U.S. Politics, 7

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

So... do you want to stop locker room interviews entirely, or just not allow women to do that part of their job?

[DanteGabriel]

I agreed that their behavior is inexcusable (but entirely predictable). With that said, females do NOT belong in a mens' locker room.

Why not? They are there in a professional capacity. Should gay sportswriters be banned from men's locker rooms because they might get turned on? Maybe lesbians should be allowed in NFL locker rooms.

By the way, in case you felt like trotting out the idea that male journalists are not allowed in women's locker rooms... You'd be wrong.

• The NFL, Major League Baseball, the NBA and the NHL all designate the locker room as a work environment. While one of the Jets players reportedly yelled at Sainz, "This is our locker room," the reality is that the locker room is a workplace where many people -- including me and other women -- do our jobs. We're not given an alternative option.

The rooms are open to the media at designated times. There is no ambush or surprise or shock element. For as long as any of the New York Jets players have been alive, NFL locker rooms have been open to members of the media to conduct interviews.

• Men are, indeed, allowed in women's locker rooms. Driving into work on Monday I heard a nationally syndicated radio commentator lamenting the fact that he couldn't go in women's locker rooms. Apparently he's never attempted to cover women's sports -- sadly, not too surprising. But as this particular radio talker works for a network that covers both the WNBA and the women's NCAA basketball tournament -- and also employs several high profile women sports reporters -- you'd think he might have checked his facts.

The WNBA -- the playoffs are going on right now -- has the same rules as the NBA. Open locker rooms at designated times. In the NCAA tournament, the same rules govern both men and women's locker rooms -- they're both open at specific times. During the regular season, NCAA institutions can make their own rules about locker room availability, but during the tournament the NCAA has a uniform policy. When Stanford played UConn in last April's championship, if you wanted to see how devastated Jayne Appel was after her terrible shooting night, you needed to be in the locker room. I was there. So were my male colleagues.

But the "men in women's locker rooms" argument is a red herring. There is simply no female equivalent to professional men's sports. There is no billion-dollar female sports league that fuels millions of jobs, the way the men's professional leagues do.

The NFL is a slickly packaged media entity. The Sanchez story that Sainz was doing is exactly the kind of story the globe-conquering NFL covets.

And the Jets -- those Hard Knocks media darlings, who spent all of a training camp with HBO cameras following their every move -- should be totally aware that their locker room is as much a media stage as it is a place to change their clothes.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/ann_killion/09/14/reporters/#ixzz0zbZyJ8It

It's an excellent column overall on the topic. I suggest you read it.

[DanteGabriel]

"Women shouldn't dress provocatively because men might be unable to overcome their animal instincts around them" is the argument behind the burqa.

[Tempra]

Why not? They are there in a professional capacity.

Because it is a locker room. Many athletes are showering and dressing while these interviews occur, and I do not think it is appropriate any reporters, let alone female reporters, to be in the locker room.

Should gay sportswriters be banned from men's locker rooms because they might get turned on?

No. Gay men are allowed in male locker rooms and bathrooms. Same junk.

Maybe lesbians should be allowed in NFL locker rooms.

I'm not sure why you care to bring up sexual orientation other than to be snarky.

Until we are the point where there is no need for separate bathrooms and locker rooms, I see nothing wrong with excluding women from men's facilities and vice versa.

By the way, in case you felt like trotting out the idea that male journalists are not allowed in women's locker rooms... You'd be wrong.

Note how the article says "at designated times." I have no problem if the journalists are only let into the locker room after everyone is done showering, dressing, etc, but this is simply not the case in (male) professional sports.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/ann_killion/09/14/reporters/#ixzz0zbZyJ8It

It's an excellent column overall on the topic. I suggest you read it.

Thanks. Unfortunately, I can't find anything to corroborate this story. Every article seems to quote the same guy.

ETA: Found this "1. Deadline constraints, our desire to get spontaneous quotes after a game, and logisitical considerations are the reasons interview rooms do not work as well as quote-gathering immediately after a game. Why not do it the way the WNBA does it? Reporters come in for 15-20 minutes, the athletes do interviews fully clothed, and then reporters are asked to leave, doors are closed, and the athletes can shower and change in privacy and peace. Seems like a civil solution."

Male sports should adopt a similar rule.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=whitlock/050811

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

"Designated times" applies to NFL locker rooms too. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2010/09/a_few_words_on_women_in_nfl_lo.html

After NFL games, there is a 10-minute cooling off period, during which the locker room is closed to the media. This period often lasts longer, sometimes significantly so. By the time we enter the room, some players -- often including Chris Cooley, for example -- are already showered and changed. There is also a private training room for players who'd like more privacy, plus the shower area.

So there you go. If the players really don't want to be interviewed, they don't have to be. If they want to be finished showering and dressing, they can be. Now, if the players choose to be present but not yet dressed within a reasonable time frame... well, that's up to them.

ETA: This is also beside the point of any of the actions that are alleged to have occurred during the practice proper.

[DanteGabriel]

Note how the article says "at designated times." I have no problem if the journalists are only let into the locker room after everyone is done showering, dressing, etc, but this is simply not the case in (male) professional sports.

For fuck's sake. It's designated times for both male and female locker rooms. Said so right there in the article and in the excerpts I posted. Twice.

Are you trying to be dense or are you just skimming because you're not interested in learning anything that might challenge your baked-in preconceptions?

[Tempra]

"Designated times" applies to NFL locker rooms too. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2010/09/a_few_words_on_women_in_nfl_lo.html

So there you go. If the players really don't want to be interviewed, they don't have to be. If they want to be finished showering and dressing, they can be. Now, if the players choose to be present but not yet dressed within a reasonable time frame... well, that's up to them.

ETA: This is also beside the point of any of the actions that are alleged to have occurred during the practice proper.

It's hardly the same rule and you know it. If reporters want to interview players, they can interview them in the conference room, which is specifically designed for, you know, interviews.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

It is the same rule. The reporters are restricted as to when they can enter the locker room to do interviews. During that time, athletes can be dressed as they please, or not present at all.

Did you even read the articles, particularly the bits about the deadlines these journalists must meet? In the time it would take the players to get changed and to the conference room, the deadlines will have passed. Unless you force the players who want to be interviewed to go straight from the field to the conference room instead? Even then, it sounds like they'd be pushing it.

[Shryke]

Can we skip this NFL shit and put it in it's own thread since it has fuck all to do with anything?

Anyway, back to O'Donnell hilarity:

Mr. Hannity said, “Today alone, just this morning, you were on ‘Today Show,’ you were on ‘Good Morning America,’ you were on ‘The Early Show,’ you were on CNN, you were on all those liberal shows?”

“I was,” Ms. O’Donnell said, laughing.

He continued, “Why have you decided to subject yourself to the — what I would argue is — probably biased, tough questions, and obviously some of the attacks against you?”

“Because I wanted an opportunity to counter those attacks,” she said.

Speaking to media outlets that seem friendly — and shunning all others — is a time-honored strategy for some politicians, and Ms. Palin’s advice to “speak through Fox News” is something she has clearly internalized. Most of the interviews she gives are to Fox programs, since she is a paid contributor, though she does appear on other networks for book promotion.

“Speak to the American people. Speak through Fox News,” she said on “The O’Reilly Factor,” giving her advice to Ms. O’Donnell, whom she endorsed in the primary. “Let the independents who are tuning into you — let them know what it is that she stands for, the principles behind her decisions.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/16/palin-steers-odonnell-to-fox-news/

Also, she's an idiot:

"Evolution is a theory and it's exactly that," O'Donnell said. "There is not enough evidence, consistent evidence to make it as fact."

O'Donnell's comment came from a section of the interview where she defined creationism.

"Well, creationism, in essence, is believing that the world began as the Bible in Genesis says, that God created the Earth in six days, six 24-hour periods. And there is just as much, if not more, evidence supporting that," O'Donnell said.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/16/odonnell-questioned-evolution/

This is like so close to Palin's entry onto the scene, it's CREEPY.

[TrackerNeil]

This guy Coonz had better step to the plate and win this Delaware race. But even if he does, I fear that O'Donnell is now a Tea Party darling and will be able to keep making noise long after this race is over.

She's welcome to make all the noise she wants, as long as she doesn't do it from the floor of the Senate.

Edited to add: Please do watch this speech, given by a really crazy Republican in Ohio. The audience was composed of Republicans, and even they seemed...taken aback.

[IheartTesla]

So...who on the East Coast is going to the "Rally to restore sanity"?

[jurble]

me

[ThinkerX]

Bit on the news (CBS) last night about how 75% of folks in the US (give or take a few percentage points) are deeply PO'd at Congress in general...and their congress-critter in particular. Includes Republicans and Democrats, though the later come in slightly higher. Given the bleakness of the economy and dug in pointless stupidity of the majority of congress critters of both parties, this situation is not likely to change for years - maybe even a decade or two.

So...if this situation persists....

One has to wonder how much longer the business as usual can proceed if those numbers stay that high, or climb even higher. Do the politico's finally 'get it' and start behaving themselves? Or do they and their works become so completely disconnected from ordinary folks that the whole governmental apparatus becomes impotent, of no significance at all to the majority of people in the country? Do we see see alternative political parties sprouting up - and maybe even the fractured demise of one of the big two?

[Guy Kilmore]

A Rally that might change our lives. Follow the link, if you dare.

http://www.keepfearalive.com/

[Tinydigit]

Five things to keep in mind as Congress debates the Bush tax cuts:

http://www.slate.com/id/2267681/

[Tempra]

It is the same rule. The reporters are restricted as to when they can enter the locker room to do interviews. During that time, athletes can be dressed as they please, or not present at all.

Did you even read the articles, particularly the bits about the deadlines these journalists must meet? In the time it would take the players to get changed and to the conference room, the deadlines will have passed. Unless you force the players who want to be interviewed to go straight from the field to the conference room instead? Even then, it sounds like they'd be pushing it.

No it is not.

NFL Rule: 10 minute cooling off period (possibly more) and then reporters are given (indefinite?) access.

WNBA / NCAA Rule: Interviews are done right away and then reporters are kicked out.

See the difference? This is how interviews are done at the super bowl. There is really no reason for pre-locker room interviews to not be standard procedure. And the deadlines are irrelevant. They can be changed to meet the reality.

And Shryke's right, this isn't the place for the discussion. Unless you want to start a new thread, i'm done here.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/13951537/close-the-locker-rooms-to-all-media-men-and-women

[TrackerNeil]

So...if this situation persists....

One has to wonder how much longer the business as usual can proceed if those numbers stay that high, or climb even higher. Do the politico's finally 'get it' and start behaving themselves? Or do they and their works become so completely disconnected from ordinary folks that the whole governmental apparatus becomes impotent, of no significance at all to the majority of people in the country? Do we see see alternative political parties sprouting up - and maybe even the fractured demise of one of the big two?

I think congressional ratings are usually pretty low, and yet most incumbents stay in office regardless. As to third parties, Americans consistently express support for them, but that doesn't usually translate into votes. In 2009 the independent candidate for governor in NJ (I forget his name) was polling at 20% two days before the election and wound up getting about 5% of the vote. ::shrug::

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Well, if she was wearing anything like those jeans, I would say that it's a totally appropriate outfit for a woman to wear, and that she has such a rockin' ass that it just stands out.

These repeated comments about her ass from posters of both genders demonstrate that the world isn't the antiseptic environment that some would like to pretend. It's the exact type of thing those athletes would have noticed/remarked upon. Sure, there's a difference between saying it here and saying it there. But the mere fact that everyone can't help but remark on her ass, while playing the intellectually superior android when saying what those players should have done, is humorous.

It's like if it's inappropriate, it's because her body itself is so sexually suggestive, and tight jeans on someone else may not have elicited any response at all. If it's inappropriate, it's only because she makes makes appropriate clothes in inappropriate. That's tough to fault her for.

I really can't understand the willful blindness that is pervading the commentary on this. This is not just a woman who "can't help it", and just wants to do her job. She advertizes herself as the "hottest sports reporter in Mexico". She wants to be evaluated as a sex object while doing her job as a reporter. Most everyone here is just ignoring that point and pretending that all this is just completely inadvertent on her part.

And yes, I do fault her for her outfit. She clearly could have worn jeans that didn't look spray painted on, worn a light jacket over the top, etc. Professional women have to take similar things into account when dressing. For example, a woman with bigger boobs may have to choose a different top, or unbutton fewer buttons on it, compared to other women so her boobs aren't hanging out. She knows exactly how she looks and deliberately dresses to accentuate that. You can deny that if you want, but most folks in the real world see it exactly that way. Sure, blame the players and talk to them about what is approriate/inappropriate comment. But don't, at the same time, give her a complete free pass for dressing in that manner deliberately to attract such notice.

Is it possible that she is trying to use her sex appeal to up her status as a reporter? Totally could be.

Why the willful blindness? There's no "possible" or "could be" about it. It's how she consciously chooses to market herself.

[Guest Raidne]

I agree with you Shryke. I'll take the quotes from this thread that I want to respond to and move it over to the currently designated sexism thread. If nothing else, it's a wonderful example of actual sexism vs. the sort of unintentional endorsement of bias that we've been talking about so far.

[Hereward]

Ms O'Donnell is now famous-ish in the UK. You must be very proud.

Political analyst, Roy Hobbs, said: "While I'm certain the rise of the Teapot movement will mean the destruction of humanity in a screaming lake of blood, bones and fire, I can't stop wanking over terrifyingly right-wing brunettes.

"I just have this instinctive feeling that they would be eye-poppingly filthy.

"They totally would, wouldn't they? Oh yes."