking his ass with her "soft limbs."   He'd like it so that spoils my fun.

2 comments:

Steve Zacher said...

I'll just repost the comment I left on the Telegraph.uk website:

"Comparing two elite level athletes competing on behalf of their respective countries, to "two drunken women bashing ten bells out of each other" is mindbogglingly stupid.

While you might get used to anything, I will never get used to this level of ignorance, regardless of how often I encounter it."


Obviously, this guy was trolling for hits, and he hit the motherlode with this one. On the one hand, it's good to see so many people spurred to action if only to respond to a turd on a website. But on the other hand, he's likely defining success as page hits and I expect that the vehemence and volume of comments will only encourage him to be equally stupid in future articles.

AsmoX said...

Oh Georgette, this man's culture shock is hardly something to get into a tizzy about. Sure he's admittedly sexist, sure he's ignorant, but he's most definitely the lilly white frail and decrepit artiste you picture him as. He simply cannot see beyond the brawn for the beauty of the sport.

The realities of any sort of physical confrontation, be it during war, during a lawful arrest by police, or even in sport are ugly truths that most people bury their head in the sand to escape from. Or at the very least, in regard to sport, place in box on shelf next boxing or any other form of previously vetted and accepted ritualized combat. I spend a good deal of my time helping people see the beauty in the sport that I love, but I don't judge them for having preconceived notions of proper human discourse. Physical confrontation is scary and will always be, and while I feel having no other strategy for dealing with conflict other than avoidance is foolish practice, it may in fact be the safest statistically. It makes you a lamb among wolves, but at least you're not seeking the wolves out for a spat.

I'm a police officer in one of the deadliest cities in america per capita. I can't tell you what I'd give for citizens of my city to suddenly possess conflict resolution skills. That's not going to happen anytime soon, but one can dream.

A side point, Great Britain does not have Title IX. This single piece of legislation is perhaps the most influential portion of the women's rights movement in the United States, and because of it, the view of women in sport has forever been changed in this country. We can look to this chap to see what it would be like without it.