• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Missoula Rises is giving Griz Nation a chance to submit some questions

PlayerRep said:
i_the_sky said:
I find it hard to believe Seth Bodnar and Bobby Hauck would be wasting their time spending an afternoon with Lisa Davey! But I have been fooled before! Go GRIZ!

I think, and hope, that Bodnar and Hauck, and Haslam if there, will overpower and outshine the Daveys of the world. Davey is all political view and agenda, with no substance, and without facts, from what I can see. She has bitten off more than she can chew on this one. I plan to weigh in with the moderator ahead of time. They are barking up the wrong tree.

I will offer some friendly advice from a completely neutral 3rd party bystander. If this forum deal comes off as UM leaders and administrators discrediting and taking shots at Lisa Davey....... that isn't going to work out very well for you. Like it or not there is a large group of people out there that are of the opinion that the UM football program was out of control during Bobby's first stint.
 
At some point this nonsense has to end right?

I'm a little surprised Bodnar, Haslam, and Hauck agreed to this given the clear and unified message they already sent out since the Hauck hiring. What is the benefit of the forum to UM Athletics? What can UM say that hasn't already been said to ease the minds of a few concerned citizens? It's seems clear the only thing that will make these people happy is if Bobby Hauck is fired. No matter what is said or done now will change that mindset.
 
griz5700 said:
At some point this nonsense has to end right?

I'm a little surprised Bodnar, Haslam, and Hauck agreed to this given the clear and unified message they already sent out since the Hauck hiring. What is the benefit of the forum to UM Athletics? What can UM say that hasn't already been said to ease the minds of a few concerned citizens? It's seems clear the only thing that will make these people happy is if Bobby Hauck is fired. No matter what is said or done now will change that mindset.

I agree with your views, at least to some extent. I assume UM is doing this to play along with the Davey crowd, to try to mollify them a bit, and perhaps to put out some small fires. The Davey crowd doesn't have facts on their side in this one. What does UM athletics and football have to do with tackling feminism? I would say very little.
 
poorgriz said:
PlayerRep said:
i_the_sky said:
I find it hard to believe Seth Bodnar and Bobby Hauck would be wasting their time spending an afternoon with Lisa Davey! But I have been fooled before! Go GRIZ!

I think, and hope, that Bodnar and Hauck, and Haslam if there, will overpower and outshine the Daveys of the world. Davey is all political view and agenda, with no substance, and without facts, from what I can see. She has bitten off more than she can chew on this one. I plan to weigh in with the moderator ahead of time. They are barking up the wrong tree.

I will offer some friendly advice from a completely neutral 3rd party bystander. If this forum deal comes off as UM leaders and administrators discrediting and taking shots at Lisa Davey....... that isn't going to work out very well for you. Like it or not there is a large group of people out there that are of the opinion that the UM football program was out of control during Bobby's first stint.

Perhaps that perception still has some legs, but it isn't accurate. And, when the onion is pealed regarding the bad behavior, the house burglary, perhaps combined with the frosh punch or punches, were the only big things that amounted to much during Hauck's tenure. Sorry, Jimmy Wilson, was mainly a lot of bad press. Half of the bad behavior involved arrests where the charges were dropped or essentially went away. Hauck wasn't around for the taser incident, and that ended in minor disorderly conducts. Hauck has already admitted that they could have done a bit better with some of the transfers they admitted. UM does vet transfers better and more. The UM athletic code of conduct is now in place.

Hauck isn't going to be fired. Much of Griz Nation supports Hauck. The Bodnar-Hauck team is likely to be very good and positive for UM. The players will need to be extra careful, for their own good and the good of UM athletics.
 
griz5700 said:
At some point this nonsense has to end right?

I'm a little surprised Bodnar, Haslam, and Hauck agreed to this given the clear and unified message they already sent out since the Hauck hiring. What is the benefit of the forum to UM Athletics? What can UM say that hasn't already been said to ease the minds of a few concerned citizens? It's seems clear the only thing that will make these people happy is if Bobby Hauck is fired. No matter what is said or done now will change that mindset.

Just speculation, but I think you and several others have a misconception about the purpose of this forum. I doubt that Missoula Rises plans to continue trying to dispute Hauck's hiring. I certainly don't think the UM staff is planning to attack Ms. Davey in any way. I'm guessing the air will be briefly cleared over a couple of recent matters, but that's it. I think the purpose is to make amends and begin to work together in the future.

Like it or not; agree or disagree, there is an issue of sexual violence on college campuses throughout the country. For the UM AD men to stand up and acknowledge that being part of the solution is high on their priority list is good for the UM and good for the community. Holding onto all of the outrage over Hauck being blamed really doesn't help. I firmly believe he has already suggested that we let it go. And I think the purpose of this is to reiterate that. I think the people on the panel are trying to model an attitude of cooperation and a united front against sexual violence.
 
GGNez said:
griz5700 said:
At some point this nonsense has to end right?

I'm a little surprised Bodnar, Haslam, and Hauck agreed to this given the clear and unified message they already sent out since the Hauck hiring. What is the benefit of the forum to UM Athletics? What can UM say that hasn't already been said to ease the minds of a few concerned citizens? It's seems clear the only thing that will make these people happy is if Bobby Hauck is fired. No matter what is said or done now will change that mindset.

Just speculation, but I think you and several others have a misconception about the purpose of this forum. I doubt that Missoula Rises plans to continue trying to dispute Hauck's hiring. I certainly don't think the UM staff is planning to attack Ms. Davey in any way. I'm guessing the air will be briefly cleared over a couple of recent matters, but that's it. I think the purpose is to make amends and begin to work together in the future.

Like it or not; agree or disagree, there is an issue of sexual violence on college campuses throughout the country. For the UM AD men to stand up and acknowledge that being part of the solution is high on their priority list is good for the UM and good for the community. Holding onto all of the outrage over Hauck being blamed really doesn't help. I firmly believe he has already suggested that we let it go. And I think the purpose of this is to reiterate that. I think the people on the panel are trying to model an attitude of cooperation and a united front against sexual violence.

Then, if the panel/group wants to have a discussion, address a few issues, and move on in cooperation, why does some of the event press continue to tout Davey's petition and 800 signatures, and why doesn't she take down the stupid Krakauer cover? Where is there any indication that Davey is ready to move on?

I am still stuck on the title, and presumably premise, of the event. "Tackling the Culture of Sexism". Come here the new UM football coach, whom we don't think should have been hired (even though we have no facts to support our view).
 
Good questions, PR. And, again, I'm basing my prediction on pure speculation. I DO hope some attention is paid to the unfairness of putting blame on Bobby for things that had nothing to do with him. Look back to the Press Conference. Had it not been for AG's BS, Hauck could have defended his record, set some things straight, etc. But, AG made it so that we had a woman being ganged up on, threatened, attacked and put in real danger, IMO. The men had to step up and say, "Stop. That's Not OK." And they were right to do so.
I think AG, his apologists and those who still don't get the difference between what he did and putting out a petition containing falsehoods are making it harder for the UM to defend Hauck.
 
PlayerRep said:
griz5700 said:
At some point this nonsense has to end right?

I'm a little surprised Bodnar, Haslam, and Hauck agreed to this given the clear and unified message they already sent out since the Hauck hiring. What is the benefit of the forum to UM Athletics? What can UM say that hasn't already been said to ease the minds of a few concerned citizens? It's seems clear the only thing that will make these people happy is if Bobby Hauck is fired. No matter what is said or done now will change that mindset.

I agree with your views, at least to some extent. I assume UM is doing this to play along with the Davey crowd, to try to mollify them a bit, and perhaps to put out some small fires. The Davey crowd doesn't have facts on their side in this one. What does UM athletics and football have to do with tackling feminism? I would say very little.

That right there, why not do it. They have nothing to hide and can get out in front control the narrative and speak their own words instead of having outsiders put them in their mouths for them..

I like the move.
 
BadlandsGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
griz5700 said:
At some point this nonsense has to end right?

I'm a little surprised Bodnar, Haslam, and Hauck agreed to this given the clear and unified message they already sent out since the Hauck hiring. What is the benefit of the forum to UM Athletics? What can UM say that hasn't already been said to ease the minds of a few concerned citizens? It's seems clear the only thing that will make these people happy is if Bobby Hauck is fired. No matter what is said or done now will change that mindset.

I agree with your views, at least to some extent. I assume UM is doing this to play along with the Davey crowd, to try to mollify them a bit, and perhaps to put out some small fires. The Davey crowd doesn't have facts on their side in this one. What does UM athletics and football have to do with tackling feminism? I would say very little.

That right there, why not do it. They have nothing to hide and can get out in front control the narrative and speak their own words instead of having outsiders put them in their mouths for them..

I like the move.

But, again, they won't do that because they look like a bully if they do. I hope this turns out to be a positive, as the underlying society issues are important. This, though, is not an accurate depiction of how the societal issue really is.
 
...raise some awareness and move on...
..."ism" words point to human failures...
...discuss the "hauckism".."athleteism"...

... :die: ...
 
Some who have never cared for football, have no interest in attending a game and see Saturdays in the fall as a huge inconvenience due to heavy traffic, no parking anywhere near the UM, and likely many people drinking and driving have a hard time relating to "us". The whole football culture of discussing recruits, jersey numbers, helmet styles, coaching staff, seating, tailgating, on and on....
If you don't know or care what a first down is, you're certainly not going to be able to conceptualize the factors that go into deciding what to do on 4th; or whether or not and when to go for a 2-point conversion.

It's important to recognize that the complexities of sexual violence, sexual harassment, domestic abuse, emotional abuse, etc are beyond what many people can conceptualize with basic, layman's knowledge. It doesn't reflect on a person's intelligence that they don't know what they haven't learned. But, believing that you have nothing more to learn DOES.

If you heard someone say: "football is boring - just a bunch of dumb jocks fighting over a ball. why would anyone want to watch that?"

It is the equivalent of this: " sexual assault education is dumb. we all know not to rape. let's move on."

There is a deep, deep ocean of complexities within all of this stuff and it won't hurt anyone to begin understanding what has others so riled up.
 
GGNez said:
Look back to the Press Conference. Had it not been for AG's BS, Hauck could have defended his record, set some things straight, etc. But, AG made it so that we had a woman being ganged up on, threatened, attacked and put in real danger, IMO. The men had to step up and say, "Stop. That's Not OK." And they were right to do so.
That must have been quite a Press Conference. Helpless, attacked women, big, strong men coming to their rescues! Real danger! Stereotypes flying in all directions! Sorry I missed it. When was this humdinger?
 
PlayerRep said:
griz5700 said:
At some point this nonsense has to end right?

I'm a little surprised Bodnar, Haslam, and Hauck agreed to this given the clear and unified message they already sent out since the Hauck hiring. What is the benefit of the forum to UM Athletics? What can UM say that hasn't already been said to ease the minds of a few concerned citizens? It's seems clear the only thing that will make these people happy is if Bobby Hauck is fired. No matter what is said or done now will change that mindset.

I agree with your views, at least to some extent. I assume UM is doing this to play along with the Davey crowd, to try to mollify them a bit, and perhaps to put out some small fires. The Davey crowd doesn't have facts on their side in this one. What does UM athletics and football have to do with tackling feminism? I would say very little.

UM needs to bluntly present the facts. Enough of the soft talking points about creating "cultures of respect". You're right UM football has virtually nothing to do with tackling feminism, sexism, or cyberbullying. Ms. Davey and Missoula Rises are using UM to further their political agendas and careers at the expense of UM. Missoula Rises doesn't get front page coverage in the Missoulian without UM.

Bodnar and Haslam should show they are 110% behind Hauck. Haslam has some fires to put out and I expect him to own that and discuss it frankly.
 
AZDoc said:
BadlandsGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
griz5700 said:
At some point this nonsense has to end right?

I'm a little surprised Bodnar, Haslam, and Hauck agreed to this given the clear and unified message they already sent out since the Hauck hiring. What is the benefit of the forum to UM Athletics? What can UM say that hasn't already been said to ease the minds of a few concerned citizens? It's seems clear the only thing that will make these people happy is if Bobby Hauck is fired. No matter what is said or done now will change that mindset.

I agree with your views, at least to some extent. I assume UM is doing this to play along with the Davey crowd, to try to mollify them a bit, and perhaps to put out some small fires. The Davey crowd doesn't have facts on their side in this one. What does UM athletics and football have to do with tackling feminism? I would say very little.

That right there, why not do it. They have nothing to hide and can get out in front control the narrative and speak their own words instead of having outsiders put them in their mouths for them..

I like the move.

But, again, they won't do that because they look like a bully if they do. I hope this turns out to be a positive, as the underlying society issues are important. This, though, is not an accurate depiction of how the societal issue really is.

That's the game Ms. Davey and Missoula Rises play... Which is why I see little upside in UM attending. Both UM and Missoula Rises will answer questions in the most generic politically-correct manner possible. Nothing will be learned and views won't change. But the next day UM will have another frontpage headline involving Griz FB and sexual assault. That's a win for Missoula Rises and another PR loss for UM.
 
griz5700 said:
AZDoc said:
BadlandsGrizFan said:
PlayerRep said:
I agree with your views, at least to some extent. I assume UM is doing this to play along with the Davey crowd, to try to mollify them a bit, and perhaps to put out some small fires. The Davey crowd doesn't have facts on their side in this one. What does UM athletics and football have to do with tackling feminism? I would say very little.

That right there, why not do it. They have nothing to hide and can get out in front control the narrative and speak their own words instead of having outsiders put them in their mouths for them..

I like the move.

But, again, they won't do that because they look like a bully if they do. I hope this turns out to be a positive, as the underlying society issues are important. This, though, is not an accurate depiction of how the societal issue really is.

That's the game Ms. Davey and Missoula Rises play... Which is why I see little upside in UM attending. Both UM and Missoula Rises will answer questions in the most generic politically-correct manner possible. Nothing will be learned and views won't change. But the next day UM will have another frontpage headline involving Griz FB and sexual assault. That's a win for Missoula Rises and another PR loss for UM.

BINGO! They needed to do it because if not, that plays into their hands. Attending also plays into their hands. Lose, lose in my opinion. There are better ways to discuss/address the issue. It is, though, what it is.
 
I am with PR on this. I will be extremely disappointed if the U bows down to her. She did not cross the line, she long-jumped over it. Alpha's response let her play the victim and people still look at her that way. I am 100% in favor of her having an opinion and not wanting Bobby to be the head coach. That is her right. If she ever posted my face on a book like Krakauer's - the first person she would have heard from was my lawyer and receiving papers for a defamation (libel) lawsuit. I hope Bodner, Haslam, and Hauck have a civil discussion but also, in a polite way, use facts to contradict all the conjecture she has put in the public. IMO, if they stand up for the University, it in no way condones treating women in any way other than respectfully,
 
michaelsol said:
GGNez said:
Look back to the Press Conference. Had it not been for AG's BS, Hauck could have defended his record, set some things straight, etc. But, AG made it so that we had a woman being ganged up on, threatened, attacked and put in real danger, IMO. The men had to step up and say, "Stop. That's Not OK." And they were right to do so.
That must have been quite a Press Conference. Helpless, attacked women, big, strong men coming to their rescues! Real danger! Stereotypes flying in all directions! Sorry I missed it. When was this humdinger?

Grab your popcorn and get comfy, Mike.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9Wyis7ucF8[/youtube]
 
Of all of the things I’ve learned in the multitude of threads about Hauck/Davey and sexual assault, the most significant is this: we are speaking two entirely different languages. It’s as if one side is yelling in Greek, the other in Italian.

Disclaimer: I’m not on one side or the other. I’m discouraged by the extremes on both and have friends and allies on both. I recognize that many people speak both languages.But, the analogy I used before is this: if someone doesn’t even know or care what a first down is, you can’t expect them to help decide what to do on 4th. Similarly, if someone doesn’t know the difference between sexism and sexuality; thinks that “toxic masculinity” suggests that masculinity is bad or that “feminism” is about hating men, it’s no wonder people are pissed.

Men: if you want your daughter to be able to choose whether or not to be a stay-at-home mom or get her PhD in rocket science, you’re a feminist. If you would NOT stand for someone raping your sister, then the police blaming her because she was out at night and had been drinking, you’re a feminist. If your think your daughter has just as much right and reason to play on a rugby team as your son, you’re a feminist (PR). If your wife is a school teacher and you expect her to get paid the same salary as her male counterparts who have been on the job as long as her, you’re a feminist. If you believe that BOTH men and women are entitled to be treated with respect in the workplace, you are a feminist. If you think your wife, daughter, sister and mother deserve to be able to drive, vote, wear jeans, enjoy sex (even if you don’t want to think about that one), you’re a feminist.

Why is that “feminism” instead of “equality?” Because it’s only been very recently that any of those opportunities were afforded to women. It’s been an ongoing process.

We didn’t get to vote or drive. We didn’t get to complain if our husbands beat and raped us; that was their right and nobody else’s business. We certainly couldn’t divorce him. We still don’t get paid the same for the same work in many cases. There are still people who post things like Alpha does and, it’s not funny to those who have been in abusive relationships, have been undermined and controlled or who spend their work days helping women and children escape from an abuser, knowing that right after they leave is the point where he is most likely to kill her. Think of Jimmy Wilson’s aunt, for example. But her abuser was a gang member. They come in all professions, socio-economic levels and communities. They might be your neighbor and you’d never know. They talk about raping other posters wives like Alpha. They go on late night rants about women like Alpha. They know how to be courteous and fun at a tailgate party like Alpha. I don’t mean to pick on that particular person, but he’s certainly put the examples out there publicly for years.

So, when the “other side” seems overly pissed off and can’t take a joke, it’s because there are real issues that still need to be resolved and there are people who deny any problems exist. If the pro-Hauck, anti-Davey side seems overly pissed it’s because good men are suddenly walking on eggshells, unsure of why their intentions and morality appear to be under fire.

As for toxic masculinity (simplified explanation): It includes the pressure and requirement by society to “man up” – don’t be emotional, don’t grieve when someone dies or you divorce. You’re a man. Man up. Be tough. If your buddy is feeding shot after shot of vodka to a girl at the bar while he takes shots of water so that he can take her home and have his way with her, you go along with it! That’s what men do. They get laid. If their buddy makes decisions based on his girlfriend or wife’s feelings and needs, he’s “pussy whipped.” It’s not cool to just be respectful to women. Men stick together. They do man stuff. My work is mostly geared toward child sexual abuse and “toxic masculinity” has made it so that male victims speak up FAR less than females. Men aren’t allowed to be victims. SO, most of you are very masculine which is a good, natural thing. Hopefully, you weren’t a victim of toxic masculinity as boys, because it’s not good for your mental health, relationships and well-being, nor is it good for society. Toxic masculinity made it so many guys left eGriz rather than standing up to Alpha and people who post like him. You’re supposed to let men degrade women if they want to. Otherwise, you're a pussy. That's toxic masculinity.

Currently, 1 in 4 undergrad college students will experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation. We can all agree that’s not acceptable. Sex = good. But women should be able to choose whether or not they engage in it. This is the next level of equality that we would all like women to share, right? While we’re at it, let’s let women have all the sex they want and not shame them for it; same as men.

SO, that’s a big part of what women and the men who support them are fighting for.
THE CURRENT PROBLEM: People on the fringes, taking things too far and over reacting.

IE: A petition filled with misleading information and lies, blaming the wrong person for a cultural problem. AND, men like AG1, who take away the voices of all of the good men and Hauck supporters by being the epitome of a sexist ass. And the two can’t be considered equal because AG1 put a woman’s safety at risk. A comparison: last week, a high school student in Darby posted a threat on social media stating that he was going to shoot up the school, essentially. I’m guessing the kid’s been bullied. I bet there are people who treated him VERY unfairly. But, he took it to a level that negates all of that. He’s the perpetrator now and protecting everyone from him is the main concern. That’s what Alpha did with Davey.

Those who signed the anti-Hauck petition and others with similar mindsets need to meet people where they are at, in terms of understanding the real issues.

Just as I can’t bring my Aunt Suzy (who “only understands touchdowns”) to a Grizzly Football game and call her an idiot because she isn’t pissed that the ref misses 3 holding calls in a row, it’s unfair for those trying to implement change in sex assault matters to get pissed at an 80 year old man for telling her she has a nice body. They need to look at intent, educate when appropriate and stop being so abrasive.

The anti-Hauck petition and response by AG is just the lightening rod in this discussion. It’s not just a matter of “them” accepting that Hauck is the coach. It’s not just a matter of “you” not raping and harassing women.

Bodnar, Hauck and Haslam are smart men who respect women, like most of you. Having a Q & A with a group about what they can do to be part of the solution is a good thing. If the other group responds like aggressive, stubborn a-holes, that will be on them. But, the gentlemen are doing a good thing by participating in this. What does all of this have to do with football? The Griz players are local heroes. Just as they are expected to shake hands, sign autographs and engage in polite conversation with fans in public, they should be at the forefront of understanding and leading the charge in how to have mutually respectful relationships with their female peers. It's really great that they have a mentor like Hauck in that regard.
 
GGNez said:
Of all of the things I’ve learned in the multitude of threads about Hauck/Davey and sexual assault, the most significant is this: we are speaking two entirely different languages. It’s as if one side is yelling in Greek, the other in Italian.

Disclaimer: I’m not on one side or the other. I’m discouraged by the extremes on both and have friends and allies on both. I recognize that many people speak both languages.But, the analogy I used before is this: if someone doesn’t even know or care what a first down is, you can’t expect them to help decide what to do on 4th. Similarly, if someone doesn’t know the difference between sexism and sexuality; thinks that “toxic masculinity” suggests that masculinity is bad or that “feminism” is about hating men, it’s no wonder people are pissed.

Men: if you want your daughter to be able to choose whether or not to be a stay-at-home mom or get her PhD in rocket science, you’re a feminist. If you would NOT stand for someone raping your sister, then the police blaming her because she was out at night and had been drinking, you’re a feminist. If your think your daughter has just as much right and reason to play on a rugby team as your son, you’re a feminist (PR). If your wife is a school teacher and you expect her to get paid the same salary as her male counterparts who have been on the job as long as her, you’re a feminist. If you believe that BOTH men and women are entitled to be treated with respect in the workplace, you are a feminist. If you think your wife, daughter, sister and mother deserve to be able to drive, vote, wear jeans, enjoy sex (even if you don’t want to think about that one), you’re a feminist.

Why is that “feminism” instead of “equality?” Because it’s only been very recently that any of those opportunities were afforded to women. It’s been an ongoing process.

We didn’t get to vote or drive. We didn’t get to complain if our husbands beat and raped us; that was their right and nobody else’s business. We certainly couldn’t divorce him. We still don’t get paid the same for the same work in many cases. There are still people who post things like Alpha does and, it’s not funny to those who have been in abusive relationships, have been undermined and controlled or who spend their work days helping women and children escape from an abuser, knowing that right after they leave is the point where he is most likely to kill her. Think of Jimmy Wilson’s aunt, for example. But her abuser was a gang member. They come in all professions, socio-economic levels and communities. They might be your neighbor and you’d never know. They talk about raping other posters wives like Alpha. They go on late night rants about women like Alpha. They know how to be courteous and fun at a tailgate party like Alpha. I don’t mean to pick on that particular person, but he’s certainly put the examples out there publicly for years.

So, when the “other side” seems overly pissed off and can’t take a joke, it’s because there are real issues that still need to be resolved and there are people who deny any problems exist. If the pro-Hauck, anti-Davey side seems overly pissed it’s because good men are suddenly walking on eggshells, unsure of why their intentions and morality appear to be under fire.

As for toxic masculinity (simplified explanation): It includes the pressure and requirement by society to “man up” – don’t be emotional, don’t grieve when someone dies or you divorce. You’re a man. Man up. Be tough. If your buddy is feeding shot after shot of vodka to a girl at the bar while he takes shots of water so that he can take her home and have his way with her, you go along with it! That’s what men do. They get laid. If their buddy makes decisions based on his girlfriend or wife’s feelings and needs, he’s “pussy whipped.” It’s not cool to just be respectful to women. Men stick together. They do man stuff. My work is mostly geared toward child sexual abuse and “toxic masculinity” has made it so that male victims speak up FAR less than females. Men aren’t allowed to be victims. SO, most of you are very masculine which is a good, natural thing. Hopefully, you weren’t a victim of toxic masculinity as boys, because it’s not good for your mental health, relationships and well-being, nor is it good for society. Toxic masculinity made it so many guys left eGriz rather than standing up to Alpha and people who post like him. You’re supposed to let men degrade women if they want to. Otherwise, you're a pussy. That's toxic masculinity.

Currently, 1 in 4 undergrad college students will experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation. We can all agree that’s not acceptable. Sex = good. But women should be able to choose whether or not they engage in it. This is the next level of equality that we would all like women to share, right? While we’re at it, let’s let women have all the sex they want and not shame them for it; same as men.

SO, that’s a big part of what women and the men who support them are fighting for.
THE CURRENT PROBLEM: People on the fringes, taking things too far and over reacting.

IE: A petition filled with misleading information and lies, blaming the wrong person for a cultural problem. AND, men like AG1, who take away the voices of all of the good men and Hauck supporters by being the epitome of a sexist ass. And the two can’t be considered equal because AG1 put a woman’s safety at risk. A comparison: last week, a high school student in Darby posted a threat on social media stating that he was going to shoot up the school, essentially. I’m guessing the kid’s been bullied. I bet there are people who treated him VERY unfairly. But, he took it to a level that negates all of that. He’s the perpetrator now and protecting everyone from him is the main concern. That’s what Alpha did with Davey.

Those who signed the anti-Hauck petition and others with similar mindsets need to meet people where they are at, in terms of understanding the real issues.

Just as I can’t bring my Aunt Suzy (who “only understands touchdowns”) to a Grizzly Football game and call her an idiot because she isn’t pissed that the ref misses 3 holding calls in a row, it’s unfair for those trying to implement change in sex assault matters to get pissed at an 80 year old man for telling her she has a nice body. They need to look at intent, educate when appropriate and stop being so abrasive.

The anti-Hauck petition and response by AG is just the lightening rod in this discussion. It’s not just a matter of “them” accepting that Hauck is the coach. It’s not just a matter of “you” not raping and harassing women.

Bodnar, Hauck and Haslam are smart men who respect women, like most of you. Having a Q & A with a group about what they can do to be part of the solution is a good thing. If the other group responds like aggressive, stubborn a-holes, that will be on them. But, the gentlemen are doing a good thing by participating in this. What does all of this have to do with football? The Griz players are local heroes. Just as they are expected to shake hands, sign autographs and engage in polite conversation with fans in public, they should be at the forefront of understanding and leading the charge in how to have mutually respectful relationships with their female peers. It's really great that they have a mentor like Hauck in that regard.

GG, I genuinely appreciate your attempts at educating us about the real meaning of "feminism" and "toxic masculinity," and I agree with you that one of the biggest issues in this discussion is a fundamental disagreement about what those terms mean. But to most people, perception is reality.

"Feminism" might trace its origins back to suffrage and equal rights measures, but in most peoples' perception feminism has devolved into something much more sinister. To many people, feminism isn't about equality any more; it's about elevating women's rights above everyone else's rights and at everyone else's expense (whenever possible), while also shaming anyone who dares to interfere or disagree with their agenda. THAT is the general perception that feminists must overcome to be taken seriously - not the one that says women should be respected and treated equally.

Similarly, even though "toxic masculinity" might be an appropriate label for sleazeballs and misogynists, the term has taken on a connotation that includes everyone who doesn't agree with the feminist ideal. Do I agree with equal rights and opportunities for women? Absolutely, but don't label me a feminist. Do I agree with some feminists' goal of attacking and dismantling the nuclear family? Absolutely not, but don't label me a toxic man.
 
I understand, Ringneck. And, similar to your point, one could parse through all of these threads and "prove" that Grizzly Football fans are clueless and apathetic about sexual abuse/assault, that they think women are inferior and belong in the kitchen and that if they speak to women at work, they are likely to lose their homes in a lawsuit.

The extremes on both sides have become the vocal majority. It's Davey vs Goliath. (Just kidding, I thought that was punny)

But, Alpha v Davey is the epitome of what is wrong with the community on this issue. You see "them" as you described above, many of "them" see "us" as Alpha and others like him. Most on either side would not elect either of them as a representative.
 
Back
Top