06-23-2021, 10:55 AM
(06-23-2021, 10:10 AM)hollodero Wrote: And what generalization would that be? That he evaluated their level of play? If anything, that is his opinion of how women's sports compare to men's sports, and that can not be sexist if the word sexist is used in a negative way. It's just his perception, and it is one that can easily be shown as being basically true. Women lose against men in their respective sports every time, mainly due to athletizism.
And that is a legit reason for considering women's sports less attractive to watch. If any, you called people that aren't interested in watching women's sports "stupid". That, imho, is way more of an unjustified generalization than Wes ever made.
-- Not that I really think that is a big deal overall, but yeah I do question your using the word "sexist" here and think it's uncalled for.
He stated that high level middle school male athletes would be able to beat D1 women's champions. That's a generalization. Whether it is his opinion or not, it is prejudicial based on sex. That's the definition of sexism. If something meets the definition, it is 100% called for.
As to my "stupidly" comment, saying an opinion is stupid isn't calling an individual stupid. There is a difference there. Just like how I said Wes showed his "sexist streak" and referred to his comments as sexist rather than calling him a sexist. Those things are referring to statements or opinions that are sexist, not the individual themselves.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
