Why are we not talking about this?

[Maggie5]

The abuse of male umpires can be as cutting and personal as that directed at females, we just don't care about it. Why is the questioning of one's sexuality, threats of a beating or comments about a male umpire's physical features or perceived flaws any less threatening or demeaning than abuse meted out to female umpires?

I am sick of the gender empathy gap. Why do we need to categorize abuse or place it on a sliding scale? How about condemning all abuse of umpires and all violence directed against any person?

This was your first post in this thread and I can't seem to find any empathy or understanding from you regarding the female umpires experiences in subsequent posts, you went straight to how male umpires are treated.

Not sure how you can say you care about both when you can't write one sentence in understanding their situation.

 

[Kirby]

This was your first post in this thread and I can't seem to find any empathy or understanding from you regarding the female umpires experiences in subsequent posts, you went straight to how male umpires are treated.

Not sure how you can say you care about both when you can't write one sentence in understanding their situation.

That wouldn’t fit his agenda.

 

[gouki88]

This was your first post in this thread and I can't seem to find any empathy or understanding from you regarding the female umpires experiences in subsequent posts, you went straight to how male umpires are treated.

Not sure how you can say you care about both when you can't write one sentence in understanding their situation.

Bang on maggie5. In any thread that involves discussion of an issue impacting women, old pal domie immediately jumps to the 'what about men' line. Boring, predictable, and a waste of time for all involved

 

[JB1975]

Then why did you mock the notion of men suffering or being victims in our society?

I don't.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

The abuse of male umpires can be as cutting and personal as that directed at females, we just don't care about it. Why is the questioning of one's sexuality, threats of a beating or comments about a male umpire's physical features or perceived flaws any less threatening or demeaning than abuse meted out to female umpires?

I empathise with your points in general more than most here, but I think you’ve missed the mark in this case.

Male umpires are the rule in football, female umpires are the exception. Any umpire of any gender identity being assaulted/threatened/intimidated/vilified is very, deeply wrong and has the potential to cause grave harm. However as female umpires are seen at times as being a novelty and/or inherently unqualified, they clearly have a bigger target on their backs. If we are desirous of keeping female umpires, trainers, physios, etc. involved in the sport, we need to acknowledge that they are in their own way pioneers, and there are unique obstacles females need to overcome, to be seen as just as much part of the fabric of the game.

 

[Kappa]

if i may intervene for a second, domie, I think there might be differences in the experiences between male and female umpires. The report indicated that males -either players or in the crowds were making inappropriate comments or sending dick flicks or generally making the women umpires feel uncomfortable while they went about their duties.....

now i'm not sure if too many male umpires get pics of various female parts in the course of their duties....

and, as in the bumping matters, the outcome is the focus. Not enough female umpires are coming forward and many are leaving the ranks......and it should be said that many male umpires are leaving the ranks too....

so there are similar problems between the sexes but females do have some special cases...

The way they get abused is different but the end result is pretty similar, which is why the vast majority of male umpires have quit umpiring.

It's truly bizarre to try and make this only about 1 gender when clearly it's a much broader issue than that.

 

[domus]

This was your first post in this thread and I can't seem to find any empathy or understanding from you regarding the female umpires experiences in subsequent posts, you went straight to how male umpires are treated.

Not sure how you can say you care about both when you can't write one sentence in understanding their situation.

The thread was created for the purposes of discussing the shocking abuse of women in football-specifically female umpires.

The person who posted the thread also asked what we are going to do about this state of affairs. If I started a thread about the sexual abuse of boys and you posted a comment saying girls are sexually abused too, I would take that to mean can they share the attention being given to the boys. You could not possibly believe I am advocating for boys only and you know I wasn't doing that. I also stated very clearly in subsequent posts that I wanted and felt compassion for all victims of abuse regardless of gender. I have seen no such comment from those attacking me.

If I posted a thread asking when we are going to do something to end the horror of male suicide or male homelessness and did not once mention female suicide or female homelessness would you not be tempted to write a post asking why I am only concerned about male suicide? Such a question would be suggesting we show the same level of concern for both genders-rather than focus exclusively on either one.

It's those who respond to the abuse of one demographic with deep concern while ignoring or belittling the same suffering endured by another that astounds me.

If you argue we focus exclusively on women because women make up the majority of victims I would ask why the few articles or advertising campaigns there have been on suicide or workplace deaths are always gender neutral? They never refer to these issues as 'gendered" even though there are far bigger disparities between male and female victims than in DV. In fact family violence is the only societal issue which has more women affected than men and it is the only issue to be presented in a gender specific way.

Why? If this is the right approach why isn't it used with regard to all of the other issues I have referenced?

I've already referenced our acknowledgement of the brave men and women who sacrificed their lives fighting for Australia and how this is considered right and proper despite the enormous difference in the number of deaths of men and women in our military history. Nobody says, "hang on, 70 000 men gave their lives and a handful of women, maybe we should just focus on male victims?" Yet that is exactly what we have done with regard to domestic violence for decades now. Why?

Surely if we keep pushing the idea of showing respect to all umpires that includes everybody. It's the same with the latest "Respect Women" campaign. How about we teach our kids to respect people? I know many women and men who I do not respect for very good reasons. Why should we demand respect for a demographic based upon its immutable characteristics?

In fact respect is something we earn by being a truthful, trustworthy person. I think treating others in a courteous manner is a better aim. We should be polite to all we encounter. Nobody should be respected until they prove themselves worthy of respect.

 

[gouki88]

Nobody should be respected until they prove themselves worthy of respect.

What the ****?

 

[JB1975]

The thread was created for the purposes of discussing the shocking abuse of women in football-specifically female umpires.

The person who posted the thread also asked what we are going to do about this state of affairs. If I started a thread about the sexual abuse of boys and you posted a comment saying girls are sexually abused too, I would take that to mean can they share the attention being given to the boys. You could not possibly believe I am advocating for boys only and you know I wasn't doing that. I also stated very clearly in subsequent posts that I wanted and felt compassion for all victims of abuse regardless of gender. I have seen no such comment from those attacking me.

If I posted a thread asking when we are going to do something to end the horror of male suicide or male homelessness and did not once mention female suicide or female homelessness would you not be tempted to write a post asking why I am only concerned about male suicide? Such a question would be suggesting we show the same level of concern for both genders-rather than focus exclusively on either one.

It's those who respond to the abuse of one demographic with deep concern while ignoring or belittling the same suffering endured by another that astounds me.

If you argue we focus exclusively on women because women make up the majority of victims I would ask why the few articles or advertising campaigns there have been on suicide or workplace deaths are always gender neutral? They never refer to these issues as 'gendered" even though there are far bigger disparities between male and female victims than in DV. In fact family violence is the only societal issue which has more women affected than men and it is the only issue to be presented in a gender specific way.

Why? If this is the right approach why isn't it used with regard to all of the other issues I have referenced?

I've already referenced our acknowledgement of the brave men and women who sacrificed their lives fighting for Australia and how this is considered right and proper despite the enormous difference in the number of deaths of men and women in our military history. Nobody says, "hang on, 70 000 men gave their lives and a handful of women, maybe we should just focus on male victims?" Yet that is exactly what we have done with regard to domestic violence for decades now. Why?

Surely if we keep pushing the idea of showing respect to all umpires that includes everybody. It's the same with the latest "Respect Women" campaign. How about we teach our kids to respect people? I know many women and men who I do not respect for very good reasons. Why should we demand respect for a demographic based upon its immutable characteristics?

In fact respect is something we earn by being a truthful, trustworthy person. I think treating others in a courteous manner is a better aim. We should be polite to all we encounter. Nobody should be respected until they prove themselves worthy of respect.

I'm willing to deal.

If we stop calling out the abuse of female umpires, will you stop trying to tell people that men get a dodgy deal in the Family Court?

 

[Markfs]

The way they get abused is different but the end result is pretty similar, which is why the vast majority of male umpires have quit umpiring.

It's truly bizarre to try and make this only about 1 gender when clearly it's a much broader issue than that.

The report was about the women umpires because they are new and have come with the increase in female competition. You have run this line all day....Give me some new material please

 

[JB1975]

What the fu**?

You're not taking the man seriously, are you?

He's satire.

 

[Markfs]

What the fu**?

Domie just wants you to spit on his face... it's an old trick he uses

 

[The Royal Sampler]

In fact respect is something we earn by being a truthful, trustworthy person. I think treating others in a courteous manner is a better aim. We should be polite to all we encounter. Nobody should be respected until they prove themselves worthy of respect.

I disagree, on the contrary I think all humans, all life should be respected until it proves itself unworthy.

 

[domus]

Bang on maggie5. In any thread that involves discussion of an issue impacting women, old pal domie immediately jumps to the 'what about men' line. Boring, predictable, and a waste of time for all involved

But you never answer the question. We only ever see posts about issues impacting women. Not just on Big Footy but in our mainstream media or online it is the same.

I will never stop asking "what about men?" if people continue to speak and write about women only when the issue discussed affects both genders. That's the very definition of inclusivity.

I was watching Footy Classified recently and Caro was accusing Kennett of playing the old attack and blame the woman card because he called her out for her implying he is a racist. I laughed. This woman has made a career out of attacking men-both players and administrators but nobody ever accuses her of being a man hater or misandrist. It all flows in one direction.

Why is it boring to discuss male issues? Why is it a waste of time? When is the right time to bring up male victims of abuse be it umpires, husbands, brothers, or dads?

It's truly ironic. All of you do the exact thing you accuse me of doing. You focus on one gender. Unlike you, I continually stress my empathy and compassion for men and women. I've had posters here mock me for caring about males and dismissing entirely the suggestion that many men are suffering and doing badly in our society. Why?

You'll simply have to take my word for it but I have a very large circle of beloved female friends who I speak to and catch up with on a regular basis. They would laugh at some of the vicious comments thrown in my direction. I have no agenda as others continually tell me, other than compassion for all. If that's my biggest fault than I'll die a happy man.

 

[domus]

I disagree, on the contrary I think all humans, all life should be respected until it proves itself unworthy.

Respect has to be earned otherwise it is meaningless. But we should be courteous and treat everyone we encounter kindly.
Coaches earn the respect of their players by being honest, open and consistent in their messaging and treatment of players. The same applies to people from all walks of life.

 

[domus]

I'm willing to deal.

If we stop calling out the abuse of female umpires, will you stop trying to tell people that men get a dodgy deal in the Family Court?

Not as long as men get a dodgy deal in the family court. But thanks for the attempted compromise.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Respect has to be earned otherwise it is meaningless. But we should be courteous and treat everyone we encounter kindly.
Coaches earn the respect of their players by being honest, open and consistent in their messaging and treatment of players. The same applies to people from all walks of life.

Tomay-toh, tomato I think we’re essentially on the same page here anyway. I don’t even know why I bothered objecting to your last post, it was clear enough.

 

[JB1975]

But you never answer the question. We only ever see posts about issues impacting women. Not just on Big Footy but in our mainstream media or online it is the same.

I will never stop asking "what about men?" if people continue to speak and write about women only when the issue discussed affects both genders. That's the very definition of inclusivity.

I was watching Footy Classified recently and Caro was accusing Kennett of playing the old attack and blame the woman card because he called her out for her implying he is a racist. I laughed. This woman has made a career out of attacking men-both players and administrators but nobody ever accuses her of being a man hater or misandrist. It all flows in one direction.

Why is it boring to discuss male issues? Why is it a waste of time? When is the right time to bring up male victims of abuse be it umpires, husbands, brothers, or dads?

It's truly ironic. All of you do the exact thing you accuse me of doing. You focus on one gender. Unlike you, I continually stress my empathy and compassion for men and women. I've had posters here mock me for caring about males and dismissing entirely the suggestion that many men are suffering and doing badly in our society. Why?

You'll simply have to take my word for it but I have a very large circle of beloved female friends who I speak to and catch up with on a regular basis. They would laugh at some of the vicious comments thrown in my direction. I have no agenda as others continually tell me, other than compassion for all. If that's my biggest fault than I'll die a happy man.

Your embrace of 'compassion for all' is a thinly disguised effort to deny that there are serious issues for women.

I'm not sure I think you are compassionate at all. I suspect you might be a self-serving and incorrigible anti-feminist.

 

[JB1975]

Not as long as men get a dodgy deal in the family court. But thanks for the attempted compromise.

Men are the victims. Can't be any other way.

Gotcha.

 

[domus]

What the fu**?

Do you seriously not understand that statement? Wow.

 

[Markfs]

The thread was created for the purposes of discussing the shocking abuse of women in football-specifically female umpires.

The person who posted the thread also asked what we are going to do about this state of affairs. If I started a thread about the sexual abuse of boys and you posted a comment saying girls are sexually abused too, I would take that to mean can they share the attention being given to the boys. You could not possibly believe I am advocating for boys only and you know I wasn't doing that. I also stated very clearly in subsequent posts that I wanted and felt compassion for all victims of abuse regardless of gender. I have seen no such comment from those attacking me.

If I posted a thread asking when we are going to do something to end the horror of male suicide or male homelessness and did not once mention female suicide or female homelessness would you not be tempted to write a post asking why I am only concerned about male suicide? Such a question would be suggesting we show the same level of concern for both genders-rather than focus exclusively on either one.

It's those who respond to the abuse of one demographic with deep concern while ignoring or belittling the same suffering endured by another that astounds me.

If you argue we focus exclusively on women because women make up the majority of victims I would ask why the few articles or advertising campaigns there have been on suicide or workplace deaths are always gender neutral? They never refer to these issues as 'gendered" even though there are far bigger disparities between male and female victims than in DV. In fact family violence is the only societal issue which has more women affected than men and it is the only issue to be presented in a gender specific way.

Why? If this is the right approach why isn't it used with regard to all of the other issues I have referenced?

I've already referenced our acknowledgement of the brave men and women who sacrificed their lives fighting for Australia and how this is considered right and proper despite the enormous difference in the number of deaths of men and women in our military history. Nobody says, "hang on, 70 000 men gave their lives and a handful of women, maybe we should just focus on male victims?" Yet that is exactly what we have done with regard to domestic violence for decades now. Why?

Surely if we keep pushing the idea of showing respect to all umpires that includes everybody. It's the same with the latest "Respect Women" campaign. How about we teach our kids to respect people? I know many women and men who I do not respect for very good reasons. Why should we demand respect for a demographic based upon its immutable characteristics?

In fact respect is something we earn by being a truthful, trustworthy person. I think treating others in a courteous manner is a better aim. We should be polite to all we encounter. Nobody should be respected until they prove themselves worthy of respect.

Domie's epistle to the magpieites.....

"forget the words of the master and do not love thy neighbour. Reserve your love until you know that they can pay their taxes and fund your retirement"

 

[Good Horse]

A more accurate choice would be choosing between a severe bashing and being r*ped. Both horrific. But to pretend one is somehow far more heinous than the other is a pointless exercise.

jesus ****ing christ please for the love of god stop posting.

 

[Good Horse]

So a report is compiled to directly address why female umpires are leaving game and undercovers abhorrent behaviour from male colleagues and members of the public towards them YET this report should have also concluded male umpires get abuse too?

I mean it wasn’t what the investigation and report were addressing but it just should have been mentioned because you know “men have it bad too”. That we shouldn’t forget all the male suffering should have been the ultimate conclusion of the report, just to make sure we acknowledge it.

I mean why would a report into why female umpires are leaving in droves not just focus on the poor plight of their male colleagues? I just don’t get it?

I may have a brain injury.

i do have a brain injury and its making no more sense to me

 

[gouki88]

Do you seriously not understand that statement? Wow.

You seriously think people don't deserve respect unless they've "earnt" it?

I guess that kind of moronic take is perfectly in line with the other vomit you've posted in this thread.

 

[gouki88]

Your embrace of 'compassion for all' is a thinly disguised effort to deny that there are serious issues for women.

I'm not sure I think you are compassionate at all. I suspect you might be a self-serving and incorrigible anti-feminist.

Yeah, he's not compassionate one iota