Women and Spirit
ulticritic
but i'll take the most immediate one. I was just thinking that in my
experience arguing is much more prevalent in men's ultimate than in
women's ultimate and i really wasnt sure why. Is this the case for
other people? Anybody know why?
Ulticritic
benlw...@gmail.com
experience in many phases of the game...but:
When was the last time you went to a tournament? To a Championship
event? To a competitive tournament?
themagi...@yahoo.com
I can't say as I know why but this is the case for me, especially when
I have seen teams like CUT and the Hodags play and the discussions
they get into.
Frank Huguenard
premium on winning then they do other things, such as making sure everyone
is happy.
"ulticritic" <t...@ec.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ece0a0aa-3169-4756...@f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
ulticritic
> Not to discount your experience, because I know you have a ton of
> experience in many phases of the game...but:
> When was the last time you went to a tournament? To a Championship
> event? To a competitive tournament?
why do you ask......are you refuting my contention?
Joe Buck
<fhuguenard(no_spam)@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong here ladies but isn't it because women place a lower
> premium on winning then they do other things, such as making sure everyone
> is happy.
men are from mars, women are from venus.
you are from the moon. you are a moon man.
wanie...@gmail.com
<fhuguenard(no_spam)@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong here ladies but isn't it because women place a lower
> premium on winning then they do other things, such as making sure everyone
> is happy.
>
Wow. Clearly Frank has never met any competitive women ultimate
players...or competitive women for that matter. MAYBE you could make a
generalization about women as a group being more relational and such,
but that is a big generalization. Once a woman playing competitive
ultimate (or any sport for that matter) steps on the field, those
generalizations mean nothing at all. Having seen the women on my co-ed
soccer team take out 3 opposing MALE players with their aggressive
play in a tournament final, I am pretty sure the case can be made that
women are just as competitive and aggressive as men. They just aren't
as big so the collissions aren't as spectacular and gory.
benlw...@gmail.com
> why do you ask......are you refuting my contention?
I'm sorry, my computer seemed to delete the part where you responded
to my question. I'll repeat:
Toad; When was the last time you went to a tournament? To a
Championship event? To a competitive tournament?
This will help us frame your response, and maybe give some context to
your assertions.
zaebo...@yahoo.com
> players...or competitive women for that matter. MAYBE you could make a
> generalization about women as a group being more relational and such,
> but that is a big generalization. Once a woman playing competitive
> ultimate (or any sport for that matter) steps on the field, those
> generalizations mean nothing at all. Having seen the women on my co-ed
> soccer team take out 3 opposing MALE players with their aggressive
> play in a tournament final, I am pretty sure the case can be made that
> women are just as competitive and aggressive as men. They just aren't
> as big so the collissions aren't as spectacular and gory.
You are some kind of idiot.
thom...@stanford.edu
A lot of men don't know the rules but think that they do.
DQT
> A lot of women don't know the rules and know that they don't.
>
> A lot of men don't know the rules but think that they do.
Bingo.
ulticritic
well, lets just say this.....although i do not attend any tournys i do
keep up with the sport and the competitive and championship events and
i haven herd yet of a female player spiking a disc directly on a
female opponent latley.......or herd of ANY pushing, shoving, spitting
or hitting in womens ultimate competition E V E R.
ulticritic
uhm.....so the difference is inherant? if so, what does that tell you
about the ability for men to be as "spiritual" as women.
Rhett
remarks to minorities, so I'm going to begrudgingly give you them, but
you are exploiting the rating system and I don't like it. There was a
certain understanding when I developed the rating system that some
spirit would be shown, and that you wouldn't take advantage of its
rules.
Frank gets zero out of four (+1 bonus) cute little pandas.
Ulticritic gets three out of four closet homosexuals for starting
another thread for the sole purpose of stirring everyone up into
another sexist/feminist frenzy. The remaining point could have been
gained by reminding everyone that ultimate isn't a good sport because
it doesn't have refs or whatever.
benlw...@gmail.com
> well, lets just say this.....although i do not attend any tournys i do
> keep up with the sport and the competitive and championship events and
> i haven herd yet of a female player spiking a disc directly on a
> female opponent latley.......or herd of ANY pushing, shoving, spitting
> or hitting in womens ultimate competition E V E R.
Hey Toad,
I'm sorry to keep beating a dead horse (and if you can answer me these
last ones I'll stop so the discussion can continue):
Just to clarify; you haven't attended a tournament since when?
Besides that, all your information for the past how many years comes
from RSD?
bill maroon
call isn't as important. For example, I've played co-ed with a very
talented woman who played mainly women's ultimate and basically
refused to call fouls on hucks thrown to her. In women's ultimate you
know that you have a good chance of getting that disc back when the
other team has to work the disc up the field 70 yards. In most elite
men's games one turnover (especially if it leads to a break or
defensive score) can dictate the whole game.
Jared Smith
constitute around 51 or 52% of the world's population.
2. It would be wrong to make an assumption about women who play
ultimate based on something that is applied to women in general
(regardless of its validity). You run into a problem of selection
bias. It is possibly true that women are less competitive and prefer
everyone to have a good time. However it could also be true that the
women who aren't competitive stay out of sports. Let's just say 100%
of men are aggressive and competitive while only 25% of women are.
However because not all of the population plays sports seriously
perhaps only 25% of men play sports and 25% of women play sports. We
can then have 100% of both genders of sportspeople being aggressive
and competitive. In my personal experience I have not noticed a trend
of women's ultimate being less competitive and argumentative and
actually I found it was the opposite. For some reason it seems like
women (my experience only) have a higher tolerance of letting the
people arguing argue it out, while men will allow this to go for so
long until someone just tells them to shut the hell up and play. Long
story short you're all sexist.
wanie...@gmail.com
>
> You are some kind of idiot.
Really?? I don't mind being called an idiot, it has happened before
and will happen many time again I am sure, but I would love to hear an
explanation as to why this particular post has revealed to you my
idiocy. I really wasn't expecting that response on this occasion.
Normally I can anticipate when what I am saying is idiotic and expect
the response.
cjh...@yahoo.com
<fhuguenard(no_spam)@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Correct me if I'm wrong here ladies but...
Dear ladies and others,
By written declaration and by accepted precedent, actually responding
to the content of Frank's posts is no longer encouraged, as it merely
encourages him to continue visiting our little forum. Making us all,
as it were, enablers to Frank's struggle with addiction.
I ask that you please resist the urge to tell Mr. Frank just what a
sad, condescending little nuisance he is, and instead channel your
energies into something more constructive for both yourselves and the
rest of the forum. Allow me to suggest some possible options:
1. responding with non-sequiturs
2. responding with thinly veiled mockery
3. responding with open mockery
4. not responding
5. actively not responding, also know as ignoring (subtly different
from 4.)
6. eat a tree, plant a sandwich, or anything other than engaging in
"debate" with a person whose very existence is the best possible
advertisement for the innate superiority of having a moderated
discussion group. For even the laziest, most incompetent moderator in
the English speaking world, simply by removing the occasional posts
from discount Chinese shoe merchants, paranoid raving nutjobs, and the
MI-5 guy, could improve this forum's quality significantly.
Please, ladies and gentlemen, help keep rec.sport.disc clean! Do it
for yourself, or for the game, or for the children, or for Frank,
whatever. But please help keep this unmoderated discussion group more
palatable with one of the only means at our disposal.
Sincerely,
Chris Hayden
Concerned interweb citizen
ulticritic
>
> Ulticritic gets three out of four closet homosexuals for starting
> another thread for the sole purpose of stirring everyone up into
> another sexist/feminist frenzy.
that wasnt even a purpose, much less sole purpose (i will reveal that
in another thread) so if it has that effect then its more telling of
ultimate players in general....dont ya think?
------------------------------------------------------
The remaining point could have been
> gained by reminding everyone that ultimate isn't a good sport because
> it doesn't have refs or whatever.
it'll come back around to that though
ulticritic
as soon as you tell us if you refute my original contention
ulticritic
so they dont argue as much cause theyre not as good?..........see what
i mean rhett
walla...@gmail.com
hearing your answer. when WAS the last time you went to a tournament?
jim
Damn toad, you sound worse than a politician! Won't give a straight
answer huh?
Now i see you!
ulticritic
> hmm i dont care much about your original contention - im interested in
> hearing your answer. when WAS the last time you went to a tournament?
sorry......i asked first
benlw...@gmail.com
Alright, Toad. I'll answer.
I wrote out my opinion, and it is sitting here in front of me. I will
push 'send' as soon as I see your response.
Not that it should matter, since I am asking you a factual question.
Just facts, Toad. What's wrong with that?
You answer, I'll post. As soon as I can. Not that my opinion matters,
really, but I will play along since I am curious.
So...
> Toad: you haven't attended a tournament since when?
> Besides that, all your information for the past how many years comes
> from RSD?
Well?
ulticritic
>
> Well?
last year, college easterns. I watched the finals (wisc vs.
pit).....bord me to tears. I believe the wisconsin sideline was
chanting b-o-r-i-n-g at one point in the game it was so boring.
Across the way the women were having a luv/turnover fest while the men
got into quite a few lengthy and heated discussions. I think i herd
one guy from wisconsin tell an opponent he was gonna punch him.
MrP...@gmail.com
> Now i know there are a lot of directions i could go with this title,
> but i'll take the most immediate one. I was just thinking that in my
> experience arguing is much more prevalent in men's ultimate than in
> women's ultimate and i really wasnt sure why. Is this the case for
> other people? Anybody know why?
>
> Ulticritic
I'm not sure I'd characterize it that way. I watch a fair amount on
both sides of the gender divide and I'd be more comfortable asserting
that the arguments on the men's side are probably more theatrical but
not necessarily more numerous.
This kind of thing is always colored by the fact that women's
atheltics is so new in the grand scheme of things and that such a
higher percentage of males participate in athletics than females.
There are more men's teams then women's teams and among the men's
teams, many more players who have experience in other highly
competitive sports. Add youth and testosterone as an amplifier to the
natural confidence provided by that experience, and there's probably a
pretty significant effect.
I'd have trouble making a blanket statement applying to all men and
women here since we're not talking about all men and women. We're
talking about folks who have already self-selected for a system played
under the current rules structure, and we're talking about semi-
independent cultures between open, women's and co-ed.
If you're interested enough in the perceived phenomenon to tabulate
some data and approach the matter with some sober and educated
analysis, I'd be interested in the results. Then again, we both know
that that's not why we're here. You want to argue that Ultimate is
for ladies and queers since real men are (and by right ought to be) so
vicious with each other that they need the adult supervision of a
referee. That's a pretty tendentious claim, but if it's what you want
to say, just say it.
~p
benlw...@gmail.com
I think you may be avoiding the part where you should have said:
but I haven't been to a Championship tournament in 15 years
or the part where you say
and this was the only game I have watched in X number of years
or the part where you say
and yes, I do get 99% of my information from RSD and I believe
everything I read implicitly
But ok, a deal is a deal. I will post my response to the Spirit issue
below.
On Feb 28, 11:17 am, ulticritic <t...@ec.rr.com> wrote:
> last year, college easterns. I watched the finals (wisc vs.
> pit).....bord me to tears. I believe the wisconsin sideline was
> chanting b-o-r-i-n-g at one point in the game it was so boring.
>
> Across the way the women were having a luv/turnover fest while the men
> got into quite a few lengthy and heated discussions. I think i herd
> one guy from wisconsin tell an opponent he was gonna punch him.
My opinion: Spirit can be boiled down to respecting your opponent and
respecting the rules.
The people that have the most to gain from this are often (but not
always) the ones who take the game the most seriously, and who find
themselves playing against the same opponents repeatedly. From my
experience, there is great spirit in many places...but best spirit is
at the highest levels of play, regardless of gender.
The top teams play each other often, so they force each other to stay
within the rules more than one-off opponents. I find that teams new to
each other have trouble defining what a good call is...whereas teams
with history know where the travel rules stands much better. Or what a
foul is. Experience helps these teams to play within a common set of
rules and rule interpretations.
They also have a mutual understanding of safety...I have never felt as
safe physically in a chaotic, dangerous sporting arena as when I am
playing against the Condors or Jam or Boston, etc...these are great
athletes that know how to bid around my body and take the force of the
blow on themselves, and not on my knees. Of course there are
exceptions, both in certain people and in certain mistakes on the
field...but I could not expect to play this long at a high level in a
refereed sport, and I credit Spirit of the Game.
Women: At lower levels of the game, I see the rules broken more often
and with less checks and balances. And I think letting your opponent
cheat is almost as bad as your own cheating. In terms of respecting
the rules and each other, I think it doesn't get better than Riot v
Fury (no matter how much they may hate each other, I don't think they
cheat each other).
Ok, Toad, that is my opinion. Women's spirit is different that Men's,
maybe, but not worse or better. Level of play is more important.
ulticritic
> I'm not sure I'd characterize it that way. I watch a fair amount on
> both sides of the gender divide and I'd be more comfortable asserting
> that the arguments on the men's side are probably more theatrical but
> not necessarily more numerous.
more theatrical as in more swearing, being louder, posturing, etc?
arent these things the basis for judging spirit?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> competitive sports. Add youth and testosterone as an amplifier to the
> natural confidence provided by that experience, and there's probably a
> pretty significant effect.
significant how? spiritually?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I'd have trouble making a blanket statement applying to all men and
> women here since we're not talking about all men and women.
you would
-------------------------------------------------------------
> If you're interested enough in the perceived phenomenon to tabulate
> some data and approach the matter with some sober and educated
> analysis, I'd be interested in the results.
this IS the analysis dumbass
--------------------------------------------
Then again, we both know
> that that's not why we're here. You want to argue that Ultimate is
> for ladies and queers since real men are (and by right ought to be) so
> vicious with each other that they need the adult supervision of a
> referee. That's a pretty tendentious claim, but if it's what you want
> to say, just say it.
well, i dont have to now
ulticritic
>
> My opinion: Spirit can be boiled down to respecting your opponent and
> respecting the rules.
> The people that have the most to gain from this are often (but not
> always) the ones who take the game the most seriously, and who find
> themselves playing against the same opponents repeatedly. From my
> experience, there is great spirit in many places...but best spirit is
> at the highest levels of play, regardless of gender.
talk about a politician style answer
-------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The top teams play each other often, so they force each other to stay
> within the rules more than one-off opponents. I find that teams new to
> each other have trouble defining what a good call is...whereas teams
> with history know where the travel rules stands much better. Or what a
> foul is. Experience helps these teams to play within a common set of
> rules and rule interpretations.
which Is the underlying flaw in the whole self officiating
syatem.......thanks for pointing that out.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> field...but I could not expect to play this long at a high level in a
> refereed sport, and I credit Spirit of the Game.
you tellin me that if ulti had refs your career would be shorter?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Women: At lower levels of the game, I see the rules broken more often
> and with less checks and balances. And I think letting your opponent
> cheat is almost as bad as your own cheating.
and yet another reason refs would be batter at those levels as
well.......thanks again ben
------------------------------------------------------------
In terms of respecting
> the rules and each other, I think it doesn't get better than Riot v
> Fury (no matter how much they may hate each other, I don't think they
> cheat each other).
what?........better than sockey furious? And you said earlier spirit =
respect........well, if so fat so........spirit dosent get any better
than with women.......YOU SAID IT. You make this too easy
--------------------------------------------------
>
> Ok, Toad, that is my opinion. Women's spirit is different that Men's,
> maybe, but not worse or better. Level of play is more important.
Different???????
benlw...@gmail.com
> On Feb 28, 2:32 pm, benlwigg...@gmail.com wrote:
> > field...but I could not expect to play this long at a high level in a
> > refereed sport, and I credit Spirit of the Game.
>
> you tellin me that if ulti had refs your career would be shorter?
Toad, I truly believe this.
Since my opponents are vested with the responsibility for keeping me
safe (like a ref would try to do in soccer, for example) they take
more care to play safely. If these opponents had only the disc to
think about, I definitely think that the game would be more
dangerous.
As it is, I've had my leg broken on a bid by another player that
momentarily valued the disc more than my safety. One time. There have
been other mistakes made, but I cannot count how many times some
player has flown by me, missing vulnerable parts of me by inches, even
if it gave them a little less of a shot at the disc (or maybe caused
them to miss it by those same inches).
Spirit of the Game = I get hurt less. I hope that I live up to my
opponents in this shared responsibility.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Toad Said:
> what?........better than sockey furious? And you said earlier spirit =
> respect........well, if so fat so........spirit dosent get any better
> than with women.......YOU SAID IT.
> --------------------------------------------------
Toad, you might try reading more carefully.
I clearly titled that paragraph "Women:". Meaning, IN THE WOMEN'S
GAME, I don't think it Spirit gets better than in a Riot v Fury
game.
> Toad said:
> You make this too easy
Toad, this isn't me versus you. It's a bit more complicated than that.
Which you might know if you spent a little more time reading and
little less time furiously typing 10-page interspersed unreadable
comments with the same repetitive overdramatized hypothesis. Get over
it, or find a new way to convince me. MLU didn't convince me, your
'evidence' didn't convince me, your arguments for darn sure don't
convince me.
ulticritic
>
> > you tellin me that if ulti had refs your career would be shorter?
>
> Toad, I truly believe this.
> Since my opponents are vested with the responsibility for keeping me
> safe (like a ref would try to do in soccer, for example) they take
> more care to play safely. If these opponents had only the disc to
> think about, I definitely think that the game would be more
> dangerous.
yea......dangerous. definitely makes for higher entertainment
levels. So you agree that with refs the game would be more
entertaining to watch then?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Spirit of the Game = I get hurt less.
and yet another definition of sotg
---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Toad, this isn't me versus you. It's a bit more complicated than that.
yea its men vs. women.......whos more spirited
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Which you might know if you spent a little more time reading
funny you mention that. My dad just suggested i read a book about
this dude Bill Veeck (autobiography). He was a sports promoter from
st.louis back in the day.......maybe you should read it too.
------------------------------------------------------------
Get over
> it, or find a new way to convince me.
convince you of what?
-------------------------------------------
MLU didn't convince me,
there was no womens div in mlu though?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
your
> 'evidence' didn't convince me, your arguments for darn sure don't
> convince me.
well, your a stuborn mutha fucka......what can i say.
ulticritic
> > experience, there is great spirit in many places...but best spirit is
> > at the highest levels of play, regardless of gender.
so if spiking on an opponents chest is the "best" spirit that the
sport has to offer......i'd hate (wait a miniute....i'd LOVE) to see
how they play at the medium and lower levels.
Manzell
> i mean rhett
Can we end the idiocy whereby more turnovers = worse players?
Scoring trends in major sports ebb and flow; it (rarely) has anything
to do with the quality of the players. Does anyone really believe b-
ball players in the 70's (when teams scored 115+ per game) were 20-30%
better than todays players (or better than even the MJ-Era Bulls, who
didn't score that much)? Obviously, no one thinks that. Points !=
Skill.
Likewise, in ultimate. Two teams of identical offensive and defensive
skill. Let's imagine both teams improve on defense, but not on
offense. Suddenly, there are more turnovers. Clearly, it's because the
teams are not as good as before. Lack of Turnovers != Skill.
One can easily make an argument that male ultimate players are
"better" - elite teams are picking from a much deeper and more
competitive talent pool and elite women's teams. 'Nuff said. No need
to throw in some pointless "statistical" argument.
ulticritic
> > so they dont argue as much cause theyre not as good?..........see what
> > i mean rhett
>
> Can we end the idiocy whereby more turnovers = worse players?
no, because that a logical equasion.......but how about more turnovers
= better spirit?
cjh...@yahoo.com
over and the votes are in.
98.9 % of us declare Benlwiggins the "ironclad" winner of this debate,
1% are sticking up for Toad, and Frank is sulking because no one is
talking about Franktimate, or responding to his attempt to be
"controversial" by blaming women for New-Gamey pussboyedness.
None of the three camps are likely to change their minds, so let's
just declare that we're all winners! Yay!
Effeminately yours,
Chris Hayden
PS Are you related to that Ben Wiggins fellow I keep reading about? If
so, you've got to stop preventing the strong from the ultimate
domination they should claim as their birthright with your weak-ass 80-
yard backhands on the money to a sprinting receiver. It's fucking
retarded.
PPS You're probably Jewish too. Figures.
ulticritic
>
> 98.9 % of us declare Benlwiggins the "ironclad" winner of this debate,
pfft.....you need to learn how to fuckin add.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 1% are sticking up for Toad, and Frank is sulking because no one is
> talking about Franktimate, or responding to his attempt to be
> "controversial" by blaming women for New-Gamey pussboyedness.
uhmmm....that was actually me
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> None of the three camps are likely to change their minds, so let's
> just declare that we're all winners! Yay!
how gay
---------------------------------------------------
>
> Effeminately yours,
you got one thing right at least
cjh...@yahoo.com
>>Franktimate, or responding to his attempt to be
>>"controversial" by blaming women for New-Gamey
>>pussboyedness.
>ulticritic: uhmmm....that was actually me
Dear Mr. Toad,
Hmm, that's a tricky one. I was thinking of the fourth post in the
thread, in which Frank made the attempt referenced above. But I
understand your frustration that you are not getting proper credit for
what I can only say is an inspired attempt at sophistry, so I looked
back through your posts in this forum to see if you had, in fact, said
something similar.
There were a lot of posts! Good for you for being so devoted to
contributing here, you are a very special member of the group! It took
me a while to read through them, because your posts have a unique and
special formatting to them that tends to slow me down. Not that the
formatting is bad, or even appalingly, preposterously bad. It's just
different, and that's okay.
But anyway you were right, and I failed to give credit where credit is
due! You are a shining example, Mr. Toad, of how one can do so
much...and yet not really do that much. There is an almost zen-like
quality to that which I find quite admirable.
>> Chris Hayden: so let's just declare that we're all winners! Yay!
>Ulticritic: how gay
>> Chris Hayden: Effeminately yours,
>Ulticritic: you got one thing right at least
Ouch! Double ouch! Guilty as charged, I am in fact what is known as "a
gay". But if enthusiasm for your posts in this forum, whose uncanny
prolificness is matched only by the overwhelming inaccessability of
their visual construction...well I'm not so good at math, but I'd say
at least 110% of us in here are also "gays".
But that's okay! So take a bow, Mr. Toad, you've earned it! You are a
very, very special member of this electronic community.
With wince-inducing sincerity,
Chris Hayden
PS I was only kidding. It is in fact unspeakably, improbably bad.
ulticritic
>
> Hmm, that's a tricky one. I was thinking of the fourth post in the
> thread, in which Frank made the attempt referenced above.
yea but in that prticular post he was much mor pc in his
implification. I, on the other hand, will pontificate it in the
manner you referenced repetedly.
------------------------------------------------------
But I
> understand your frustration that you are not getting proper credit
well you got to give credit where credit is due i always say.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> But anyway you were right, and I failed to give credit where credit is
> due!
see?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are a shining example, Mr. Toad, of how one can do so
> much...and yet not really do that much. There is an almost zen-like
> quality to that which I find quite admirable.
are you hitting on me?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Ouch! Double ouch!
dont ya mean "ouchy, and double ouchy"?....are you pintos' boyfriend?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Guilty as charged, I am in fact what is known as "a
> gay".
so youve come out.....thats great.
---------------------------------------------------------------
...well I'm not so good at math, but I'd say
> at least 110% of us in here are also "gays".
i dont know........only you and pinto from what i can tell.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> With wince-inducing sincerity,
you sure that wincing isnt from pinto......i'm just figuring youre
probably the bottom
Jeremy Bentham
I concur with hayden. more Wigginz plz.
MrP...@gmail.com
> implification. I, on the other hand, will pontificate it in the
> manner you referenced repetedly.
"Pontificate?" Isn't that word a little, erm... gay... for you? Or
do you hope to make up for your momentary lapse into literacy with
such gems as "implification?" I figure that implification is a cross
between implication and amplification, so basically the result of
making a charge known, loudly. If that's so, I must offer my respects
to you twice. First as a master implificator, and second as an
accomplished artist of the linguistic variety.
> ...well I'm not so good at math, but I'd say
>
> > at least 110% of us in here are also "gays".
>
> i dont know........only you and pinto from what i can tell.
Don't ask, don't tell, my friend.
~p
ulticritic
>
> Don't ask, don't tell, my friend.
stay in the closet all you want.....you aint foolin noone
Joe Buck
> stay in the closet all you want.....you aint foolin noone
Wagenwheel
I'll answer for my sexist/homophobic pal. Ulticritic attended College
Easterns in Wilmington NC in 2007. How do I know? I saw his bored ass
at the event. He also coached perhaps the most competitive, and
questionably the most dominate women's team to national championship
in 1992, with arguably the most contentious and aggressive women's
team the college scene has ever seen. T. Satterfield, S Turner, and
others argued more than any other team, were more agressive than any
other team, and won not only through intimidation, but pure athletic
prowess.
So now that I've answered the question on behalf the world's worst
ulticritic, I'm interested in hearing your reply, Sir knight of
Ultimate. Do you refute Ulticritic's contention, enquiring minds want
to know?
Baer
1. It seems to me that men do argue more than women on the Ultiamte
field, but I have seen some women get into some pretty fierce
arguments, even in B league play. Why there are differences, if any, I
don't know, but I guess you could discuss cultural influences on
gender roles and what is deemed to be acceptable behavior by men and
women, or whatnot...
2. Ulticritic, you know I agree with much of what you usually say when
it comes to Ultimate, but you also know that I disagree with your
presentation and crudeness, but whatever...
3. The arguments that have been posted in this thread are quite
entertaining, but Ulticritic buddy, I think it's quite clear that you
lost this battle of wits to blw and company. Can't win em all!
4. I think it's important to the future of Ultimate to continue to
include, promote, and support women in playing the game at all levels,
and it's sad to see a couple of recent threads that would probably do
nothing but turn women away from Ultimate. I thought that we, as
Ultimate players and a community, were more progressive than that.
Wagenwheel
I see BLW already answered. I didn't catch that this ridiculously
stupid post was strong.
ulticritic
well now that wagenwheel has chimed in this thread has officially run
its course and i can unveil the masterplan behind starting it. Now
subconciously i'd say that both rhett and pinto had a good idea what i
was up to BUT.............the reality is that this thread was just a
gagg/experiment.
first off, for those that hadent already caught it, my original post
was a verbatum, word for word copy of the original post on the "women
and hammers" thread....accept i substituted the words spirit and
arguing for hammer obviously. And since noone pointed this out i'll
assume noone noticed........bunch a suckers
My main idea was to show people how there is much more intrest and
emphisis placed on "the hammer throw" than sotg and my original over/
under guestimate for thread length was 15. So i was off a little.
Many of the posts were me and blw wasting cyber space in some pissin
contest over who went to what tournament when. Either way i've
concluded that sotg is about 1/4th as important as fundamental disc
skills from this experiment. Therefore it should be treated as such
and put on the back burner.
as for bears opinions on this thread....
>
> 1. It seems to me that men do argue more than women on the Ultiamte
> field
thank you......a conclusion olny those in denial of playing by an
effeminent rule enforcement process wouldnt acknowledge
----------------------------------------------------------------
Why there are differences, if any, I
> don't know, but I guess you could discuss cultural influences on
> gender roles and what is deemed to be acceptable behavior by men and
> women, or whatnot...
if any???? please. c'mon bear....just because you acknowledge that
there are obvious differences(as you just described) in the abilities
of men and women (both physically and spiritually) dosent make you a
sexist. I mean....is the yin and yang philosophy sexist? I'd say its
just nature and it cant be denied
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 2. Ulticritic, you know I agree with much of what you usually say when
> it comes to Ultimate, but you also know that I disagree with your
> presentation and crudeness, but whatever...
exactly.....whatever. and you call yourself a family guy fan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 3. The arguments that have been posted in this thread are quite
> entertaining,
thats what i'm here for......entertainment value (maximum)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
but Ulticritic buddy, I think it's quite clear that you
> lost this battle of wits to blw and company. Can't win em all!
well since it was a gag to begin with i'd say that i win..... hands
down. Everybody that had a serious reply was simply part of an
experiment. Like i could give a shit is women are more spirited (or
if they fuckin throw hammers).....even though anyone with half a brain
realizes they are(and they dont....throw hammers). Also, all blw said
was that at the highest levels womens and mens ulti was equally
(un)spirited, thus sidestepping the original contention. And while he
did say that womens and mens spirit was "different".....he wouldnt
elaborate. And whats worse, all that time he could have been
soliciting a food vendor for his showcased game......and he talks
about me wasting my time. So see....i dont conceed shit.
and "wit"? blw and wit? you got to be kiddin me. I never herd that
dude say anything that wasnt serious
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 4. I think it's important to the future of Ultimate to continue to
> include, promote, and support women in playing the game at all levels,
> and it's sad to see a couple of recent threads that would probably do
> nothing but turn women away from Ultimate. I thought that we, as
> Ultimate players and a community, were more progressive than that.
is this the same group that uses an archaic rule enforcement system
that you speak of when you use the term "progressive"? bear, im
dissapointed in you. Havent you figured out by now that this sotg
facad is simply a front for being cheap and lazy.......and, from what
youve learned about them/us from the recent
threads........hypocritical sexist assholes
As for women.....very telling that no women responded to this
thread......well besides pinto and his new boyfriend. Which should be
proof in itself that they are better spirited.......or at least
smarter.......probably both.
ulticritic
>
> I see BLW already answered. I didn't catch that this ridiculously
> stupid post was strong
if by stupid you mean.........stupid, i'll have to agree
if by strong you mean...........stinks like shit, i'll have to agree
again
MrP...@gmail.com
> emphisis placed on "the hammer throw" than sotg and my original over/
> under guestimate for thread length was 15. So i was off a little.
> Many of the posts were me and blw wasting cyber space in some pissin
> contest over who went to what tournament when. Either way i've
> concluded that sotg is about 1/4th as important as fundamental disc
> skills from this experiment. Therefore it should be treated as such
> and put on the back burner.
Other possible theories:
1) We've just had a discussion on the intersection of sexism and
Ultimate, so the people who participated in that one were weary of the
subject and opted not to participate in the sequel.
2) You started this thread and, given your past behavior, many folks
ignored it immediately as flamebait. The previous thread was started
by someone who lacks your reputation.
3) The hammer thread sounded like a plausible thing to wonder about,
your topic sounded more like straight up flamebaiting.
~p
Mike Gerics
was a woman....barely....
ulticritic
>
> 1) We've just had a discussion on the intersection of sexism and
> Ultimate, so the people who participated in that one were weary of the
> subject and opted not to participate in the sequel.
no. and many people in the w&h thread were convinced they were not
being sexist in their analogies anyway.......those that were didnt
respond to this thread(byron hicks??? the table was set for him yet no
response)......which, like it or not, IS a legit topic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 2) You started this thread and, given your past behavior, many folks
> ignored it immediately as flamebait.
so all got suckered in accept the great blw........i mean when he
responds.....well, forgetaboutit. And what are you talkin
about.....i'm the biggest draw on rsd bar none
------------------------------------------------------------
The previous thread was started
> by someone who lacks your reputation.
irrelevent, but wouldnt that support my argument if it were?
rhetorical question so dont bother to answer
-----------------------------------------------------
> 3) The hammer thread sounded like a plausible thing to wonder about,
dude.....more like a stupid and sensless thing to wonder about
--------------------------------------------------------------------
> your topic sounded more like straight up flamebaiting.
yes, sotg is a flame-ish (another word for gay) topic......and
concept. you got me there. But some did take the bait.........kinda
why i refered to you all as suckas
ulticritic
> The least spirited ultimate community member that i have ever come across
> was a woman....barely....
just wonderin......did she ever spit on an opponent? That act would
have to be some form of benchmark
Baer
>
> first off, for those that hadent already caught it, my original post
> was a verbatum, word for word copy of the original post on the "women
> and hammers" thread....accept i substituted the words spirit and
> arguing for hammer obviously. And since noone pointed this out i'll
> assume noone noticed........bunch a suckers
>
Curses! We've all been hoodwinked!!!!
Conversations about disc skills and spirit appeal to different people
(or incite different arguments, I guess)...
> > Why there are differences, if any, I
> > don't know, but I guess you could discuss cultural influences on
> > gender roles and what is deemed to be acceptable behavior by men and
> > women, or whatnot...
>
> if any???? please. c'mon bear....just because you acknowledge that
> there are obvious differences(as you just described) in the abilities
> of men and women (both physically and spiritually) dosent make you a
> sexist. I mean....is the yin and yang philosophy sexist? I'd say its
> just nature and it cant be denied
I was just trying to give a very basic response with some dumbed down
sociology and psychology, but leaving some wiggle room for doubt. Of
course there are many many differences between men and women.
>
> > 2. Ulticritic, you know I agree with much of what you usually say when
> > it comes to Ultimate, but you also know that I disagree with your
> > presentation and crudeness, but whatever...
>
> exactly.....whatever. and you call yourself a family guy fan
What can I say...
> well since it was a gag to begin with i'd say that i win..... hands
> down. Everybody that had a serious reply was simply part of an
> experiment. Like i could give a shit is women are more spirited (or
> if they fuckin throw hammers).....even though anyone with half a brain
> realizes they are(and they dont....throw hammers). Also, all blw said
> was that at the highest levels womens and mens ulti was equally
> (un)spirited, thus sidestepping the original contention. And while he
> did say that womens and mens spirit was "different".....he wouldnt
> elaborate. And whats worse, all that time he could have been
> soliciting a food vendor for his showcased game......and he talks
> about me wasting my time. So see....i dont conceed shit.
>
> and "wit"? blw and wit? you got to be kiddin me. I never herd that
> dude say anything that wasnt serious
Maybe "wit" was the wrong word, but, well whatever! Carry on...
>
> > 4. I think it's important to the future of Ultimate to continue to
> > include, promote, and support women in playing the game at all levels,
> > and it's sad to see a couple of recent threads that would probably do
> > nothing but turn women away from Ultimate. I thought that we, as
> > Ultimate players and a community, were more progressive than that.
>
> is this the same group that uses an archaic rule enforcement system
> that you speak of when you use the term "progressive"? bear, im
> dissapointed in you. Havent you figured out by now that this sotg
> facad is simply a front for being cheap and lazy.......and, from what
> youve learned about them/us from the recent
> threads........hypocritical sexist assholes
>
I maintain hope that these problems can be fixed, with a lot of work
from the Ultimate community of course!
ulticritic
> Conversations about disc skills and spirit appeal to different people
> (or incite different arguments, I guess)...
so its telling that so much time and ink got wasted on such a stupid
and meaningless topic, right? That thread should have never reached
double digits much less triple......and it wasnt even hijacked to
another subject. and, god, did you see how long some of those posts
were....geez louise
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I was just trying to give a very basic response with some dumbed down
> sociology and psychology,
no, you were flyin your pc flag.......and please, you cant dumb down
sociology or psycology
-----------------------------------------------------------------
> course there are many many differences between men and women.
exactly......one being that women are less argo than men and another
that they, generally speaking, dont develope the proper throwing
mechanics to throw objects over their heads.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What can I say...
that you are a sexist, homofobe asshole.......like the rest of us
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I maintain hope that these problems can be fixed, with a lot of work
> from the Ultimate community of course!
dont hold your breath........these people arent as progressive as they
make themselves out to be
Mike Gerics
> The least spirited ultimate community member that i have ever come across
> was a woman....barely....
just wonderin......did she ever spit on an opponent? That act would
have to be some form of benchmark
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--no....
Baer
>
> that you are a sexist, homofobe asshole.......like the rest of us
Sexist? No (hopefully my wife would agree!)...
Homophobe? No...
Asshole? Sometimes (sorry everyone)...
ulticritic
just fuckin wit ya g........but c'mon, name names. I'm thinkin you
were talkin about that cindy fisher chick......or some woman from
stanford???
Mike Gerics
> have to be some form of benchmark
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> --no....
just fuckin wit ya g........but c'mon, name names. I'm thinkin you
were talkin about that cindy fisher chick......or some woman from
stanford???
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---her bad breath spittle was green and flyin' everywhere...but not
spitting.
cindy fisher...yes....worst thing out there.