The Bombshell

[Burgundy Burner]

Oh, and I'm sure the catfish story will be referenced many times in the coming weeks. Phil Daniels paid a price for that mess.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

first, I thought I was being clear, I said that after all the hype, finding out that this so called apocolyptic "biblical" news was literally simple harassment and even worse, just inappropriate behaviour was not just annoying but watching the youtube and twitterverse acting as if this was all still some massive thing, was more than a little annoying. Henry, one of the women was literally a professional greeter who was hired because she was attractive, was told to dress a certain way in the capacity of said employment.

the cheerleader stuff is another story entirely, and while still gross, telling women to take topless pics and hang out with suite holdres is not on the level of murchison hiring actual prostitutes to cheer for the cowpies, Santos hitting on women in the office is creepy but not outside what we see all the time. should he have been fired? I would say yes, was it some "omg this is the worst thing ever" moment? no.

This teams front office has been dysfunction for over 2 decades some of us remember sarge telling us what happened to his mother who was employed when danny cleaned house.

some of you seem to think im marginalising what happened, and in a way I am, not to excuse what happened as it was innapropriate and unprofessional, something the skins FO has been known to be, but to simply say " if you tell me you have world altering news, and then tell me about everyday nonsense, I am not taking you seriously anymore"

I played football for 20 years, I dated a professional cheerleader, I have friends who played in the NFL close friends, which is why I am not not shocked at this, not even a little bit. you all want to get outraged? fine, but dont act like you didnt know this shit was endemic. you remind me of the people who got outraged at weinstein, when half of hollywood made jokes about his casting couch for years.

anyway, I was supposed to go on Fox this weekend to talk about the name change, they were interviewing me and a couple other indians, but we got told with all the "breaking news" that the name change isnt even on the schedule anymore lol so there is that I suppose.

 

[MikefromOH]

You all take that shit to the Catfish thread. Lol.

You're no daisy.

You're not daisy at all!

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

and now back to our regularly scheduled bitching about football and our team sucking

 

[Elephant]

Don't ever PM me again telling me what a great guy I am Brian - okay? I've been in Nursing Management for most of the past 30 years - all I deal with is young attractive women and I've never had a single issue or complaint because I am a consummate professional and I respect women. We are all human and sexuality is an integral part of that. That is not the same thing as sexual harassment and abuse.

The next time you have a problem with a post - report it.

John, I never said you ogled nor salivated over the images. But there were some in this thread who did and are now talking about how terrible this behavior is.

 

[Henry]

And the straw man has been created!

This is so disingenuous that the rest of your post means little. At least be honest...NO ONE SAID IT WAS A NOTHING STORY!

Ryman has been saying it repeatedly. I disagree with him. I will continue to say so. And I will continue to explain why.

 

[Kel Varnsen]

I know I'm just a regular guy, but this has been bugging me today so I'll say it. This story really sucks and at times I'm at a loss for words. We can all come on here and state our feelings. Some are stronger than others. We can agree on points being made or disagree. That's why we have the like and dislike buttons. Sometimes we have to correct each other and that's fine too. What I don't understand is why some people have been going after other members. Our anger should be directed towards the people who did this and the smug little punk who let this behavior go on until his hand was forced. One of the things I've liked about this board is that people generally aren't attacking each other. I prefer for it to stay that way, even when the news is awful and disgusting.

 

[Elephant]

Ryman has been saying it repeatedly. I disagree with him. I will continue to say so. And I will continue to explain why.

No Henry, he said it did not match the headline. But you see what you want to see.

 

[ChiefRunningSioux]

Another made up story. Just more pretend drama

 

[Sassy Gretsch]

first, I thought I was being clear, I said that after all the hype, finding out that this so called apocolyptic "biblical" news was literally simple harassment and even worse, just inappropriate behaviour was not just annoying but watching the youtube and twitterverse acting as if this was all still some massive thing, was more than a little annoying. Henry, one of the women was literally a professional greeter who was hired because she was attractive, was told to dress a certain way in the capacity of said employment.

the cheerleader stuff is another story entirely, and while still gross, telling women to take topless pics and hang out with suite holdres is not on the level of murchison hiring actual prostitutes to cheer for the cowpies, Santos hitting on women in the office is creepy but not outside what we see all the time. should he have been fired? I would say yes, was it some "omg this is the worst thing ever" moment? no.

This teams front office has been dysfunction for over 2 decades some of us remember sarge telling us what happened to his mother who was employed when danny cleaned house.

some of you seem to think im marginalising what happened, and in a way I am, not to excuse what happened as it was innapropriate and unprofessional, something the skins FO has been known to be, but to simply say " if you tell me you have world altering news, and then tell me about everyday nonsense, I am not taking you seriously anymore"

I played football for 20 years, I dated a professional cheerleader, I have friends who played in the NFL close friends, which is why I am not not shocked at this, not even a little bit. you all want to get outraged? fine, but dont act like you didnt know this shit was endemic. you remind me of the people who got outraged at weinstein, when half of hollywood made jokes about his casting couch for years.

anyway, I was supposed to go on Fox this weekend to talk about the name change, they were interviewing me and a couple other indians, but we got told with all the "breaking news" that the name change isnt even on the schedule anymore lol so there is that I suppose.

Personally, I think you're being very clear.

You don't think this story rises to the level of "apocalyptic 'biblical' news" that some people on social media promised, and that it is just "simple harassment" and "inappropriate behavior" that doesn't warrant this level of attention. Therefore, why are we evening talking about it at all?

You acknowledge that you're "marginalising" what happened, that it's "inappropriate" and "unprofessional", but since it's "everyday nonsense" and not "world altering news" then there's no point in getting "outraged" and talking about it, because that's somehow worse than the behavior that's being alleged.

Also, something about we shouldn't be outraged about a convicted rapist because some people in Hollywood made jokes about him being a rapist.

TL; DR, Because some people on the internet overhyped the story (not the journalists who wrote it or the newspaper that published it), we just shouldn't give a damn.

 

[Henry]

No Henry, he said it did not match the headline. But you see what you want to see.

Sigh.

its barely even surprising.

this is not even worth talking about except to fire some idiots

it happens in every workplace. people are people.

frankly its boring

Maybe I'm seeing what I want to see and you are seeing what you want to see or whatever, but I am not setting up any straw men here. I am speaking specifically to the above sentiment. If you don't like my wording, I'm sorry. But if someone is going to presume to lecture this board about how systemic sexual harassment is boring, not important and doesn't need to be talked about I'm going to respond. If that's ok with you.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

I literally said that it was innapropriate and unprofessional and some people got fired over it. it is not however anywhere near what we were led to believe. I did not say it was a nothing story, I did say it was pretty much par and that acting like its still this biblical story is nonsense.

I did not say we shouldn't talk about, nor did I say it was not disgusting. but I did say that if this was what all the fuss was about, its nonsense. carry on.

 

[Elephant]

Sigh.









Maybe I'm seeing what I want to see and you are seeing what you want to see or whatever, but I am not setting up any straw men here. I am speaking specifically to the above sentiment. If you don't like my wording, I'm sorry. But if someone is going to presume to lecture this board about how systemic sexual harassment is boring, not important and doesn't need to be talked about I'm going to respond. If that's ok with you.

It was in relation to the headline, Henry. Are you being intentionally obtuse?

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

btw the quotes I saw in wapo said one woman complained about being told to wear high heels and form fitting dresses (the professional greeter) and several others said that santos asked them if they were romantically attracted to him. neither of which is world shattering sexual harassment even if one includes the power dynamic. although the second one is problematic and the dude got fired for it. Larry MIchaels was an old dude who thought his almost famous celebrity meant he could hit on women out of his league but until we get details, all we really know is he hit on some women.

given the details given in the story I saw, you could argue sexual harassment against santos if he was in a position of power over the women he hit on, but it does sound as if he wasnt overtly demanding sex which makes me less likely to get so heated up about all this.

levels people, levels.

 

[Henry]

I did say that if this was what all the fuss was about, its nonsense. carry on.

In other words, a nothing story. I'm sorry, I should have used the word 'nonsense' instead, so Elephant wouldn't ignore the rest of my post in a huff?

Seriously, what are we even doing at this point?

Nothing story, nonsense story, not worth the fuss ... pick an acceptable term. I'm good with any of them.

Good grief.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

its nonsense when people claim that something that is literally a minor thing is biblical. a woman was told to wear high heels OMG OMG get the pitchforks! Come on man.

 

[Henry]

It was in relation to the headline, Henry. Are you being intentionally obtuse?

Really? You don't like picking out a word or a phrase and taking out of context and ignoring the rest of the post?

Who knew?

 

[Henry]

its nonsense when people claim that something that is literally a minor thing is biblical. a woman was told to wear high heels OMG OMG get the pitchforks! Come on man.

And this is what I was addressing in my post about 20 posts ago before we started talking about this bullshit. Feel free to refer to that as my response.

 

[Boone]

You can stop rushing to Ryman's defense now Brian, since as you've continued claiming he has been abused and misunderstood, he has double and tripled-down on exactly the things you keep claiming he didn't say or didn't mean. He doesn't have any problem with minimizing what went on so I'm not sure why you have one with our disapproving of it

 

[SkinsNumberOne]

I literally said that it was innapropriate and unprofessional and some people got fired over it. it is not however anywhere near what we were led to believe. I did not say it was a nothing story, I did say it was pretty much par and that acting like its still this biblical story is nonsense.

I did not say we shouldn't talk about, nor did I say it was not disgusting. but I did say that if this was what all the fuss was about, its nonsense. carry on.

Let's seek agreement on reasonable statements then (although I think you should understand the bold and underlined points are where contention lies). Let's see if we can clearly distill truth from the fog here.

1) The buildup of this story prior to its release, purely on rumor and speculation, was bigger than the actual story. I think that is something arguable. This is not some obvious point, like you are stating; some people simply may not agree and I think that's understandable. For the record, I do agree with that statement. I already posted in this thread; this story is not surprising in many ways. Dan Snyder is a poor leader, and kind of a scummy individual in many ways. He hides from the limelight a lot because I don't really think he knows how to convince people otherwise, and probably like many people he does not see him the way others do. Simple psychology, and I won't digress further. Suffice it to say, though, Dan Snyder running an organization with a major sexual harassment scandal in the NFL doesn't need to be a surprise to anyone, in my opinion either, but I can understand that others may disagree.

2) This behavior is abhorrent, and does not have a place in modern society. I find this thread and a lot of discussions really interesting, because I think they are instructive on some major issues here. Do we understand that societal norms need to evolve sometimes? When we as a society recognize something is wrong, we have a duty to try to fix it in order to simply improve society (since the alternative is to observe behavior that we find morally repugnant). The fact that our opinion as a society evolved is not something to ignore or dismiss as wrong; it is correct for us to reexamine ourselves and seek to improve. It is almost a basic requirement of intellect, to be honest; that is a fact that seems increasingly lost on many people. When we disagree on what is wrong, of course, that is a different issue.

So personally, I feel that is at the crux. Let's put #1 aside for a moment. Do we all agree on #2? No one cares about the past. No one cares about NFL culture when we consider #2 in the context of society as a whole. Some are equating this with the "woke mob" and ascribing the pejorative connotation with pure disdain. I get it. Do you understand what I wrote in #2? You see, the "woke mob" exists in your mind as a pejorative when you disagree that something is wrong. If you agree that something is wrong, that description should not really apply, because at that point, we are seeking to right a wrong together. When you use that label, it definitely sounds like #2 is not in agreement. That type of messaging in your posts is what is causing some wrangling I think on many points. If we come together and clearly state agreement on #2, then I think a lot of problems are solved. I hear some words that sound like #2 is agreed upon, and yet I at the same time hear words that disagree with #2.

Anyway, my 2 cents.