OT-Peyton Manning...might NOT be a good dude.
I had heard rumors about this incident before (including on this board) but never anything in a legitimate news outlet until I saw this article in the NY Daily News this morning.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/king-peyton-manning-squeaky-cl…
Obviosuly both sides have their own version of events but this is not a good look for Peyton or the Manning family and some of it is pretty disturbing.
I've never been a big fan of Manning because I think he's a phony who smiles for the camera and is probably not the great guy everyone makes him out to be in his off-camera life but this is worse than I thought.
February 14th, 2016 at 6:46 PM ^
I suppose you could argue that the school is somewhat to blame if you can show that this was common behavior and they were criminal enough to permit it, but you have shown no such thing. The ONLY person to blame for ciminal behavior is the criminal. Manning is the ONLY one responsible for his criminal behaior, and each adminsitrator is the ONLY one to blame for his or her criminal behavior. I find your concept of collective guilt unsupported and probably unsupportable.
February 15th, 2016 at 7:39 PM ^
February 13th, 2016 at 12:59 PM ^
It also doesn't mean that we should blame the victim for a male not being able to control himself or give an excuse to not hold him accountable.
Is it smart for a female to walk down a poorly lit street at 2 in the morning? Absolutely not. Is it still okay if she is mugged and or raped? Absolutely not. It is still the mugger/rapists responsibility to control his or her actions. And it is on the powers that be and society to hold that person accountable.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:16 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 13th, 2016 at 1:21 PM ^
Why? I'm sure UM has female athletic trainers too.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:26 PM ^
And at some point, it has probably caused or will cause a problem.
February 13th, 2016 at 3:36 PM ^
yes, let's significantly limit the training opportunities for all female trainers just so one or two rapey men don't cause a problem.
you think your pragmatism is masking your misogyny, but it's not. your argument is equivalent to, "don't wear tight pants in public, it might attract impulsive men who can't control themselves" when in reality we should all be making it clear to men that there is no excuse for this kind of behavior.
February 13th, 2016 at 3:44 PM ^
There isn't an excuse. That doesn't mean people should continue to be put in bad situations. I have named several others in this thread.
February 14th, 2016 at 2:51 PM ^
What about female grad assistants, ball girls, & cheerleaders? In fact, given how players jump up onto the walls and could easily get to the first few rows, those should probably be male only to make sure there can be no intersex interaction, Jackson. Whose idea was it to allow women in a football stadium anyway? I blame the institutions.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:22 PM ^
Your stance still excuses his behavior to an extent and the idea that "boys will be boys". It's ignoring the reason why it's not a safe environment for females and what could be done to make it so.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:29 PM ^
My stance suggests that there are multiple ways to address the issue.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:45 PM ^
Your stance does nothing to address the issue and work for a safer environment. It's essentially "it is what it is"
February 13th, 2016 at 1:49 PM ^
I appreciate your ability to have an intelligent conversation about this rather than just calling names.
However, you're projecting what my stance is. You're right that I did not put forth a memorandum about how to address this issue. I didn't know that was a requirement. That doesn't mean that I wouldn't suggest continuing to try to educate young men on ohw to behave.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:58 PM ^
Your suggestion - to not allow women in these apparently male only spaces - is akin to segregating races in order for there to be less incidents of racism. Not sufficient. Not practical. Not just.
February 13th, 2016 at 2:10 PM ^
That's not an accurate representation of my stance. I hesitate to get into discussions of "racism" because nobody is going to come out of it looking any good. Here's the only thing I will say going down this avenue:
It would not be a good idea to toss a Jewish person in the middle of a neo-Nazi convention. It would also not be a good idea to toss a bikini-clad female into the middle of a group of Islamic Fundamentalists. Those people are prone to certain reactions around certain people. You can educate neo-Nazis and Islamic Fundamentalists, but that doesn't mean their behaviors will change. Those are still actions that should be avoided, though, and I think we can all agree.
Like I said, that's all I'm going to say about this being similar to a "race" issue.
February 13th, 2016 at 2:14 PM ^
We also wouldn't, hopefully, allow the neo-Nazis to go unpunished. By making "non-Jewish" areas, you are limiting Jewish rights and empowering the oppressors. By not allowing women in the lockerroom, you are limiting female rights and empowering sexism. I understand your intent, but it still doesn't solve anything. It tells the boys it's okay to behave however you want in the lockerroom. Don't think that doesn't have long term effects on how they will perceive women in other venues.
February 13th, 2016 at 2:18 PM ^
Yup. Punish the neo-Nazis. We agree.
February 15th, 2016 at 7:48 PM ^
February 14th, 2016 at 6:51 PM ^
So you are saying that male athletes are the equivelent of neo-Nazis and Islamic Fundamentalists?
I'm sure they'll thank you for that analogy!
Stop drinking and go to bed.
February 15th, 2016 at 7:44 PM ^
February 13th, 2016 at 1:26 PM ^
Why? If the program felt she was the most qualified and talented person for the position, they shouldn't give her the job just because she's a female? A woman should be able to do her job in the presence of men without being assaulted.
Maybe the program shouldn't allow men in its locker room that can't control themselves around women.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:29 PM ^
"Should" is a word being thrown around rather loosely around here. There are a lot of things we "should" be able to do, but societal norms, other people's behaviors, etc. prevent us from doing so. I should be able to leave my house door unlocked, I should be able to leave my wallet on my front porch, I should be able to travel on an airliner without being frisked/searched/scanned, etc.
But I can't. Why not? Because other people sometimes do things they shouldn't.
February 13th, 2016 at 10:26 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 13th, 2016 at 1:20 PM ^
The last remaining Cro-magnon, everybody!
February 13th, 2016 at 12:28 PM ^
I know a lot of people who would be felons, on the sex offender list, etc. for doing things in college if they only got caughtThat doesn't make Manning any less shitty. It means you knew a lot of degenerates in college.
Let male trainers/doctors take care of male athletes in the locker room/training room. Otherwise, you're putting the women, the program, and the university at risk of being tarnished by the actions of 18- to 23-year-old, hormonally charged boysOr the program could take non-Neanderthal measures to ensure crap like this doesn't happen, like taking allegations of harassment seriously and creating an environment where that shit is not okay. Comparing this to walking into a very violent neighborhood waving around money tells me that you're thinking about this the wrong way.
February 13th, 2016 at 12:34 PM ^
So...peeing in public makes someone a degenerate? We could take a poll on here and see how many people would admit to peeing in public, and we'll see how that goes. That can put you on a sex offenders list. Get drunk, go pee in the alley, a police car pulls into the alley, and you could be toast.
Sure, you can create an environment where that stuff's not okay. I didn't see anyone in the NFL telling Ray Rice "Hey, bud, it's okay if you want to punch your fiancee in the face." It still happened.
The point is that there's a difference between what SHOULD happen and what DOES happen. What SHOULD happen is that we have no need for a justice system or legal system, because everyone abides by the rules and doesn't wrong anyone else. What DOES happen is people murder and steal and do all the other things that Terrelle Pryor waxed philosophical about.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:13 PM ^
The more you reveal yourself to be a rambling, incoherent idiot who just likes to hear himself talk.
Which is something every poster here who doesn't have their head up their ass has known about you for a long, long time.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^
February 13th, 2016 at 1:18 PM ^
Which is populated by approximately one person - a backwards, unintelligent, misogynistic dipstick who lacks enough self-awareness to keep digging this hole of his deeper.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:40 PM ^
...says Charlie Sheen, who allegedly knowingly gave other people AIDS. Pot, meet kettle.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:53 PM ^
to continue blabbering aimlessly about my avatar in an effort to deflect from the fact you're a miserable, misogynistic piece of shit whose proposed solution to workplace sexual assaults is "don't have women around men"
You, sir, are an insufferable twat.
February 13th, 2016 at 3:00 PM ^
In a thread where you lecture me for a lack of self-awareness regarding issues of women, it's profoundly interesting that your choice of insults includes calling me an "insufferable twat."
February 13th, 2016 at 3:08 PM ^
and I'm an idiot who will ramble about anything as long as I get the last word on an internet forum because thats the kind of pathetic insecure piece of shit that I am and oh HEY LOOK GUYS HERES SOME BOOBIES 4 U TO LOOK AT ON MY TOUCH THE BONER WEBSITE
Fuck you.
February 13th, 2016 at 3:18 PM ^
...says the person attempting to get the last word in a meaningless way with not substantive comments to make. I'll let you have the last word if you want it, though. Here's your chance, because I won't be responding to you anymore.
February 13th, 2016 at 3:24 PM ^
Please. Pretty please. Reiterate your wonderfully astute argument that the victim of a sexual assault is somehow to blame for the damage and misery inflicted upon her.
And don't forget to post the Hottie Boobies of the Day on your shit website.
Get bent.
February 13th, 2016 at 4:06 PM ^
I don't even like Magnus, but that was never his argument. Anyone can see that.
February 13th, 2016 at 4:21 PM ^
on source analysis. Because "anyone can see that" that was exactly what he was saying.
Unless you think "well maybe they shouldnt have girls around boys" somehow IS NOT victim-blaming
in which case
that says enough about you.
February 13th, 2016 at 12:31 PM ^
Manning because he is upset that Cam Newton is getting bashed, so not necessarily fair reporting. What I can't figure out, if a guy 6'5" is sitting on a training table and you are looking at his foot hanging way below that table, how all of the sudden is his ass on your face and dick on your head, I mean you can't see the large body moving its ass towrds your head in time to move away? I can't see this happening. Maybe if some of what the Tenessee staff was trying to do to cover it up was true that is bad but even that was racistly bent, not sure if this article is about Manning being a bad guy, as much as it is about a racist writer pissed that Cam Newton is being judged.
February 13th, 2016 at 12:33 PM ^
off as black.
February 13th, 2016 at 12:40 PM ^
Uhhh. It's entirely Peyton Manning's Fault. He was the one who put his ass and junk on the woman. Nobody else made him do that.
February 13th, 2016 at 12:47 PM ^
You're right. Nobody made him do that. And nobody made that guy in downtown Detroit mug me for my sweater made of $100 bills. But my boss also shouldn't have made me wear my $100 bill sweater while traversing inner city Detroit, either.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:16 PM ^
has failed you.
Pitiful, offensive comparison.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:26 PM ^
February 13th, 2016 at 7:31 PM ^
February 13th, 2016 at 12:40 PM ^
February 13th, 2016 at 1:02 PM ^
Magnus, I believe that you are a high school football coach, correct?
If one of your players did this to a female trainer, what would your action be?
Because I find your opinion on this to be wanting in the justice and youth development departments.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:08 PM ^
My player would be off the team.
However, we also do not allow females in the locker room. Why? Because high school boys aren't very mature. And believe it or not, neither are 18- to 23-year-olds.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:14 PM ^
You are denying employment and/or skill buidling opportunities to women if you are not allowing female trainers. Do you address respect for women and others with your players? Of course high schoolers are immature. But what better person to talk about respect for women and their rights than someone they look up to i.e. football coaches. What would your players take from your comments on this thread?
February 13th, 2016 at 1:42 PM ^
Similar skills can be built in other situations, with female athletes, etc.
I also address respect for others' property, but I also tell my players to lock their lockers. You see, there are ways to come at issues from multiple angles.
February 13th, 2016 at 1:52 PM ^
You haven't addressed the core issue. Preventing women in men's lockerrooms/training rooms may prevent some bad situations. But it also teaches young men that there are "male spaces" where they can act however the fuck they want. They may not sexually harrass women in the lockerroom, but you've done nothing to decrease the chances that they may do something outside of the lockerroom.
What about a female that wants to coach football? By not allowing them in the lockerroom, you're denying them the ability to do their job and pursue a passion and become the best at it as they can. You also deny your players the ability to see women treated as equals in the workplace by creating a male only space.