SmootSmack
09-15-2010, 12:02 PM
SS One thing that makes this story unique in comparison to so many others is, it involved an episode having to do with what was perceived to be disrespect for a female member of the media. It's only natural that her fellow comrades come to her defense.
While I agree this story will soon become a non-issue, in the meantime there's still that lingering question in the minds of many people as to: Why it's so important to the NFL [or any party for that matter] to make it mandate women be allowed access to the locker-rooms of players when foresight should remind them of the potential problems it could pose? I have a hard time trying to distinguish reward vs. risk even though I'm mindful of the fact it's their job.
I'm trying to understand why male reporters wouldn't be the more appropiate way to get the message out. Members of the media [especially female] must recognize the inherent dangers of just being there, despite the fact we may want to think players are going to conduct themselves in a professional manner. This episode serves to demonstrate that's not always the case, making it unwise to asume.
Common sense begs me to understand how/why female reporters being allowed unfettered access to male locker rooms would not somehow create an uncomfortable atmosphere for both parties. Thus, the unanswered question....Why do it when you have a more viable alternative which in all probability would have reduced the risk of what we just witnessed happening.
Thoughts!
See post #103
But it's not just about the locker room truthfully, it's about giving female sports journalists the proper respect for them to do their job. There's a strong misconception that they don't belong in the pro sports field, which is simply not true and ignorant
While I agree this story will soon become a non-issue, in the meantime there's still that lingering question in the minds of many people as to: Why it's so important to the NFL [or any party for that matter] to make it mandate women be allowed access to the locker-rooms of players when foresight should remind them of the potential problems it could pose? I have a hard time trying to distinguish reward vs. risk even though I'm mindful of the fact it's their job.
I'm trying to understand why male reporters wouldn't be the more appropiate way to get the message out. Members of the media [especially female] must recognize the inherent dangers of just being there, despite the fact we may want to think players are going to conduct themselves in a professional manner. This episode serves to demonstrate that's not always the case, making it unwise to asume.
Common sense begs me to understand how/why female reporters being allowed unfettered access to male locker rooms would not somehow create an uncomfortable atmosphere for both parties. Thus, the unanswered question....Why do it when you have a more viable alternative which in all probability would have reduced the risk of what we just witnessed happening.
Thoughts!
See post #103
But it's not just about the locker room truthfully, it's about giving female sports journalists the proper respect for them to do their job. There's a strong misconception that they don't belong in the pro sports field, which is simply not true and ignorant