Quantcast
Tuesday, March 16th, 2010 at 2:35 pm  |  158 responses

Brittney Feared

When the hype was young for Brittney Griner.

brittney_griner_1
Photo by Jamie Conlan
Originally published in SLAM 124

Think about what you’re saying about Brittney Griner. Yes, she cleaned someone’s clock recently. No, that’s not clean play. But before you go off on her — the most physically gifted 19-year-old woman ever — try to remember what it’s like to be 6-8, female, and dominant at the game basketball. That’s right, you can’t.

  • Add a Comment
  • Share
  • RSS

Tags: , , ,

  • The Philosopher

    I once said that Brittney Griner wouldn’t dominate anyone. But to be honest, that was before the “punch”. I didn’t know she had a mean streak like that. If her overall skill can reach the level of her mean streak, then we may very well be witnessing a pioneer at work in the Women’s game.

  • trainer33

    who’s the guy with the braids in the picture?

  • kwame

    looks like a scrotom is painted on the wall behind her?

  • Rob

    “the most physically gifted 19-year-old woman ever” from what I see right there, I’d say that’s a LIE!

  • http://www.slamonline.com James the Balla

    Juwanna Mann

  • Diesel

    Lil Bow Wow has GROWN since I last saw him.

  • Diesel

    And of course she’s feared. I’d be feared on the basketball court too if I punched everyone that played me hard in the face.

  • the_baller20

    theres really no proof that Brittney is a woman except for her face, but other than that she dresses very much like a man and has absolutely no boobs at all and at 19 you should have boobs. I mean at least something but it’s totally flat. Well good luck to her but she better watch out because theres a girl who I know will surely steal the spotlight.

  • the_baller20

    theres really no proof that Brittney is a woman except for her face, but other than that she dresses very much like a man and has absolutely no boobs at all and at 19 you should have boobs. I mean at least something but it’s totally flat. Well good luck to her but she better watch out because theres a girl who I know will surely steal the spotlight.

  • Madex

    can’t be a girl….the face doesn’t even look like a girl……could be one of them transgender or something…

  • matt

    whats with all the sexism.

  • http://slamonline.com YKnot

    Exactly Matt. What does that have to do with her game. Of course Tyrone Hill, and Sam Cassell had great carrers because they are model material.

  • Chazz Michael Michaels

    This guy is good no doubt…

  • SylVain

    There was a special about her a couple years back. She was dunking all over the place. But, with a up close shot, there is something very strange about her physique. This reminds me of the track star from the olympics two years ago. She was dominate enough to question his/her sexuality.

  • Chazz Michael Michaels

    Where did they get this old pic of snoop dogg anyways?

  • riggs

    even though i hate the “girls a man” comments, i gotta say yall stepped it up and made me a chuckle a few times.

  • Joey E.

    yeah, dude’s pretty good

  • NDP

    Just wait til you hear “her” talk.

  • pilight

    You guys are pathetic. She’s good, therefore you people don’t think she’s female.

  • http://thacorner.net/forums Kevin

    LOL at some of these comments

  • http://jdfkslld.com Jukai

    Plight: That is EXACTLY it. That and the fact that if you told me this was Gerald Wallace in High School, I would have dead set believed you.

  • shes ugly

    ugl ugly ugly ugly ugly ugly, look at those mosquito bites lol

  • http://jayemmbee.blogspot.com/ ClutchPerformer

    Urine test? to prove thats really a girl and no that not sexism, she dont look like a chick, or anyone in the WNBA, Parker, Leslie, Hammon, etc. looks like a dude

  • str8 from samoa

    what da? that really what i see?

  • matt

    clutchperformer, as much as you might think otherwise “she dont look like a chick” is a sexist line. whatever a chick is supposed to look like, i’m not sure. what you mean is she doesn’t look like a ‘chick’ through your prism of anthropological masculine bias.

  • big easy

    chill matt, its not clutchperformer’s fault your the only guy that has a crush on her

  • Chazz Michael Michaels

    Uh! Matt has a crush on young snoop doggy dogg? It’s true, fame can do anything.. matt is nothing but a groupie!

  • http://jayemmbee.blogspot.com/ ClutchPerformer

    @ Matt. no im not gonna put women into a mold or anything but… but woman of all shapes and sizes tend to have similar features, she looks like a skinny NBA player rather than a Future WNBA player. She looks like a cross between Bow wow and Snoop Dogg and Latrel Sprewell. there isnt one feminine bone on her body, and if you saw her in the street you would think she was a man too, unless your blind or have rose colored glasses on, cuz the rest of us see it

  • http://slamonline.com tealish

    You know, you don’t want to say it but it’s unavoidable: I just don’t know if that is a woman right there, because on top of this picture, I’ve heard her voice in an interview and it’s hella DEEP. Just saying.

  • Lebran

    Remember that south african runner who everyone thought was a dude? Caster Semnya. Turned out she was a bit of both.

    Her name was an anagram of ‘Yes, a secret man’

    Can anyone find a transgender anagram in brett… i mean brittneys name?

  • Royal

    I bet Brittney gets more girls than any of us so lets stop playa hating lol

  • Jrooks

    i hope im not taking this to far but RIP HIS F@*KING BALLS OFF! !

  • Jrooks

    Its off the movie water boy

  • Diesel

    Some Duct Tape company needs to step up and sign her to an endorsement deal now. “Hi I’m Brittney Griner, and when I’m taping back my twig and berries, I need to make sure the tape I use is strong and I can rely on it. That’s why I only use Elmer’s Duct Tape. Its the only brand I trust to hold me back…all of me.”

  • The Philosopher

    A lot dominant feamle athletes who pioneered their respective sports were not what we consider attractive. Billie Jean King, Martina Navritilova, Babe Didrickson. Florence Griffith Joyner was pretty, though. Candace Parker is beautiful. She can be a model. Lisa Leslie is pretty too.

  • matt

    again clutchperformer, by saying ‘not a feminine bone on her body’ you are only referring to qualities judged by you to be acceptable for women to have. I didn’t say it wasn’t funny, but it is sexist. At least have the stones to admit that.

  • Chazz Michael Michaels

    matt has the stones to prove he likes snoop doggy dogg over the net…

  • Diesel

    Matt – I think you’re posting to Slam, instead of Oprah’s Book Club Blog by accident.

  • http://jdfkslld.com Jukai

    Matt: It’s not really sexist. If Griner dropped her pants and we saw a gigantic d*ck, would it be sexist of me to say “wow, that’s a dude!”
    Would you post and say “how DARE you say it’s a dude! Who says a woman can’t have a shlong bigger than my arm?”
    Women all have similar anatomical features.. that’s medical, not opinionated. Is it racist if I point out Anthony Parker sometimes looks white from afar because he’s so light skinned?

  • The Philosopher

    Jukai’s a beast.

  • matt

    Jukai loves his hyperbole. Obviously if griner ‘dropped her pants’ and she had a ‘gigantic dick’ then saying “wow, that’s a dude” would be a semi-factual emperical observation. (Excluding the possibility of transgender). And yes, although I wouldn’t label you personally a racist for pointing out Anthony Parker’s ‘whiteness’ I would tell you that thought process is rooted in the concept of racism. What we view as ‘feminine’ what we view as ‘race’ are all highly subjective metaphors used by human beings to structure their reality in a way that is less confusing to them. Hence, your misguided idea that race equals clear cut distinct categories of people when in fact it is simply your mind’s own method of organizing reality. Please, find any genetic markers that are in everybody of a particular race and in nobody of some other race. There are no genetic markers that define race biologically. Look up the dictionary definition of the binary oppositions black/white sometime and you’ll see how problematic language is and how influential its mediation has been on the humanities, INCLUDING science.

    p.s. russell is still better than wilt, hands down

  • http://www.realcavsfans.com Anton

    Haha Anthony Parker does look white.

  • http://jdfkslld.com Jukai

    That really makes no sense. Gender and race are ‘classifications’, after all. If you’re saying there are no clear markers as to what defines gender and race, then everyone is sexist and racist for pointing out anything that has to do with gender and race. By your guidelines, I’m sexist for saying someone over there is a “really beautiful woman” because, hey, who am I to classify what is beautiful in a gender with no apparent guidelines?
    You’re also wrong in terms of gender. It’s a medical classification. There are medical guidelines in body type, height, weight, etc. that average women should look like, including facial features. Regardless of what your opinion of these guidelines are, they do exist, and are not sexist.
    Not to mention you’re using the term racism technically wrong, but so was I, so I’m not going to get too into it.

  • http://jdfkslld.com Jukai

    I mean, bottom line, at one point that person in those photos had NBA aspirations, not WNBA dreams.

  • http://www.another48minutes.com Gerard Himself

    besides her features, it’s her voice that’s odd to me. Sure she’s talented, and I said to myself I would not leave a comment on this post, but it’s just something that can’t be denied.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Everybody focuses on how this chick looks.
    No doubt, she got a masculine build and face, to a degree.
    But, I really believe that if she was “cute” people would have taken her punch very differently. I’m convinced.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Yo, I just want to say that Matt murdered y’all at 11:42. Damn son, that’s what I’m talking about.

  • http://nationofmillions.ca ciolkstar

    co sign AllenP on Matt at 11:42
    Jukai is a joke.

  • Diesel

    Why does everyone on this site always take one piece of someone’s extensive comment and analyze the hell out of it? Congratulations, its sexist! Doesn’t change the fact that she still looks like a guy.

  • LA Huey

    matt Posted: Mar.18 at 11:42 pm
    “Ether [SLAMOnline Remix]“

  • http://www.another48minutes.com Gerard Himself

    this is going nowhere, but we already knew that 24 hrs ago. I regret posting in it earlier. If I was an online editor on this site, I’d delete this post, and just post a new pic.

  • nastierthanu

    I feel for the young lady. U cats make me sick. Can’t be easy for her I hope she never reads these comments. Its a contest on who can be the most ignorant. “With this faith we can transform the jangling discords of our nation into a symphany of brotherhood” MLK. Stop standing on her back to make urselves seem witty

  • The Philosopher

    nastierthanu: I wish everyone can think like that.

  • http://fdjsklf.com Jukai

    Matt’s response was utterly illogical and I’m a bit lost if you guys agree with it.

  • matt

    Jukai, not saying that everyone is a racist/sexist but that everyone is COMPLICIT in racism/sexism just by the language we use. It is impossible to escape, because every word carries the trace of its opposition. That is why I asked you to look up the Webster definition of white/black. You might learn something. As far as your assurance that ‘medical guidelines exist’ I would assure you that they only exist through language and metaphor. Medical guidelines are ‘concepts’ mediated by language not an object like a rock or a tree. And remember, we already pointed out the impossibility of not being complicit as far as language is used. I would also point out to you how slippery and shifting these ‘medical guidelines’ are depending on what culture one finds themselves in as an example of how they are only useful as a means of structure, and do not represent truth in and of itself, as much as you think otherwise. Jukai, these are difficult ideas I am discussing I would not expect you to immediately be able to follow them. And they are not my own ideas, this has been the subject of theory for the last two hundred years. I recommend starting out with Nietzsche’s ‘On Truth and Lies in a Non Moral Sense’ if you still feel utterly lost and wish to know more. Please, before you attack me and an entire episteme of critical thinking as illogical and defend sexist language, educate yourself first.

  • magicmic

    Yo, watch a clip of her having a interview on Youtube. I swear she’s a hermaphrodite!!!!

  • Maya Laku

    Not to be offensive but she’s a real life Juwanna Mann

  • the nerve

    She hits like a man fights like a man and looks like a man hell she even dunks with her nuts in your face like a man…..

  • The Philosopher

    @the nerve: You’ve got nerve.

  • the nerve

    Now you show me one sexy picture of her looking like she like men and then you talking

  • horsey

    wow. way to be so close minded about the picture and ignore the fact that she’d probably outplay most people on this site. big ups to the brave guy who made himself the new name “shes ugly” instead of posting under the real one. way to stand for the stupid things you say trying to get a laugh from the crowd…most of you though: turn 6.

  • Dallas

    Damn these comments are hella funny. The one about Lil Bow wow grown up was funny

  • the nerve

    To horsey: she probably could beet me in ball but i guess she been through a lot and it shows maybe she was always getting picked on and got use to looking mean and rough

  • http://fdjsklf.com Jukai

    Oh boy, someone’s recommending me Nietzsche… this is going places.
    While we’re at looking up definitions, please look up the definitions of ‘racism’ because you’re vastly misusing it. Other than that, if you’re trying to convince me that dedicated medical organizations guidelines on the difference between males and females are based on ‘concepts’ and not ‘empirical research’, I guess there’s really no point in continuing this debate. You’re right when saying everything is subjective and there is no true objectivity, but you’re taking it to idiotic extremes that only a man obsessed with Nietzsche would go.
    Next time I’ll say “american medical classifications” so there’s no squabbling over viewpoints. Of course, you’re going to have to look long and hard to find a doctor who would tell you that she doesn’t have masculine features. Because, you know, all doctors are sexist.

  • ceb

    She looks like Brandon Knight’s older brother. But hey, she can ball.

  • http://www.another48minutes.com Gerard Himself

    So if I understand it correctly: some people in the U.S. would call me a racist if I would agree that from a distance Anthony Parker looks white? If people are that sensitive, I fear how they will do in the real world. Good luck with that.

  • matt

    Lol just trying to educate you Jukai. I recommended Nietzsche because that essay is the most simple one to read (if still difficult to comprehend as you have demonstrated here). I can see though that it is more important for you to get the last word in and call me idiotic (and by extension the last 200 years of metaphysics)then consider thoughtfully what I’m trying to tell you. Such pride, boy. Go pick up a book.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    No no, you’re right. All doctors are sexist and should read an overt psychoanalysist with extreme Nazi-esque beliefs who threw out the concepts of good and evil yet spoke out about the evils of just about everything he hated, namely democracy and religion. Much to your chagrin, I did take some philosophy classes in college and did have to read several of Nietzsche’s ideas. He’s a good foundation, but the bias in his writing made him relatively unreliable and I just look down on anyone who brings him up to try and justify any point.
    But you’re bringing up metaphysics to justify your points which have no grounds in this debate. The average man has features that the average women does not. These features are known as ‘masculine features.’ As silly as this sound, doctors need to have guidelines to tell the difference between men and women, and they create these guidelines not by some dude saying “well all women should look like this…” but through empirical research. I know that sounds silly, but it’s the truth. Now, if you’d like to debate that society has set guidelines to how women should be dressed and be shaped, that’s a bit of a stretch, but perfectly fine… but empirical research shows women have a bigger chest, less striking and sharp facial features, smaller arms, a less spoon-y like body shape, and other features which, well, our friend Brittney here doesn’t have. Sure, you can throw in the whole “well you’re also saying that cause she has dreads and doesn’t dress feminine” angle, but that’s societal, and that sure as hell isn’t in Nietzsche’s writing in the way you’re phrasing it.
    And yes, because I do love the final word, saying “wow that chick looks like a dude” is not truly sexist. Saying “wow, chicks should stay off the basketball court!” is sexist.
    And your racism argument is way off the mark. You have no idea what racism even means. Even Allenp makes a distinction between ‘racism’ and ‘race-related.’

  • Ronald

    Co-sign Jukai. Please Matt, get off your high horse, labelling what everyone has said does not make you better than everyone else. And looking at AP and calling him “white” is not racism. However, if you looked at him, assumed he was white, then went to assume he couldn’t play a lick of basketball, then that would be racism. You know, prejudice is a prerequisite of racism? Not merely pointing out facts based on colour. Just like if I the sky was blue doesn’t mean I hate the sky or something like that. It’s a perception. An obvious one at that.

  • matt

    Lol you must have done pretty poorly in those classes. Nietzsche wasn’t a psychoanalysist. I’m not sure how he could have had extreme Nazi-esque beliefs when the Nazi party didn’t come into existence for another 130 years after his death. Bias in his writing makes him unreliable? If you had actually done your homework you wouldn’t have missed his key point that ALL LANGUAGE IS UNRELIABLE. And since language mediates all the humanities including your beloved empiricism…empiricism is unreliable as well. Taking this very slowly for you now. What you describe as TRUTH is not PURE TRUTH or TRUTH IN AND OF ITSELF…Language is created by man as a means of structure. To begin with, a nerve stimulus is transferred into an image: first metaphor. The image, in turn, is imitated in a sound: second metaphor. This second metaphor is a WORD and every word instantly becomes a concept as it is not supposed to serve as a reminder of the unique and entirely individual original experience to which it owes its origin; but rather, a word becomes a concept as it simultaneously has to fit countless more or less similar cases… do you see how useful this could be? Do you understand what I’m talking about now when I state language is a means of structuring and making sense of our ‘reality?’ Am I getting through to you? It goes far beyond subjectivity, in fact language actually has the opposite effect of turning subjectivity into objectivity while making one forget of the orginal subjectivity. As far as empircism goes, if I make up the definition of a mammal, and then, after inspecting a camel, declare “look, a mammal!” I have indeed brought a truth to light in this way, but it is a truth of limited value. That is to say, it is a thoroughly anthropomorphic truth which contains not a single point which would be “truth in and of itself” or really and universally valid apart from MAN. As far as my not understanding racism I have not been able to defend myself because you have not pointed out in any of your responses where my wording is incorrect. Please, enlighten me. And let me know if you have any questions, Jukai.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Okay, I still see the point you’re making, and once again I’m saying it’s overt psychoanalytical bullsh*t. Yeah, categorizations are all MAN-MADE so there are natural biases from those who created these classifications, but then let me throw this nonsensical pendulum right back at you and say that your use of the terms ‘sexist’ and ‘racist’ is in itself an invalid point because you’re using words that are man-made classifications THAT LACK UNIVERSAL TRUTHS. So you’re wrong that saying me calling Brittany Griner is a man, because that’s your flawed use of a naturally biased language, MAKING THIS ENTIRE ARGUMENT POINTLESS.
    In other words, you’re thinking too hard, and you really should stop reading this stuff and bringing it to debates.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    So you’re wrong that saying calling Brittney Griner is a man is sexist*

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Also, racism:
    “a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race”
    So, tell me how pointing out that Anthony Parker looking white from afar is racist. Then, apologize. Or don’t. Whatever.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Oh, sorry, forgot to mention: I said Nietzsche had nazi-esque views, not that he was a Nazi. I wasn’t putting that in a time frame, merely stating that a lot of his ideas sounded a lot like what the nazis thought. Dude pretty much couldn’t understand religion and democracy and had trouble understanding why the powerful didn’t rule, which made more sense to him.
    You know, I was going to explain this further, but I just googled ‘Nietzsche Nazi’ for some help and I found a bajillion comparisons from people much smarter than me who already had noted this. So, yeah, go for it.

  • matt

    Let’s go back to my original quote. “And yes, although I wouldn’t label you personally a racist for pointing out Anthony Parker’s ‘whiteness’ I would tell you that thought process is rooted in the concept of racism.” Let’s make it clear I didn’t say pointing out Anthony Carter’s ‘whiteness’ is racist, but that it is an observation rooted in the concept of racism. Two different things. Now, let’s head over to Webster. Several interesting definitions including “From the former stereotypical association of good character with Northern European descent” “Free from moral impurity” now lets circle back to my original argument that race is not real biologically. Putting two and two together, as you yourself said you could see the point I was making, do you concur how useful it might have been at the time for one to structure reality in a way where those with light pigmentation had an upper hand? Do you follow my point that since the creation of this structure we have been complicit in racism even when one is without any intentions of being racist themselves simply through the use of language?

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Look, I get the point you’re making, at best it is thought provoking, but you are still misusing the term racism.
    I took that definition from webster, so I’m not sure where you’re pulling those definitions from, but you seem to be paraphrasing them. Racism is not limited to northern European decent, that is an improper definition of the word. Racism did not originate in eastern europe, it has existed since the dawn of time where one ‘race’ hated on another ‘race’ because they did not understand their customs or cultures. It is a generic term.
    Because it is such a generic term, you’re going to have an awful time pulling your metaphysical magic on it, but if you do, good for you, I’ll rebuttal it in a similar way as I did last time.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Also, my Nietzsche/Na zi post didn’t show up, so you know, just google that and you’ll find a bajillion articles on the subject that can explain it better than I could.

  • Ronald

    So, Matt, how would you describe Griner aesthetically?

  • matt

    Sorry Jukai, my bad. I should have pointed out that I was looking up the definition of the word ‘white.’ You know, since we were talking about Anthony Carter’s ‘whiteness.’

  • matt

    she ain’t winnin’ no beauty contests Ronald. Is that the answer you’re fishing for?

  • matt

    Jukai, now that you understand I wasn’t paraphrasing any definition I’ll allow you another response.

  • Chazz Michael Michaels

    matt proposed to brittney griner already…

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Oh, I see, so you’re trying to twist my words by using another definition of the word that I said. Congratulations.
    This was the definition I was using:
    ——————————–
    2 a : being a member of a group or race characterized by light pigmentation of the skin
    ——————————–
    Incase you didn’t get it, I also was not talking about this:
    ——————————–
    7 : of, relating to, or constituting a musical tone quality characterized by a controlled pure sound, a lack of warmth and color, and a lack of resonance
    You’re stretching again.
    ——————————–
    Also, you still are paraphrasing, because your secondary definition had nothing to do with race, but had to do with more the concept of white/black as good and evil. Unless you’re saying Lord of the Rings are racist because of the white magic/black magic etc. etc.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Jukai
    We just had a situation where a woman was accused of being a man, and then examined because of this.
    That was that South African runner.
    Doctors performed several tests and decided that due to a lack of certain female organs and an overproduction of testosterone, Caster Semenya was not fully a woman.
    But, the issue is, who gets to decide what classifies someone as a woman? Is there a worldwide committee? Did you get to vote? Who established the criteria and what were their motives?
    That same question is related to issue of “race.” Who established what is “white” and what is “black?” Or any other race. So, I get Matt’s point about white and black being subjective, and that there is some subjectivity involved when defining male and female.
    But, all of that’s immaterial, in my opinion. The real problem is that random anonymous folks are congregating on a website to spew insults about the looks of a 18-year old girl. An 18-year old girl who have never wronged any of them, nor who has invited their insults or critques.
    Even if we don’t examine the sexist mindset that tells men that it’s cool and acceptable to critique and deride any woman who doesn’t meet our accepted beauty standards, there is still the obvious cruelty and lack of respect in many of the comments posted here. Some of you scoff at those concerns, telling folks they are too sensitive, but I would wager your comments would be different if you had a personal connection to the woman pictured. If she were your sister, cousin or friend. Then I doubt you would be so cavalier about calling her out of her name, or comparing her to a transvestite.
    Life is simple. Treat people the way you would them to treat you and those you care about. That’s it. And if you refuse to do that, don’t get pissy when somebody points out that your actions are despicable.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Oh, and Jukai.
    Matt’s comments about white and black speak to the connotations for the words used to describe particulalr races.
    In truth, there are NO white or black people in the world. None of the people currently characterized as “white” or “black” or actually that shade. Most of them vary from very dark brown, to a pale pink.
    Thus, somebody chose the words “white” and “black” as identifiers for particular races, and it’s instructive to look at what those words mean in total, what they are related to in other fields, to get an understanding of how and why they are applied to particular groups.
    Why associate one group of people with a word that is often used to denote dirtiness and evil?
    Why associate another group with a word that is associated with purity and good?
    Since race is a purely social construct, a point Matt also made, then what social purpose those this classification serve?

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Allenp:
    It’s human nature to classify things and separate themselves. That was important key in Nietzsche’s early works, so Matt would probably jump to agree with me. So, yeah, once again it is thought provoking to go back to the origins of words and classifications and say that everything in the world has a questionable bias to it, but in the end, those classifications still exist. Just like ‘sexist’ and ‘racist’ classifications still exist. Who is to classify what exactly sexism is? Who is to classify what racism is? We all accept the classifications we agree with (it’s sexist to make fun of Brittney Griner because she’s ugly, because making fun of a women’s looks that society dictates is by definition sexist) but disagree with classifications that upset us (Caster is not a woman because she has testicles and other internal features that more resemble the average man than woman).
    You’re very careful with your thoughts so there’s nothing really disagreeable with anything you said. But when Matt starts telling me about natural biases in human thought processes while throwing around the words ‘sexist’ and ‘racist’ then I just get annoyed. He’s using metaphysics as a buffet; picking what he wants and disregarding anything he doesn’t want.
    But yeah, obviously making fun of an ugly 18-year-old girl is mean spirited and cruel. People don’t feel any connection to her, plus anonymity, so it’s openly acceptable. However, I don’t think anyone here can really say they’re openly passed judgment enough to be above the comments on this board.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    You do bring up an interesting point: do you think some origins of racism came about because of the ideas that ‘white’ is pure and innocent and ‘black’ is dirty and evil? Did racism cause that thought process? Or are they just an ironic coincidence?

  • colin

    chicks a dude

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/genetics Mauritz

    Now, the problem with Jukais argument is not the overly philosophical problematics that matt is so critical of. Yeah, matt you’re right, nobody can say anything for certain, but that’s not the point (even David Hume agreed that the fact that we can’t be certain doesn’t mean we sholdn’t act on the conclusions we draw). The point is that there is no strict biological definition, which makes these things kind of problematic. What we know for certain, is that one (1) gene (which is normally, but not always located in the “y”-cromosome) is the one that makes the female sexual organs that all fosters have at first transform into the male ones. Now this gene is not only not always in the “y”-cromosome (and therefore not necessarily associated with all the other things that is normally associated with being “male”), it can also be malfunctioning in a variety of ways.
    What I’m trying to say is that what is “male” and “female”, in the strictly biological way, is extremely relative and very much up for debate. So to say that Brittney Giner is “male”, or “looks like a dude”, is to ignore the biological reality that Jukai claims to be the reason he is right and matt is wrong (even though they are discussing two different things and talking right past each other). Brittney is most certainly a girl, at least she obviously thinks so herself (and she probably have more facts to her claim than random internet trolls have to their (what she looks like naked, that is)) and her teammates doesn’t seem to have anything to say about it.
    It is extremely typical that a female athlete gets this kind of comments instead of praise (or criticism, by all menas) for her athletic ability. This is the 21st century, can we please move along and start realizing that there is no good reasons to keep opressing women?

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/genetics Mauritz

    And on the definitions debate (and Allenp’s question: “Since race is a purely social construct, a point Matt also made, then what social purpose those this classification serve?”), it is NOT a good idea to refuse to recognize the concepts of race, gender, sexuality or whatnot even if these definitions are purely social. As there is no doubt that these classifications exist in society, and are used to opress some of the groups defined (women, blacks, queers etc), we need to understand those concepts in order to be able to resist and eventually stop the opression.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Mauritz: you’re wrong. There is more to male/female differences then the Y-chromosome. Check out the female runner that allenp pointed out, and what doctors decided. If there was no other differences between men and women medically, why would that female runner even be tested in the first place?
    But yeah, co-sign on yer second post.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    I mean, let me withdraw that statement… there really isn’t any difference, when you get down to the smallest level.
    But as I mentioned, empirical research has stated that, on average, women look like blank and men look like blank. You can call this ‘sexist’ if you want, but masculinity is a word that pretty much states that the AVERAGE man has these features, and not all of it is societal. You can’t say that women have breasts because society dictates them too. Women don’t have greater body fat percentages because society dictates them to. Men’s skin doesn’t have more collagen and sebum because society is holding women down, men don’t have more body hair then women because of society’s constructs (although, I guess that’s debatable!).
    There are some clear differences that are medically valid and discovered through perfectly scientific routes that can’t be discounted. Yes, she’s clearly a woman, I highly doubt anything else. But to deny that she has many masculine features and pass it off as societal seems ridiculous to me.
    Maybe my point is being lost on people?

  • Royal

    Sooo how do y’all feel about Karl Marx’s Conflict Theory????

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Jukai]
    I agree that she has features that would typically be classified as masculine, and she has a deep voice.
    I do think that the idea of “masculine” is an ever-changing standard, just like the standard of beautiful. In different times, different things are attractive. But, in our time, Griner has “masculine” features.
    However, talking about those features on an article about her basketball ability is sexist. How she looks has nothing to do with her talent. That’s the real problem.
    Mauritz
    I made my point about race being a social construct not to downplay it’s importance, but just to note that it’s something that humans define on an ever shifting basis. Black in America is not the same thing as black in Brazil. There is a different standard. And, as somebody noted, there are no genetic markers solely present in “black” people, that are not found in every other “race.”
    So, while it’s important to remember how race affects our lives, it’s even more important to remember that its importance, particularly when predicting behavior, is very much overblown.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Allenp: You know, yer 100% right. Saying “she’s only good at basketball cause she’s a man” is sexist, and I totally neglected to see that point.
    I apologize for that oversight.

  • LA Huey

    This is not a SLAM Top 50 article and the comments have not a single utterance of royal or reptilian players. The rules clearly state you all need to wrap this up before reaching the 100 comment mark.

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/genetics Mauritz

    When it comes to averages, you will get different averages if you divide a group (like the world’s population) into two subgroups (men and women), no matter what it is. This has something to do with the biological differences (the features that are usually located in the y-cromosome, and therefore in many cases associated with being male, or features that aren’t genetical per se but develops because of other features, e g the hormone levels, where testosterone increases if you’ve got a pair, because that’s a place where a lot of tesosterone is produced). However, these average differences has nothing to do with the definition of being male or female, since there are a lot of examples where these averages doesn’t apply (e g Brittney Giner), and to say that “Women all have similar anatomical features.. that’s medical, not opinionated”, as Jukai did, is simply false. What Jukai said in his last post, “to deny that she has many masculine features and pass it off as societal seems ridiculous”, has a lot more truth to it;-).
    As far as the averages go, you will see that the working class have more body fat than the upper class, that tall people are stronger than short people, etc. People should be careful about drawing too heavy conclusions based on those averages.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Find me one place where anything example I gave does not apply somewhere in the world and I’ll take back my points. Yes, these averages are different all over the world, but those observations have been found pretty much standard throughout the planet. Find me a society where women have more collagen in their skin or where women are taller, and I’ll rethink the original point I made.
    But I see what statement you’re picking at— my “Women all have similar anatomical features.. that’s medical, not opinionated”
    That actually is a factually incorrect statement (at least, in terms of the point I was driving), and my wording was awful. I should have added ‘generally’ or ‘on average.’ So that’s the second mistake I’ve made in these debates.

  • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/genetics Mauritz

    And oh, by the way, Karl Marx was pretty much right. As he usually was.

  • Diesel

    “that depends on what the definition of the word ‘is’ is…” – Bill Clinton

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    “Simple minds seek simple explanations…” Me.

  • Diesel

    “I don’t need to read a book what I can experience for myself out in the real world” – me

  • Diesel

    ps – you bother the sh*t out of me. you and gloria allred

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    You don’t bother me at all.
    You amuse me greatly. Arrogantly ignorant and proud of it.
    The sheer idiocy of thinking that in the 70-80 years you have on this planet you can “experience” enough to eliminate the need for books, is quite hilarious.
    Examine your thinking critically, and see what happens.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp
  • Diesel

    I don’t think there is no need for books. I just think its really stupid to come on to a BASKETBALL website and over analyze to death the writings of karl marx and nietzsche in hopes to sway someone’s opinion. Do you really think people think brittney looks like less of a man after all that you and matt posted? I think everyone involved forgot what they were even arguing about in the first place. My ‘ignorance’ and thinking is a result of my life experiences throughout my 28 years. Its going to take more than a quick post on SLAM to sway my deep rooted personal beliefs. I consistently challenge and mock you not because i don’t agree with you (I disagree with most of the time but I occasionally agree with some things) but because I think you’re doing it in the wrong forums. Use this site as a place to talk about basketball and take jabs at each other/the players. Because if you feel you’re posts on THIS sight are going to inspire or change anyone, you’re wrong.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    G, they told me I should come down cousin, but I flatly refuse I ain’t dumb down

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Diesel
    When exactly was the meeting held where it was decided that the only topics of conversation permitted on this site were about basketball and making fun of players and each other?
    Was there a handout?
    Why do you find it entertaining to ridicule strangers anonymously?
    Do you ridicule strangers in person?
    90 percent of my comments are about basketball.
    You’re trying to control the other 10 percent, but that’s really not going to happen.
    The truth is, I do change folks. Ask the cats who interact with me regularly on this site. Jukai, Bryan, Moose, Eboy, Myles, and all the others who have debated issues with me.
    I make them think about what they’re writing before they write it. I make them rethink their entrenched positions, and consider them from another perspective.
    And they do the same with me.
    You challenge and mock me because I refuse to allow you to behave the way you want without making my opinion known.
    You would prefer if I shut up and stayed in my place.
    That is really, REALLY not going to happen.
    But continue to play your role. The only way you could be a more perfect foil would be if I made you up as an alias.

  • Diesel

    Have you ever considered that YOU’RE the arrogant idiot? That you’re so rooted in your ways of looking at everything through your racial undertone glasses that you don’t see what’s truly happening? I don’t want to start a whole debate with you on politics but the article is basically saying that if Obama didn’t win the election it would have been because people were scared by a black man’s success and wouldn’t vote for him because they couldn’t handle it?…that they don’t know how to handle a succsseful black man? I think most black people NEED to believe that so that they can justify their failures. Obama and everyone supporting him would be able to say “well, white people didn’t want a black man as president so that’s why we lost”. But then you don’t give the geenral population credit when you consider that there’s no way Obama wins if a majority of the white people in america didn’t vote for him. It wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that he and mr emanual have been tied to several high profile illinois corruption schemes, or that he never truly took a stance on the majority of the topics during the debates. Could it be that people sided with McCain because they thought he had more experience? And that they believed in his ideas? Why does it have to be because they can’t handle a black man’s success?

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Diesel: Not to call a spade a spade, but you’re beginning an argument with Allenp off topic, which is exactly what you just threw a sh*t fit about.

  • Diesel

    Touché

    My bad.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Diesel
    You really, REALLY need to embrace facts.
    For example, what percentage of white voters actually voted for Barack Obama?
    All predictions were that it would be 44 percent, and the actual numbers were right around there.
    So, I didn’t major in math, but I’m willing to wager that 44 percent is not a “majority” in any country in the world. But, maybe your superior grasp of logic and reasoning can show me the truth.
    So, how exactly did a “majority” white people vote for Obama?
    Also, white folks make up roughly 65 percent of the population here in America. That means that 35 percent of the population is non-white, correct?
    So, if Obama had overwhelmining support among blacks, who make up 12-13 percent of the pop, very solid support among latinos, who make up 13 percent of the pop, and fairly good support among all other minorities, why would he need the “majority” of white people to win anything?
    Actually DO THE MATH SON.
    See, this is why books and reading are important. You can actually learn things if you read stuff that challenges your arrogantly incorrect worldview.
    Bill Clinton didn’t get the “majority” of white people to vote for him. And he was still elected. You don’t need the “majority” you just need enough white voters to combine with your support among other groups.
    Which is what Democrats have been doing since the Republicans unvieled the Southern Strategy as an off-shoot of the civil rights movement.
    Reading is fundamental.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Allen, do you think I was afraid and jealous of a black man’s success when I was undecided on who to vote for (McCain or Obama) before McCain picked Palin as the VP? Was I afraid and jealous when I voted for Hilary in the primaries? I’ve agreed with everything you’ve posted here, but the article was relatively insulting.

  • Diesel

    Once again you’ve taken a small portion of my argument and over analyzed it to hell. My point is that the article that you linked to…its entire argument is rooted in the belief that “It is impossible that anybody has objectively considered John McCain and Sarah Palin and decided that they are more qualified to run this country than Barack Obama and Joe Biden” WHY THE F*CK is that a given? Please tell me what obama did in his 4 years in illinois that would make him more qualified then mccain and his 30 years? I’m from illinois and I’ll answer it for you…obama did absolutely nothing in his time in illinois…instead he was prepping for his run for the presidency from the second after he gave his speech at the democratic convention. What I’m asking you..and what I’ve always tried to point out to you, is to ask yourself if its racist for a majority of the black population to vote for Obama based soley on the color of his skin? In illinois the news crews were out in downtown chicago when obama won…they were in a predominently black community which was celebrating. They came up to a young black male and asked him why he voted for obama..which one of his views did he agree with.. and he looked like a deer caught in headlights. he had no idea. because the only reason he voted for obama was because he’s black. Isn’t that racist?…not even considering mccain because he’s white? Practice what you preach is what I’m akways trying to get through to you.

  • Diesel

    With that said I’m not replying to any more posts on this page. I’m not going to do what I was just complaining about as Jukai pointed out.

  • The Philosopher

    Some people seem to have a God complex.

  • frank

    Just scrolled through these comments and thought i’d say WHO CARES. Seriously, you’re arguing about sexism on a basketball website.

  • The Philosopher

    I’ve been around all types of women.And I mean ALL TYPES OF WOMEN. And I’m sure some people on SLAM can vouch for this: She isn’t THE MOST “manly” looking girl on the block, let me tell it.

  • The Philosopher

    And I agree with Frank ten million percent, I mean, some of these folks, Frank…….

  • http://www.realcavsfans.com Anton

    Mama there goes that man

  • http://www.broy7.com nate the great

    Shes a man. im sorry. im not sexiest. just honest.

  • http://www.broy7.com nate the great
  • http://slamonline.com Ben Osborne

    14 Blocks last night. Respect.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    The caption on the picture that is the point of this thread was about the Brittney Griner’s game. It noted that despite the fact that she punched a woman recently, she’s probably the most talented and dominant women’s player in a generation.
    Yet, 80 percent to 90 percent of the comments were about how she looks. I have yet to find a comment that attempts to dissect her game, or her impact.
    If cats don’t see the sexism and disrespect in that, then they don’t want to see it. You all prefer ignorance, probably ’cause it’s easier. Spending 100 comments making fun of the looks of a random stranger is utterly ridiculous on a “basketball” website.
    Jukai
    Sorry if you were insulted, that wasn’t my intention. The intention was to point out that people actually were complaining that Barack Obama was “too smart.”
    When did being intelligent become a drawback? How does it make sense to want to elect somebody to serve as the political leader of a complex and diverse country like America who ISN’T smart? Why did it make sense for people to attack Obama as an “egghead”?
    Doesn’t that strike you as a patently ridiculous stance to take? Basically people were saying that even though they weren’t qualified to be president of the United States, they wanted to elect a candidate that was just like them. That’s freaking asinine, in my opinion. If I can’t do a job, why would I hire somebody who is just as qualified as I am?
    The crux of my argument in that post was that when I compared Barack Obama and Joe Biden to McCain/Palin it was impossible for me to see how anyone could believe the Republican duo were the Democratic duo’s intellectual equal. Thus, there must be a different criteria being applied, and I offered an opinion on why that criteria was being used. I only applied that opinion to a segment of the population, but I think it was justified.
    I could go into a longer discussion on the topic, but I won’t.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Diesel
    You wrote that it would have been impossible for Obama to win without the majority of white people supporting him, when that is obviously a lie.
    I can see how it would be my fault for pointing out that glaring whole in your logic, and I can totally see how that whole comment about the majority of white people supporting Obama was immaterial to your argument. It had nothing to do with your main point that black people love to blame their failures on everybody else, and that without the support of white people black people would have accomplished nothing.
    I was totally off base, I’m sure.
    Here’s the thing. You’re upset with what I wrote despite the fact that I clearly outlined my logic. It’s fine to disagree with me, but you’re actually upset that I would even write something like that.
    But you’re not upset that people are comparing a random 18-year old girl to a man. That there has been a rush to find the next creative way to call her a man.
    That doesn’t bother you. In fact, by your logic, since YOU think she looks like a man, it’s perfectly all right for folks to make fun of her.
    So, to recap, your upset about what I wrote based on what I saw, despite the absence of crude jokes or insults, you’re not upset about what you and others wrote despite the inclusion of crude jokes and insults.
    Gotcha.

  • The Philosopher

    A lot of people in the world have this insatiable need to feel like they’re right about something. Why? Is it that important? Does it help one’s man/womanhood? Does one wake up the next morning feeling that they did a good deed for society because they merely felt like they were right about something?

  • The Philosopher

    As a people, we are a violent, hateful species. Hate is in our DNA, and this topic of discussion just further proves it. Like Allen P said, a lot of us don’t want to talk about her game. Must be too boring, so people go on to say hateful things about the girl. And she probably is a sweet girl.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Allenp: I get the gist of the article. Sarah Palin really solidified the deal for me. To this day, I still don’t understand how any true American could genuinely think Sarah Palin should run any portion of our government. She had so many skeletons in her closet, they were uncountable, they tripled her IQ level. But, more importantly, it showed that McCain put ‘politics first’ and pretty much showed me the old McCain I used to admire was dead, lost in a party who knew how to run a great campaign but not a country.
    But was Obama the clear superior over McCain before their VPs were picked? Ehhhh…

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Jukai
    To me, intellectually, yes.
    My post was about the anti-intellectual movement that continues to be a problem in the country.
    It’s not cool, not to think.
    No matter what you’re discussing, you should be able to think critically. Basketball, football, race, religion, politics, women, whatever.
    The idea that you should suspend your reasoning power, or ignore all outside factors when discussing sports is just an off-shoot of the general anti-intellectual movement.
    That post was speaking to another aspect, but I’m sure you’ve noticed the exact same thing right here on this thread.
    There is hostility towards thinking.
    Sad days man.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Allenp: What you’re considering a ‘movement’ I’d consider ‘status quo’
    I just don’t see how you’re applying it to the discussions here. Unless you’re getting aggravated at the people telling everyone to stay on topic and not discuss philosophers and sexism on a boring-ass Sunday.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Jukai
    The discussion on this thread, or the discussion on Slam in general? If you don’t see how it applies to this specific discussion, then we just see things differently.
    Besides, exactly what is the “topic” that everyone stayed on in this thread?
    The idea that Brittney Griner “looks like a man”?
    How did that become the topic of the thread?

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    We do see things differently. This isn’t about some tea party member on the street arguing against healthcare when he doesn’t know one thing about the bill… this was just a random grouping of arguments, mostly for me, over relatively odd issues.
    I was arguing with Matt over how he uses metaphysics as a buffet
    I was arguing with Mauritz over a semantics error on my part
    And I dun even really know what I’m discussing with you
    But I don’t get what you’re talking about with this anti-intellectual movement. Are you angry with Diesel? Diesel had some good points but they were ushered between bad generalizations and awkward phrasings. I don’t think he was being intelligently dishonest or intelligently ignorant.
    I think you’re taking this a bit too far because you don’t agree with his half-truths.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    The complaints that this is a basketball website and thus not the place for discussions about sexism, racism or Germans had an anti-intellectual vibe, in my opinion.
    Sports do not exist in a vacuum. It is quite possible that a basketball related topic could involve discussion of all three of those things, and in my opinion it’s not an example of people over-thinking or introducing unimportant stuff to a discussion.
    Besides, if it’s a random grouping of arguments, then why the repeated comments about “staying on topic.”
    On the Diesel issue, this is a carryover from the other post on Griner where he repeatedly called her an animal.
    I guess it’s an improvement that she’s now joined the human race, even if she’s the wrong gender.
    If you’re going to make an argument, actually use facts. Don’t twist information, don’t twist my arguments. If you can’t be bothered with “books” or “facts” or outside sources, but you still think your opinion is valid simply because you believe it, then you are arrogantly ignorant.
    YOu don’t care that you don’t know that you’re wrong, you’re right simply because you say so. That’s how you can build an argument around the premise that Barack Obama got the majority of white people to vote for him, when he was only supported by 44 percent of white voters.
    That’s how you can build an argument that McCain and Palin were the intellectual equals of Biden and Obama. (Which was one of the points of the piece, not the idea that if you vote for McCain you must hate black people. That’s idiotic. Some people actually do support what McCain represents, but that doesn’t mean that McCain/Palin was on the same intellectual plane as Obama/Biden. You can argue about who you think would be a better president, but let’s not even pretend there’s an argument about who has shown themselves to be smarter.)
    Ignoring facts that challenge your viewpoint allows you to make any argument you want to make. In all of our arguments on this site about Steve Nash, have I ever once said “Nash is bum. He just can’t play. He’s all hype.”
    No, never. Why? Because that would be an outright lie and building an argument on a lie is arrogant and dishonest.
    Where did I say black people should vote for Obama simply because he’s black?
    Where did I say that I didn’t support McCain and Palin because they were white?
    I never said any of those things, but that’s what cats want to argue.
    You and I have discussed many topics and we have vastly different views on the world, but we have developed a grudging respect for one another because we both understand that the other person is not going lie and make things up to win a discussion or argument. You and I may spin statistics or facts, but we’re not going to just make stuff up. And when we do make a mistake we say “Yeah, my bad, I effed up there, so I really have to retract that position I was taking.”
    If you don’t have that, or if you don’t think that’s necessary, that’s arrogant and it’s dishonest.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Oh, and “half-truths” are lies.

  • Diesel

    Alright, I said I wouldn’t respond but I can’t take this anymore. First off, I didn’t say there’s no place for intellect in these threads. What I did say was that it seemed like you guys were analyzing racism and sexism to such minute detail that the people involved and everyone reading, had forget what you were even talking about. I was just trying to say lets move on. Especially considering you were the one preaching that commenting on Brittney’s looks had nothing to do with the topic of the article. My comment about books is a reference to my previous e-beefs with Allen in which he sites numerous books he read on a certain topic, but he rarely provides his real life experiences. He’s like a retarded version of Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting. At no point did I say that I couldn’t be bothered by facts or outside sources. That’s a generalization that you made because its easier for you to consider me an ignorant idiot than to consider that what I am saying actually has some validity. I’ll admit I made my “majority” comment in the heat of the moment without fact checking. That doesn’t change the spirit of my argument, which was that Obama got the most white votes of any Democrat in recent history. The reason I wanted to make that point is because the article you linked to…like many of the items you reference and your personal beliefs…is littered with anti-white racial undertones. As for the point that you’re trying to make with the article (which I had to decide for myself since you simply linked to it), that Obama and Biden are the intellectual superiors to McCain and Palin…I would argue that’s not based in fact either. What are your criteria for making such a statement? Are you using degree of schooling? Experience in the field? Which one is more important when trying to run the free world…a high level of schooling or a high level of experience in politics? You’re also operating under the assumption that a high level of schooling means you’re an intellect. I know a lot of people with their MBA’s that don’t know how to deposit a check at the bank or pump their own gas. It’s a personal opinion whether you value street smarts and common sense over book smarts. And I won’t even get started on Biden and his common sense. So once again, I am asking you to look at your own beliefs and analyze their roots…and if their based in facts…before you attack me for mine.

  • http://dfjklf.com Jukai

    Allen: the half-truth issue was how he expressed the massive experience difference between McCain/Obama and overlooked the experience difference between Biden/Palin. Even in his previous post, he took jab at Biden’s lack of ‘common sense’ which is really more about Biden being more honest and less political… but not a MENTION of Sarah Palin, who I consider to be the dumbest person to ever run for such a high office. And yes, I remember Dan Quayle.

  • http://dfjklf.com Jukai

    I WILL meet both of you in the middle of the road and say I don’t believe Obama is McCain’s intellectual superior, but I believe he came off as intellectually superior because a lot of the campaign that McCain was running on, McCain personally didn’t care for or believe in and couldn’t back it up properly.

  • Diesel

    Funny thing is I actually voted for Obama, but I was undecided for a long time. I just don’t like being told that if I didn’t, then I’m an idiot because Obama was clearly more intelligent and therefore the only choice.

  • matt

    I still don’t understand Jukai ‘She look like a man! Its got no basis in sexism!’ Do you really believe this? Besides the obvious argument that in the beginning you used it to debase her and then quickly switched hit your way over to the ‘I’m a man of pure empircism’ tatic, I would point out that you seriously misunderstand how those female traits you foolishly described as ‘belonging to every women’ were enframed/structured, based off of coverture laws. The legal definition of coverture made explicit that a woman’s power within marriage was her appearance. Her value within the transaction, that which she exchanged for the economic and legal ‘protection’ of her husband was her looks. That relationship today between beauty and value should be pretty obvious to even you through advertising. Now before you hit me back with “oh sure so all doctors are sexist” bs try to keep in mind what I said about language making us complicit in certain concepts, even if that complicity was not our actual intention. And keep in mind (British) empiricism orginated during this period of legal coverture. Just thought I’d have the last word!

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Matt: that’s just… okay, I’m not going to use ‘untrue’ because maybe this subject is certainly not my specialty, BUT, to my knowledge, coverture was not solely focused on a female’s appearance… the focus of coverture had to do with a woman’s power and wealth through her family. I’m sure a woman’s appearance played a role in any arranged transaction, but coverture, in the sense you’re describing legally, was about power and wealth. I’ve given this a brief google search and I can’t really find anything about appearance.
    And empirical knowledge had been around during the time of the Greeks, so your last statement I can say is untrue with 100% certainty.
    And you still haven’t acknowledged that, while you keep trying to prove that every rebuttal I use is a ‘biased classification,’ you’re using a ‘biased classification’ in the word sexism.
    Look, I’ll stop picking at your iffy-logic and go back to the main premise: I made a semantics error by saying “all women have similar anatomical features” and that is untrue. Griner is living proof that it is untrue. But women all HAVE similar features, and many of them are non-societal, and many of them, Griner lacks. So, while Allenp made a good point about the underlying sexism that ‘female ballers can’t play so if she’s good, she must be male,’ I think what you’re trying to prove is, for a lack of a better term, horse sh*t.
    Good day.

  • http://dsfjklf.com Jukai

    Damnit, I did it again: MOST women have similar features… or the AVERAGE woman has similar features… damn, I need coffee..

  • Get a job

    Youall have too much free time

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Diesel
    If I were you, I’d check that stat that says Obama got the highest percentage of the white vote for a Democrat in recent history. Just do a little research.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    And why would I use my personal experiences to make a point to you, or anyone else?
    My personal experiences differ vastly from yours, and Jukai’s and the vast majority of the cats who post on SLAM.
    So, I used easily verfiable information that can show you how what I’m saying has been backed up by numerous studies and statistics.
    You’re asking me to depend on anecdotes, which you can’t even verify, instead of giving you information you can verify on your own.
    Yet, I’m pretty certain that if I spoke mainly from my personal experiences, which typically back up the research, there would be someone who would tell me I can’t use anecdotes to make sweeping statements of fact.
    It’s a lose/lose situation.
    Finally, my very first comment on this thread noted that I believe this young lady’s “masculine” appearance has affected how people viewed her punch. I’ve also repeatedly said that it’s quite ridiculous to make these sort of hateful comments about a stranger. I didn’t introduce sexism or racism to the discussion, I just commented on the posts of others.
    The main problem is that folks don’t want anyone interrupting their fun. Which in this case involved making “man jokes” about a young woman. Any attempt to point out the problem with this practice, which is was Matt did early on, was met with scorn and refusal to consider your actions.
    That’s fine. People gonna’ do what they want.
    And so am I.

  • Diesel

    I did fact check my comments. Obama received more white votes then both Kerry and Gore before him. And my point on the personal experiences has to do with the fact that two people can view the same facts and form two different opinions. Its all about perception…which is, you guessed it, influenced by life experiences and envirnoment. I’m not asking you to talk about personal experiences when you’re talking baout steve nash. But when you come on these threads and infer that white people won’t hire black people…and that white people won’t vote for Obama..your ‘facts’ don’t prove your point like you think they do. That 44% can be perceived many different ways. You’re thinking why wasn’t it higher and I’m seeing it as higher than its been in the past 8 years for a democrat. And with that said, this time I really am done with this thread.

  • http://slamonline.com Allenp

    Diesel
    No, I didn’t say white people wouldn’t vote for Obama.
    That’s a ridiculous comment, since he would have never won the Democratic primary if that was the case.
    Nor did I say white people won’t hire black people.
    I’m black and just about every job I’ve gotten has been working for white folks.
    Again, you have crafted a strawman argument, to buttress your points. It’s really quite sad.
    If you have a question about what I think, ask me. If you don’t care what I think, then don’t put words in my mouth.
    Saying that 44 percent is a “majority” is not a matter of perception. It’s an outright lie, that vastly skews reality.
    I never said “why wasn’t it higher.”
    I said “That’s not a majority.”
    You created an argument, created comments from me in that argument, and then proceeded to try to dismantle my fictional comments.
    There is no need to “infer” what I meant, I said what I meant.
    But, keep on doing you.

  • Tron

    Diesel Posted: Mar.22 at 7:56 pm

    McCain is gonna croak anyways he looks unhealthy

  • the nerve

    No disrespect ~ But soon as he Obama won a lot of white called a black radio station . Some were mad, some were hoping it would bring us together, but people should not fear, because he is both races and all black guys love white women .

  • matt

    Time and again science has studied “the laws of nature” to reveal a female nature suspiciously consonant with woman’s assigned social role and its accompanying feminine ideal under patriarchy. Also I made it clear I was referencing British Empiricism, which was the basis for the Enlightenment and the scientific advancement of the west. Jukai, you fail again.

  • http://fdjsklf.com Jukai

    Okay Matt, how do I fail when a) your entire post was about ‘coverture’ which has nothing to do with this Time and again science article… which then has nothing to do with “British Empiricism” and b) British Empiricism -I’m positive- began in the 17th century, and coverture in terms of a legal sense began at the start of the 19th century (according to wikipedia).
    So, don’t tell me I fail when you really don’t seem to have any idea of what you’re talking about. Look up these topics and be positive you’re not making a fool out of yourself.
    I know, I’m still picking at your logic and not addressing the main point, but your logic is hideously flawed. I’m sure the Time and Again science article has some validity to it, after all, rich men are going to get their trophy wives, you are right. What you really should be focusing on is what masculinity has meant over the years, since I am referring to Brittney as looking very manly.
    Or, just stop making up these bizarre, flawed arguments and just tell me you’re not alright with me making fun of Griner. Whatever.

  • Ansonpanson

    someone test him/her. its the only possible solution to this debate. i personaly think the person who i shall refer to as B until gender is proven is a guy.

  • matt

    So you are making fun of her. And here I thought you were simply pointing out an unbiased observation rooted in emperical truth, not sexist in any way. You just fell on your own sword, Jukai. Checkmate. Oh, and my arguments are only bizarre to one who cannot connect more than one idea at a time. I’ve wasted so much time having to backpedal and explain things out to you, that it is starting to get stale. So, to end on a note of humiliating reinforcement of your own emasculating inferior intellect, checkmate. Checkmate, b**ch.

  • matt

    Making fun of Griner eh? And here I thought this whole time you were simply making an empirical observation rooted in undeniable truth, and not the least bit sexist. Looks like you fell on your own sword here Jukai. Checkmate. I didn’t expect you to slip up and freely admit your own bias just like that. And by the way, my arguments are only bizarre to one who can not connect more than one idea at a time. I’ve gotten tired of having to backpedal and explain everything out for you, I’m glad this is finally done for. Oh, and just to reforce your own emasculating intellectual shortcomings, I’ll end on this. Checkmate, b**ch.

  • matt

    Making fun of Griner eh? And here I thought this whole time you were simply making an empirical observation rooted in undeniable truth, and not the least bit sexist. Looks like you fell on your own sword here Jukai. Checkmate. I didn’t expect you to slip up and freely admit your own bias just like that. And by the way, my arguments are only bizarre to one who can not connect more than one idea at a time. I’ve gotten tired of having to backpedal and explain everything out for you, I’m glad this is finally done for. Oh, and just to reforce your own emasculating intellectual shortcomings, I’ll end on this. Checkmate, b*tch.

  • Izzy

    Guess what? Every1 starts getting bored & stops reading long draggy comments about Nazis & British Empirism after a while…LOL lighten up ppl!

  • Kourtney

    She is a man. she is ugly and someone needs to check her gender.

  • vill

    I am a women basketball fan, and against sexism… we know many female athletes look and behave like men(stereotypically),yet we know and we dont question their gender. But Brittney Griner is just different. If you see “her” move and play, you just cannot help but doubt… but until she wins a championship, no one will seriously dare ask for a gender test(its a very sensitive issue in this country which worship “privacy rights”).. But most of us who see her have the same question about her yet we pretend we dont see it,or we just keep quiet… I think its wise to have her gender confirmed before it blows out of proportion… or,i was thinking, if she is really a he, then for all the trouble he/she was doing for sports fame, then shall we just let her/him get away with it..in case

  • karen

    She has the physique of a guy. Has she been tested for testosterone levels? Y chromosome? Something is not right.

Advertisement
Fullcourt.com