Before Christmas, the media here in England was whipping itself up into a froth over what has become known as Manchester United's "Rape Party" - a private-ish holiday bash for which
players paid a planner to "harvest" cute girls from the city's shops, sidewalks, and bars. WAGS were left at home as the guys

went from a strip club (where they could never have behaved as they would later on), to a bar, to a hotel (pictured here) they'd rented out for the night (
see standard tabloid story by The Mirror here). Newspapers here recited tales of players groping and molesting their guests, and settled on their favorite story - of a woman who was "roasted" by six players, who left her with the compliment that she was "a great shag." The night took a predictable turn when a rape was reported to the police - and here, of course, the story gets murky: a 26 year old model reported having been raped by a 19 year old player (who was "quizzed" by police and released). The truthfulness of her complaint is now, again predictably, in dispute. Rumors abound that her boyfriend had been thrown out of the party, and was the person who phoned the police. The scandal has died down: Man U won its games following this event, seems in form as a team, and that's that. Few seemed genuinely bothered by the fact that money which flows to the team from fans is being used to fund the worst impulses of a bunch of spoiled assholes who can't imagine bonding with each other unless it is via and through the body of some woman they've "used" together.
Sir Alex Furgeson has said very little - word is he's banned parties, but the party line is that it's a "club matter".
WOW
ReplyDeleteI hope you realize that you trivialize rape when you condone someone making a false rape claim purely because they've been treated like meat. Every time a woman makes a rape claim, there's always the suspicion that she's making it up. It makes harder to believe the genunine cases when people give false testimony because they've been offended by boorish behaviour. As Lionel Hutz would say, there's rape, and then there's "rape". And there's a world of difference between the two.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, why does the women's side have a right to expect help from the men's side? They're both competitors for the same market (football fans). From a financial point of view, Man Utd should see them in exactly the same light as they see Man City, FC United and any other Mancunian footy side. Are you suggesting the women's team deserve help purely because they're women?
Granted, it'll be nice to see a big club like Man Utd look after a smaller, lesser establish club like the Man Utd ladies. But make no mistake about it - they don't have the "right" to demand anything of Man Utd.
I'm Ipanema Bob.
Hi Bob. If you'd read the comments & replies on soccerlens (where I know you are a participant), you'll see my reiterations regarding the filing of false accusations - my point was *rhetorical*.
ReplyDeleteAnd re: Man U Ladies - there's a bigger story there - about how the FA has tried to go about starting a women's league, and done so badly, and about the sexism of the organization itself. Man U's behavior towards the ladies team was just plain awful - no matter how you cut it. This isn't just about rights, it's about sportsmanship and fair play.
Now - I'm happy to get dialogue going on my blogspot site. But a couple of your posts replying to my writing on soccerlens were really lame - one in particular was just flat out offensive. This blogspot marks out a different sort of community: Imagine, for example, my 12 year old niece reading this, as well as my Dad, my sis, and my teammates from Hackney Ladies. Post anything like that here and I'll do whatever I can to make sure you never post to From A Left Wing.
Jennifer,
ReplyDeleteYou devoted a substantial part of that post to the Jonathan Evans rape claim, and then expanded it to include a similiar incident involving a lacrosse player. So, I figured rape was something you wanted to discuss.
About the Man Utd women's team, I've got no idea about the attempts of the FA to set up a women's league. I can't comment about the treatment the Man Utd ladies received from Man Utd. However, the tone of your article suggested that Man Utd OWED something to the ladies club, as if they were entitled to something. I felt this wasn't incorrect.
By the way, you haven't explained why thinking that a 2-1 goal advantage for women is "lame" or "flat-out offensive".
IB,
ReplyDeleteI used the words "lame" and "flat-out offensive" to describe the first post on soccerlens under the creepier Ipanema name - I've been assuming you were the same author.
I've maintained throughout my posting regarding the 2 point rule that I don't personally like it, and have pointed out numerous times that it's something aimed at low level play to change bad habits - I was, however, surprised to learn that the rule wasn't about a mindset in which women are assumed to be bad players, but a mindset in which guys need incentive to see that women are in fact part of the team.
My post on Man U's party isn't about rape, it's about creepy and abusive sexist behavior that might drive someone to call the cops. AND, it's about reading that behavior on a continuum with how Man U treated its women.
You should familiarize yourself with the FA's campaigns regarding women's football and the association of (already existing) women's teams with men's clubs, and what a disaster that's been for some of the women's teams: Imagine your club - playing together for nearly 20 years - gets taken over by Man U, which promises all sorts of support, which they never come through with, the little they did give they then take away, and then they tell your team they can't even play as a team any more. Now that doesn't seem fair does it? So yeah - I think the Man U ladies deserved better.
I found this post really interesting (a bit belatedly! I hope you see this!)
ReplyDeleteI have to say that I a) see no continuum at all between the rape issue and the lack of a ladies' team; and b) don't see why Utd should have to support a ladies' team. The latter point in particular I found myself feeling quite strongly about as I read your post.
First and foremost: why *should* they have a ladies' team? The FA should be supporting the women's game, sure, but individual men's clubs have no obligation to take part. If they want to, great. But if the women's game is to take off it ought to have its own structures and perhaps its own teams. I love that Doncaster Belles are a much bigger side than Doncaster will ever be, though I dislike the cutesy name. Far worse than Utd's longstanding indifference, and far more damaging to the women's game, is what Charlton did to their women's side, traditionally one of the strongest.
I guess I see it as a reductive thing - the idea that a women's side is like the youth team or the reserves - an appendage to the "proper" team. Sod that, if women's football deserves a proper club structure it shouldn't be an afterthought.
I should raise the caveat that I neither play nor have any real interest in women's football, other than as another arena in which women suffer discrimination and inequality. So maybe if I were within the game, my opinion would be different.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThanks FG - I deleted that inappropriate post, and your post pointing it out. I was traveling when that was posted, and missed it in my last weeding.
ReplyDelete