Chicks who play video games: zomg sho us ur titz

[Tonitrus]

I like the typical Languish dichotomy here, about how the guy is a misogynist, bigoted jerk regarding sexually demeaning comments, while over in the Olympics thread, female athletes are being rated on HOTTness and "doable-ness". 

[Eddie Teach]

Speaking of which, I'd like to console Maria Sharapova.

[Admiral Yi]

I like the typical Languish dichotomy here, about how the guy is a misogynist, bigoted jerk regarding sexually demeaning comments, while over in the Olympics thread, female athletes are being rated on HOTTness and "doable-ness". 

There is no contradiction.  A positive comment not directed at the object is not demeaning.  If two tubby Armenian gamer nerds had been talking to each other about the hottness of gamer chick that wouldn't have been demeaning either.

[grumbler]

The University at Buffalo's story about running into the issue: http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=buffalo58

I'd heard that story but couldn't remember the school.  Thanks for posting that, it's a great story.

[Neil]

How did bowl games and the like work?  Or were those not really nation-wide until televised football?

Well, for a long time there was just the Rose Bowl, and it didn't invite any segregated teams.  In 1935, three bowls were established in states where it was illegal for "the race to mix" on the same football team, and teams invited to the Sugar, Orange, or Sun bowls had to leave their "black" players at home, if they had any. 

Interestingly, one of the reasons why the Big Ten and Pac Ten have their deal for the Rose Bowl is that, when the deal was made, they were the only two conferences that banned discrimination in the game.  The Tournament of Roses committee didn't want to deal with the issue of teams demanding that the Pac Ten team bench all its non-white players before the visiting team would agree to play.

And the reason why that is especially interesting is that the conferences made that rule after a huge brouhaha at Michigan in 1934, when the Michigan AD agreed to bench Michigan's leading scorer, Willis Ward.  There was a huge storm of protest from the students and faculty, but the contract had been signed.  Ward's roommate announced that he wouldn't play if Ward didn't play, but rescinded the decision after Ward convinced him that the best revenge would be to beat Georgia Tech, and that the team needed Ward's roommate to do it.  Michigan did, indeed, win the game, led by Ward's roommate.  That roommate was Gerald R. Ford.

Cool story.

[Admiral Yi]

It is a cool story, but Ford played center.  How much of a difference would his absence have made?

[dps]

It is a cool story, but Ford played center.  How much of a difference would his absence have made?

How bad was his backup?

[katmai]

Well it is Michigan.

[Siege]

I'm still not sure why such tournaments exist. WTF wants to watch other people play video games?

WTF wants to watch other people playing basketball, or football, or baseball, or boxing ...

Word. I never understood the point of watching other people having fun.
It must be some form of masochism.

[Neil]

It is a cool story, but Ford played center.  How much of a difference would his absence have made?

A strong offensive line is the most important part of football, so pretty important.

[grumbler]

It is a cool story, but Ford played center.  How much of a difference would his absence have made?

He was the team's only All-American, was team MVP, and (at linebacker, his other position) the team's leading tackler (or maybe just the leading tackler to that point in the season; I can't find any data on who was the leading tackler for the season).

Of course, he was the leading tackler for a 1-7 team, so he didn't have to be all that good to be the leading tackler!

On the other hand, Ford was on two national championship teams in his three years of eligibility, so he was no slouch.

Edit:  he wasn't an All-American, he was an "All Star" on the team that played the pro champion Chicago Bears.  My bad.

[Valmy]

I like the typical Languish dichotomy here, about how the guy is a misogynist, bigoted jerk regarding sexually demeaning comments, while over in the Olympics thread, female athletes are being rated on HOTTness and "doable-ness". 

Wait saying somebody is hot or doable is insulting?  Then I guess most women are bigoted misandrists as well.  There is no difference, it seems, between sexual harrassment and finding people attractive.

[dps]

I like the typical Languish dichotomy here, about how the guy is a misogynist, bigoted jerk regarding sexually demeaning comments, while over in the Olympics thread, female athletes are being rated on HOTTness and "doable-ness". 

Wait saying somebody is hot or doable is insulting?  Then I guess most women are bigoted misandrists as well.  There is no difference, it seems, between sexual harrassment and finding people attractive.

If we're posting about someone who doesn't themselves post here, I don't think anything we post could be considered harrassment, sexual or otherwise.

It might be sexist, racist, etc., but it wouldn't be harrassment.