She made it sound ugly.

From the NY Post, Teacher allegedly called out cheerleaders who ‘showed a lot of vagina’

Eubanks, 59, a city teacher for ​two decades​ and former educator with the New York City Ballet, was ​​accused of saying the girls ​“showed a lot of vagina” ​or “flashes of vagina​,” ​ and using ​the words “g-string​,” “burlesque moment” and “nasty” within​ ​earshot of students, thus embarrassing or belittling them in violation of chancellor’s rules.

Fortunately she wasn’t fired and only received a letter of reprimand.  But this still serves to demonstrate our new feminist morality.  Policing modesty is the new sin, and this has left women naked in more ways than one.

The article opens with the hilarious line:

​She saw something — and said something.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Modesty, New Morality, Turning a blind eye, Ugly Feminists. Bookmark the permalink.

69 Responses to She made it sound ugly.

  1. Chris says:

    Maybe she had a point, or maybe she’s a subscriber to the repressed variety of Feminism. Judging from her pic, it could go either way.

  2. Gunner Q says:

    “​She saw something — and said something.”

    Those motivational TSA posters actually work? Now I must find something else to ridicule.

  3. earlthomas786 says:

    Maybe she had a point, or maybe she’s a subscriber to the repressed variety of Feminism. Judging from her pic, it could go either way.

    Or both your points are valid.

    I commend her for pointing it out and trying to stop it…but she certainly ‘went real’ about it.

  4. SnapperTrx says:

    Perhaps she was really just quoting her favorite Austin Powers film? Did they even think about that?

  5. feministhater says:

    Moar vag plz! Really, what they going to do now, create a below the knee skirt restriction? Lol! That’s so 1950s… even the churchian cheerleaders now trim the bush for maximum exposure.

    As far as I know, cheerleaders have always been uber sluts, horizontal caregivers for the school’s football team and it’s known that the vag has special healing powers too. Can’t stop it now..

  6. Cane Caldo says:

    Eubanks, 59, a city teacher for ​two decades​ and former educator with the New York City Ballet, was ​​accused of saying the girls ​“showed a lot of vagina” ​or “flashes of vagina​,” ​ and using ​the words “g-string​,” “burlesque moment” and “nasty” within​ ​earshot of students, thus embarrassing or belittling them in violation of chancellor’s rules.

    She broke the laws concerning labialous speech.

  7. thedeti says:

    Teacher allegedly called out cheerleaders who ‘showed a lot of vagina’

    I can’t believe no one posted this yet.

    http://austinpowers.wikia.com/wiki/Alotta_Fagina

  8. Patrick Albanese says:

    I suppose cheerleading tournaments will have a cover charge and 2 drink minimum before long.

    It’s probably best to bring a stack of crisp singles too.

  9. Robert What? says:

    It’s not wrong for the girls to show everything, it’s only wrong for men to notice.

  10. seventiesjason says:

    I actually commend her. We all know if it was the 47 year old math teacher he would have been fired. Perhaps even required to register as a sex offender, if not that then “sensitivity training” about how cheerleading is an extremely competitive sport and how evil men designed the uniforms…..

    Even at the local Christian high school here in Fresno (Valley Christian) the cheerleaders uniforms are no less modest than any other high school.

    This woman does forget today that not just cheerleaders, but most women under 35 get brazilian fresh very frequently. It’s just grooming us all for child porn….

    Brittany Spears’ photo shoot in 1996 for Rolling Stone mag-rag was very explicit and if I had a daughter that age, at that time and took photos of her like that, I would have been arrested for kiddie porn.

    I’m glad she said something and its actually going to take women to say it.

  11. SnapperTrx says:

    I somewhat referenced it above. Honestly its the first thing that hit my mind! 😀

  12. feeriker says:

    Fortunately she wasn’t fired and only received a letter of reprimand.

    Of course she wasn’t fired; she’s a black female teacher in New York. Those italicized attributes automatically grant her a get-away-with-anything-including-murder-scot-free card. Being a teacher in NY means that she’s part of a union that makes her impossible to fire.

    This is another hilarious case of “which official victim group’s special rrights trump those of the other?” The black woman’s, or the sluts’? Do their “rights” overlap?

  13. Bruce says:

    “This is another hilarious case of “which official victim group’s special rrights trump those of the other?”
    I still haven’t figured out how they decide this. Maybe they play rock-paper-scissors to figure it out: “black crushes female”, etc.

  14. Pingback: She made it sound ugly. | Reaction Times

  15. earl says:

    Despite her anger, Stone admits she would have kept the scene in the movie if she was the director.

    Can’t make this stuff up. Hollywood actresses certainly have a rationalization hamster on steroids or live in some alternate reality I don’t want to be a part of.

    I suppose she was more angered she was lied to by the perv director, than the fact he exploited her and exposed her for the cinema world to see.

  16. Frank K says:

    It’s not wrong for the girls to show everything, it’s only wrong for men to notice.

    Oh, they want men to notice, but only the right ones. If you’re on the team, you can look, in fact the girls will want you to look; but if you’re in the band … just keep marching. As Sgt. Schultz would have said: I see nothing!

  17. Frank K says:

    Can’t make this stuff up. Hollywood actresses certainly have a rationalization hamster on steroids or live in some alternate reality I don’t want to be a part of.

    I saw Bladerunner 2049. What I found interesting was that while the two younger female leads had nude scenes, Gosling and Ford did not. Robin Wright did not, but that was not surprising as she looked VERY post wall in the movie (Princess Buttercup, what happened to you?)

    I also thought that the two nude scenes with the young women were gratuitous, especially the second one (where she appears as a giant hologram). But I guess that if you’re woman in Hollywood you’re just gonna have to take it all off if you want to be in a movie.

    But I’m sure that’s empowering or something.

  18. Oscar says:

    @ Bruce says:
    October 9, 2017 at 3:24 pm

    “I still haven’t figured out how they decide this. Maybe they play rock-paper-scissors to figure it out: ‘black crushes female’, etc.”

    You’re not supposed to figure it out. You can’t learn to play a game when the rules are always changing (imagine a diabolical version of Calvin Ball). That makes it easier for Leftists to keep you off balance. Of course, that also means that the game can be turned on them.

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/backlash-spreads-against-black-lives-matter-shutting-down-aclu-free-speech-event/article/2636825

  19. earl says:

    But I guess that if you’re woman in Hollywood you’re just gonna have to take it all off if you want to be in a movie.

    Perv producers and directors have to get their fix, there’s another block of degenerates who are ‘dark triad’ men.

    There’s also enough dumb broads who want to make a name for themselves by giving up their dignity. I’ve read stories from these actresses who know they have to do some sort of scene like that they need some sort of mind altering drugs to do it (not the empowered female they think they are). They subconsciously know it’s not a good thing for them to be doing.

  20. Matt says:

    This is another hilarious case of “which official victim group’s special rrights trump those of the other?” The black woman’s, or the sluts’? Do their “rights” overlap?

    Consulting my Designated Victim Group quick reference card here, it’s woman vs. woman so you have to go to the tiebreakers. Black is plus points, non-sex-positive-feminist opinions are minus points. Adding ’em up, black is not given a personal foul but does get a five-yard penalty for a neutral zone infraction.

  21. Scott says:

    Oscar, Bruce-

    Currently the hierarchy places the sensibilities of genteel SWPL feminism (no shaming of anything a woman/girl wears WHATSOEVER) slightly trump those of a middle aged black woman who invokes the modesty clauses that are pretty common in that community.

    That can always change when the moment suits the SJW singulariy pogrom.

    Its one of the “benefits” of being a “white” male with no sexual proclivities, visible disabilities or other victim card to play. I don’t really have to worry about it. I am at the very bottom of the hierarchy.

  22. Scott says:

    Also, Oscar, the confusing, mysteriousness is absolutely paramount. This is why the language constantly changes.

    I am in a mental health profession. I went to school with these people. I read their journal articles, etc. You will begin to see “intersectionality” replace “[white] privilege” as any moron can see how wholly inadequate such language is to describing who is successful in life and who is not.

    There are a large number of groups who cannot describe with a straight face how meth addicted white hillibiliies are “privileged” over them.

    Its similar to the shift from “global warming” to “climate change.”

  23. earl says:

    You will begin to see “intersectionality” replace “[white] privilege” as any moron can see how wholly inadequate such language is to describing who is successful in life and who is not.

    It all goes back to Marxism and Marxist infiltration…they just have different terms for it now.

  24. Matt says:

    You will begin to see “intersectionality” replace “[white] privilege”

    The do mean slightly different things to the Left, so the change is not entirely neutral. “White privilege” just means whites are at the bottom of the hierarchy. “Intersectionality” means that the rest of the hierarchy is specifically obligated to take sides against whites during a conflict between whites and another group, NATO-style, even if it would otherwise be against their interests.

  25. Oleaginous Outrager says:

    All this happened at the “High School for Environmental Studies”. Is that one of those “elite” public schools? Does sound all that elite to me.

    Eubanks, who makes $93,790 a year, is now teaching at ​nearby ​Facing History HS​.

    First, teachers sure are underpaid, aren’t they? Secondly “Facing History” high school? The poz is strong with these schools. No wonder the students have neither dignity nor self-respect, they’re just “doin’ what they feel”.

    The proceeding​ last fall​​ ​ generated a 974-page transcript and a dense 42-page ruling in January by Doyle Pryor, a hearing officer who gets $1,400 a day plus expenses to conduct testimony and write rulings.

    Termination cases typically cost some $300,000 in investigative ​efforts, lawyer fees and other staff time.

    A third of a million just to get rid of someone (and that’s just ‘typically’)? Public employee unions are scourge upon this planet.

  26. Spike says:

    This isn’t at all surprising. The cheerleaders behaved exactly like cheerleaders. The black school teacher was never going to get fired, because she’s a black female school teacher (If it had been a WHITE, MALE teacher – different story).

    What is surprising is the aftermath: There had to be a ”trial”…You know trials: they;’re the things that they blame Christians for having in Inquisitions and at Salem….

    Of course the Principal with the 10-year old daughter ”didn’t see anything”. If you are anywhere near the dance world, pre-pubescent girls are constantly taught inappropriate, sexually provocative and downright explicit moves for the stage. Judges don’t mark them down or disqualify them. Rather they reward them with more points. Don’t believe me? Go to that episode of ”Dance Moms” where that fat ugly dance teacher tells a bunch of 10-to-12 year olds to do a burlesque Feather Dance. They have to imagine they are naked behind the feathers but they actually wear skin-colored tights. One kid even protests that ”she’s only twelve”.
    And the mothers? They just all go along with it….

  27. earl says:

    If you are anywhere near the dance world, pre-pubescent girls are constantly taught inappropriate, sexually provocative and downright explicit moves for the stage.

    Funny how the crackdown is usually on the people consuming this stuff…but it’s hardly ever on the people who are actually peddling the stuff.

  28. Frank K says:

    Eubanks, who makes $93,790 a year, is now teaching at ​nearby ​Facing History HS​.
    First, teachers sure are underpaid, aren’t they?

    FWIW, they aren’t all paid that well. Here in the Centennial State, salaries in most school districts max out in the low 70’s. And that’s usually after 30 years on the job. My son is a high school teacher in metro Denver, starting his second year. He’s paid a princely 40K, plus an extra 3K stipend for being an assistant coach on one of the teams (not football), which he performs after hours.

  29. Frank K says:

    They have to imagine they are naked behind the feathers but they actually wear skin-colored tights. One kid even protests that ”she’s only twelve”.
    And the mothers? They just all go along with it….

    I’ll bet some of those mothers are living vicariously through their daughters. It’s not just the football team dads.

  30. Frank K says:

    Funny how the crackdown is usually on the people consuming this stuff…but it’s hardly ever on the people who are actually peddling the stuff.

    That would be censorship, domination, misogyny and patriarchy to do that.

    When a VERY protected class person complained (she could have only been higher up the totem had she been a homosexual or a cross dresser), it must have been a real conundrum for the people in charge. What’s an SJW to do!?

  31. Anonymous Reader says:

    Eubanks, who makes $93,790 a year,

    In New York City that is not so much money.

  32. David says:

    In New York City that is not so much money.

    Bull. They only work 9 months a year, and they get a state pension.

    Plus, they can live in Brooklyn or Queens. Plus their job is recession-proof.

  33. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    If anyone cares, October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month: http://www.nrcdv.org/dvam/DVAM-history

  34. mmaier2112 says:

    Frank K: “I’ll bet some of those mothers are living vicariously through their daughters. It’s not just the football team dads.”

    So they wish they’d been whores?

    At least the dads wish they’d be athletic heroes…

  35. feeriker says:

    And the mothers? They just all go along with it….

    What Frank K said about the mothers living vicariously through their daughters.

    Any parent, male or female, who lets their pre-adolescent daughter participate in this (or in “kiddie beauty pageants”) should be charged with child abuse/endangerment.

  36. earl says:

    Any parent, male or female, who lets their pre-adolescent daughter participate in this (or in “kiddie beauty pageants”) should be charged with child abuse/endangerment.

    The people who run these things should be as well…but then again I’m thinking like a nasty Patriarch who wants to dispense justice those who peddle this nonsense.

  37. feeriker says:

    So they wish they’d been whores?

    They just wish they could’ve gotten a head start with it when they were their pre-adolescent daughters’ ages rather than wait till they reached their teens.

  38. feeriker says:

    The people who run these things should be as well…but then again I’m thinking like a nasty Patriarch who wants to dispense justice those who peddle this nonsense.

    There’s too much money in it for it to be outlawed. As we all know, money talks.

  39. Spike says:

    Frank K says:
    October 9, 2017 at 5:45 pm
    They have to imagine they are naked behind the feathers but they actually wear skin-colored tights. One kid even protests that ”she’s only twelve”.
    And the mothers? They just all go along with it….

    I’ll bet some of those mothers are living vicariously through their daughters. It’s not just the football team dads.

    -You touch on something way more important than just mothers living vicariously, Frank.

    It’s mothers who tell their daughters to ”get an education” because ”you can’t rely on a man” – while actually relying on a man.
    It’s mothers who tell their daughters ”don’t get married too early..” (code for the carousel), while they have married the best man they could find, by definition.
    It’s mothers who tell their daughters that they ”wish they had slept with more people before marriage” – while extracting as much resources as they can out of a man while dishing out the barest minimum of sex, in a begrudging fashion.

  40. Dave says:

    If anyone cares, October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month:

    You meant to write:

    “If anyone cares, October is Violence against Women Awareness Month: …”

    Domestic Violence can only be against women; men are always the perpetrators. That is why all the shelters cater to women, and men assaulted by their female spouse have nowhere to go.

  41. infowarrior1 says:

    Feminism either advocates the pathology of frigidity like the ”sex is rape” feminists or the pathology of promiscuity (cock carousel). Never chastity which is healthy vibrant sexual expression within wedlock.

  42. earl says:

    Never chastity which is healthy vibrant sexual expression within wedlock.

    Well that’s not the rebellious way to express sex. Feminism is all about rebellion…first by doing it with anyone who isn’t your spouse, and then shutting it off when you do get married.

  43. earl says:

    Correction…shutting it off to your husband. You can still have sex with anyone who isn’t.

  44. Jason says:

    A decade and half ago “Abercrombie & Fitch” made a flash in the news about selling “thong underwear” for pre-teen girls……the usual “conservative” prune faces made the usual statements about the nation going to the dogs…….and at the time……I thought women’s advocacy groups, mothers, and concerned other shrill feminists who care so deeply about the “self-esteem” of women and girls would actually get on board and say “hey, what’s up with that? come on cut that out!”

    But no! All women and mothers who were asked thought it was “cute” and “fun”

    Even my cousin, who was a mother of two young girls at the time said “it’s no big deal, girls should have choices of what they want to wear, and thongs are not sexual, they’re fun!”

    I don’t know how you men here who are fathers to girls do it. My hat goes off to you. I’d be dead from a coronary already

  45. earlthomas786 says:

    “it’s no big deal, girls should have choices of what they want to wear, and thongs are not sexual, they’re fun!”

    Only a woman could reason butt floss as ‘fun’.

  46. Oscar says:

    @ Scott says:
    October 9, 2017 at 4:35 pm

    “You will begin to see ‘intersectionality’ replace ‘[white] privilege’ as any moron can see how wholly inadequate such language is to describing who is successful in life and who is not.

    Its similar to the shift from ‘global warming’ to ‘climate change’.”

    Exactly. It’s sophistry through weasel words. The more vague, the better, because if you don’t understand them… well, that probably means you possess a functioning brain… but it also means they get to frame the argument however they want, and reframe it as necessary.

    But there’s a limit to how far they can push at any one time. Remember “climate chaos”? That was supposed to be the new term after “climate change”, but it was too stupid to catch on.

  47. rocko says:

    it’s no big deal, girls should have choices of what they want to wear, and thongs are not sexual, they’re fun!”

    Until they catch some pervy neckbeard wanting to join the fun, then you don’t hear the end of it.

    As an example, I mentioned this one on ROK, but I’ll mention it here. Remember Honey Boo Boo? Remember how every one lost their marbles when Mama June went back with her sex offender boyfriend who had abused her older daughter? Now don’t get the wrong idea. I don’t condone sexual abuse of children, plain and simple. Yet, the audience (I’m assuming mostly women) conveniently threw the pedophile under the boss and washed their hands Pilate style, because it’s never their fault for sexualizing their daughters. It’s always men. And they wonder why men don’t want anything to do with them.

  48. Oscar says:

    @ Jason says:
    October 9, 2017 at 10:00 pm

    “I don’t know how you men here who are fathers to girls do it.”

    You say, “that’s skirt’s too short now. Go change and give the skirt to your little sister.” What’s so difficult about that?

    Unfortunately, too many men fear their wives.

  49. infowarrior1 says:

    @rocko

    Similar logic to slutwalks. women can never be held responsible for anything.

  50. infowarrior1 says:

    @Spike
    ”They have to imagine they are naked behind the feathers but they actually wear skin-colored tights. One kid even protests that ”she’s only twelve”.
    And the mothers? They just all go along with it….

    I’ll bet some of those mothers are living vicariously through their daughters. It’s not just the football team dads.”

    Its like they never left high school.

  51. feeriker says:

    Even my cousin, who was a mother of two young girls at the time said “it’s no big deal, girls should have choices of what they want to wear, and thongs are not sexual, they’re fun!”

    The more frequently I hear stupid shit like this, the more I begin to believe that maybe, just maybe, those states that used to sterilize people branded “mentally incompetent” actually had perfectly valid grounds for doing so.

  52. feeriker says:

    Its like they never left high school.

    Psychologically, most North American women today never leave high school. Why should they, when there is nothing that compels them to take responsibility for anything, including themselves?

  53. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    I once read of someone complaining that child beauty pageants attracted pedophiles. An angry mother responded, “There is nothing sexual about this. If you think there is, that’s in your sick mind!”

    Of course child beauty pageants attract pedophiles. That should be obvious.

    And shame on those mothers who pimp their 7-year-olds for pedophiles’ gawking eyes. But the mothers can’t stand to being judged as lousy mothers. They want to pimp their 7-year-old daughters in skimpy clothes, and then be celebrated as great mothers, empowering their daughters, yada, yada.

    I wonder how many of these mothers are single mothers? I wonder how many are married to manginas who dare not tell them how to raise their daughters?

  54. patriarchal landmine says:

    the jealous post wall former toilet just couldn’t keep quiet anymore.

    back in the day, when a girl fucked and sucked the whole football and basketball team, it had more meaning. now the new sluts are ruining everything, by learning from the example set by their mothers.

    so yea, she’s a sex negative stealth feminist now that it doesn’t matter to her.

  55. Bruce says:

    Off-topic, for your enjoyment: Sluts are nuts.

    http://anepigone.blogspot.com/2017/10/sluts-are-nuts.html

  56. earlthomas786 says:

    ‘An angry mother responded, “There is nothing sexual about this. If you think there is, that’s in your sick mind!”

    Well as effective as slut shaming is, I’m sure that’s going to make the pedo pervs feel sorry for their disease.

  57. earlthomas786 says:

    Posted this in the wrong thread: here it is.

    Speaking of crazy mothers doing something weird.

    ‘Moms hold special mini-wedding photo shoot with their kids’

    https://www.yahoo.com/gma/moms-hold-special-mini-wedding-photo-shoot-kids-200413891–abc-news-parenting.html?cid=social_twitter_gma

    I get childhood playing make believe…but it gets weird when the mothers take it too far.

  58. PVW says:

    One important point. The girls were likely young and black. It was a generational sex positive thing, young black sex positive girls v. old fogey black conservative woman.

  59. Boxer says:

    One important point. The girls were likely young and black. It was a generational sex positive thing, young black sex positive girls v. old fogey black conservative woman.

    Biggest problem in my book is the fact that it shouldn’t be a teacher’s job. These young women had no fathers at home to school them in the basics of modesty, self-respect, understatement, class and restraint. They are children of the matriarchy.

  60. Opus says:

    I suppose that in the heirarchy of victimhood and coming lower even than straight-white-male are straight white males who are sexually attracted to children (however you define children) but it has always been somewhat lost on me what such a person would get out of watching a school’s balletic display. If they are getting something out of it then they must be otherwise ill-served for titilation in their preferred paraphilia.

    Many years ago a British Television Production company thought it would be a grand idea to have a show where pre-pubescent children performed songs by the favoured pop-groups of the day. A friend of mine provided the musical arrangements for the show and he told me that what his employers the producers were afraid of was that the children would fail to produce heartfelt or convincing performances. They need not have worried for as my friend explained they outdid the glam-rockers they were impersonating in terms of make-up and gyrations. Mini-Pops as it was entitled was not unsuccessful but the feminists and their ilk complained en-masse so that not only was there no follow-up series but also no repeat and Mini Pops is now part of the unmentionable of television history – the tyranny once again of the very small minority.

    It was the French who invented the first flash-dance – the Can Can – and like the Can Can I very much doubt – unless the pose is held – that anyone can see anything. If you want to see children dressing-up as being smut (as with the Mini Pops) then you may rely on a feminist to so observe – a case of projection methinks. It was however the Americans who invented cheerleaders and like Baseball and Grid Iron Football it has not – mercifully – penetrated English or European culture.

  61. Tarl says:

    This is another hilarious case of “which official victim group’s special rights trump those of the other?” The black woman’s, or the sluts’? Do their “rights” overlap?

    The sluts are black women, too, as you can tell from the hilarious text “Yea. She think she some high and mighty bitch.” But as Don Imus found out, you have to have nappy hair yourself to call out nappy-headed hos.

  62. Tarl says:

    If you are anywhere near the dance world, pre-pubescent girls are constantly taught inappropriate, sexually provocative and downright explicit moves for the stage.

    A few years back I was at a family camp with the kids. Pretty conservative place; they say grace before every meal, they do a flag-raising and lowering every day where everyone stands and puts their hand over their heart. At the end of the week they had a talent show, and some girls maybe 10 to 12 years old did a dance routine that to me, looked like what pole dancers do. Very provocative and inappropriate, I thought. But this excited no negative comment from the parents in the audience. To the contrary, there was enthusiastic cheering and applause. I was rather taken aback but I guess I’m a prudish old fart.

  63. PVW says:

    This is key: “Biggest problem in my book is the fact that it shouldn’t be a teacher’s job. These young women had no fathers at home to school them in the basics of modesty, self-respect, understatement, class and restraint. They are children of the matriarchy.”

  64. Jason says:

    Opus……baseball has its share of problems (and I would be happy to debate and discuss it with any true fan), but “cheerleading” isn’t one of them. That’s football. That’s basketball.

    Huge baseball fan. The only sport I ever played, and the only sport I actually watch. Could care less about football, hockey, basketball, and soccer (though I do wear the 1960’s blue and white banded ‘Cardiff Bluebirds’ scarf when I’m on the Vespa for Wales sake).

    Baseball is American. It’s a Victorian-era sport and baseball still can bring the best out of a boy, an older man like myself and young college guy. It’s the world’s most perfect imperfect game. It’s what America was. It was for everybody. Everybody that comes up to that plate to bat has “got a world record in something” and It’s still big, but even I have to contend that “it’s not the national pastime anymore” basketball or football has indeed taken that spot.

    What gets me more and more “annoyed” with the National Baseball League TV Network is this:

    When they go to the news, updates, nuances, talk…..one guy knows what he is talking about. The other guy is usually a former ball player, he’s okay. The third person????

    ALWAYS. ALWAYS. A young woman wearing ‘pole-swinging’ heels, low cut dress…..slender, boob job and it’s obvious she’s reading off a tele-prompter. They try to make her always look smart, but her canned, vague, and generic takes on the game or playoff or a stat are really trite. I once wrote an email to the NBL TV Network discussing these annoyances in 2016, here are parts of their limp and spineless reply:

    ……and Mr. Wojesczleski may we remind you that baseball is trying to break into the female demographic……According to studies, American women now make up almost 75% of the purchasing decisions for the home, and baseball today has not only an awesome opportunity to grow its fan base y tapping into those purchasing decisions but, a duty to what makes America great, which is our women……..if we want women women to watch baseball, we have to have women on the panels, giving the news, and in locker rooms………

    can guys just have ONE place where women don’t have to be involved? Don’t have to be considered just-one-of-the-guys? Every woman now thinks herself as a “girls guy” and for once can we just have “good people” for the tasks at hand instead of this “oh, we gotta have an equal balance of women, or the demographic will get deeply, deeply offended”

  65. Jason says:

    Women in sport……

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s