Kevin Keegan

[llcoolc157]

Think Keegans  bang on the money meeself like…

I struggle to get away with that ‘try hard’ who shrieks her way through every match… and yes, I know, there are poor male pundits too…

I just used to like a bit of comedy, interaction, light hearted banter that you’d get from a few male ex pros… a bit of entertainment if you like… now it’s all about analysing with the same old cliches ‘well they lacked a bit of quality in the final third’ or ‘they failed to cope with the high press’… hear the same shite every week…

[Thomson Mouse]

It’s clearly not the end but that’s it for me  

[Thomson Mouse]

3 minutes ago, llcoolc157 said:

Think Keegans  bang on the money meeself like…

I struggle to get away with that ‘try hard’ who shrieks her way through every match… and yes, I know, there are poor male pundits too…

I just used to like a bit of comedy, interaction, light hearted banter that you’d get from a few male ex pros… a bit of entertainment if you like… now it’s all about analysing with the same old cliches ‘well they lacked a bit of quality in the final third’ or ‘they failed to cope with the high press’… hear the same shite every week…

 

An additional   

[KaKa]

4 minutes ago, oldtype said:

 

But I'm also entitled to react by pointing out that it's a dumb and misogynistic preference.

 

 

Hey, go for it. 

 

Some people are more prone to imagine the worst of other people, so I get it.

[TRon]

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

 

I mean as guys we all grow up watching the men's game, playing football against other guys, talking endlessly about football with other guys.

 

Maybe for some guys when they watch the punditry they just prefer to see the same because it's what they're are used to and that's it. It could be the level of banter that takes place in that kind of setup, the stories that are shared from the guys that are ex pros, which they find more compelling etc etc. Who knows?

 

I think reducing that to simply a hatred of women is really poor.

 

I'm not really interested in talk about hatred for women or misogyny tbh, I'm not sure what that's got to do with this. I don't watch women's football, but I support it 100%. I'm sure lots of people really enjoy it and fair play to them. I watch women's tennis same as I watch men's tournaments, this is just a personal preference.

 

But when it comes to listening to football opinions  I prefer to listen to people who can offer some insight rather than buffoons regardless of the sex.

[TRon]

7 minutes ago, llcoolc157 said:

Think Keegans  bang on the money meeself like…

I struggle to get away with that ‘try hard’ who shrieks her way through every match… and yes, I know, there are poor male pundits too…

I just used to like a bit of comedy, interaction, light hearted banter that you’d get from a few male ex pros… a bit of entertainment if you like… now it’s all about analysing with the same old cliches ‘well they lacked a bit of quality in the final third’ or ‘they failed to cope with the high press’… hear the same shite every week…

 

Not sure if this is a wind up but if it is it's top stuff.

[MrRaspberryJam]

They should be equal. 

[MrRaspberryJam]

Just now, MrRaspberryJam said:

They should be equal. 

I’ve always said that.  

[oldtype]

8 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

I mean as guys we all grow up watching the men's game, playing football against other guys, talking endlessly about football with other guys.

 

Maybe for some guys when they watch the punditry they just prefer to see the same because it's what they're are used to and that's it. It could be the level of banter that takes place in that kind of setup, the stories that are shared from the guys that are ex pros, which they find more compelling etc etc. Who knows?

 

I think reducing that to simply a hatred of women is really poor.

 

Of course. As men, we are generally more comfortable around and familiar with men. So aside from sexual partners, we generally prefer to surround ourselves with men: socially, in the workplace, in the media we consume etc. It's perfectly natural.

 

...it's also exactly why women have been systematically excluded from jobs they are perfectly capable of performing (such as football commentary) for decades.

 

Congratulations @KaKa, you've managed to perfectly describe the underlying mechanism of institutional misogyny.

[KaKa]

Just now, TRon said:

 

I'm not really interested in talk about hatred for women or misogyny tbh, I'm not sure what that's got to do with this. I don't watch women's football, but I support it 100%. I'm sure lots of people really enjoy it and fair play to them. I watch women's tennis same as I watch men's tournaments, this is just a personal preference.

 

But when it comes to listening to football opinions  I prefer to listen to people who can offer some insight rather than buffoons regardless of the sex.

 

Well it's got to do with it because the misogyny label is getting flung at people left, right and centre.

 

And regarding your preference, you are entitled to it, but it's not going to be the same for everyone for various reasons.

[KaKa]

Just now, oldtype said:

 

Of course. As men, we are generally more comfortable around and familiar with men. So aside from sexual partners, we generally prefer to surround ourselves with men: socially, in the workplace, in the media we consume etc. It's perfectly natural.

 

...it's also exactly why women have been systematically excluded from jobs they are perfectly capable of performing (such as football commentary) for decades.

 

Congratulations @KaKa, you've managed to perfectly describe the underlying mechanism of institutional misogyny.

 

 

Man, can't even hang with your boys anymore without being misogynistic.

 

God help us.

[Hanshithispantz]

It comes with the territory of them having a much harder ride than men in their profession, but it's pretty obvious a lot of women in these jobs feel an expectancy to perform which comes across awkwardly.

 

I hate probably most commentators as I find them cringey and mawkish, so I honestly couldn't care less who's talking, but there is an obvious difference in male and female commentators, and I can see how someone would prefer the classic (but shite), sickly style of a Drury or Motson, and why they would perceive women to be shite (The BBC pushing Oakley out the door at the start probably played a big part in that.)

 

 

Edited October 6, 2023 by Hanshithispantz

[oldtype]

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

 

 

Man, can't even hang with your boys anymore without being misogynistic.

 

God help us.

 

 

Nobody gives a shit about "hanging with your boys." The problem is that people in positions of power make decisions about hiring etc. based on the exact same thought process. 

[kingxlnc]

Not sure the issue here. Keegan is stating his preference and his opinion, which some may agree with, and some may not. 

My preference may be the same as Keegan's on this issue, and that's fine. And it's okay if it's not, too. 

 

There are bigger problems in the world. 

[KaKa]

2 minutes ago, oldtype said:

 

 

Nobody gives a shit about "hanging with your boys." The problem is that people in positions of power make decisions about hiring etc. based on the exact same thought process. 

 

Listen I'm going to leave you to it. I can see you're getting over excited, and soon will come the meltdown and abuse.

 

I'm quite looking forward to a really nice evening ahead.

 

So you enjoy yourself.

[gbandit]

Have you chatted to Oldtype before? Can’t think of many people less likely to have a meltdown or start abusing people. The debate’s been pretty civil and there’s been a miscommunications and also just major differences of opinion. That’s all fine, and why we’re here 

[Kid Icarus]

50 minutes ago, Hanshithispantz said:

So what is it then? He can be infuriated as he likes, people cannot just make nonsensical arguments because they sound good man. 

 

We all prefer gendered things of various colours, it's not misogynistic and it doesn't need addressing. Keegan's commenta are clearly misogynistic.

Eh? You're just hoying new stuff into the point here. 

 

No one's refuting that there aren't legitimate gendered things that contribute to why there's a difference between the men's and women's game, but if you don't watch women's football because it's women or you're assigning something that has nothing to do with being a woman to the reason you don't watch women's football, like lack of intelligence for example, or (the original point being argued against) as the reason why that women pundits and commentators shouldn't be involved in the men's game, then that's completely different.

 

The original obviously sexist points have moved so wildly away from where they were earlier in the conversation that we're now in 'eh? what's wrong with having a preference for the men's game' and 'there are biological differences between men and women' territory that has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it's sexist to group good or bad female pundits and commentators by their gender - something that would never happen with any other demographic except, rightfully, Americans.

 

 

Edited October 6, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[oldtype]

3 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

Listen I'm going to leave you to it. I can see you're getting over excited, and soon will come the meltdown and abuse.

 

I'm quite looking forward to a really nice evening ahead.

 

So you enjoy yourself.

 

I think I'm being pretty calm  If you think that the mere invocation of the word "misogyny" constitutes aggression or abuse, that's probably a you problem and not a me problem.

[Kid Icarus]

14 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

 

Man, can't even hang with your boys anymore without being misogynistic.

 

God help us.

I seem to remember a certain poster recently saying that we were all secretly racist. 

 

Totally different though I'm sure.

 

 

Edited October 6, 2023 by Kid Icarus

[SEMTEX]

We knew Oldtype had a temper when we married him

[wormy]

You fucking know a forum debate has peaked when KaKa comes barrelling in to tell people they're being too emotional.

 

 

Edited October 6, 2023 by wormy

[Hanshithispantz]

22 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Eh? You're just hoying new stuff into the point here. 

 

No one's refuting that there aren't legitimate gendered things that contribute to why there's a difference between the men's and women's game, but if you don't watch women's football because it's women or you're assigning something that has nothing to do with being a woman to the reason you don't watch women's football, like lack of intelligence for example, or (the original point being argued against) as the reason why that women pundits and commentators shouldn't be involved in the men's game, then that's completely different.

 

The original obviously sexist points have moved so wildly away from where they were earlier in the conversation that we're now in 'eh? what's wrong with having a preference for the men's game' and 'there are biological differences between men and women' territory that has nothing whatsoever to do with whether it's sexist to group good or bad female pundits and commentators by their gender - something that would never happen with any other demographic except, rightfully, Americans.

 

 

 

Wullie isn't making theoretical arguments based around some utopian future though.

 

If there's a tangible reason to prefer a man over a woman then it isn't necessarily mysogyny. It's just sophistry to imply that someone doesn't care about gender in sports because "if things were equal I wouldn't care". The fact things aren't equal are why we prefer men's football. The fact female commentators clearly differ in their style to men is why some people will prefer men. This isn't something that person needs to work on.

 

I haven’t read 40 pages of this argument, so fair enough if I've missed a load of mental nonsense and I'm jumping in on the 'wrong side', but where we seem to be at the minute is "prefering male commentators is mysogynistic" which is just daft.

 

 

 

Edited October 6, 2023 by Hanshithispantz

[Orphanage]

1 minute ago, Hanshithispantz said:

Wullie isn't making theoretical arguments based around some utopian future though.

 

If there's a tangible reason to prefer a man over a woman then it isn't necessarily mysogyny. It's just sophistry to imply that someone doesn't care about gender in sports because "if things were equal I wouldn't care". The fact things aren't equal are why we prefer men's football. The fact female commentators clearly differ in their style to men is why some people will prefer men. This isn't something that person needs to work on.

 

I haven’t read 40 pages of this argument, so fair enough if I've missed a load of mental nonsense and I'm jumping in on the 'wrong side', but where we seem to be at the minute is "prefering male commentators is mysogynistic" which is just daft.

 

 

 

 

Dont try talking sense to them ...

[Tiresias]

Young colleague at work fell in love with football through watching the lionesses, and is slowly getting more involved in watching the game more widely. the idea that people would prefer analysis from men rather than women would be just the thing to drive her right away. There are good and bad pundits(and god knows there are plenty of them), everything else is just nonsense. Some of the female pundits have been bad, and i do understand ex players getting a bit annoyed at pundits not playing at that level, but there is a range of different punditry and analysis that can be delivered. As mentioned Emma Hayes was an excellent pundit when she's not managing, would like to see more of her.

[Kid Icarus]

7 minutes ago, Hanshithispantz said:

Wullie isn't making theoretical arguments based around some utopian future though.

 

If there's a tangible reason to prefer a man over a woman then it isn't necessarily mysogyny. It's just sophistry to imply that someone doesn't care about gender in sports because "if things were equal I wouldn't care". The fact things aren't equal are why we prefer men's football. The fact female commentators clearly differ in their style to men is why some people will prefer men. This isn't something that person needs to work on.

 

I haven’t read 40 pages of this argument, so fair enough if I've missed a load of mental nonsense and I'm jumping in on the 'wrong side', but where we seem to be at the minute is "prefering male commentators is mysogynistic" which is just daft.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not even talking about Wullie man.

 

You've definitely missed a lot in the previous pages, all of which I'm talking about.