 |
| Mr. Baer veers unintentionally into a national debate |
Oh good you came back. Yes, yes, I know the writing over there is amazing. The articles articulate and well-researched. And that GIF thing they do over there is really cool.
I know.
They way they seem to effortless mesh saber-metrics with scouting reports and present all that information with a precision and succinctness that makes you wonder if they have an understanding of their place in the universe and probably yours too that you most likely will never fathom?
Yeah, I got that too.
Oh, and you thought they had a better sense of humor over there as well.
Whatever.
But you read the post?
I was shocked to see such a strangely and completely off target piece as well. Mr. Baer is usually so in tune, so centered.
Oh, you agreed with him.
Well, let me assert a few things first and then circle around a bit before my big finish.
1. First and worst of all, Mr Baer, you dropped the straight white male bomb. In an article criticizing sexists attitudes you come off as, well, sadly, and I say this with love and respect, brother, you come off as sexists and just the tiniest teeniest bit mean. Dude. It's ironic when you argue against generalizing whilst generalizing (macho be a man culture - straight white male) - a call to to conversation while posting an article that cannot be commented on. 2. Secondly, you're attacking a vernacular that you paint as venomous and violent though you don't make any connections to support those assertions other than saying, like a parent to a small child, it's true because I say it's true - a Wikipedia page about the issue in sports (not baseball, and not in particular the Phillies - you're just slinging mud, here Bill) and a link to an article about the general issues involved in the suffrage of the LGBT don't count as proof of your charge.
It's just a manner of speaking Bill. Flip the switch and there are also any number of masculine pejoratives that fit your into your misguided argument as well. IE: Dont be a dick - meaning don't be so overly masculine, quit using that usually crude or inappropriately aggressive behavior. Negative masculine qualities. It's a crude and colorful manner of speaking but it doesn't rise to the level of offensive (unless you want to be offended) by any stretch of the imagination, particularly the two instances which you present as evidence of an organization wide social, sexual and cultural bias.
3. Finally, let's address the most glaringly obvious problem with your article. Simply, it's a matter of physics and biology, girls don't throw as hard as boys. Except when they do (Thank-you MO'NE DAVIS!!!!), and when they do, we as a society celebrate every single performance.Why do celebrate those performances. Because, we know it's rare. Because we know it's special and we might never get to see it again.
Because for the most part, girls don't throw as hard as boys.
So, specifically, this is for you Bill.
Saying that you throw like a girl is not offensive to girls (and certainly has nothing to do with the attitudes that lead to domestic violence as you so horribly and nimbly and evilly imply), it's offensive to the guy who throws like a girl.
If, in 100 years, women have taken over baseball and are throwing 110 to 115 mph, telling a player she throws like a man will have the same implications of poor form and low velocity.
 |
| The next righteous cause for murder and incarceration? |
(I love you the way you play the game, Chase, but Jaime Moyer registers on human level, while you will remain forever a ballplayer.)
.
Sorry for the sideways rant there Bill. Let's get back to it, shall we.
Honestly though, I don't imagine any gay man or transvestite coming across a story about the Phillies and their rookies in women's dresses, stopping and saying to himself (or herself), oh gosh, now I'll NEVER be accepted by society.
Oh, and not for nothing but the Astros, a severely "modern" team by any estimation had their rookies dress up as female super-heroes. So, c'mon man.
Domestic violence and discrimination of any kind are serious issues and as such, laying these behavior patterns at the feet of "straight white men" not only renders your argument absurd, but in a way, dilutes a larger and much more nuanced and important conversation.
If you wish to engage in such a conversation, by all means, Mr. Baer. But it must be a conversation, and conversations, by their very definition are inclusive.
