I also see the double standard applied to others as compared to her.
There are certainly posts in this thread, including most of the first dozen or so, that express disapproval of Diana's action. It just may not have been harsh enough or unanimous enough for your taste.
Others take it more lightly, others confess to an occasional ornithological dalliance themselves, and others want to engage in a serious discussion of athletes as role models. All well and good.
It's not so important to us whether people are partisan in their judgments. It's the nature of the beast. If there are specific hypocrites in the crowd who come on strong against a Parker's behavior and make light of the same behavior by a Taurasi, I haven't seen them identified, and frankly wouldn't care to see it.
More important to us than partisanship is our feeling that coming on with harsh personal criticism of
any players is topic-peripheral and generally leads to no good for the board.
VTCW stuck in the double standard implication with which you agreed. Acknowledging his many strengths, he has long been a bit more of a devotee of posting and reading personal judgments on players than we are, as he knows.
Yes, on balance this is a partisan place. It's also a place marked by a diversity of viewpoints, yielding generally good natured, mature and intelligent perspectives.
I referred to an alternative place where, if you had read soon after the incident,and before a thread deletion, you'd have seen all kinds of harsh things said about Diana, including people proceeding to call her a drunk and a doper. That's partisan too, and it's an extreme example of why we have a rule against player-trashing.
I'm sorry if I jumped on you too hard. It was against that background.