Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Jeter’s booty hauls

Graceless, rangeless, and soon, memorabilialess.

Yankee star Derek Jeter, one of New York’s most eligible hunks since his split with longtime gal pal Minka Kelly, is bedding a bevy of beauties in his Trump World Tower bachelor pad — and then coldly sending them home alone with gift baskets of autographed memorabilia.

The Yank captain’s wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am kiss-offs came to light when he mistakenly pulled the stunt twice on the same woman — forgetting she had been an earlier conquest, a pal told The Post.

“Derek has girls stay with him at his apartment in New York, and then he gets them a car to take them home the next day. Waiting in his car is a gift basket containing signed Jeter memorabilia, usually a signed baseball,” the friend dished.

“This summer, he ended up hooking up with a girl who he had hooked up with once before, but Jeter seemed to have forgotten about the first time and gave her the same identical parting gift, a gift basket with a signed Derek Jeter baseball,” the pal said.

“He basically gave her the same gift twice because he’d forgotten hooking up with her the first time!”

Repoz Posted: December 13, 2011 at 03:31 PM | 568 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: fantasy baseball, memorabilia, yankees

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 6 pages  1 2 3 4 5 6 > 
   1. Joey B. Posted: December 13, 2011 at 03:41 PM (#4014937)
Emily Smith, Tara Palmeri, and their editors at the New York Post really need to get a life. Maybe they're jealous that they're not among the thousands of Jeter conquests.
   2. Dan The Mediocre Posted: December 13, 2011 at 03:51 PM (#4014949)
Emily Smith, Tara Palmeri, and their editors at the New York Post really need to get a life. Maybe they're jealous that they're not among the thousands of Jeter conquests.


They are jealous that they don't have herpes?
   3. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: December 13, 2011 at 03:51 PM (#4014950)
Jeter promises the top-level conquests a chance to win the ball he pilfered from Christian Lopez if they put out right.
   4. The_Ex Posted: December 13, 2011 at 03:54 PM (#4014956)
I thought Jeter had hooked up with Josh Booty.
   5. Dag is a salt water fish in fresh water world Posted: December 13, 2011 at 03:56 PM (#4014957)
They are jealous that they don't have herpes?

Don't pretend that you're not.
   6. chemdoc Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:00 PM (#4014965)
His inability to produce different parting gifts for each visitor is an obvious manifestation of his limited range.
   7. Shredder Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:01 PM (#4014967)
“This summer, he ended up hooking up with a girl who he had hooked up with once before, but Jeter seemed to have forgotten about the first time and gave her the same identical parting gift...."
If there's a better distillation of the American dream out there, I've certainly never heard it.
   8. Don Lock Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:05 PM (#4014971)
This is a common problem with the single members of this board and we look to Derek to lead us in solving such social dilemmas.
   9. Joey B. Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:09 PM (#4014976)
If there's a better distillation of the American dream out there, I've certainly never heard it.

And besides, how insulted could the lady have really been if she came around for seconds?
   10. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:09 PM (#4014977)
Emily Smith, Tara Palmeri, and their editors at the New York Post really need to get a life. Maybe they're jealous that they're not among the thousands of Jeter conquests.


How do you know they aren't? Did Derek not bust out of a helluva slump last year?
   11. The Yankee Clapper Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:15 PM (#4014982)
This didn't make the front or back cover - and the Post seems to be making a bigger story out of Katie Couric's break-up with her "boy toy". Well, it's the off-season.
   12. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:16 PM (#4014983)
1. It is not a surprise that a pampered professional athlete treats women like whores.

2. It is not surprising that some contingent of this board seems to think that behavior deserves some sort of defense.
   13. Matthew E Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:19 PM (#4014987)
Do the women also get a copy of the home game?
   14. The District Attorney Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:27 PM (#4014996)
Do the women also get a copy of the home game?
They don't even get that. They are COMPLETE LOSERS.
   15. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:27 PM (#4014997)
Do the women also get a copy of the home game?

That'd be a pretty disturbing sex toy, wouldn't it?

Also, #6 is awesome.
   16. bobm Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:28 PM (#4014998)
It is not surprising that some contingent of this board seems to think that behavior deserves some sort of defense.


Well, if you watched him play shortstop, you'd know that Derek Jeter can't defend himself. :)
   17. Bourbon Samurai Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:28 PM (#4015000)
A: When did he break up with Minka Kelly? I was unaware of this.

B: This is hilarious. This seems like something from a ridiculous movie rather than something a person would actually do.
   18. The_Ex Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:33 PM (#4015006)
The Post should ask the women how Jeter is in the clutch.
   19. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:37 PM (#4015014)
Living in New York, I've run into women who have run into Jeter. Apparently the ghastly rumors are true: he's a famous single athlete with millions of dollars who enjoys his bachelorhood.

I could have written such gossip years ago if I'd thought it was newsworthy.
   20. tshipman Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:37 PM (#4015015)
B: This is hilarious. This seems like something from a ridiculous movie rather than something a person would actually do.


Isn't it a bit bizarre? I mean, I realize that athletes aren't known for introspection, but giving people an autographed ball as a, "Hey, thanks for sleeping with me" present? Really? At no point do you think that you're an #######?
   21. Johnny Chimpo Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:41 PM (#4015020)
Well, clearly they like his balls.
   22. Matthew E Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:47 PM (#4015028)
The Post should ask the women how Jeter is in the clutch.


I have stated before that there should be a baseball-themed dating service called "Clutch Singles".

ETA: And the baseball version of "Ashley Madison" could be called, "Backdoor Sliders".
   23. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:48 PM (#4015029)
This made me think of Barney Stinson for some reason.
   24. bunyon Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:52 PM (#4015036)
Takes two to tango, all. I wouldn't "defend" Jeter's actions except to say, he's an adult and can have consensual relations with anyone he likes. As can his "dates". If they're offended, perhaps they shouldn't go home with the guy who everyone knows is a player.

Like this girl who now has two of Jeter's balls. She was so shocked and angered at his terrible treatment of her that she went home with him again even after it was clear that he didn't remember her. If he is a base individual (and, sounds like he is), then so is she.
   25. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:52 PM (#4015037)
1. It is not a surprise that a pampered professional athlete treats women like whores.

2. It is not surprising that some contingent of this board seems to think that behavior deserves some sort of defense.


I think you may be confusing jocular cynicism with any serious "defense". Personally I think the part about sending them off with a package of autographed memorabilia waiting for them in a car is almost too funny to be real. It's such a perfect combination of ego and casual contempt that if it's not actually true it would qualify for the summit of Mt. Apocrypha.
   26. Matthew E Posted: December 13, 2011 at 04:56 PM (#4015045)
Besides, let's face it, nothing Jeter is described as doing here is anywhere near as bad as having a painting of himself as a centaur would be.
   27. WhoWantsTeixeiraDessert Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:01 PM (#4015053)
These women probably imagine he makes his best plays in the hole...
   28. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:02 PM (#4015057)
Besides, let's face it, nothing Jeter is described as doing here is anywhere near as bad as having a painting of himself as a centaur would be.


I'm not sure "Thanks, Baby. Here's a signed baseball for you to hold dear, to remember your night with The Captain for always," is right on par with painting himself as a centaur. It's all of a piece of egos gone wild.

I'm not interested in defending the behavior of the woman in question, but I see little reason not to call Jetes obvious misogyny what it is, either.
   29. phredbird Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:04 PM (#4015059)
It is not surprising that some contingent of this board seems to think that behavior deserves some sort of defense.


sarcasm meter broke?

dude, some of us are in our mom's basement by choice!
   30. Spahn Insane Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:08 PM (#4015064)
And besides, how insulted could the lady have really been if she came around for seconds?

Yeah, really--was she expecting a World Series ring on the second go around?
   31. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:09 PM (#4015065)
I could have written such gossip years ago if I'd thought it was newsworthy.

The news is that he gives them a parting gift of an autographed baseball and other Jeterobelia, rather than a simple, "I'll call you."
   32. micker17 Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:10 PM (#4015069)
It's good to be the king.
   33. Spahn Insane Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:12 PM (#4015070)
B: This is hilarious. This seems like something from a ridiculous movie rather than something a person would actually do.

Yup. The camp value easily offsets any offensiveness.

Besides, it'd be easier to object to Jeter's treating these women like whores if they weren't simultaneously out to rack up starf*cker points themselves (unless you think they were oblivious to the fact that the random stray they've picked up is Derek F'ing Jeter, and were in fact innocently out looking for true love). Cuts both ways.

EDIT: That said, I don't really disagree with Sam's 28. I can be simultaneously appalled and amused by this if I want to be.
   34. base ball chick Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:15 PM (#4015074)
Sam Hutcheson doesn't fully appreciate Derek Jeter Posted: December 13, 2011 at 10:16 AM (#4014983)

1. It is not a surprise that a pampered professional athlete treats women like whores.

2. It is not surprising that some contingent of this board seems to think that behavior deserves some sort of defense.


- smile
one of the reasons that mrs H has put up with his stuff for 16 years

but what i wanna know is - why is this activity called jeter's conquest?
seems to me it is the other way around - some woman got herself a piece of His Jeteriness.
SHE is the one competing against other females for the prime piece and SHE won

but saying - thanks for a good time - with a derek jeter autographed baseball - now THAT'S an insult

and it is news that some rich good-looking male screws around?
   35. Spahn Insane Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:15 PM (#4015076)
These women probably imagine he makes his best plays in the hole...

Perhaps they're hoping for a hookup with Jeter, but with an assist from Jeffrey Maier at the moment of climax.
   36. Morty Causa Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:20 PM (#4015078)
Yes. I remember a Shel Silverstein cartoon panel of many years ago that has the caption (something like) America is the only place where a woman can dress like a whore, talk like a whore, and act like a whore, but if you treat her like a whore, she calls a cop. That was a long time ago; now they tell a reporter for cash how they've been mistreated--but that's not part of the whoring.
   37. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:21 PM (#4015081)
and it is news that some rich good-looking male screws around?

Is Jeter really good-looking, or is it just a reflection of his fame/money?

I'm completely unable to judge what females find physically attractive in a man, once you get beyond the obvious classic leading man.

I mean, I understand the Cary Grant, Robert Redford, George Clooney look, but some women seem to think Matthew McConaughey, Prince William and Owen Wilson are attractive, while, to me, they look like the hind end of a horse.
   38. Matthew E Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:21 PM (#4015082)
Would it be better if he gave out baseballs autographed by C.C. Sabathia?
   39. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:23 PM (#4015085)
I'm not interested in defending the behavior of the woman in question, but I see little reason not to call Jetes obvious misogyny what it is, either.

I'm sure you'll pass this little test with flying colors, Sam, but just out of curiosity, what was your take on Chipper Jones's excellent adventure?

---------------------------------------

but what i wanna know is - why is this activity called jeter's conquest?
seems to me it is the other way around - some woman got herself a piece of His Jeteriness.
SHE is the one competing against other females for the prime piece and SHE won


That seems like a much truer way of looking at what's really going on here---"Hey, look, sister spudinas, Derek Jeter came into McDonald's today, and of all the french fries he could've eaten, he chose ME!!!"

but saying - thanks for a good time - with a derek jeter autographed baseball - now THAT'S an insult

Well, at least it's an insult that's now going for about $449.99. That'll buy you a lot of french fries.
   40. McCoy Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:26 PM (#4015088)
I mean, I understand the Cary Grant, Robert Redford, George Clooney look,

Aren't two out of those three gay and the other is a "bachelor"?
   41. Morty Causa Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:27 PM (#4015092)
No.
   42. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:27 PM (#4015093)
I'm completely unable to judge what females find physically attractive in a man, once you get beyond the obvious classic leading man.

I mean, I understand the Cary Grant, Robert Redford, George Clooney look, but some women seem to think Matthew McConaughey, Prince William and Owen Wilson are attractive, while, to me, they look like the hind end of a horse.


Exhibit A of the kavorka of inner beauty.
   43. Gary Truth Serum Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:29 PM (#4015094)
I mean, I understand the Cary Grant, Robert Redford, George Clooney look, but some women seem to think Matthew McConaughey, Prince William and Owen Wilson are attractive, while, to me, they look like the hind end of a horse.

Well come on, with all of those triples that Owen Wilson hit you'd have to think he scored fairly often.
   44. Bob Tufts Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:30 PM (#4015096)
How did he get Bob Sheppard to do the voiceover for "now climaxing, number two, Derek Jeter"?
   45. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:36 PM (#4015101)
Aren't two out of those three gay and the other is a "bachelor"?

Pretty sure neither Clooney or Redford has had even rumors of being gay. I think Cary played for both teams, but, pace Mick Jagger, that doesn't stop you from being a skirt-chaser.
   46. bunyon Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:38 PM (#4015106)
Aren't two out of those three gay and the other is a "bachelor"?

Pretty sure neither Clooney or Redford has had even rumors of being gay. I think Cary played for both teams, but, pace Mick Jagger, that doesn't stop you from being a skirt-chaser.


Refreshing saved me a coke. I would also say that a lot of guys would be happy to get an autographed Jeter ball. Hell, I know guys that would probably sleep with him to get memorabilia. I may even suggest it to them.
   47. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:43 PM (#4015115)
I'm sure you'll pass this little test with flying colors, Sam, but just out of curiosity, what was your take on Chipper Jones's excellent adventure?


Infidelity and broken marriages are always 1) bad news and 2) more complex than they seem. Chipper cheated on his wife. That was bad of him. he then divorced his wife, whom by all accounts he did not love any more, and married the girl he cheated with. He now has many healthy children by his second wife, whom he still seems to love.

I have no interest in either 1) defending Chipper's behavior to any great extent or 2) condemning him as a moral monster. He was a pampered athlete who married his "high school sweet heart" very soon after coming into ass-loads of cash via professional baseball. He then slept around on his marriage, while in his early 20s, but eventually settled down into some sort of stable, adult marriage with his second wife, with whom he is raising multiple children.

In the greater game, I'd say Chipper's behavior is morally problematic, but that Jeter's behavior is worse.
   48. Shredder Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:45 PM (#4015118)
I mean, I understand the Cary Grant, Robert Redford, George Clooney look, but some women seem to think Matthew McConaughey, Prince William and Owen Wilson are attractive, while, to me, they look like the hind end of a horse.
Celebrity (loosely defined) is a powerful aphrodisiac. I go to a lot of concerts. There's something about a stage, a guitar, and a microphone that makes an otherwise ordinary to marginally attractive woman look really hot. At least, I can't think of another explanation for crushes on Carrie Brownstein and Eleanor Friedberger.
   49. Lassus Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:47 PM (#4015122)
Oh yay, we've turned into Deadspin.
   50. RMc is a fine piece of cheese Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:47 PM (#4015125)
Man, this thread is full of teh win (especially 2, 6, 7 and 14 -- everybody likes Weird Al references!).

I am a bit disappointed it took 26 posts for someone to mention the centaur, tho...
   51. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:50 PM (#4015129)
Infidelity and broken marriages are always 1) bad news and 2) more complex than they seem. Chipper cheated on his wife. That was bad of him. he then divorced his wife, whom by all accounts he did not love any more, and married the girl he cheated with. He now has many healthy children by his second wife, whom he still seems to love.

I have no interest in either 1) defending Chipper's behavior to any great extent or 2) condemning him as a moral monster. He was a pampered athlete who married his "high school sweet heart" very soon after coming into ass-loads of cash via professional baseball. He then slept around on his marriage, while in his early 20s, but eventually settled down into some sort of stable, adult marriage with his second wife, with whom he is raising multiple children.

In the greater game, I'd say Chipper's behavior is morally problematic, but that Jeter's behavior is worse.


Damn Sam, since when do you make so much sense?
   52. Spahn Insane Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:52 PM (#4015135)
Is Jeter really good-looking, or is it just a reflection of his fame/money?

I'm completely unable to judge what females find physically attractive in a man, once you get beyond the obvious classic leading man.


I have the same lack of judgment, but I'd say Jeter's a good-looking guy. I've encountered women who think he's the hottest man on the planet and others who think he's just "eh," so I dunno.
   53. Lassus Posted: December 13, 2011 at 05:57 PM (#4015148)
I'm slightly lost, what did Jeter do that was morally worse than infidelity? And how is snapper agreeing, is marriage not a sacrament?
   54. Ben Broussard Ramjet Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:01 PM (#4015155)
I'm slightly lost, what did Jeter do that was morally worse than infidelity? And how is snapper agreeing, is marriage not a sacrament?


Yeah, it seems like Jones made a promise to be monogamous, and broke it; Jeter made no such promise, and so I'm not clear why there's a disapproval of his behavior that outweighs it. Sending someone a gift after consensual sex seems a world away from cheating on your wife to me.
   55. Swedish Chef Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:02 PM (#4015156)
And how is snapper agreeing, is marriage not a sacrament?

Enjoying sex makes god angry.
   56. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:02 PM (#4015159)
I'm slightly lost, what did Jeter do that was morally worse than infidelity?


Treating women as animal-objects is worse than being unfaithful. Doing so while in your late 30s - being a "player" as you approach 40 - is far worse than a single infidelity as a young man.

To be honest, I'm inclined to forgive Chipper the indiscretions of youth. If he did the same thing now, I'd be much harsher on him. The fact that Derek Jeter is nearly 40 and still treating relationships and women as if he were recently pledged to Kappa Alpha is pathetic.
   57. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:02 PM (#4015160)
I'm slightly lost, what did Jeter do that was morally worse than infidelity? And how is snapper agreeing, is marriage not a sacrament?

I don't know whether Chipper Jones' marriage was sacramental or not, that depends on a lot of things. Not every marriage is a sacrament.

I'd answer that they're both serious moral wrongs, and we have differences in volume. In a vacuum, adultery is worse than fornication, but is one broken marriage worse than 500 cases of fornication, who the hell knows? It's impossible to say which is morally worse.

At least Chipper seems to have mended his ways. If he hasn't, I'd reconsider.

Also, Jeter's behavior seems to show more callous disregard for these women.
   58. base ball chick Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:03 PM (#4015161)
snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 11:21 AM (#4015081)

Is Jeter really good-looking, or is it just a reflection of his fame/money?

I'm completely unable to judge what females find physically attractive in a man, once you get beyond the obvious classic leading man.


- obviously different females find different looks attractive. there are very few men who appeal to straight females of all ages and races (see brad ausmus) who is just hot. he just is.

- i would say jeter was very hot when he was younger before he fell so in luuuuvvv with Himself.



I mean, I understand the Cary Grant, Robert Redford, George Clooney look, but some women seem to think Matthew McConaughey, Prince William and Owen Wilson are attractive, while, to me, they look like the hind end of a horse.

- not much difference i can see, really. and they all have a LOT of money and that definitely makes a man more attractive. but none of those guys, or brad pitt, does anything for me. bland and boring except owen wilson who looks like he's on drugs - uck.

gimme terrence howard, matt kemp and grady sizemore ANY day. and please do not ask me to explain jayson werth because i can't.
   59. zonk Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:04 PM (#4015163)
Yeah, really--was she expecting a World Series ring on the second go around?


Well, sounds like she needs a better agent. Someone should have told her you don't qualify for arbitration until after the 3rd go-around, and actual FA negotiation takes 6 beddings.
   60. base ball chick Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:04 PM (#4015165)
andy,

if you give a woman money or something worth money after a 1 night stand, it's an INSULT. i can't believe you don't get this.
   61. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:05 PM (#4015166)
Enjoying sex makes god angry.

You should read some Catholic Moral theology; not in the least.

The late Pope even wrote that a husband has an obligation to make sure his wife, ummm, really enjoys the act, so to speak.
   62. Spahn Insane Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:06 PM (#4015167)
Also, Jeter's behavior seems to show more callous disregard for these women.

What were the expectations these women held going into their encounters with Jeter? I guess I'm not seeing the "callous" part.
   63. Matthew E Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:07 PM (#4015171)
Enjoying sex makes god angry.

You should read some Catholic Moral theology; not in the least.

The late Pope even wrote that a husband has an obligation to make sure his wife, ummm, really enjoys the act, so to speak.


So you count Catholicism as part of Christianity?

I guess that makes some sense.
   64. Spahn Insane Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:08 PM (#4015172)
Well, sounds like she needs a better agent. Someone should have told her you don't qualify for arbitration until after the 3rd go-around, and actual FA negotiation takes 6 beddings.

And by then, as the modern SABR-savvy playa knows, she's past the point where you want to make a particularly lavish investment. It's not like the old days.
   65. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:08 PM (#4015173)
What were the expectations these women held going into their encounters with Jeter?


The moral failings of the women in question doesn't remove the moral failings from Jeter.
   66. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:09 PM (#4015175)
I, too, have no understanding of how to figure out what a good-looking guy is. Mind you, I've no use for the skill, but every now and then it does surprise me.

My 18-year-old daughter and I were watching Game of Thrones, and I made an off-hand remark about how the ladies probably swoon over Jaime Lannister. She frowned at me and said, "Dad, the only good-looking guy in the whole show is Jon Snow."

Shows what I know.
   67. Shredder Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:09 PM (#4015176)
Also, Jeter's behavior seems to show more callous disregard for these women.
I'm not sure what's more misogynistic, Jeter's treatment of the women, or Sam and Snapper's assumption that these women are all just dupes with no real minds of their own or role in the decisions that they make. Check that, actually I am pretty sure. I doubt these women are dumb enough to believe that they're being courted for a long term relationship. I doubt there's any deception involved.
Treating women as animal-objects is worse than being unfaithful.
Animals don't have the capacity for consent. Upon reading this thread, I have serious questions over who considers these women to be more animal-like in nature.
   68. Ben Broussard Ramjet Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:11 PM (#4015181)
Treating women as animal-objects is worse than being unfaithful. Doing so while in your late 30s - being a "player" as you approach 40 - is far worse than a single infidelity as a young man.


Typed out a long post to disagree, but then realized I don't really care enough about these people's personal lives, or judging them, so #### it. But 'animal-objects' seems to kind of deny the women's agency in this whole story. They are thinking adults, and no-one seems to be betraying any confidences.

Still, if we're going to compete for outrage in morally judging celebrities: go to, go to.
   69. base ball chick Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:11 PM (#4015183)
Gern Blanston Posted: December 13, 2011 at 12:06 PM (#4015167)

Also, Jeter's behavior seems to show more callous disregard for these women.

What were the expectations these women held going into their encounters with Jeter? I guess I'm not seeing the "callous" part.


- you don't hand a woman money after a 1 night stand. she might could be a slut or star f****r but she is NOT a prostitute. and yes there IS a difference, a HUGE difference to us females.
   70. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:12 PM (#4015187)
if you give a woman money or something worth money after a 1 night stand, it's an INSULT. i can't believe you don't get this.

THIS. It makes it seem like payment for services rendered. Even I get this, and my wife will happily explain to anyone that I'm pretty clueless overall.
   71. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:13 PM (#4015189)
Animals don't have the capacity for consent. Upon reading this thread, I have serious questions over who considers these women to be more animal-like in nature.


Oddly enough, I have made a couple of points through this thread explicitly confining my criticism to Jeter's behavior. You might take that into account before going off the rails.
   72. Swedish Chef Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:13 PM (#4015190)
if you give a woman money or something worth money after a 1 night stand, it's an INSULT. i can't believe you don't get this.

The big problem with ####### stars is that your grandchildren will simply not believe the stories you tell of your wild years in your youth and give you the respect you deserve. It is simply thoughtful of Jeter to provide a keepsake as proof. Even better would be if he provided some certification that carnal relations took place, but that bug might be fixed in version 2.0 of the Derek Jeter Appreciation Kit.
   73. Spahn Insane Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:14 PM (#4015191)
The moral failings of the women in question doesn't remove the moral failings from Jeter.

That's not what I asked. If their expectations going in were for nothing more than a night's-duration "good time," how is Jeter's behavior "callous" (which, to me, suggests a depraved indifference to/deliberate disappointment of meeting whatever expectations they held)?
   74. Shredder Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:14 PM (#4015192)
THIS. It makes it seem like payment for services rendered. Even I get this, and my wife will happily explain to anyone that I'm pretty clueless overall.
It's funny. Thousands and thousands of people have asked Derek Jeter for autographed memorabilia over the course of his career, but apparently none of these women ever did.
   75. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:15 PM (#4015193)
But 'animal-objects' seems to kind of deny the women's agency in this whole story.


The women in question are responsible for their own actions, moral failings and all. They're thinking adults, as you say. But the fact that they're not actually animals doesn't remove the problem of Jeter's behavior, which indicates strongly that he THINKS OF THEM AS ANIMAL-OBJECTS himself.
   76. base ball chick Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:16 PM (#4015194)
both jeter and his sexual partners are treating each OTHER "like animals" unless you think that jeter is seducing these innocent girls who have been in a convent and never been near a real live man before.

BOTH people are involved in the hooking up. the females are CHOOSING to have sex with jeter. they can and do say - um, no thanks.
   77. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:16 PM (#4015195)
andy,

if you give a woman money or something worth money after a 1 night stand, it's an INSULT. i can't believe you don't get this.


Yes, it's far more preferable to buy the woman dinner, and before the sex. Then it's not called an insult; it's just a date.
   78. Shredder Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:17 PM (#4015196)
Oddly enough, I have made a couple of points through this thread explicitly confining my criticism to Jeter's behavior. You might take that into account before going off the rails.
Sorry Sam, you can't explain away your "treating them like animals" comment by saying "Oh, I'm not actually referring to the behavior of the animals". You can't blame one party for consensual sex. You might want to try, but it doesn't wash.
   79. Spahn Insane Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:17 PM (#4015198)
- you don't hand a woman money after a 1 night stand. she might could be a slut or star f****r but she is NOT a prostitute. and yes there IS a difference, a HUGE difference to us females.

So it would've been less callous for him to just call her a cab and tell her to clear out?

I will say, Sam's acknowledgement that the two parties share "moral failings" in this instance is an important point, if we're going to characterize them as such; they're using the celebrity to placate their own egos or whatever, and he's, well, doing the same thing (only using his own celebrity as the selling point). And, well, they're both getting laid, which presumably is part of what they're after.

EDIT: Coke to bbc's 76. But I'm still curious about the first part...
   80. Shredder Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:19 PM (#4015202)
both jeter and his sexual partners are treating each OTHER "like animals"
Insomuch as humans are part of the animal kingdom perhaps, but I don't think that's what you or Sam are getting at. They're treating each other like humans. Humans have sex, often with several different people over the course of their lifetimes, and often with no real emotional ties involved.

Look, if Sam's point is that ALL sex between individuals who aren't involved in a relationship is per se immoral, then whatever. There's no point in even arguing the specific actions here. But this thread would be a lot shorter if he had just said that at the beginning.
   81. Tom Nawrocki Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:19 PM (#4015203)
Yeah, I don't see why people are condemning Jeter here. He wants to have sex with hot chicks; hot chicks want to have sex with Derek Jeter. Everyone gets what they want, including a nice fruit basket. Why should we care?
   82. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:19 PM (#4015205)
Sorry Sam, you can't explain away your "treating them like animals" comment by saying "Oh, I'm not actually referring to the behavior of the animals". You can't blame one party for consensual sex. You might want to try, but it doesn't wash


If you're going to quote me, at least have the intellectual honesty to quote what I actually said. I said Jeter was treating women like animal-objects. Perhaps that's too complex of a formulation for you, but I have not called anyone animals. In fact, I've called out Jeter for treating human beings as animal-objects, which is the opposite of what you're accusing me of.
   83. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:20 PM (#4015206)
Treating women as animal-objects is worse than being unfaithful.


This, of course, is nonsense, and perhaps the woman doesn't feel she's being "treated as an animal-object."

Wow. Sam really does have blinders on when it comes to Braves players.
   84. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:20 PM (#4015207)
Yes, it's far more preferable to buy the woman dinner, and before the sex. Then it's not called an insult; it's just a date.

I get what you're saying here, but that's actually the truth.

Hey, I don't make the social rules, pal.
   85. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:22 PM (#4015212)
I get what you're saying here, but that's actually the truth.


I don't disagree with you; that is, in fact, what I'm saying. Despite what bbc said, there's no difference between the two; buying the woman dinner in advance = giving the woman a parting Jeterobilia afterwards.
   86. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:22 PM (#4015213)
andy,

if you give a woman money or something worth money after a 1 night stand, it's an INSULT. i can't believe you don't get this.


Of course I do, but I was trying to go with the flow of the thread. AFAIC Jeter's simply a typical spoiled jock, and my only defense of him is that the women were equally willing.

--------------------------------------

I'm slightly lost, what did Jeter do that was morally worse than infidelity? And how is snapper agreeing, is marriage not a sacrament?

No kidding. Chipper's wife didn't ask to be cheated on. Jeter's women were either deaf, dumb and blind or they were fully aware of what they were doing. To try to put a single man's boompsying with a series of willing women in a worse category than cheating on one's wife sounds to me like little more than a case of which cap the two guys play baseball with.

--------------------------------------

I don't know whether Chipper Jones' marriage was sacramental or not, that depends on a lot of things. Not every marriage is a sacrament.

So I guess it depends on what the definition of "sacrament" is, eh?
   87. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:24 PM (#4015215)
I'm not sure what's more misogynistic, Jeter's treatment of the women, or Sam and Snapper's assumption that these women are all just dupes with no real minds of their own or role in the decisions that they make.


Exactly. Clearly, Sam and Snapper are more wrong than Jeter's actions ever were.
   88. Spahn Insane Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:25 PM (#4015218)
Treating women as animal-objects is worse than being unfaithful.

Wonder if Chipper's wife agrees.
   89. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:26 PM (#4015219)
I don't disagree with you; that is, in fact, what I'm saying. Despite what bbc said, there's no difference between the two; buying the woman dinner in advance = giving the woman a parting Jeterobilia afterwards.

Well I think the (minor) difference is that beforehand is no guarantee -- you don't automatically get sex if you buy someone dinner. Giving her something afterwards feels more like leaving a fifty on the nightstand and tossing her her beeper on the way out.
   90. Guapo Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:26 PM (#4015220)
I said Jeter was treating women like animal-objects.


Like, a centaur?
   91. base ball chick Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:28 PM (#4015222)
ray

no wonder you are single

sigh

do you really SERIOUSLY have no idea what is the difference between 2 people going on a date and 2 people meeting and deciding on a 1 night stand?
   92. rr Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:28 PM (#4015223)
Hmmm. I was thinking this thread exploded because a bunch of guys would be bragging about chick magnets.
   93. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:29 PM (#4015226)
Despite what bbc said, there's no difference between the two;


Of course there is. Contrary to your pipe dreams, culture is not a math problem and the world is not populated by homo economicus.
   94. phredbird Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:31 PM (#4015230)
BOTH people are involved in the hooking up. the females are CHOOSING to have sex with jeter. they can and do say - um, no thanks.


that still does not absolve jeter from his transgressive behavior. just because nobody is covered in glory here doesn't mean he isn't a cad. in fact, if his sexual behavior were more skillful -- that is, kind and compassionate instead of exploitative -- this cycle of behavior would not be happening.

still, we are only taking the word of a scandal sheet for this, so who knows what's going on?
   95. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:32 PM (#4015233)
Lisa: a lot of guys see it this way, even if they don't say it out loud.

Not saying I agree; my point in #89 is more how I really feel. But many guys feel that the cost of a date isn't that different from outright paying for sex, and while I think that says as much about the intentions of the guy as anything else, I do think that in some instances this is exactly what is happening from the perspective of both participants.
   96. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:32 PM (#4015234)
Despite what bbc said, there's no difference between the two; buying the woman dinner in advance = giving the woman a parting Jeterobilia afterwards.
The purchasing of dinner does not purchase you sex. Giving items of value afterwards implies that the sex is now being paid for. These are completely different things.

If you think that buying someone dinner is a financial / bodily transaction in which sex is the capital exchanged for the price of the meal, I think it will take a terrifyingly long time to explain to you how human society works.
   97. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:33 PM (#4015235)
- you don't hand a woman money after a 1 night stand. she might could be a slut or star f****r but she is NOT a prostitute. and yes there IS a difference, a HUGE difference to us females.


I have never accessed the services of a prostitute, but I have to believe that they, you know, ask for the money up front.

Which prostitutes are not asking for payment until afterwards?
   98. Don Geovany Soto (chris h.) Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:33 PM (#4015236)
The purchasing of dinner does not purchase you sex. Giving items of value afterwards implies that the sex is now being paid for. These are completely different things.

For the record I agree, but I personally know many guys who feel exactly as Ray does.
   99. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:33 PM (#4015237)
that still does not absolve jeter from his transgressive behavior. just because nobody is covered in glory here doesn't mean he isn't a cad.

And since the women may well have been using Jeter in return, what does that make them, cadettes?
   100. Spahn Insane Posted: December 13, 2011 at 06:34 PM (#4015238)
do you really SERIOUSLY have no idea what is the difference between 2 people going on a date and 2 people meeting and deciding on a 1 night stand?

The standards of conduct appear to be higher in the latter case...

EDIT: Lest there be any misunderstanding: yes, I'm being flip.
Page 1 of 6 pages  1 2 3 4 5 6 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Backlasher
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogBlue Jays To Acquire Josh Donaldson From Athletics For Brett Lawrie, Others
(62 - 4:19am, Nov 29)
Last: Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos

NewsblogRoyals trade reliever Aaron Crow to Miami for two minor leaguers
(1 - 2:32am, Nov 29)
Last: Joyful Calculus Instructor

NewsblogOT - November 2014 College Football thread
(641 - 1:14am, Nov 29)
Last: Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams)

NewsblogSource: Tomas agrees to six-year deal with D-backs | MLB.com
(39 - 12:51am, Nov 29)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogWhatever happened to Wendell Kim? The sad story
(7 - 12:50am, Nov 29)
Last: A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose)

NewsblogBaseball's most underrated Hall of Fame candidates. | SportsonEarth.com : Anthony Castrovince Article
(42 - 12:09am, Nov 29)
Last: alilisd

Newsblog[Cricketer NOT baseball player] Phil Hughes dies after “pitch” to the head
(21 - 11:49pm, Nov 28)
Last: Phil Coorey is a T-Shirt Salesman

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(1198 - 11:48pm, Nov 28)
Last: PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth)

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 11-28-2014
(13 - 11:30pm, Nov 28)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogBoston Red Sox prove (once again) that competitive balance in baseball will never exist | cleveland.com
(55 - 11:30pm, Nov 28)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

NewsblogSandy Alderson says Mets can move quickly if a shortstop becomes available - NY Daily News
(51 - 11:27pm, Nov 28)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogMarlins seek lefty balance in lineup, on mound | MLB.com
(4 - 11:13pm, Nov 28)
Last: Leroy Kincaid

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - November 2014
(1149 - 10:06pm, Nov 28)
Last: Famous Original Joe C

NewsblogBaseball’s Teen-Age Twitter Reporters - The New Yorker
(11 - 7:14pm, Nov 28)
Last: Joe Kehoskie

NewsblogJon Lester has plenty of options in addition to Red Sox - Sports - The Boston Globe
(13 - 4:54pm, Nov 28)
Last: SoSHially Unacceptable

Page rendered in 0.6498 seconds
52 querie(s) executed