Discrepancies in the Bubble/Treatment of men vs women (merged) | Page 2 | The Boneyard

Discrepancies in the Bubble/Treatment of men vs women (merged)

huskyd said:
Uh oh. Venturing into dangerous waters here by disparaging the "kitchen help." Are you suggesting that the "help" is generally not discerning and usually doesn't care what slop is offered them? They're just like Dickens' orphans who hold out their bowl and say, "More gruel, please." Tch, tch.
Expand ...
I think you should reread the post you are disparaging. He inferred that the " kitchen help" would likely be too discerning to eat what the young ladies are being offered. I do not see the insult you have inferred. And young Oliver was not plaintively asking for something delicious, but just something to fill his stomach rather than please his palate. Tch,tch! ;)
 
I fumed about this for a while before drafting my reply. As a woman, I know all too well what it’s like to be treated as second-class. I’ve had male bosses tell me I would be more successful if I would dress sexier, smile more, or do more things to help them succeed. I’ve been told I should do a job for two or three years at a lower rate of pay and then they would consider paying me fairly for it. I’ve been told by a male boss that women cannot compete in business because they do not learn how to compete in sports. I‘ve spent a lifetime hoping that things will be better for the next generation. There was a story in a national media outlet the other day that implied that the woman who would benefit the most from the NCAA allowing players to profit from the images were the ones who are the prettiest or sexiest. 50 years after the failed attempt at ratifying ERA, women still are not valued equally as people. In my opinion, the only way we will get to equality is when both men and women decide they will accept nothing less. In the meantime, our institutions must do a better job of setting an example and showing leadership. I don’t believe that not one person in the NCAA considered that there would be some public outcry over the unequal treatment. I think it’s much more likely that they considered it and just didn’t care.
 
Carnac said:
You are 100% correct!! Why do the men get the best of everything, and the women are given substandard accommodations and food the kitchen help wouldn’t eat?

Someone didn’t do their due diligence. The March madness tournament is the biggest and most watched (covered by the news media) event during the year. Millions of dollars are made from this tournament. How can there be such a H-U-G-E gap in accommodations and the quality of food served? This is unacceptable under any circumstances.

If San Antonio (or any other location) that is being considered as a host can’t provide the same quality of accommodations and food service that the men get, it should not be on the list of the tournament’s potential sites. How hard is it to vet potential sites prior to awarding them a tournament? 😕
Expand ...

Why the differences? Simple answer, even if you don't like it, the men's tourney generates substantially higher $$$ from the networks due to significantly higher audience ratings. Simple economics to the NCAA brass, however, it gives them a big black eye in the tone def category.
 
One really absurd difference in the swag bags is that the men received the 500-piece NCAA jigsaw puzzle while the women got the 150-piece one.
Don't know why they did that, unless someone at the head office thought the bigger one might be too complicated for the wimmins :eek:
 
.-.
Fore! said:
Why the differences? Simple answer, even if you don't like it, the men's tourney generates substantially higher $$$ from the networks due to significantly higher audience ratings. Simple economics to the NCAA brass, however, it gives them a big black eye in the tone def category.
Expand ...
So if that’s the case then, it should mean that the men’s teams that produce less revenue should be given inferior treatment. Since we know that’s not true, I call BS.
 
If they had provided zero weights, I think it would have stuck out less than what they did.

With no weights provided, you might think that they were half-assing it. But with that single lonely dumbbell rack, you see that someone thought that the women might want some weights in the practice area...but then provided the bare minimum. So it's not even half-assed - it's more like one-tenth assed. :rolleyes:
 
I am just speculating but I wouldn't be shocked if it was the financial office, those who have to sign off on the expenditures, was told to "cut10%" and "training equipment" was simply eliminated to help stay on budget and the rack was what was hastily provided when the "non-financial" people realized what had been done. That same financial official hasn't the power to do that to the men, who provide a billion dollars through their TV contract. The BS about a lack room is just that BS and I'm glad that today's social media is there to point that out. The days of making some cavalier response are over. Or will those who reported the BS be banned from social media as "conspiracy nuts" or "athletic terrorists"? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
.-.
Bama fan said:
I think you should reread the post you are disparaging. He inferred that the " kitchen help" would likely be too discerning to eat what the young ladies are being offered. I do not see the insult you have inferred. And young Oliver was not plaintively asking for something delicious, but just something to fill his stomach rather than please his palate. Tch,tch! ;)
Expand ...
Well he didn’t really know any better did he? Been a long time since read that.
 
cordarone said:
One really absurd difference in the swag bags is that the men received the 500-piece NCAA jigsaw puzzle while the women got the 150-piece one.
Don't know why they did that, unless someone at the head office thought the bigger one might be too complicated for the wimmins :eek:
Expand ...
More likely the other way around
 
Carnac said:
You are 100% correct!! Why do the men get the best of everything, and the women are given substandard accommodations and food the kitchen help wouldn’t eat?

Someone didn’t do their due diligence. The March madness tournament is the biggest and most watched (covered by the news media) event during the year. Millions of dollars are made from this tournament. How can there be such a H-U-G-E gap in accommodations and the quality of food served? This is unacceptable under any circumstances.

If San Antonio (or any other location) that is being considered as a host can’t provide the same quality of accommodations and food service that the men get, it should not be on the list of the tournament’s potential sites. How hard is it to vet potential sites prior to awarding them a tournament? 😕
Expand ...
The weight room thing is truly outrageous but apparently the food is bad for everyone. I hadn’t heard about the swag bags?
 
Have the "swag bags" always been so different? I wonder if it is a bit of a strain since I doubt that all 64 teams got them in years past. I get that WCBB doesnt have as much sponsorship, but it seems like some things (the puzzles?) are really head scratchers. Alone, however, this wouldnt be that big of a deal.

When they start short-changing the women on stuff they need to do their sport, they are way out of line. No valid excuse for that "weight room". The food issues seem to stem from the difficulties of arranging all this in the bubble. It seems there were food issues on the men's side too, but not as bad? But how the organization can not account for different dietary needs (vegan, religious, medical, etc) is surprising and dumb.

As CD said, they spoke up and steps are being taken. It shouldnt have to take this, but the women got it done!
 
.-.
stamfordhusky said:
Things are far from perfect. But women have gained massively from Title IX. There are tens of thousands of examples.
Expand ...
Let's see title IX was passed in June1972. That's almost 49 years. When you consider that a LARGE contingent of schools had no programs for women, at that time, tens of thousands of examples and massive may not be much. When you go from nothing to something, all progress is relative. So, relatively speaking, the NCAA has a long way to go to have a situation where fairness is considered acceptable. 49 years!!!!!!! and we haven't arrived at fairness. I understand the men's programs generate $$$$$. I'm not foolish (some in my family may not agree with that statement), I'm not expecting equality yet. I'm certainly expecting fairness.
The least that could be done is to provide necessities. I am guessing the NCAA has no idea what necessary is. I would venture a guess that athletic trainers would deem weights necessary. I would venture a guess that team nutrition is necessary. I'm wondering what the comfort level is, for the women. Are my sights set too high here?
 
Puppy Love said:
I fumed about this for a while before drafting my reply. As a woman, I know all too well what it’s like to be treated as second-class. I’ve had male bosses tell me I would be more successful if I would dress sexier, smile more, or do more things to help them succeed. I’ve been told I should do a job for two or three years at a lower rate of pay and then they would consider paying me fairly for it. I’ve been told by a male boss that women cannot compete in business because they do not learn how to compete in sports. I‘ve spent a lifetime hoping that things will be better for the next generation. There was a story in a national media outlet the other day that implied that the woman who would benefit the most from the NCAA allowing players to profit from the images were the ones who are the prettiest or sexiest. 50 years after the failed attempt at ratifying ERA, women still are not valued equally as people. In my opinion, the only way we will get to equality is when both men and women decide they will accept nothing less. In the meantime, our institutions must do a better job of setting an example and showing leadership. I don’t believe that not one person in the NCAA considered that there would be some public outcry over the unequal treatment. I think it’s much more likely that they considered it and just didn’t care.
Expand ...
In the late 70's while stationed in Germany the Group XO, a Major had harassed one of my female enlisted soldiers. I confronted him on this and he stated that he's the XO and I'm a Sargent and it was none of my business. When I told my wife letting out my frustration on the issue she just tried to calm me down so I wouldn't get in trouble, I had a previous confrontation with the same XO.

Two days later I was called into the Group Commander's office, he asked me if what the incident was true, I stated that it was. He then asked how the female soldier was I said that she was shaken up about the incident, but doing okay. I inquired on how he found out and he stated that his wife heard about it and had addressed the issue with him when he got home from work the day before. There was a quick investigation by the command and the Major got a scathing reprimand put into his official file by the Commander.

I found out later that my wife had a scheduled outing with the Commander's wife the morning after the incident and had informed her of what I had stated the night before. My wife, who is German was acting as the translator for the planing of the Group Christmas party at one of the local fest halls. When I asked her about it she stated that Caroline had told her that if she ever had a problem adapting to the Military or the American lifestyle that she would be happy to help her. She asked her if it was proper for a Officer to ask inappropriate questions to a female private, Caroline had told her no and it went from there.

I found out later down the road that the Major was passed over twice for LTC and had to retire at 20 years, I hope that the letter and his attitude towards women in the military had something to do with his getting a forced retirement.
 
Carnac said:
I had better chow while going through basic training at Fort Ord than it appears the women are getting in San Antonio. How can that be? 😳
Expand ...
Basic training chow halls are generally better than regular units. Plus everyone is hungery as hell so food always tastes better.

Interestingly enough, when I went through basic in the mid sixties at Ord we were put in a bubble as well. There had been a meningitis outbreak so we were restricted contact from everyone but our own unit. We also were to keep space between ourselves as well.
 
willtalk said:
Basic training chow halls are generally better than regular units. Plus everyone is hungery as hell so food always tastes better.

Interestingly enough, when I went through basic in the mid sixties at Ord we were put in a bubble as well. There had been a meningitis outbreak so we were restricted contact from everyone but our own unit. We also were to keep space between ourselves as well.
Expand ...
The only reason why it was better is because of two things:

1. When you entered the chow hall you had to get your food and get out in less than 15 minutes,

2. Like you said you were hungry as hell so it tasted better, I believe that it tasted liks S..., but you needed food in you to get through basic.
 
.-.
My dad who enlisted before Pearl Harbor always claimed army food was great!
I think a lot of this is because the tournament had never done anything like this before and while they had plenty of time to really do it right, they were all focused on logistics and practice schedules and housing for 2000+ people in the 64 travel parties, and totally dropped the ball in other areas. They only ever had to worry about a four team tournament location before.

Swag bags - sorry, but it doen't look like the men's swag is anything to write home about so I'm not going to lose sleep about it. It's not like an Oscars swag bag with $20,000 worth of goodies. Looks sort of like a first class air travel gift bag!

But the weight room!!! That is completely unacceptable. And is just classic idiocy on the part of an NCAA that is 50 years out of touch with reality. That they still focus on landline phone calls in recruiting contact compliance is a classic example. I'm not sure they are aware that Ma Bell no longer has a monopoly on telecommunications.
 
willtalk said:
Basic training chow halls are generally better than regular units. Plus everyone is hungery as hell so food always tastes better.

Interestingly enough, when I went through basic in the mid sixties at Ord we were put in a bubble as well. There had been a meningitis outbreak so we were restricted contact from everyone but our own unit. We also were to keep space between ourselves as well.
Expand ...
The meningitis concern was still prevalent when I got there in 1969. We were in the old barracks. We were restricted to our company street. That sucked because we were NOT on the hill in the newer barracks. We had nothing. No day room, no TV's, no vending machines...............nothing!! We roughed it. The food was great. Yes, at the end of the day, we were all hungry as hell and ate everything put on our plate, and looked around at everyone else's plate hoping there was something on their plate they didn't want.

Every platoon wanted to be first to go in so that after everyone had been served, if they called seconds, you could get more. You couldn't get more if you were still eating. Our company cook knew what seasoning was and how to use it. :( Two MAJOR newsworthy occurrences happened during my 8 weeks there. The 1st moon landing on July 20, and the Tate-LaBianca murders (Charles Manson) in Los Angeles a month later.
 
Last edited:
I was also in boot camp during the summer of '69 and had similar experiences. We were not allowed to watch TV until after the 5th week but one day we were required to go to the TV room. That was the day of the first moon landing! I still remember laughing when my then wife wanted to know why I was not getting a haircut before I left 🤣. The food didn't agree with me like it did for you and I lost 20 pounds in boot camp (back then I couldn't afford to lose that much). After that I was sent for electronics training on Governor's Island in NYC where the future chefs also had school. That food was outstanding. I had never had steak and potatoes (or grits) for breakfast before. The lobster boats got inspected every Friday so we had plenty of the rejects for dinner.
 
Bama fan said:
I think you should reread the post you are disparaging. He inferred that the " kitchen help" would likely be too discerning to eat what the young ladies are being offered. I do not see the insult you have inferred. And young Oliver was not plaintively asking for something delicious, but just something to fill his stomach rather than please his palate. Tch,tch! ;)
Expand ...
With respect 'Bama, Carnac is a self-confessed disparager of kitchen help. No amount of diversionary chit-chat can refute a man's heartfelt confession. And who, besides you and Bob Woodward, really knows what Oliver had in mind?
 
It turns out that the NCAA is providing tests which are "cheaper and generally provides quicker results but is less sensitive and more likely to yield false negatives" than what they are providing to the men
www.nytimes.com

Anger Erupts Over Disparities at N.C.A.A. Tournaments (Published 2021)

Officials apologized for providing inadequate facilities for the women’s basketball players, but later acknowledged they were also receiving cheaper, less sensitive coronavirus tests.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,505
Messages
4,579,222
Members
10,489
Latest member
Djw06001


Top Bottom