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, July 29, 2014

SOE: Minor League Manhood - A first-hand account of masculine sports culture run amok.

Manhood. It’s a competition. Has been since the first grunting, snorting, finger-sniffing Neanderthal scratched out whatever he felt defined it on the wall of his cave. Battle, power, money, looks—they all have their place in the contest, but the one thing that’s been a true indicator of Manhood, since the days when men huddled around flame adorned in animals pelts, is Woman.

Editor’s note: This story contains graphic language. 
Let the speculation begin about “Jimmy Keets”.

Random Transaction Generator Posted: July 29, 2014 at 11:11 AM | 178 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: hayhurst, minor leagues, sexual assault, women

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 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. Batman Posted: July 29, 2014 at 04:40 PM (#4759876)
I'll wildly speculate that it's Fernando Valenzuela Jr. Fernando Jr. is still playing in the Mexican League. He has a .327 career batting average there in 2311 PA.
   2. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 29, 2014 at 05:18 PM (#4759911)
The whole thing is just pretty disgusting.
   3. ursus arctos Posted: July 29, 2014 at 05:35 PM (#4759921)
If unsurprising.

2003 Eugene Emeralds roster for the forensically inclined.
   4. Blastin Posted: July 29, 2014 at 08:17 PM (#4760029)
This too.
   5. McCoy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 08:40 PM (#4760042)
I would guess it is a black guy.
   6. PreservedFish Posted: July 29, 2014 at 09:12 PM (#4760056)
When men are stuck together they get awful. Myself included.
   7. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: July 29, 2014 at 09:18 PM (#4760059)
There really isn't anything shocking in there. I heard similar stories from buddies in fraternities. The fish is right, we are kind of appalling as a group.
   8. McCoy Posted: July 29, 2014 at 10:13 PM (#4760085)
Get 25 young women together and they don't form a knitting circle.
   9. PreservedFish Posted: July 29, 2014 at 10:26 PM (#4760089)
True.
   10. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: July 29, 2014 at 10:43 PM (#4760094)
7 - This is well beyond anything I've heard firsthand from people. Mind you, I've mostly hung out with bookish types, but still...
   11. Sonic Youk Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:02 AM (#4760149)
I've generally enjoyed Hayhurst, but I wonder how long he's going to stick around as a decent writer. I can't believe he has too many more good stories about baseball players nobody cares about from when he was still a major league fringe player.
   12. Joe Kehoskie Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:40 AM (#4760171)
I've generally enjoyed Hayhurst, but I wonder how long he's going to stick around as a decent writer.

I'm rooting for "not long."

Hayhurst is probably a nice-enough guy and all that, but he clearly has a huge axe to grind not only with professional baseball, but with men generally. (And maybe even with life generally.)

I know plenty of guys who are bitter about how their professional baseball careers ended up, but Hayhurst seems to have a worse case than most. I hope he can get past it and move on.
   13. steagles Posted: July 30, 2014 at 01:05 AM (#4760179)
wouldn't the smart move for hayhurst be to write and produce a scripted series?
that would enable him to tell interesting stories based on his first hand knowledge while removing the burden of the stories having to be true.

he could co-write it with buzz bissinger and it could air friday nights on NBC. it'll be a baseball version of that thing ESPN did a while ago that got them asscaked by the NFL.
   14. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: July 30, 2014 at 01:15 AM (#4760186)
Hayhurst is probably a nice-enough guy and all that, but he clearly has a huge axe to grind not only with professional baseball, but with men generally. (And maybe even with life generally.)

I know plenty of guys who are bitter about how their professional baseball careers ended up, but Hayhurst seems to have a worse case than most. I hope he can get past it and move on.


I don't know about that, but the more I read from Hayhurst the more surprised I am that he lasted as long in the game as he did.
   15. PreservedFish Posted: July 30, 2014 at 01:41 AM (#4760190)
the more I read from Hayhurst the more surprised I am that he lasted as long in the game as he did.


Yeah? I wouldn't be surprised if everyone in the clubhouse thought of Hayhurst as "one of the guys."
   16. Joe Kehoskie Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:08 AM (#4760195)
Yeah? I wouldn't be surprised if everyone in the clubhouse thought of Hayhurst as "one of the guys."

I doubt it, especially if the conversations he relates are even semi-accurate.
   17. Brian C Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:43 AM (#4760208)
I know plenty of guys who are bitter about how their professional baseball careers ended up, but Hayhurst seems to have a worse case than most. I hope he can get past it and move on.

It's not even that that bothers me about this piece.

Here's the thing: if his fairly detailed description of the "Jane" character is accurate, then it's probably not that hard for people that were around the team - not to mention friends or family of hers - to know who he's talking about. I mean, how many young female groudskeepers could there have been for Eugene at the time? So ... did she know that there was a video made of her? Does she in any way want people to know that she lost her virginity that way? It seems like fairly personal information that is now broadcast to the world behind a transparent alias. Unless, of course, Hayhurst is fudging the details, but that's not a particularly appealing option, either. But then, the piece reeks of novelization throughout, so perhaps I'm giving him too much credit for being accurate with the details to begin with.

But, let's go further. Why does "Jane" need to be in this article in the first place? A player sleeping with the groundskeeper isn't all that shocking or scandalous, even if she was a virgin at the time. The dude made a video, and that's sh-tty, but still, relative to the rest of the piece it's not all that notable. So why is it there, when the risk of embarrassing her personally should be a consideration? I mean, it couldn't have anything to do with the fact that she spurned our noble hero when he asked her out, could it?

It's just kind of a creepy piece. It has the tone of a hard-hitting expose, but it's littered with enough salacious details that it reads like a steamy gossip piece ("GUESS WHICH RELIGIOUSLY OUTSPOKEN BALLPLAYER WAS SPIED AT DA CLUB GETTING BLOWJOBS!!"). It withholds the names of the guilty while decrying the culture of secrecy that leads to those same players being protected. And over and over again it purposely builds up the nobility and good character of its writer; sure, he was surrounded by unrelenting sleaze, but oh, that's not what he was like! After all, here he is, playing white knight over ten years later!

It's odd. And while I'm in full agreement with #7 above and have no doubt that ballplayers can pretty much be heinous jerks, it sets my BS detector off pretty strongly.
   18. PreservedFish Posted: July 30, 2014 at 04:23 AM (#4760210)
I couldn't tell if Dirk's teammate was being cruel here or not:

"Damn, Hayhurst, you should have told me you liked that chick," my roommate said later. "I would have waited until you were back in the room, so you could have ran the camera."


And the piece actually runs counter to the introduction. These stories are as much about team bonding as they are about cutthroat competition. Depraved bonding, but still
   19. Howie Menckel Posted: July 30, 2014 at 08:45 AM (#4760231)
There is something.... odd about the story. I think Hayhurst is trying to do something right by exposing a subculture, but for some reason the piece didn't work so well. No. 1 is one reason and No. 17 is another.

It clearly is a brutal environment to have been placed in for anyone who has any qualms, though. Walking away from a part-time retail job where weird #### happens is one thing; as he notes, being so young and getting paid (at all) to play baseball would not be an easy thing for most people to walk away from, or risk it all by whistleblowing (to bosses who may have done similar things minus the tech decades earlier).

I don't think, No. 18, that comment was meant to be cruel. In the culture in question, the far greater assumption would be "you want to see her naked" vs "wait, you have feelings for her so this might be awkward."
   20. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 09:16 AM (#4760236)
Yeah? I wouldn't be surprised if everyone in the clubhouse thought of Hayhurst as "one of the guys."


They certainly did not. It's a major theme in his books.

I have bad news for the sheltered among you: EVERY young female employee/intern of a minor league baseball team ##### players. I'm sure there are occasional ultraconservative exceptions but very few. Young women are free to #### whoever they're attracted to, it turns out a great many of them are attracted to professional athletes, and the nonathletes among us might want to check our jealousy at the door.

Did anybody else catch the statutory rape that, if Hayhurst is to be taken at his word, the team must have had swept under the rug?
   21. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 09:21 AM (#4760240)
I have bad news for the sheltered among you: EVERY young female employee/intern of a minor league baseball team ##### players. I'm sure there are occasional ultraconservative exceptions but very few. Young women are free to #### whoever they're attracted to, it turns out a great many of them are attracted to professional athletes, and the nonathletes among us might want to check our jealousy at the door.

I only got half way through the article, but the idea that we'd be jealous of these meatheads is laughable.

It would be an interesting pscychological study as to why these young women are attracted to these men who openly treat them like pieces of meat. I mean, you can kind of squint and understand it with the big leaguers who have the allure of fame and money. But these guys?
   22. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 09:21 AM (#4760241)
This was the gayest thing I've ever read, and not the good kind of gay either.
   23. Random Transaction Generator Posted: July 30, 2014 at 09:27 AM (#4760245)
I mean, you can kind of squint and understand it with the big leaguers who have the allure of fame and money. But these guys?


The possible future of fame and money? I've sat in the same section that the Toronto Blue Jays wives/girlfriends/families sit in (a few times) and even the fringe players who are up from AA/AAA for a cup of coffee often have smoking hot wives/girlfriends. Maybe they've decided to get in on the ground floor of a great business opportunity...
   24. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 09:35 AM (#4760253)
With the sole exception of a handful of AAA cities, the young male pickins in minor league towns range from slim to none.

It's not hard to understand why young women are attracted to the local pro baseball players, but it's extremely unpolitic to talk about--women tend to naturally be attracted to (a) strong, healthy physiques, (b) men who demonstrate superiority to other men in some obvious way, and (c) men who project aggressiveness and confidence. Those last two things correlate strongly with being an #######, creating the popular "why are women attracted to ########?" misconception.

Don't blame me; it's Darwin's fault.
   25. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 09:41 AM (#4760256)
Don't blame me; it's Darwin's fault.


Evolution is just a theory, heathen.
   26. TJ Posted: July 30, 2014 at 09:42 AM (#4760257)
Remember this article the next time you feel sorry after reading something about how minor league players have to live on peanut butter sandwiches...
   27. My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto Posted: July 30, 2014 at 09:50 AM (#4760262)
To paraphrase "Point Break", these guys are young, dumb, and full of come; what to you expect?
   28. Lassus Posted: July 30, 2014 at 09:53 AM (#4760266)
The fish is right, we are kind of appalling as a group.

Disagree. Appalling people are appalling by themselves or in a group. I suppose weak people can turn appalling when a group does so, but I admit I consider those people even more appalling because they were too weak to resist being appalling. People who are not appalling will not become appalling if the guy next to them is being appalling. I guess I think that if that happens, that person was always appalling, just lacking opportunity.
   29. The Good Face Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:00 AM (#4760270)
women tend to naturally be attracted to (a) strong, healthy physiques, (b) men who demonstrate superiority to other men in some obvious way, and (c) men who project aggressiveness and confidence.


All true.

Those last two things correlate strongly with being an #######, creating the popular "why are women attracted to ########?" misconception.


Then it's not really a misconception, is it?
   30. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:11 AM (#4760279)
It is, because no one likes an ####### and all women that don't have deep-rooted mental problems would prefer an assertive, confident guy who is nice over an #######. It's just that for every assertive, confident guy who is nice there are ten or twenty of them who are ########--and it seems that if you can only have one or the other, most women would rather have meanness than spinelessness.

Women aren't attracted to ####### behavior--it's something a lot of them live with because they're attracted to traits that often correlate with it. Passivity, shyness, cowardice--THOSE are the instant turnoffs. That's my amateurish theory, anyway.
   31. djordan Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:20 AM (#4760284)
#30 "The Tao of Steve," decent indie film from back in the early aughts, handled this theory pretty well, specifically the "Be excellent in her presence" scene.
   32. The Good Face Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:23 AM (#4760286)
It is, because no one likes an #######


Apparently a lot of women do.

and all women that don't have deep-rooted mental problems would prefer an assertive, confident guy who is nice over an #######.


The trouble there is that too much "nice" erodes the very confidence and assertiveness that women find attractive in the first place.

It's just that for every assertive, confident guy who is nice there are ten or twenty of them who are ########--and it seems that if you can only have one or the other, most women would rather have meanness than spinelessness.


Well then if we agree, and it appears we do, that, ceteris paribus, women prefer meanness to spinelessness, where's the misconception? Women are as a general rule attracted to ########, because ######## as a general rule are more likely to have the traits of aggression and confidence that women like.
   33. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:27 AM (#4760290)
Pffft, listen chumps, if you want to know how to attract women all of your hand-waving and theorizing can't compete with the proven and tested methods of the Prince of Persuasia.
   34. Eddo Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:30 AM (#4760292)
Well then if we agree, and it appears we do, that, ceteris paribus, women prefer meanness to spinelessness, where's the misconception? Women are as a general rule attracted to ########, because ######## as a general rule are more likely to have the traits of aggression and confidence that women like.

But the women aren't attracted to the ####### trait; they're attracted to the other traits, which ######## are simply more likely to have.

You would never say, "People prefer the taste of carbohydrates;" rather, people prefer the taste of sugars and starches, which are high in carbohydrates. It might be a subtle distinction, but it's there.
   35. The Good Face Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:36 AM (#4760298)
But the women aren't attracted to the ####### trait; they're attracted to the other traits, which ######## are simply more likely to have.

You would never say, "People prefer the taste of carbohydrates;" rather, people prefer the taste of sugars and starches, which are high in carbohydrates.


That's like saying, "People don't actually like ice cream; they just enjoy the sweetness of the sugar, the taste of the flavoring, and the mouth feel of the butterfat."
   36. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:45 AM (#4760308)
There are a lot of ######## out there who aren't aggressive or confident; they're just ########. A great many of them spend most of their time in their bedrooms playing video games, watching porn and posting on 4chan or Something Awful, and hate women because women ignore them.
   37. Lassus Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:46 AM (#4760311)
Apparently a lot of women do.

I hope you don't think this is exclusive to women. ####### men hang out with - an onto - other ####### men like their lives depended upon it.

In fact, ####### men are far more attracted percentage-wise to other ####### men at a rate women could not even hope to approach in this universe.
   38. Random Transaction Generator Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:50 AM (#4760315)
In fact, ####### men are far more attracted percentage-wise to other ####### men at a percentage women could not even hope to approach in this universe.


Sounds like we need a movie sequel to "Mean Girls", called \"####### Men".
   39. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:50 AM (#4760316)
A lot of men follow assertive ######## around once they realize that a lot of women follow them around.

John McGraw wisely observed a hundred years ago that "One percent of ballplayers are leaders of men; the other 99 percent are followers of women."

By the way, all of this is purely hormones; as women and men both gain age and maturity they begin to consider factors other than how viscerally attracted to this person am I. But in our teens and early 20s? Most of us pretty much do what our hormones order us to do.
   40. Harmon "Thread Killer" Microbrew Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:55 AM (#4760319)
Couple of thoughts:

- I'm surprised that the general threads of the comments are basically: "Man, Hayhurst sure is bitter", "None of this is surprising", and "Women are attracted to ballplayers".
- all the ######### make the latter portions of the thread pretty hard to follow

Edit - a second reading indicates that all the #######s are the same word, so it's not that hard. I just need more coffee.
   41. The Good Face Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:57 AM (#4760320)
There are a lot of ######## out there who aren't aggressive or confident; they're just ########. A great many of them spend most of their time in their bedrooms playing video games, watching porn and posting on 4chan or Something Awful, and hate women because women ignore them.


You can be an ####### while lacking confidence and assertiveness. But it's hard to be very confident and assertive without having a decent amount of ####### in your makeup. Perhaps not impossible, but certainly very rare.

I hope you don't think this is exclusive to women. ####### men hang out with - an onto - other ####### men like their lives depended upon it.


Sure, confidence and assertiveness are leadership qualities. People of any gender are more likely to gravitate to exceptionally confident and assertive people.
   42. Lassus Posted: July 30, 2014 at 10:58 AM (#4760321)
A lot of men follow assertive ######## around once they realize that a lot of women follow them around.

Eh. I'm not sure I agree this is the main reason. I'm sure it IS a reason, but the biggest? Does not ring true for me.


Sure, confidence and assertiveness are leadership qualities. People of any gender are more likely to gravitate to exceptionally confident and assertive people.

Except I wasn't talking about leaders, I was talking about ########. Unless you think all ######## are leaders of men.
   43. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:04 AM (#4760327)
#40: I just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge how amazing your handle is.
   44. Davo Dozier Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:13 AM (#4760334)
The thing that always surprises me about these stories (about athletes or rock stars) is that they don't get tired of it. I mean, seriously, do you really expect to get anything new out of your 1000th night of casual sex with a stranger that you didn't get from your previous 999? Besides herpes of course.
   45. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:16 AM (#4760341)
Remember this article the next time you feel sorry after reading something about how minor league players have to live on peanut butter sandwiches...


Huh. So that's what they're calling it these days.
   46. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:20 AM (#4760344)
Too many ########s in the text here to follow.
   47. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:22 AM (#4760345)
The thing that always surprises me about these stories (about athletes or rock stars) is that they don't get tired of it. I mean, seriously, do you really expect to get anything new out of your 1000th night of casual sex with a stranger that you didn't get from your previous 999? Besides herpes of course.


It's a fundamental instinct. Do you get tired of eating?
   48. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:28 AM (#4760352)
You can be an ####### while lacking confidence and assertiveness. But it's hard to be very confident and assertive without having a decent amount of ####### in your makeup. Perhaps not impossible, but certainly very rare.


I disagree with this. I know plenty of confident, assertive people who aren't asses.

With the sole exception of a handful of AAA cities, the young male pickins in minor league towns range from slim to none.

It's not hard to understand why young women are attracted to the local pro baseball players, but it's extremely unpolitic to talk about--women tend to naturally be attracted to (a) strong, healthy physiques, (b) men who demonstrate superiority to other men in some obvious way, and (c) men who project aggressiveness and confidence. Those last two things correlate strongly with being an #######, creating the popular "why are women attracted to ########?" misconception.

Don't blame me; it's Darwin's fault.


So, you're saying evolution hasn't caught up women's preferences with what's valuable in modern society? I can buy that. I'm still shocked at how many upper middle class parent care and talk more about their kids sports, than they do about their academics.
   49. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:31 AM (#4760356)
It's a fundamental instinct. Do you get tired of eating?

It's not a fundamental instinct to have an endless series of one night stands. Most people seem to prefer long-term bonding, and the ones who don't generally seem to be among the less well-adjusted members of society.

Or, as the old joke says; "Hey Joe, we see you with a different girl every night. You must be lousy in bed."

   50. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:37 AM (#4760359)
It's not a fundamental instinct to have an endless series of one night stands. Most people seem to prefer long-term bonding, and the ones who don't generally seem to be among the less well-adjusted members of society.


You're projecting.
   51. The Good Face Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:39 AM (#4760361)
I disagree with this. I know plenty of confident, assertive people who aren't asses.


I didn't say they were asses, rather that most of those people have a certain amount of ####### in them. Some may be better at clamping down on that part of themselves, but it's there. Without it they'd be unable or unwilling to engage in and win conflicts with other people, and if they can't or won't do that, then they're not actually confident and assertive.

So, you're saying evolution hasn't caught up women's preferences with what's valuable in modern society? I can buy that. I'm still shocked at how many upper middle class parent care and talk more about their kids sports, than they do about their academics.


A lot of evidence seems to indicate that education, especially in women, is negatively correlated with reproductive success. Maybe all those parents are on to something, evolutionarily speaking.
   52. PreservedFish Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:41 AM (#4760365)
Baseball players, as a group, also seem to get married early. Not a ton of bachelors in the big leagues, from what I can tell.

In The Third Chimpanzee Jared Diamond speculates that man's "natural" state of being is longterm paired bonding with some promiscuity on the side. Some animals have this pattern. There's probably a good technical term for it.
   53. djordan Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:43 AM (#4760368)
I'm still shocked at how many upper middle class parents care and talk more about their kids sports, than they do about their academics.


I would say, as a parent who has attended waaay too many neighborhood BBQs this summer, most UMC parents care & talk about whatever their kids' strengths are and lean them in that direction. If their kid rocks a Math contest, she becomes a "Mathlete" in their eyes. If their son crushes his peers in rec league hoops, suddenly all efforts move in the direction of creating the next Danny Ferry. If their daughter is amazing at cheerleading, that family heads down to "The Nationals" at the ESPN Wide World of Sports complex in Orlando every year - at fairly considerable cost.

I'll also say this for the parents pushing their kids in sports - more often than not, it's not about getting their kids to the pros. It's about any angle to get their kids into a decent - not even elite - decent college at an affordable cost.
   54. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:44 AM (#4760370)
most of those people have a certain amount of ####### in them. Some may be better at clamping down on that part of themselves,


That sounds uncomfortable.
   55. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:45 AM (#4760373)
There's probably a good technical term for it.


########, apparently.
   56. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:47 AM (#4760376)
#40: I just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge how amazing your handle is.


Huh huh. Huh huh huh. Huh huh.
   57. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:48 AM (#4760377)
The colloquial term for it is "marry the provider, #### the gardener".

A lot of evidence seems to indicate that education, especially in women, is negatively correlated with reproductive success.


Only to the extent cranking out kids by the half-dozen that have little to no hope of a decent upbringing can be called a success, as far as I can tell.

Education correlates very strongly with full-time employment and above-entry-level employment. Couples who both work full time-plus at jobs that frequently come home with them struggle to find adequate time to raise one or two kids. Four or five? Forget it.
   58. Davo Dozier Posted: July 30, 2014 at 11:50 AM (#4760379)
"In The Third Chimpanzee Jared Diamond speculates that man's "natural" state of being is longterm paired bonding with some promiscuity on the side. Some animals have this pattern. There's probably a good technical term for it."

In America, at least, we call it marriage.
   59. The Good Face Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:00 PM (#4760388)
The colloquial term for it is "marry the provider, #### the gardener".


I've usually heard it as "Alpha #####, beta bucks".

Only to the extent cranking out kids by the half-dozen that have little to no hope of a decent upbringing can be called a success, as far as I can tell.

Education correlates very strongly with full-time employment and above-entry-level employment. Couples who both work full time-plus at jobs that frequently come home with them struggle to find adequate time to raise one or two kids. Four or five? Forget it.


Mother nature doesn't care if you live in a nice neighborhood in the suburbs and give your kids a decent upbringing. If you have kids who go on to have more kids, you're an evolutionary success.
   60. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:03 PM (#4760393)
This country is very uptight about sex.
   61. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:11 PM (#4760403)
The colloquial term for it is "marry the provider, #### the gardener".

I've usually heard it as "Alpha #####, beta bucks".


The Alpha gardeners are the ones making the huge phallic topiaries.
   62. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:13 PM (#4760410)
Mother nature doesn't care if you live in a nice neighborhood in the suburbs and give your kids a decent upbringing. If you have kids who go on to have more kids, you're an evolutionary success.

And human beings have no reason to care about evolutionary success. We've literally evolved beyond the point that our behaviors are primarily driven by evolutionary pressures. Witness the large number of people and societies who are actively choosing not to reproduce themselves.

You're projecting.

No, I'm making a value judgement on what constitutes a "good life". Just as anyone who says it's great to bang a random chick every night is making a value judgement on "the good life".

This country is very uptight about sex.

Sex is incredibly powerful, and there are all sorts of negative societal consequences from certain sexual behaviors.

If you aspire to a more libertarian world order, you'd better aspire to a much more conservative societal standard on sexuality.
   63. Harmon "Thread Killer" Microbrew Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:20 PM (#4760417)
Zeth: Thanks!

When I signed up here, there was a poster who called himself "Hammerin' Hank Scorpio". I thought that was great, so modelled my handle around it.

I added the "Thread Killer" after a depressing stretch where my comments seemed to immediately end all discussion in any thread where I weighed in.
   64. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:43 PM (#4760438)
Sex is incredibly powerful,


Not really. American society and culture has made this so -- that's kind of my point -- but it's not true on a raw scale.

   65. Lassus Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:47 PM (#4760443)
This country is very uptight about sex.

Full agreement.


Not really. American society and culture has made this so -- that's kind of my point -- but it's not true on a raw scale.

I know you hate when I ask this, but this kind of assertion requires elaboration.
   66. Davo Dozier Posted: July 30, 2014 at 12:59 PM (#4760454)
#17--

But, let's go further. Why does "Jane" need to be in this article in the first place? A player sleeping with the groundskeeper isn't all that shocking or scandalous, even if she was a virgin at the time. The dude made a video, and that's sh-tty, but still, relative to the rest of the piece it's not all that notable. So why is it there, when the risk of embarrassing her personally should be a consideration? I mean, it couldn't have anything to do with the fact that she spurned our noble hero when he asked her out, could it?


You're exactly right, and I had the same bad feeling reading it that you're getting to.

He's slut-shaming her, plain and simple.
   67. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 01:08 PM (#4760472)
Not really. American society and culture has made this so -- that's kind of my point -- but it's not true on a raw scale.

The existence of a huge sex industry (including strip clubs, prostitutes and porn), popular across all cultures, and addiction to sex and porn, would seem to indicate you're wrong.

If sex wasn't powerful, why would hundreds of millions of people spend hours and hours watching it (not even participating)? Why would people spend thousands of dollars, and risk crime, legal consequences, and disease, going to prostitutes? Hell, people even travel to other countries to visit prostitutes.

   68. Biff, highly-regarded young guy Posted: July 30, 2014 at 01:08 PM (#4760474)
Wow, there's a lot of BS being spewed in this topic.
   69. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 01:12 PM (#4760481)
Wow, there's a lot of BS being spewed in this topic.


As opposed to just about any other topic with more than, I dunno, 5 or 6 posts?
   70. PreservedFish Posted: July 30, 2014 at 01:14 PM (#4760487)
I'm not sure what this exchange even means:

Sex is incredibly powerful.

-

Not really.


   71. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 01:38 PM (#4760511)
I'm not sure what this exchange even means:

Sex is incredibly powerful.

-

Not really.


I'm arguing that sex has serious emotional, and psychological impact on people. Ray is arguing (as far as I can tell) that it's a mere bodily function, and that it's perceived importance is a social construct.
   72. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: July 30, 2014 at 01:54 PM (#4760525)
You're exactly right, and I had the same bad feeling reading it that you're getting to.

He's slut-shaming her, plain and simple.


I had the same reaction. I think he's trying to have his cake and eat it too -- he's a good guy because he was disgusted by the whole thing, but he's also titillating the reader by describing her work on the field in her sports bra and revealing that she's a "screamer."
   73. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:03 PM (#4760530)

I'm arguing that sex has serious emotional, and psychological impact on people. Ray is arguing (as far as I can tell) that it's a mere bodily function, and that it's perceived importance is a social construct.


I don't think the two are mutually exclusive.

American culture and society has conditioned people to believe that sex is All Important. Conservatives and the religious right caution of sex outside of marriage and casual sex and demonize prostitution. (Meanwhile despite us having to hear lectures about this stuff from them, plenty of conservatives and members of the religious right are engaging in these activities themselves -- even Snapper has admitted here that he's watched porn, and yet here he is obsessing over the fact that people watch porn.) Liberals in turn are fevered in demanding that no judgment values be placed on sex, particularly a woman's decisions regarding sex, and they pretend something is wrong with men who find women attractive and who express that and who act on it even in a consensual way, to the point where attention paid to these issues is at an ultra peak. On a secondary level there is an obsession with inventing sex discrimination in the workplace (the unequal pay canard) and discussing birth control and "access" to birth control and abortion and same-sex marriage... the attention paid to these issues and the shouting over them and the name calling of others is endless.

American culture has amped up sex issues so that attention and discussion and debate on these issues is at a fevered pitch, which plays into the fact that individuals end up with a heightened focus on these issues which leads to serious emotional and psychological impact of these issues, as Snapper says.

And meanwhile behind closed doors everyone is doing everything, including conservatives and the religious right.

I'm not sure if I've explained this well enough but the above is the gist of my point. It's an exhausting culture to live in, where people don't just do their own thing and leave everyone else the #### alone.
   74. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:20 PM (#4760545)
Did anybody else catch the statutory rape that, if Hayhurst is to be taken at his word, the team must have had swept under the rug?
Not necessarily; he said "underage," but that could mean under 18 (given that the issue was parental objection) rather than under the legal age for sex, which in most places is 16.
   75. dr. scott Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:22 PM (#4760549)
Disagree. Appalling people are appalling by themselves or in a group. I suppose weak people can turn appalling when a group does so, but I admit I consider those people even more appalling because they were too weak to resist being appalling. People who are not appalling will not become appalling if the guy next to them is being appalling. I guess I think that if that happens, that person was always appalling, just lacking opportunity.


If this is correct, than according to Milgram's experiments, nearly 60% of people are appalling, which I suppose is another way to interpret his results. The mainstream interpretation, however, is that its fairly easy, through peer pressure and power dynamics to get most people to do awful things.

(Actually Milgram's experiments were only about avoidance of blame by following orders, and though peer pressure certainly involves power dynamics, they are quite different)
   76. PreservedFish Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:24 PM (#4760554)
Ray: sounds like, at best, a chicken/egg issue. It would be very easy to argue that the power/significance of sex is what has led to its politicization.
   77. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:29 PM (#4760558)
Ray: sounds like, at best, a chicken/egg issue. It would be very easy to argue that the power/significance of sex is what has led to its politicization.


Do other countries, such as in Europe, have these deep hang-ups? I'm asking seriously as I'm not an expert on European culture nor have I spent much time in Europe. But my impression is that they are not as hung up on sex issues. To take two very small examples: they have co-ed nude beaches as part of mainstream accepted cultural behavior; there is nudity on tv.
   78. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:30 PM (#4760560)
and yet here he is obsessing over the fact that people watch porn.

Obsessing? Where did I obsess? I was just noting the popularity of porn as an indicator of the power of sex.
   79. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:33 PM (#4760563)
Correct me if I'm wrong, Snapper, but you think porn is a Problem and that people who watch it are flawed. Sure, in the extreme everything is a problem (e.g. if someone watched porn 6 hours a day everyone agrees that would be a problem), but you think porn is bad in and of itself.
   80. PreservedFish Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:34 PM (#4760565)
Do other countries, such as in Europe, have these deep hang-ups?

How about Japan, where, if the porn I've seen is to be believed, every sexual encounter looks at least a little bit like a violation of sorts?
How about Saudi Arabia, where women are not allowed to display their ankles or hair in public?
Are the ping-pong bars of Thailand a point in your favor or against it?

This #### is complicated enough that I think it suffices to say that your summary of sexual dynamics in modern America is somewhat lacking in depth.
   81. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:38 PM (#4760571)
He's slut-shaming her, plain and simple.
Okay, so this seems like a good place to ask this question -- I can't ask it in the places where I usually hear this term used, because in those places I'd be shouted down. I haven't quite got the nuances of the term, because it seems to be used in two somewhat different, and not entirely compatible, ways. Sometimes people seem to be using it to mean calling someone a slut who isn't one. And other times, people seem to be using it to mean trying to make someone who is a slut feel ashamed of it.
   82. Eddo Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:39 PM (#4760572)
Liberals [...] pretend something is wrong with men who find women attractive and who express that and who act on it even in a consensual way

I'd love to hear an example of this.
   83. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:42 PM (#4760576)
Correct me if I'm wrong, Snapper, but you think porn is a Problem and that people who watch it are flawed. Sure, in the extreme everything is a problem (e.g. if someone watched porn 6 hours a day everyone agrees that would be a problem), but you think porn is bad in and of itself.

It's a problem in that it's a complete waste of time and effort, and distorts peoples' view of the nature of sexuality. It's a problem, but much more of a spiritual problem that impacts individuals, not society.

But the seductive nature of it (many people spend hours a day looking at porn) point to the power of sex.

Here's an interesting article from Cracked, approaching the issue from a not-at-all serious or conservative perspective.

http://www.cracked.com/article_15725_the-10-steps-to-porn-addiction-where-are-you.html
   84. Eddo Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:42 PM (#4760577)
Sometimes people seem to be using it to mean calling someone a slut who isn't one. And other times, people seem to be using it to mean trying to make someone who is a slut feel ashamed of it.

I've always interpreted it more as the first example, in that it's trying to (unfairly) shame someone who enjoys having sex. And almost 100% of the time, it's (unfairly) targeted at women.
   85. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:52 PM (#4760594)
I just began hearing the term "slut shaming" two weeks ago, in the BBTF politics thread -- suddenly there was a rash of the term being used there -- and I have no clear idea what it means as I wasn't really following the specifics of those sidebar discussions.
   86. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:53 PM (#4760597)
If this is correct, than according to Milgram's experiments, nearly 60% of people are appalling, which I suppose is another way to interpret his results


If anything, 60% sounds low.
   87. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:54 PM (#4760600)
Don't blame me; it's Darwin's fault.

Leave poor Danny out of this.
   88. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 02:56 PM (#4760603)
I thought he was referring to Bobby.

Or maybe Barney.
   89. Kurt Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:17 PM (#4760639)
I would say, as a parent who has attended waaay too many neighborhood BBQs this summer, most UMC parents care & talk about whatever their kids' strengths are and lean them in that direction. If their kid rocks a Math contest, she becomes a "Mathlete" in their eyes. If their son crushes his peers in rec league hoops, suddenly all efforts move in the direction of creating the next Danny Ferry. If their daughter is amazing at cheerleading, that family heads down to "The Nationals" at the ESPN Wide World of Sports complex in Orlando every year - at fairly considerable cost.


Personally - as someone whose kids are more gifted academically than athletically - I would say that sports and other activities are a lot more interesting to talk about and hear about than academics. "Gertrude enjoyed her art camp this summer and created XYZ" is a more natural topic of conversation than "Gertrude enjoyed getting straight A's this year, especially that 98 on her math final".

Plus, in my experience jock culture is more alpha, and therefore more braggy, than academic culture.
   90. The Good Face Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:25 PM (#4760658)
Sometimes people seem to be using it to mean calling someone a slut who isn't one. And other times, people seem to be using it to mean trying to make someone who is a slut feel ashamed of it.


I've always interpreted it as lefties taking exception to the concept of "slut" as something negative or shameworthy. It's certainly not the first one; you'll never see a scenario where an accusation of slut-shaming is withdrawn if the person accused of engaging in slut-shaming conclusively demonstrates that the slut in question is, in fact, a slut.
   91. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:30 PM (#4760669)
"slut-shaming" is a term that's been in use in feminism for a while now. One who invokes it is suggesting it is inappropriate to (explicitly or implicitly) communicate to women that it is shameful for them to like sex and actively seek it.
   92. djordan Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:38 PM (#4760676)
#89, I hear ya to some degree in terms of what parents chat about in mixed company. Little League HRs & game-winning baskets tend to get more mileage at the backyard party than sharing report cards. Many of them have their eyes on whatever's gonna get their kids into a decent school, and any edge they can develop.
   93. Non-Youkilidian Geometry Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:40 PM (#4760679)
Or maybe Barney.

That damn purple dinosaur has a lot to answer for.
   94. Eddo Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:48 PM (#4760683)
It's certainly not the first one; you'll never see a scenario where an accusation of slut-shaming is withdrawn if the person accused of engaging in slut-shaming conclusively demonstrates that the slut in question is, in fact, a slut.

It's the "shaming" part that is objectionable; why should a woman be made to feel wrong that she enjoys sex (i.e. is a slut)?
   95. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:54 PM (#4760690)
enjoys sex (i.e. is a slut)?
Of course, "enjoys sex" is not the same thing as "slut." Now, enjoys sex with many different people, perhaps.


(And of course one can't make another feel ashamed; one can only make oneself feel ashamed. If one really believes that there's nothing wrong with it, then there's no "shaming" to be done.)
   96. PreservedFish Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:57 PM (#4760696)
(And of course one can't make another feel ashamed; one can only make oneself feel ashamed. If one really believes that there's nothing wrong with it, then there's no "shaming" to be done.)


Huh? Is this some libertarian thing about owning one's ideas or something? Of course you can make someone else feel ashamed.
   97. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:57 PM (#4760697)
Derek Jeter -- slut or superslut?
   98. bunyon Posted: July 30, 2014 at 03:58 PM (#4760700)
I'm not sure what this exchange even means:

Sex is incredibly powerful.

-

Not really.




Sounds like normal post-coital conversation, to me.
   99. Eddo Posted: July 30, 2014 at 04:09 PM (#4760724)
[...] why should a woman be made to feel wrong that she enjoys sex (i.e. is a slut)?
Of course, "enjoys sex" is not the same thing as "slut." Now, enjoys sex with many different people, perhaps.

Fine, then:

Why should a woman be made to feel wrong that she enjoys sex with many different people, perhaps?

(And of course one can't make another feel ashamed; one can only make oneself feel ashamed. If one really believes that there's nothing wrong with it, then there's no "shaming" to be done.)

Now this, this is just Looney Tunes.
   100. The Good Face Posted: July 30, 2014 at 04:19 PM (#4760734)
(And of course one can't make another feel ashamed; one can only make oneself feel ashamed. If one really believes that there's nothing wrong with it, then there's no "shaming" to be done.)

Now this, this is just Looney Tunes.


Makes perfect sense. You can't make somebody feel ashamed for doing something they don't consider to be wrong or shameful. If somebody feels they've been slut-shamed, it's because on some level, they accept that that behavior is shameful.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Brian
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(2986 - 9:33pm, Sep 17)
Last: Mefisto

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-17-2014
(43 - 9:33pm, Sep 17)
Last: Baldrick

NewsblogUmpire ejects Braves fan for heckling Bryce Harper
(57 - 9:12pm, Sep 17)
Last: Rickey! trades in sheep and threats

NewsblogRudman: Clutch hitting the key to Mariners’ playoff hopes
(8 - 9:12pm, Sep 17)
Last: Petunia inquires about ponies

NewsblogOT: September 2014 College Football thread
(249 - 9:10pm, Sep 17)
Last: Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66)

NewsblogPedro pens a letter to Clayton Kershaw
(40 - 9:08pm, Sep 17)
Last: Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee

NewsblogJoe Girardi: ‘Pitch the right way’
(46 - 9:03pm, Sep 17)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogChris Davis Rescues Man Pinned Under Truck
(41 - 8:46pm, Sep 17)
Last: michaelplank has knowledgeable eyes

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(830 - 8:43pm, Sep 17)
Last: TFTIO is familiar with the work of Pablo Neruda

NewsblogBowman: A year’s worth of struggles leads reason to wonder what changes are in store for the Braves
(53 - 8:41pm, Sep 17)
Last: Brian White

NewsblogBryan Cranston’s One-Man Baseball Play Inspired By ‘Looney Tunes’ Is Incredible
(68 - 7:13pm, Sep 17)
Last: winnipegwhip

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(263 - 7:10pm, Sep 17)
Last: Mefisto

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 9-17-2014
(17 - 7:09pm, Sep 17)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogWith 8-2 win Tuesday, Orioles clinch first American League East title since 1997
(21 - 6:47pm, Sep 17)
Last: boteman is not here 'til October

NewsblogA’s lose Triple-A Sacramento affiliate
(82 - 6:42pm, Sep 17)
Last: Boileryard

Page rendered in 0.8915 seconds
53 querie(s) executed