Is Chris Gayle some sort of perverted misogynist or can everyone just settle down?

[Black_Warrior]

Nobody has suggested this, .

It has been suggested on a number of occasions by more than 1 person.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Quote it.

 

[Black_Warrior]

I have never said any of the bolded things. You're failing to comprehend my point, which is remarkably simple -- you cannot mark Mel McLaughlin's reaction to Chris Gayle's comments like an exam, there's no right or wrong way to react. By telling her that her reaction was wrong (which you did when you said she should have laughed, rather than been offended/embarrassed/humiliated etc.), you're completely denying her experience. If she found it traumatic, who are any of us to tell her that she shouldn't have?

There is a huge difference between saying "I do not think this is ***ual harassment" and "I do not think this is ***ual harassment, therefore Mel McLaughlin should have laughed instead of being offended". One is your opinion. The second is utilising your opinion to police someone else's reaction. The latter is not okay.

If you genuinely cannot distinguish between the two, I think it's time you close the tab.

But that is what this thread is all about. 'I believe this is ***ual harrassment, therefore McLaughlin is justified in her response.' Everyone who is posting here is doing just that.

 

[Black_Warrior]

Quote it.

You've read this thread.

 

[Dan]

Just curious.

I think you're right. But you seem to make it bigger and bigger. If we get this matter out of this incident, does it always apply? What I mean: Some people are easily offended. Some people experience unmcomfortability (for real), whereas others wouldn't. It's a simple fact that the impact of any sort of communication is dependent on the receiver. That raises the question whether there is some limit where we can conclude that the receiver is oversensitive.

I think there is (not saying that was the case in this CHG incident).

Do you disagree with this?

That's not quite what I'm getting at, but my solution to this is simple: don't be a dick.

I mean, there have been times where I've unintentionally offended people and not quite understood why they were offended. My response wasn't to argue that, because I couldn't understand it, they shouldn't be offended and they're oversensitive. My response was to go "****, sorry, I'll try not to do that again", and know not to do the offensive thing around them again.

There's literally nothing gained by arguing that I never actually offended them and it was all their fault because oversensitivity. That's just plain being a dick.

 

[GIMH]

So here's a question.

At what point did Gayle cross the line?

As soon as he said he batted well because he wanted an interview with her?
When he said something about her eyes?
When he asked her for a drink?
Or was it when he said 'don't blush baby'?

Interested to hear if people think the first bit in itself was straight away a problem, or only when he continued....

Apologies if it's already been discussed and I missed it in amongst the ****

 

[Ikki]

It's an interesting one though because of the response they've made to it. They released a statement absolutely panning Gayle and backing McLaughlin. If they start losing viewership, should they interpret that as people deciding not to watch because of the ***ism, or people deciding not to watch because they believe Ten's response to it was heavy-handed? I actually think I'd interpret it as the latter.

I don't know, not sure how they figure it out to be honest. I don't watch TV much so I'm not even sure how Ten have handled it on the whole. I do agree with you that I think there is starting to be a backlash to perceived overly politically correct stances in the mainstream.

Yeah, "the views of other people aren't important unless I say they are".

And therein lies the problem.

My point is much to do with Stapel's question.

We can have oversensitised reactions and I think we can also be conditioned to it.

You look at the recent hubbub with the college students in America and it's clear as day. If you haven't taken a look at it, I suggest you do because it shows where the endgame is for this kind of regressive nonsense.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

But that is what this thread is all about. 'I believe this is ***ual harrassment, therefore McLaughlin is justified in her response.' Everyone who is posting here is doing just that.

No, I believe it's ***ual harassment because of her response.

 

[Prince EWS]

The first two definitely registered on the cringometer but only at #3 did he cross into really being a dick, IMO, because it required her to actually engage it and respond.

 

[91Jmay]

So here's a question.

At what point did Gayle cross the line?

As soon as he said he batted well because he wanted an interview with her?
When he said something about her eyes?
When he asked her for a drink?
Or was it when he said 'don't blush baby'?

Interested to hear if people think the first bit in itself was straight away a problem, or only when he continued....

Apologies if it's already been discussed and I missed it in amongst the ****

I'd imagine one of the earlier instances when he did this to women interviewing him. He clearly doesn't respect women as interviewers and just treats them as *** objects.

 

[Dan]

But that is what this thread is all about. 'I believe this is ***ual harrassment, therefore McLaughlin is justified in her response.' Everyone who is posting here is doing just that.

No they aren't.

McLaughlin's response doesn't need to be justified. That's the entire ****ing point.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

So here's a question.

At what point did Gayle cross the line?

As soon as he said he batted well because he wanted an interview with her?
When he said something about her eyes?
When he asked her for a drink?
Or was it when he said 'don't blush baby'?

Interested to hear if people think the first bit in itself was straight away a problem, or only when he continued....

Apologies if it's already been discussed and I missed it in amongst the ****

I guess when it made her uncomfortable, I wouldn't know the exact comment.

 

[GIMH]

I'd imagine one of the earlier instances when he did this to women interviewing him. He clearly doesn't respect women as interviewers and just treats them as *** objects.

Well yes but clearly I meant in this incident

 

[Dan]

You look at the recent hubbub with the college students in America and it's clear as day. If you haven't taken a look at it, I suggest you do because it shows where the endgame is for this kind of regressive nonsense.

Huuuuuuuuge difference between "I'm offended, you shouldn't be a dick" and "I'm offended, you're not allowed to say that, you should actively be prevented from saying this."

Nobody has suggested locking Gayle up or deporting him, or denying him free speech rights as a result of this. Lots are saying he's a dick and that he shouldn't be one in the future.

Ironically, your 'deny the experiences of people because I've decided they're oversensitive' thing is much more akin to the ridiculously excessive US college stuff than anything the rest of us have been saying, insofar as you and the students alike want one side of the discussion silenced.

 

[cnerd123]

The chucking thread, the hb/jedibrah feud, and now this. And we even had Stokes' innings.

2016 is off to an amazing start.

 

[RossTaylorsBox]

Blocky's ban ends this week as well.

 

[cnerd123]

That's not quite what I'm getting at, but my solution to this is simple: don't be a dick.

I mean, there have been times where I've unintentionally offended people and not quite understood why they were offended. My response wasn't to argue that, because I couldn't understand it, they shouldn't be offended and they're oversensitive. My response was to go "****, sorry, I'll try not to do that again", and know not to do the offensive thing around them again.

There's literally nothing gained by arguing that I never actually offended them and it was all their fault because oversensitivity. That's just plain being a dick.

Sometimes people just need to be told to harden up tho #WatsonThoughts

 

[Stapel]

That's not quite what I'm getting at, but my solution to this is simple: don't be a dick.

I mean, there have been times where I've unintentionally offended people and not quite understood why they were offended. My response wasn't to argue that, because I couldn't understand it, they shouldn't be offended and they're oversensitive. My response was to go "****, sorry, I'll try not to do that again", and know not to do the offensive thing around them again.

There's literally nothing gained by arguing that I never actually offended them and it was all their fault because oversensitivity. That's just plain being a dick.

Thanks for the reply.

I can think of examples were it probably does make sense to try to explain people are being oversensitive. Though it is debatable doing so is wise on a specific occasion, I'd certainly think it's not per se 'just being a dick'. Earlier in this thread I said I work as a science teacher. Apart from teaching stuff about forces or molecules, part of my job is teaching kids to be able to stand up in this world. In various waus obviously.

Without giving examples, as this thread is already being adrift, I think you can imagine there are cases where people are not only being oversensitive, but that it also makes sense to address it.

 

[Stapel]

cringometer

Can you advise me where to procure such a device? Couldn't be arsed about the amount of money involved. Just needs to be good!

 

[GIMH]

I can see what Dan is saying, but I certainly don't always think that because someone says they are offended means you should change your behaviour.

Extreme example - I've known people to be offended by pro-gay sentiments.

Though I agree with the 'don't be a dick' sentiment, the same can often work to the other party. If my religion offends you, should I not ever mention it when you're around? If you find my favourite singers offensive, should I never mention them because you are upset by the mention of them? Life is full of give and take. You have the right to be offended but it doesn't mean you always have the right to not be.

Really should have chosen a word other than right. Oh well.

Btw, I hate myself for posting this as I'm now part of the problem. But it's the second day back and I'm procrastinating.