Vulgarities and the media

[MetalRaven]

Second thing. Cindy Crosby.
NOT SEXIST. Has nothing to do with women, their ability to play, or their value in comparison to men.
Cindy Crosby is a taunt meant to emasculate Crosby. Specifically make him weaker by throwing him off his game by depriving him of his male identity. Men need to be the manliest of men or women wont kiss us. If you can't be manlier then him, simply make him look less manly. Its literally that cut and dry. 

I'm confused. You claim it's not sexist, but then you immediately make a very good argument for why it is sexist (without even realizing it apparently).

I see it more as a jealous attack by other men on Crosby's perceived male ego. Being less of a man doesn't make you less human. Or less of a hockey player. It means you have less male qualities, which is desired by male individuals to inflate male ego. The same way a female can get her ego inflated by highlighting her feminine qualities.

At the end of the day its a taunt. Its ineffective, juvenile almost by definition, and if it disappeared tomorrow no one would care. That doesn't mean the people shouting it are sexist pigs, or that they believe women to be inferior to men at anything other then being men. Its not some hidden example of how men perceive women, or how society sees women.

 

[MetalRaven]

Second thing. Cindy Crosby.
NOT SEXIST. Has nothing to do with women, their ability to play, or their value in comparison to men.
Cindy Crosby is a taunt meant to emasculate Crosby. Specifically make him weaker by throwing him off his game by depriving him of his male identity. Men need to be the manliest of men or women wont kiss us. If you can't be manlier then him, simply make him look less manly. Its literally that cut and dry. 

I'm confused. You claim it's not sexist, but then you immediately make a very good argument for why it is sexist (without even realizing it apparently).

Yeah. You can't equate "masculinity" with strength without de facto associating femininity with weakness. By saying that he's "weaker" if he's more like a woman is pretty cut and dried in it's pretty rote sexism.

if you mean the word emasculating then thats a Websters dictionary battle

e?mas?cu?late
ēˈmaskyəˌlāt/
verb
gerund or present participle: emasculating

  make (a person, idea, or piece of legislation) weaker or less effective.
    "our winner-take-all elections emasculate fringe parties"
    synonyms: weaken, enfeeble, debilitate, erode, undermine, cripple; More
    remove the sting from, pull the teeth out of;
    informalwater down
    "the opposition emasculated the committee's proposal"
     
-  deprive (a man) of his male role or identity.
        "he feels emasculated because he cannot control his sons' behavior"
      archaic
-    castrate (a man or male animal).

 

[Kin]

if you mean the word emasculating then thats a Websters dictionary battle

Sure. And I know enough about language and the history of language to know that words and their usage are shaped by our biases and preconceived notions. Lots of language is or has been by definition sexist or racist or homophobic. Something being "in the dictionary" doesn't absolve it from those considerations. Samuel Johnson, who's as important a person as there is in the history of English etymology, was a raging sexist and racist and a lot of the work he did persists in our modern definitions.

Look at what we think of as a relatively benign word like Hysterical. Hystera, the root, comes from the same place we get the medical term Hysterectomy or the removal of the uterus. Acting hysterically, meaning crazy rather than funny, was said to be something that only affected women and was a condition inherent to being a woman. The meaning of it has evolved over time but there's no denying the inherent sexism there.

By calling him Cindy or the Sedin brothers the Sedin "sisters" it's an unavoidable truth that you're implying that by being women they're weaker than they were if they were men. There's really no avoiding the sexism there.

 

[MetalRaven]

if you mean the word emasculating then thats a Websters dictionary battle

Sure. And I know enough about language and the history of language to know that words and their usage are shaped by our biases and preconceived notions. Lots of language is or has been by definition sexist or racist or homophobic. Something being "in the dictionary" doesn't absolve it from those considerations. Samuel Johnson, who's as important a person as there is in the history of English etymology, was a raging sexist and racist and a lot of the work he did persists in our modern definitions.

Look at what we think of as a relatively benign word like Hysterical. Hystera, the root, comes from the same place we get the medical term Hysterectomy or the removal of the uterus. Acting hysterically, meaning crazy rather than funny, was said to be something that only affected women and was a condition inherent to being a woman. The meaning of it has evolved over time but there's no denying the inherent sexism there.

By calling him Cindy or the Sedin brothers the Sedin "sisters" it's an unavoidable truth that you're implying that by being women they're weaker than they were if they were men. There's really no avoiding the sexism there.

Oh im well aware of sexism in the english language but that a pretty big fight im not getting into. You can weaken someones ego and confidence by lowering their view of themselves without it being sexist. If a woman walks up to another woman and says "Looks like you have a little stubble there" and points under her nose. She just accused another woman of have male qualities. Does it anyway affect men or say anything about men with mustaches being unattractive? No. But it very well could crush the other womans ego or confidence. If they were in a battle over a mate it could very well be the difference maker. Men do the same thing. There is a difference in society about how men are evaluated and women are evaluated. Thats discrimination but it is essential to our continued existence.

Attaching male qualities to a female isn't inherently sexist
Attaching female qualities to a male isn't either.

Now if they said Cindy Crosby plays like a girl...thats actually different. Thats sexist.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Now if they said Cindy Crosby plays like a girl...thats actually different. Thats sexist.

... how isn't that exactly what they're saying?

 

[Kin]

You can weaken someones ego and confidence by lowering their view of themselves without it being sexist.

Sure. You can do that, primarily, by not likening them to another gender insultingly. You can call them a mouse, a worm, a weakling, a shrimp, a nothing, a loser, ugly...there are literally thousands of words you can use to imply someone is lesser than you are or desired, including words specifically related to strength, without calling them a woman. Those words aren't sexist. Specifically referring to them as a woman to imply weakness is.

Now if they said Cindy Crosby plays like a girl...thats actually different. Thats sexist.

How you don't see that that is exactly what they're doing is, quite frankly, baffling to me.

 

[MetalRaven]

You can weaken someones ego and confidence by lowering their view of themselves without it being sexist.

Sure. You can do that, primarily, by not likening them to another gender insultingly. You can call them a mouse, a worm, a weakling, a shrimp, a nothing, a loser, ugly...there are literally thousands of words you can use to imply someone is lesser than you are or desired, including words specifically related to strength, without calling them a woman. Those words aren't sexist. Specifically referring to them as a woman to imply weakness is.

Now if they said Cindy Crosby plays like a girl...thats actually different. Thats sexist.

How you don't see that that is exactly what they're doing is, quite frankly, baffling to me.

Really?  "Cindy Crosby" used as an insult specifies absolutely nothing, other then he has predominately female qualities. Anything derived from that is derived from the observers own bias. Cindy Crosby says nothing about his ability to play hockey, his strength or any particular quality that specifies which weakness the taunter is attacking other then the players self image. The taunter is attacking the players ego and confidence not his ability to play, his strength ect...Hes being called Cindy because it sounds like Sidney. If his name was Justin Fieber and everyone called him Justin Beiber it would be doing the same thing and we wouldn't be having this discussion...which I love
Rattle the man by making him believe hes less of a man. Just like the women from my earlier example Rattle the woman by making her believe shes less of a woman.

Taunting someone by saying "you play like a girl" Does state very clearly your belief that girls are inferior to men at playing. You've attacked the entire gender by stating they are inferior.

 

[Kin]

Really?  "Cindy Crosby" used as an insult specifies absolutely nothing, other then he has predominately female qualities.

Right. It's a generalized statement that implies that having female qualities is a negative thing. Otherwise, why would you use it as an insult? If there's no implication there, no meaning to infer, then how could it possibly be rattle someone?

There's really no getting around it that "woman" or variations of it are used all the time by itself as a insult within that context. Look at the infamous video of Bryan Trottier and Kevin Stevens yelling at Brian Bellows.

I mean, I could just as easily prevaricate with you and say that saying someone "plays like a girl" doesn't inherently have a negative connotation. Women and Men play differently, right? So maybe it's just innocently saying that Crosby has a game that would be more suited to women's hockey? Why is that sexist but just calling him a woman isn't?

But I won't because I know better. If you're calling someone a woman and meaning it as an insult, it's sexist. There's really no two ways about it.

 

[herman]

Nik has done a great job elucidating why insulting someone by basis of gender/sex is sexism. If one were to replace another's name with a ethnic pun with the purpose of insulting that person through stereotypical insinuation, it would be racism. Any time you insult someone (implied or otherwise) for something they do not choose (race, gender, orientation, and to a degree belief), that is unacceptable discrimination.

 

[MetalRaven]

Of course I tip my hat to Nik he is a master debater. (Im juvenile I dont care hehe)
If Tonya Harding called Nancy Kerrigan Burt Reynolds is that also sexist? If a stadium chants it? Does attaching male qualities suddenly make her elevated? No, its still going to weaken her female ego. It also doesn't suddenly make Harding sexist. At least not in my view. As a male I don't suddenly feel attacked, I sport a nice mustache and I dont suddenly feel less attractive. Just to add a little here I have personally heard a woman heckle another woman during dragon boat calling her Super Mario. I dont think that person is filled with male-hatred nor do I think if she had the chance she would try to make men earn 75% of what a woman makes. In both of my above examples neither person even tried to make fun of the name specifically. When you add to the mix that Sidney turns to Cindy really easily or Corey Perry to Katy Perry isn't really a stretch I find it even harder to suddenly attach the sexist label to what is, in my opinion, just a lazy taunter. Turn brothers into sisters, its juvenile and lazy yes, but a hidden example of how men think women are less then us? I think that's a stretch. 

 

[Kin]

Just to add a little here I have personally heard a woman heckle another woman during dragon boat calling her Super Mario. I dont think that person is filled with male-hatred nor do I think if she had the chance she would try to make men earn 75% of what a woman makes.

Intent isn't the issue. Propagating the idea that weakness is an inherently feminine trait shouldn't be done, regardless of what someone thinks "deep down". It's just rank stupidity.

Think about the moron who threw a banana on the ice at Wayne Simmonds. Was he a member of the KKK? Probably not. He was probably doing it to "rattle him". He thought it was "funny" and, I'm guessing, easy. Does his intent matter? Can we call that out for being a stupid act of racism without a full picture on that guy's beliefs on race in today's society? I think so.

Most people who use the term "gyp" don't know it's a racial slur. Some who do know that, who explain that it's a reference to an old stereotype about Gypsies being thieves don't themselves know that the word "Gypsy" is a racial slur. The people are the Roma or Romany who were said by some to look "Egyptian" hence "Gypsy". So it's stupid to use it not because people still think that here about Romany people, because most people here don't know they exist, it's stupid because regardless of intent it spreads a stupid stereotype about a maligned people. Why defend it?

When you add to the mix that Sidney turns to Cindy really easily or Corey Perry to Katy Perry isn't really a stretch I find it even harder to suddenly attach the sexist label to what is, in my opinion, just a lazy taunter. Turn brothers into sisters, its juvenile and lazy yes, but a hidden example of how men think women are less then us? I think that's a stretch.

Just about every male name can "easily" turn into a female name. John-Jane, Joe-Joan, Michael-Michelle, Alex-Alexis. I could just as easily refer to the best player on the Senators as Erika Karlsson or before him Danielle Alfredsson. There's no justification there. That doesn't lend it a credibility. Nobody has problem with offensive language or stereotypes because they're really hard to think up.

It's "Haha, you're a girl" chanted by a stadium full of morons. This really isn't complicated.

 

[MetalRaven]

Just to add a little here I have personally heard a woman heckle another woman during dragon boat calling her Super Mario. I dont think that person is filled with male-hatred nor do I think if she had the chance she would try to make men earn 75% of what a woman makes.

Intent isn't the issue. Propagating the idea that weakness is an inherently feminine trait shouldn't be done, regardless of what someone thinks "deep down". It's just rank stupidity.

Think about the moron who threw a banana on the ice at Wayne Simmonds. Was he a member of the KKK? Probably not. He was probably doing it to "rattle him". He thought it was "funny" and, I'm guessing, easy. Does his intent matter? Can we call that out for being a stupid act of racism without a full picture on that guy's beliefs on race in today's society? I think so.

Most people who use the term "gyp" don't know it's a racial slur. Some who do know that, who explain that it's a reference to an old stereotype about Gypsies being thieves don't themselves know that the word "Gypsy" is a racial slur. The people are the Roma or Romany who were said by some to look "Egyptian" hence "Gypsy". So it's stupid to use it not because people still think that here about Romany people, because most people here don't know they exist, it's stupid because regardless of intent it spreads a stupid stereotype about a maligned people. Why defend it?

When you add to the mix that Sidney turns to Cindy really easily or Corey Perry to Katy Perry isn't really a stretch I find it even harder to suddenly attach the sexist label to what is, in my opinion, just a lazy taunter. Turn brothers into sisters, its juvenile and lazy yes, but a hidden example of how men think women are less then us? I think that's a stretch.

Just about every male name can "easily" turn into a female name. John-Jane, Joe-Joan, Michael-Michelle, Alex-Alexis. I could just as easily refer to the best player on the Senators as Erika Karlsson or before him Danielle Alfredsson. There's no justification there. That doesn't lend it a credibility. Nobody has problem with offensive language or stereotypes because they're really hard to think up.

It's "Haha, you're a girl" chanted by a stadium full of morons. This really isn't complicated.

Thats where we differ. I believe intent is very important and I believe as stated in my original argument that the taunter is not so much claiming that all women are weak but rather attempting to emasculate Crosby by robing him of his male identity. A female told she has masculine qualities will lose feminine identity and a male told he has female qualities will lose male identity. Its a male ego thing which isn't at all diminishing it as ego (both) has killed and created killers out of many. The taunters are attacking Crosbys male ego not women as a whole.

As for the bananas and gypsies at no point did I defend banana throwers at all. If anything my stance should point very much against it as I see very clearly its intent, which isn't potassium deficiency. I also was very much aware of the gypsies and the origin of gyp and other slurs such as getting jewed but thanks for the lesson. I love stories. Please don't take for one to be defending them.  I, of course, appreciate that you attempt to paint me as such, but its just a deflection, lets get back to my point, calling him Cindy Crosby is the only way to emasculate him without specifically attacking women, attaching anything to it makes it an attack because it attacks a certain characteristic of women. You are less of a man because you are a woman. You are less of a woman because you are a man.

Not all men believe women are weaker. Not all men believe women play inferior hockey. Their intent is to emasculate one individual not make broad statements such as women are weaker. I think that speaks more to the observers view on women then the taunters. Cindy Crosby says nothing bad about women, just the removal of his identity by changing his name and then his male identity by turning it female. Maybe because I experienced both early on ive never attached further sexist beliefs onto what ive always seen as emasculation or efeminisation (Its not a real word which if you want to start a petition or fight the dictionary to include it im on your side)

We did. I believe we called Alfredson Krusty? Just means we're more creative then other fans, for the most part. I would have went with Sidney Crotchy myself but what can you do the masses prefered Cindy.

This really is grade 3 type taunting at its best, and I never said they weren't morons Nik, just that they're not all sexist morons.
(My main point was to do a better job at explaining this then Bettman which in this case I think I've done, and considering we could attempt to encompass all discrimination and all sorts of side-quest sexist comments I think thats beyond my capabilities and its 4am again my hat off to you Nik I never get to discuss Male ego and perceived male value vs sexism anywhere else )

 

[Kin]

Thats where we differ. I believe intent is very important and I believe as stated in my original argument that the taunter is not so much claiming that all women are weak but rather attempting to emasculate Crosby by robing him of his male identity.

Except you're ignoring the very clear pattern of who these sorts of insults get applied to. Nobody called Scott Stevens a girl's name. Nobody called him Roberta Probert. These insults are almost universally applied to players who are seen to be lacking in strength or courage. It's not a random designation with no meaning and it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise. Again, look at the Stevens/Bellows clip. Bellows is "a woman" because he didn't get up fast enough from an injury or was faking an injury. Not just a random, pulled from the ether taunt with no meaning behind it.

Words used to associate men with women, and gay men, are often about weakness and a lack of courage. You can't just pretend that isn't true. You can't just guess at what someone's intent is there because it doesn't matter. The words themselves, the propagation of those stereotypes, they matter regardless of intent.

As for the bananas and gypsies at no point did I defend banana throwers at all. If anything my stance should point very much against it as I see very clearly its intent, which isn't potassium deficiency. I also was very much aware of the gypsies and the origin of gyp and other slurs such as getting jewed but thanks for the lesson. I love stories. Please don't take for one to be defending them.  I, of course, appreciate that you attempt to paint me as such...

You're free to get overly and transparently defensive if you like but you entirely missed the point. The point is you don't know what the banana thrower's intent was. You don't have a deep insight into how enlightened he is on racial politics. We don't know these things because the guy who did it never said. We don't know if he hates all black people or if he just hates Wayne Simmonds and wanted to hurt him however he could.

But again, the intent doesn't matter. It was someone trying to deny Simmonds' humanity and that's true regardless of those things. Much like you're defending the people trying to deny someone's "masculinity" by it's traditionally defined sense. I don't need to think someone is a dyed-in-the-wool racist for them to do something that's unmistakably racist. Just like I don't need to think that everyone who chants "Cindy Crosby" is a virulent misogynist to know that it's an inherently sexist thing to do. You're free to look deep into someone's soul to try and get to what they "really mean" but I'm pretty comfortable judging people on their actual actions.

Not all men believe women are weaker. Not all men believe women play inferior hockey. Their intent is to emasculate one individual not make broad statements such as women are weaker. I think that speaks more to the observers view on women then the taunters. Cindy Crosby says nothing bad about women, just the removal of his identity by changing his name and then his male identity by turning it female.

But both of those claims are demonstrably not true. It's not about "one individual". It's an incredibly common thing in our language that you yourself have pointed to the dictionary to show that to many, many people "Emasculation" means to make weaker. You can't use the dictionary definition, which is really just a reflection of common usage, to establish common usage and then pretend that the common usage doesn't exist. 

You're going to try and say you know the intent of everyone who does that? You know the "intent" of everyone who calls a man by a woman's name is not a function of their having been raised in a society where "emasculation" is listed in the dictionary as making someone weaker but, rather, they're making a convoluted and bogus effort to simply deny his male identity but that's got nothing to do with strength because...I'll be honest I barely understand what you're saying this is at this point. It's basically just reading as straight up hogwash. You're tying yourself in knots to deny the blatantly obvious.

We did. I believe we called Alfredson Krusty? Just means we're more creative then other fans, for the most part.

Yes, because his hair resembled a cartoon character. That is not "we did" in reference to using sexist terminology to denigrate another player. All taunts are not as bad as each other. "We" don't refer to him as Danielle. We don't refer to Karlsson as "Erika". That isn't creativity. There's nothing "creative" about yelling "You're human garbage" or telling someone their game reminds you of excrement or booing whenever someone touches the puck or any one of a thousand things that you can do and be an obnoxious fan without being sexist, racist or homophobic. It really is just the barest minimum of decency and relative enlightenment being sought here.

I would have went with Sidney Crotchy myself but what can you do the masses prefered Cindy.

Well, to start, what you can do is stigmatize that sort of thing by correctly pointing out that the people who do that are acting like sexist idiots.

 

[herman]

MetalRaven, does innocent intent mitigate or prevent the damage of an insult, regardless of methodology?

I could innocently, without malicious intent, lob a live grenade at someone. Harmful words are internalized like grenade shrapnel by most people. Even if they survive the initial explosion, there are ramifications down the line. Even if the recipient of the grenade happened to be impervious to concussive force and metal projectiles, a bystander could take splash damage, or someone else could see me innocently lobbing live grenades and believe that to be acceptable and amusing.

This is the concept at the core of what this thread was started about. Some people saw a video of someone 'humorously' lobbing a loaded phrase at female reporters and thought it was hilarious and decided to do it as well (and then get fired, etc.). Your example insult is perpetuating gender stereotypes that have no business in our society, even if your intent is 'pure'.

 

[Andy007]

Calling a boy a girl's name with the intention of it somehow demeaning or bringing said boy down a peg is the effing definition of sexism. This isn't very complicated.

 

[AvroArrow]

Calling a boy a girl's name with the intention of it somehow demeaning or bringing said boy down a peg is the effing definition of sexism. This isn't very complicated.

This.  I can't believe there's even a discussion.

 

[MetalRaven]

Calling a boy a girl's name with the intention of it somehow demeaning or bringing said boy down a peg is the effing definition of sexism. This isn't very complicated.

This.  I can't believe there's even a discussion.

Because it should be. I took two very unpopular positions and chose to defend them to the best of my ability. No one touched the "Should blatent misogyny be celebrated/newsworthy" but thats because we wanted to talk hockey in a hockey forum, no one should read anything into that. There was enough meat on the other bone to satisfy all.

I heard Gary Bettman try to defend it and immediately thought "This guy was a former lawyer? I could do a better job then that in 5 minutes." Not trolling but playing Devil's Advocate. This is not me backpedaling I did defend them as best as I could, I gave an honest effort and believe my counter points may be the only arguments one could make in this discussion.

I was also secretly hoping to engage in a bit of "Is male value inherently sexist" philosophical discussion.

(I also have a rule that I don't argue on the internet for more then 12 hours but since I started this I have to finish it up.)
(Nik I have company ill get to your stuff in a few)

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

 

[MetalRaven]

People feel passionate about it, and people should see that. Staying quiet about something fixes nothing. Sometimes it takes someone to take an unpopular stance to get people talking. I figured I could take this unpopular stance, give it my honest effort so that anyone sharing the unpopular stance couldn't accuse me of phoning it in. I tried reversing it, I tried the Bieber defense, the 'its just lazy' defense, the male-ego defense I honestly can't think of any other way to defend it and the jury has spoken. My client is guilt of being sexist.

In case you mean escalated feelings, I don't think so? I have no hard feelings towards Nik or anyone else and I don't think they have hard feelings against me, and I dont think they think im sexist. For the record I try not to taunt anyone for any reason and have never called Sidney Cindy other then honest transposition. Nik thinks im certifiably insane though. Honestly I only have fun like this here.

 

[Kin]

Nik thinks im certifiably insane though.

Not really. I have no problem with someone taking a Devil's Advocate position as a means of generating discussion. Just, you know, it's super disingenuous to only announce you're doing that after the fact when your first post was not you saying "You know, obviously this is sexist but if you'll allow me some leeway..." or something as opposed to "Cindy Crosby NOT SEXIST".

Because then it does just look like back pedaling.