Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Sep 20 23:17:22 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / Cartoons again
Paramount
Member
Wed Sep 12 11:21:59
Cartoonist suspends Twitter account amid Serena Williams backlash

THE Aussie artist who created an international media storm after depicting Serena Williams’ US Open tantrum is off social media.

HERALD Sun cartoonist Mark Knight says he suspended his Twitter account overnight because of abuse towards his family over his cartoon of Serena Williams’ US Open tantrum.

Knight said he did it to protect his family and friends.

Australia’s finest cartoonist said while positive comments were outweighing negative, he chose to do it to stop family being abused.

Claims the account had been suspended by Twitter are wrong.

Knight has dismissed the global Twitter storm over his depiction of a tantrum-throwing Williams during the final of the US Open.

The Herald Sun’s veteran cartoonist says his portrayal was never about race or gender — rather the sporting superstar’s bad behaviour.

Knight’s take on Williams’ blow up showed the 23 Grand Slam winner spitting the dummy and stomping on her tennis racquet as the chair umpire told US Open champion Naomi Osaka in the background: “Can you just let her win.”

Knight said he was “amazed” at the reaction to his cartoon, depicting Serena spitting the dummy and stamping on her tennis racquet as the chair umpire told US Open champion Naomi Osaka in the background: “Can you just let her win.”

“I drew this cartoon Sunday night after seeing the US Open final, and seeing the world’s best tennis player have a tantrum and thought that was interesting,” he said.

“It’s been picked up by social media in the US and my phone has just melted down.

“The world has just gone crazy.”


See the cartoon here: http://www...4b06bcafa578d667f679e490b85091
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Sep 12 11:27:43
it did look like racist stereotype cartoons to me when i first saw it
Paramount
Member
Wed Sep 12 11:39:23
Yeah it would be because of the big lips.
Seb
Member
Wed Sep 12 12:20:06
It was pretty bad.

Also mcenroe has had plenty of racket throwing hissy fits without this level of scrutiny.
McKobb
Member
Wed Sep 12 12:30:52
https://s3.amazonaws.com/lowres.cartoonstock.com/sport-american-tennis_player-champion-champions-grand_slams-gbrn105_low.jpg
McKobb
Member
Wed Sep 12 12:31:09
http://s3....ns-grand_slams-gbrn105_low.jpg
hood
Member
Wed Sep 12 12:36:45
If Seb says it's bad, I'm perfectly content to conclude that people are overreacting and need to pull their heads out of their collective anuses.
Delude
Member
Wed Sep 12 12:53:36
I hate to do this. But I thought it was quite distasteful and agree with Seb.
Forwyn
Member
Wed Sep 12 14:09:38
It was a standard exaggerated cartoon.

Also, her "scrutiny" amounted to a day of articles criticizing her sportsmanship. McEnroe got plenty of the same treatment in his day. You have a short memory of you're ignorant to pretend otherwise.

The difference here is that Serena has been enshrined as a feminist icon for continuing to play after motherhood, and now they called the banners to criticize her sexist and racist treatment.
Nekran
Member
Wed Sep 12 14:24:53
The tantrum was shameful and deserves plenty of criticism.

She went as far as claiming she was being penalized for being a woman, which was insane.

I don't see much of a problem with the cartoon... I guess it's the big lips that cause people to feel like it's racist. But is it?
kargen
Member
Wed Sep 12 14:29:00
"Also mcenroe has had plenty of racket throwing hissy fits without this level of scrutiny."

Yeah social media gave him a complete pass.
Seb
Member
Wed Sep 12 16:13:27
McKobb:

How many front page articles have we had on this incident?

Forwyn:
Nothing like as high profile and long running. A small segment in the sports section.

And it will be written up differently too. e.g.compared to many men players who have gone further than Williams did are described as "arguing with the umpire" rather than "hysterical". I mean several have done things like spit, scream obsensities etc.

Part of the sensation is that "this isn't how women behave".

McEnroe pointed out himself he's said far worse without penalty - though of course he did acrue plenty himself with even worse behaviour.


And if you think it was "standard" that probably say something about the "standard" depiction of black people you see in your cartoons.

Nekran:

So, like I've noted, many male players do much worse and it's referred to as arguing, shouting etc. So why is this "a tantrum" and "hysterical"?

Benoit Paire spat on the court and shouted obscenities at the umpire - look at the coverage of that. That's "Beoit Paire spits at court in frustration"

Vicctor Hanescu spat at the audience at Wimbledon. Again the press reports are things like "Hanescu in spit controversy"


(both of those are the top news headlines in my google search - feel free to do your own).

So, you know, yeah, it looks a bit weird that the media headlines are far more neutral for more extreme acts.

Apparently the umpires are going to consider boycotting her. Did they ever boycott McEnroe? I don't recall it.
Seb
Member
Wed Sep 12 16:13:27
McKobb:

How many front page articles have we had on this incident?

Forwyn:
Nothing like as high profile and long running. A small segment in the sports section.

And it will be written up differently too. e.g.compared to many men players who have gone further than Williams did are described as "arguing with the umpire" rather than "hysterical". I mean several have done things like spit, scream obsensities etc.

Part of the sensation is that "this isn't how women behave".

McEnroe pointed out himself he's said far worse without penalty - though of course he did acrue plenty himself with even worse behaviour.


And if you think it was "standard" that probably say something about the "standard" depiction of black people you see in your cartoons.

Nekran:

So, like I've noted, many male players do much worse and it's referred to as arguing, shouting etc. So why is this "a tantrum" and "hysterical"?

Benoit Paire spat on the court and shouted obscenities at the umpire - look at the coverage of that. That's "Beoit Paire spits at court in frustration"

Vicctor Hanescu spat at the audience at Wimbledon. Again the press reports are things like "Hanescu in spit controversy"


(both of those are the top news headlines in my google search - feel free to do your own).

So, you know, yeah, it looks a bit weird that the media headlines are far more neutral for more extreme acts.

Apparently the umpires are going to consider boycotting her. Did they ever boycott McEnroe? I don't recall it.
Seb
Member
Wed Sep 12 16:14:26
Anyway, the only thing missing on that cartoon was a bone through the nose.

And for some reason the Haitian Japanese player is white with a blond pony tail..
kargen
Member
Wed Sep 12 17:12:21
If she thinks sexism was involved I think the solution is obvious. Let women officiate the women's tennis matches.

And we really have to quit comparing actions today to actions that happened thirty years ago or longer. Back then there was less outrage because there was much less instant access to the event and aftermath. There is more outrage (and support) now because millions more people know about it within minutes of an event happening.

Also have to throw in, most of us learned by the time we were four years old "well he got to do it" has never been a good excuse for bad behavior. If she has to point out others that behaved bad then she knows she fucked up.

smart dude
Member
Wed Sep 12 17:49:30
Did McEnroe play like 30 years ago? LOL, Seb gonna Seb.
American Democrat
Member
Wed Sep 12 17:56:22
"If she thinks sexism was involved I think the solution is obvious. Let women officiate the women's tennis matches. "

Started out with issued with your tennis suit. Which she wasn't the first woman to do that and the other didn't face any scrutiny for it.

Secondly, Even male tennis players defended her, so your whole thing about comparisons what transpired years ago is a moot point.

She wasn't even penalized for the broken racket, (point taken away), it was the Ref making the claim that she was 'cheating' by receiving coaching and that is what docked the point. Even the tennis announcers said it was odd others said it was other. Other tennis professionals and stars of the game said it was terrible umpiring.



Her actions no doubt should have been ridiculed and mocked because she was out of line, but it isn't any different that other tennis players (primarily male) in the course of the history getting frustrated how they are playing or their performance. So it is understandable as to why she and others may have that perspective.



Rugian
Member
Wed Sep 12 18:01:43
"How many front page articles have we had on this incident?"

I've seen a good several, all of which are basically SJW wankfests about how Serena's rant should be applauded as a stand against misogyny and racism.

These are the headlines I've seen. I don't know where you're seeing people obsessing over how rude she was; the people who are on that side of the fence are merely pushing back against The Narrative and calling out how it's total bullshit. That cunt throwing a hissy-fit over getting objectively outplayed is no Rosa Parks moment.
Rugian
Member
Wed Sep 12 18:08:24
Seb, you do realize that every single person who would typically oppose you on this issue would have completely forgotten about the story within 24 hours had it not been turned into a retarded social justice cause, right? Do you at least acknowledge that much? No one, here or elsewhere, cares about Serena Williams, we care about the bullshit your side all-too-predictably peddles in reaction to her loss.
kargen
Member
Wed Sep 12 21:03:58
"Started out with issued with your tennis suit. Which she wasn't the first woman to do that and the other didn't face any scrutiny for it."

Not sure what the fuck that has to do with anything. It's sexism because another female was allowed to do it?

"Secondly, Even male tennis players defended her"

Some did some didn't. If you have to compare yourself to the absolute worst behavior in all of tennis then something has gone wrong.

" it was the Ref making the claim that she was 'cheating' by receiving coaching..."

Something the coach admitted to.

"Her actions no doubt should have been ridiculed and mocked because she was out of line, but"

There is no but. She was out of line and shouldn't have done it and shouldn't make a habit of it in the future.

Maybe instead of iemulating John Mcenroe maybe she should consider Arthur Ashe who once said, "No matter how tense I am inside I will never blow up on the court. If you want to know, I'm just too conscious of the effect it might have on my image."

And that is an athlete that had to endure some harsh racism during his playing days.

Forwyn
Member
Wed Sep 12 21:10:07
"And for some reason the Haitian Japanese player is white with a blond pony tail."

Others have covered the rest, but nice coffin nail of retardation.

http://cdn...18-1014886.jpg?r=1536423136757
American Democrat
Member
Wed Sep 12 21:13:46
"Not sure what the fuck that has to do with anything. It's sexism because another female was allowed to do it?"

No it was highlighting the double standards that was already against her. But forgive me for considering you would be capable of using deductive reasoning.

"Some did some didn't. If you have to compare yourself to the absolute worst behavior in all of tennis then something has gone wrong. "

Again moot point.

"Something the coach admitted to. "

And she said she didn't as she saw a thumbs up, and even he also admitted that even doing so he didn't think she saw that part and it is something common place apparently, according to the many other professionals in this sport.

"There is no but. She was out of line and shouldn't have done it and shouldn't make a habit of it in the future. "

Oh yes, here we ago, the standard now, because she had an outburst she is condemned for eternity, please take your self-righteous garyd attitude somewhere else.

"Maybe instead of iemulating John Mcenroe maybe she should consider Arthur Ashe who once said, "No matter how tense I am inside I will never blow up on the court. If you want to know, I'm just too conscious of the effect it might have on my image."

And that is an athlete that had to endure some harsh racism during his playing days. "

"And we really have to quit comparing actions today to actions that happened thirty years ago or longer."


werewolf dictator
Member
Wed Sep 12 21:18:13
"And for some reason the Haitian Japanese player is white with a blond pony tail.."

osaka has a blonde ponytail in real life.. presumably bleached

osaka is drawn in monotone roughly equal to average tone of serena [who is drawn in tones from white to darker shades.. the darkest of which is still much lighter than skin color in photographs].. in drawing osaka also has nose which barely projects in profile.. meanwhile umpire is drawn pinkish with nose that projects freakishly forward in length..
Trolly
Member
Wed Sep 12 22:02:02
http://www...pen/ar-BBNfP9r?ocid=spartanntp

LOL shut up werewolf dicktaster...
hood
Member
Wed Sep 12 22:12:34
Multi, how is that remotely related to the point putin's fluffer made? It's actually valid; Osaka was drawn in a similar shade as Serena was. She clearly wasn't white, as seb suggested.
State Department
Member
Wed Sep 12 23:35:15
That's correct. Here's a side by side comparison:

http://i.imgur.com/MP8Ow6e.jpg
Wrath of Orion
Member
Thu Sep 13 00:40:11
I've read a lot of the articles about this after watching the match live (I have watched a lot of tennis over the years - men's and women's). Like some of those articles, some stuff in this thread is blatantly inaccurate.

Regardless, there are a couple points nobody bothers to bring up in the articles.

1. A current/former tennis player saying, "I have said far worse and not gotten a game penalty," essentially means nothing without context. I can tell you that saying, "You're fucking wrong, this is fucking bullshit and I can't believe you made that fucking call," is viewed entirely differently than, "You're a thief." It's pretty rare to see tennis players directly insult the umpire. Why? Because it almost always gets them an immediate code violation.

2. It is not all that uncommon for players to get a code violation here or there, and sometimes even a second (where they are penalized a point). However, as soon as that happens, their behavior immediately changes. They do NOT go on arguing, swearing, throwing things, insulting umpires, etc. Why? Because that second code violation means they are on thin ice and much more shit will result in a game penalty. Serena knows this.

So when someone says, "I've said worse and not been penalized a game," it can easily be true and still be totally irrelevant. Sure, you may have said worse and gotten your first or second code violation, but then you shut the fuck up and played on. Serena didn't and got her third code violation. Oops.

3. A code violation for coaching is not necessarily saying the player is cheating. It's really more of a violation against the coach and has little to do with the player other than it is assigned to the player. So Serena claiming the umpire was saying she was cheating by giving a coaching code violation is idiotic.

Quite simply, she was getting soundly beaten and was very likely to lose the match. That didn't sit well with her, and being a volatile person, she had a meltdown and ensured she would lose the a match. Awww, poor bibby.
Wrath of Orion
Member
Thu Sep 13 00:55:44
The only thing the umpire did "wrong" was giving the first code violation - coaching. And it wasn't even technically wrong, it's just that you hardly ever see it called.

But the second (smashing a racket) and third (directly insulting an official) incidents? Yep, immediate code violations.
kargen
Member
Thu Sep 13 01:24:56
"And she said she didn't as she saw a thumbs up, and even he also admitted that even doing so he didn't think she saw that part"

Yeah and President Clinton didn't inhale.

smart dude
Member
Thu Sep 13 01:44:54
"And for some reason the Haitian Japanese player is white with a blond pony tail.."

She literally has a blond ponytail, as I'm sure someone else has pointed out (I can't be bothered to read this shit). You really have to just, like, use your brain once in a while.
smart dude
Member
Thu Sep 13 01:44:54
"And for some reason the Haitian Japanese player is white with a blond pony tail.."

She literally has a blond ponytail, as I'm sure someone else has pointed out (I can't be bothered to read this shit). You really have to just, like, use your brain once in a while.
Seb
Member
Thu Sep 13 02:06:03
Smart Dude, Kargen:

McEnroes famous for his meltdown. The other two events were more recent.

Benoit's was this year

Inconsistent application of rules is still discrimination.

Rugian:
I see. It's the "SJWs" fault and this cartoon, for example, is clearly a comment on them and not on Serena herself, and was in any case forced to be produced by SJWs to pwn them... yeah, this line of argument always looks do compelling.

Hood/Forwyn:

Doesn't look like it to me, but contrasts can be funny. Either way, doesn't alter the exagerations racial features on the depiction of Serena. Like doing an exagerated hook nose on a depiction of a Jew etc. Also the caption text "can you let her win", well actually that wasn't the subtext at all, and she actually praised Osakas play.

Wrath of Orion:
Right, so this August in Washington, Benoit Paire smashed three rackets, getting penalised only on the third time? Plus insulting the umpire and refusing to play...

That's way beyond the Serena incident in terms of theatrics yet way less reported.

So, I dunno, you can create all the justifications but the while thing to me looks like rather different treatment. We expect some male players to be volatile, but women doing it is a sensation, and they are hysterical etc.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu Sep 13 02:15:30
>>McEnroe pointed out himself he's said far worse without penalty - though of course he did acrue plenty himself with even worse behaviour.<<

No shit sherlock. Times changed, what was ok last year is sexual misconduct today, what was acceptable behavior in the 70’s can lose you your job today etc. Are you saying we should go back to the time of McEnroe for what is and isn’t socially acceptable now?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu Sep 13 02:21:25
Based on 1 female and 2 male tennis players we can clearly see a pattern that can not be explained by anything other than patriarchy.
smart dude
Member
Thu Sep 13 02:53:56
"Either way, doesn't alter the exagerations racial features on the depiction of Serena."

Like what? The nose? The lips? Look at the this cartoonist's other cartoons (you won't, but whatever). They very often feature exageratedly small/large noses and small/large lips, regardless of the race of the person being charicaturized. My god, this is what chararicature artists DO. Slightly larger than average nose? Make it really big in the drawing!

Meanwhile you conveniently failed to acknowledge your criticism of Osaka's blond ponytail. It's almost like you are just blindly parroting shit you read online, like, didn't give a fuck about actual facts. Like, for example, that the woman actually has a blond ponytail. Dyed, I presume, but is that a CRIME?

"Haitian people shouldn't be able to dye their hair. They're appropriating caucasion culture."
-Seb
Paramount
Member
Thu Sep 13 04:58:25
”My god, this is what chararicature artists DO. Slightly larger than average nose?”

Drawing chararicatures of Jews is what the Nazis and it helped to get 6 million of them killed.
Paramount
Member
Thu Sep 13 04:59:34
*what the nazis did
American Democrat
Member
Thu Sep 13 05:07:21
"Yeah and President Clinton didn't inhale."


And Trump is the purveyor of truth. Regardless how you feel, you have two conflicting statements; one you picked up easily because you believe it. It doesn't dismiss the notion that the umpire was uncharacteristic and more evidence supports there was a double standard. I think Billie Jean King sums it up nicely. You know, since you brought up Arthur Ashe previously, might as well references another legend of the game.


http://www...-amanpour-interview/index.html
hood
Member
Thu Sep 13 07:27:33
"Doesn't look like it to me, but contrasts can be funny."

Alright. I copied the picture into Microsoft PowerPoint to use the eyedropper tool.

Osaka (random point on face):
r: 213
g: 188
b: 169

Serena (also random point on face):
r: 198
g: 166
b: 144

Umpire (same as other 2):
r: 250
g: 209
b: 202


So while picking a single random point isn't perfect, this pretty clearly demonstrates that Osaka wasn't "white," and was indeed closer in color to Serena than the ump. Given skin tones irl, it seems pretty reasonable.

You are free to take many more eyedropper tests should you be unsatisfied with my results. Nonetheless, I'm sure you'll be issuing a retraction concerning the depiction of Osaka as being anything but "accurate" (contextually, of course), given that she is darker than the ump, lighter than Serena, and correctly has blonde hair per real life.
Seb
Member
Thu Sep 13 07:32:20
Nim:

If times change, can you explain why Benoit Paire's way more extreme behaviour (rants, smashed three rackets, threw a game) did not get more mainstream coverage and what mainstream coverage?

hood:

Really don't care, if they are the same hue, fine, as I said it didn't look so to me, but contrast can be funny. We've moved on. I've conceded the point. Why are you fannying around with rgb values?
Seb
Member
Thu Sep 13 07:33:47
Nim

*what mainstream coverage there was, was more muted.


Sorry, got distracted part way through writing.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Sep 13 07:36:53

FOX did a decent job of covering the story.

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Thu Sep 13 07:37:41

Not the cartoon story but the lives story.

hood
Member
Thu Sep 13 07:44:53
"We've moved on. I've conceded the point"

No, you dismissed it with prejudice ("doesn't look like it to me"). You are now finally saying that you're willing to accept that Osaka wasn't drawn as a white girl.
Seb
Member
Thu Sep 13 07:49:04
Hood:

I've already answered that question twice.
Seb
Member
Thu Sep 13 07:55:35
Dismissed it with prejudice means "dismissed permanently" - i.e. rejected the claim she was drawn coloured, admitting no further challenge.

This is the precise opposite of what I did. I said that it did not look like it was the same tone in the picture but accepted contrast can play tricks on colour perception.

e.g. https://www.dawnnews.tv/news/1057431
Wrath of Orion
Member
Thu Sep 13 07:56:13
"So, I dunno, you can create all the justifications but the while thing to me looks like rather different treatment."

To start, I have not seen the match you're talking about. And I'm willing to bet you have not, either. As I said before, context is pretty important and each case should be examined individually. That said, if a player actually smashed three rackets, it should be three code violations.

It is different treatment...of tennis players. Just because he is male and Serena is female does not mean the treatment was based on gender. Umpires throughout tennis have vastly differing interpretations of when to give code violations, which is admittedly pretty retarded to allow. But that's actually a separate issue.

Nothing yet has shown this instance to be gender bias. Of course Serena thinks it is - that's her thing (just like it is yours).

So, I get it - you see gender bias wherever you go. It has become your thing. Good for you - but it makes you look like a fucking retard.

Now, come with some actual data on how referees have handled various situations regarding code violations for men and women and we can talk further. Of course, how you analyze the data will actually affect the results. So I'll bet you anything I can run one analysis and find gender bias and another and fine none.

But sure, rant on. The new you is pretty funny.
Rugian
Member
Thu Sep 13 08:00:11
Seb,

You clearly don't understand the motivations at work here.
hood
Member
Thu Sep 13 08:01:12
"I've already answered that question twice."

Weird, I didnt recall asking a question in my previous post. I had thought I just made a few statements. Crazy what people will invent.
Seb
Member
Thu Sep 13 08:26:54
Wrath of Orion:

I've seen the clips of the incidents. You can find them pretty easily.

"Nothing yet has shown this instance to be gender bias."

I dunno, I sounds like you are framing it in such a way that the only way you would ever be able to say gender bias existed is if either someone actually confesses their motivation, or we develop a mind reading scan. Maybe you could provide an example of what you think gender bias would look like?

Fine, you don't think it's gender bias. But what I see is the language and the degree of coverage is often different between the men and women, and in this case the stringency of the penalty seems higher, and suddenly apparently the upmires are planning a boycott, which I have never seen before (of course, it might not have been reported in other situations).


So I think it's pretty much looks exactly what gender bias looks like and that's fine for me. You don't have to agree; but you certainly don't have the authority to set some arbitrary threshold I or anyone else has to meet.

The only question here is whether it a reasonable person could come to the conclusion it is gender bias - and you haven't really set out what your level of proof is, but it's clear this falls below it. And I can accept that might be a reasonable judgement. But you seem to think that no reasonable person could come to the conclusion it is gender bias, and I'm not really seeing a compelling case there.

So, is this really the hill you want to die on? That it is fundamentally unreasonable for an individual to look at markedly different responses from both upmires and, more importantly, the media and say that looks unfair?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu Sep 13 09:56:32
Seb
Sure, but tell me first what we are to do with 2 contemporary examples when these decisions are to some degree discretionary. Extrapolate much?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu Sep 13 10:09:27
n = 2
1 male
1 female

Sebs answer to this is ”I dunno if this isn’t gender bias”. Fair enough, I will add, that we can’t know what this is, based on this sample size and without further analysis of other variables.

But more importantly there is a cost to issues like this when people prematurely yell foul and discrimination based on group identity. The cost is two fold, it inflames the debate, and diminishes the return of investment on crying wolf. At this point no one gives a shit what the data saya, the narrative prevails.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu Sep 13 10:19:01
If we were to take lessons on this from the criminal justice system, we know that when it comes to penalties for the same offence, men are given harsher sentences. So there is that, but I have a hard time not veiwing this as any other sport. Football world cup most recently, the consistency of judging penalties and calling hands was abysmal, even with replay!!
But now because 1 person shouted and it happened to be a black women, injustice has intersected tennis.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Thu Sep 13 10:26:32
>>no reasonable person could come to the conclusion it is gender bias, and I'm not really seeing a compelling case there.<<

No reasonable person without being able to read the umpires mind could come to this conclusion. I concure. You don’t need a compelling case for this. If you accuse someone of foul play, you must make the compelling case.
Nekran
Member
Fri Sep 14 09:25:41
If men are treated less harshly (I watch some occasional tennis and I haven't noticed, but then most players tend to remain rather decent), then I would say the problem is men not getting code violations.

I saw this game and Serena was very much over the line.
Seb
Member
Fri Sep 14 16:35:13
Nim:

Er, yes, the decisions are discretionary - that's why it's more important to hold people to account for their decisions (make sure you know what account means before responding please).

As a general principle, I prefer judgement rather than criteria based systems. But how people exercise their judgement can and should be scrutinised because bias, even the perception of bias, quickly erodes trust.

I could present n=1000 incidents with r=0.9 to six sigma certainty showing bias and it wouldn't prove any specific incident was bias. The information would be inactionable.

One must use judgement here.

You seem to be narrowing in very specifically on the umpires call, where I've spent as much time talking about the wider reporting, which in my view is more egregious.

"No reasonable person without being able to read the umpires mind could come to this conclusion."

Today, as I sat on a barstool eating a burger, I noticed someone "trip" on the strap of my bag. Only my bag had been by my feet. And now it was a meter from me.
A common way of stealing a bag is to walk back and forth, "tripping" etc to subtly move it far enough away until you can pick it up and walk off.

Now I have no way of discerning intent. But I think it is perfectly reasonable to believe that guy was trying to steal my bag.

If you think there is no reasonable way to form a view that the umpire was biased here - notwithstanding your strange belief in the face of do much evidence that people can be biased without being aware of it - I struggle to understand how it is you have so often been able to cause me of lying (which requires intent) rather than innocent misunderstanding or even error. Are you admiring to being unreasonable?

It spunds to me you are perhaps insisting that any individuals judgement should be no less than that used in criminal cases - beyond all reasonable doubt - i.e. that we must know definitively the mind of the individual here. You will notice "beyond all reasonable doubt" is explicitly not the same as "reasonable rounds to believe" (which is the test for, say, intrusive measures for obtaining evidence).

I don't subscribe to your view that we need to know beyond any doubt before forming an opinion. Nor, in practice, if you are honest, do you behave that way yourself.

Nekran:
Depends - I suspect the reason umpires show restraint is that over zealous enforcement makes for a bad game, so they tend to hold back and give informal warnings etc if their intervention might be a significant influence on the outcome.

I'm more interested in the reporting that the umpire. As I've pointed out, Benoit Paires bizarre outbursts are far more extreme but considered normal.



Nekran
Member
Fri Sep 14 17:15:14
I had to google Benoit Paire... he has had some terrible tantrums and he has also been penalized for them, booed off the court after his losses for them and has been ridiculed for them in the press.

This is not considered normal behaviour in tennis.
hood
Member
Fri Sep 14 17:15:54
Of course it's normal, nekran. Seb said so, and so it must be.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sat Sep 15 03:31:45
Seb

>>I could present n=1000 incidents with r=0.9 to six sigma certainty showing bias and it wouldn't prove any specific incident was bias.<<

No you couldn’t.

As for the wider reporting, it cannot be seperated from her calls of sexism and such. At that point a judgment call in tennis has become part of the culture war. People will pick their sides. Don’t go there then.

And lol at your paranoia. So your human instincts + constant flow of bad news makes you suspicious of other people. Maybe even people with a different skill color? Or maybe if you are a woman and view men like rapist? Or worse you are a black woman!!!

I think a ”reasonable” person should let their paranoia about all the horrible people out to get them, should be colored by actual data. The data shows that the specific umpire is strict and that men recieve many times more penalties in tennis.

”It spunds to me you are perhaps insisting that any individuals judgement should be no less than that used in criminal cases - beyond all reasonable doubt”

I think if you are accusing someone of a crime or are going to blame and shame them for a social crime you better have your shit in order. Did you try to publicly shame the person you thought was stealing your bag? Did you simmer in your anger about this ”thief” and give interviews to news papers? Shocking that you believe people should be shamed not based on evidence but ”judgment” based on instinctiv paranoia and fear. Bravo?

>>I don't subscribe to your view that we need to know beyond any doubt before forming an opinion.<<

Hilarious that you think this story amounts to something inocuous described as ”forming an opinion”. The BS is in full production. Thank you for your ”comment” on this.
Seb
Member
Sat Sep 15 12:21:52
Nim:

I really don't think I can be arsed to reply to a post that begins by deliberately misunderstands a hypothetical statement illustrating that no statistical approach, no matter how robust, could ever proove a given event was biased to instead be an assertion that I could provide robust statistics.
Seb
Member
Sat Sep 15 12:22:52
Nekran:

Yet you had to Google him... while this incident is front page news.
hood
Member
Sat Sep 15 13:19:45
"Yet you had to Google him... while this incident is front page news."

Almost like Serena Williams is an international superstar and known by everyone while Benoit Paire is... not relevant?

No, gotta be sexism!
Forwyn
Member
Sat Sep 15 15:17:32
How many people can name more than five tennis players?

How many of those will list Serena and Venus before anyone else?

It's a point against you, not for you. People barely gave a fuck about tennis outside of silver spoon Ivy League aristocrats, and the fucks given about women's tennis were in the negatives.

S/V automatically got famous in an esoteric sport for being black wymynz, and Serena got even more adoration for continuing to play after motherhood.

You might as well complain that unicycle hockey players aren't making front page news for unsportsmanlike conduct.
Seb
Member
Sat Sep 15 17:00:49
Forwyn/Hood:

So, if it's about fame, then why is comparing the relative coverage of McEnroe and others that are household names not a good comparison then?

Seems to me you want to hand the benefit of the doubt in one way only.

Forwyn
Member
Sat Sep 15 17:29:30
Again, McEnroe got plenty of shit in his day for his outbursts. You're incredibly fucking ignorant of the sport and its coverage to pretend otherwise.

And again, the difference here is that there weren't thousands of identitarians online disseminating articles defending McEnroe and crying foul that he would ever get penalized.
Seb
Member
Sat Sep 15 18:55:28
Forwyn:

Indeed he did, but they didn't tend (as I recall) to portray him as *childish* while doing so. Terminology would be more direct and neutral: outburst. Not "hysterical" as many media outlets chose to describe it.

There was a brilliant photo of the same outlet with two headlines that summed this up: a male player which the caption "xxx argues point" and the other "sereana throws tantrum".


So what do we have here in combination:

We have a few days previously male player engaging in much worse behaviour (and I pointed to another example though less recent) given far more leeway. To which the response is "oh, well, depends on the ref right?".

We have the difference in coverage "Oh, well, Serena's more famous".

And then we have the difference in how the incident is described "ah, well, yeah, that's in the past right, long time ago, things have changed".

So what you appear to be asking for before you will consider there is a structural difference in how these things are treated is:
The same ref treats male and female players with identical public profiles and history differently and media reports them differently, in the same year.

But then no doubt you will say "oh, well, it's just one rotten apple".

Which is why this is kinda pointless.

I refer you to my post Thu Sep 13 08:26:54.

There's a pattern to this - not just in tennis, in pretty much everything. You have to be wilfully blind to miss it.
Nekran
Member
Sun Sep 16 03:27:37
"Yet you had to Google him... while this incident is front page news."

He has never made a grand slam quarter final. I enjoy tennis, but I'm not a huge fan or anything.

If I'd have have happened to have seen a game of his, I would've known him. And well... now I know him.

That doesn't invalidate any point though.

And I repeat, if there's really more lax ruling going on against this sort of thing in men's tennis, then that is the problem.

Serena 100% deserved the penalties she got according to the rules of the game. And it was nothing short of a tantrum.

I personally find defending her inane claims of sexism to be damaging to your cause. Even if there's truth to men getting away with more (which I still doubt, but it's hard to study, as the vast majority of players tend to be well behaved) ... do you really want to be defending this sort of shitty behaviour?
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Sep 16 03:59:00
>>There's a pattern to this - not just in tennis, in pretty much everything. You have to be wilfully blind to miss it.<<

Paranoid people see lot’s of patterns that are not there and if left to their own devices and in their own bias bubbles they may also develop a hypersensitivity that goes with their paranoia. They may react very strongly to percieved slights and negative emotion that exists in their mind.

So we ask for evidence to weed out the robust from the crazy. And we do that for both individual claims of wrong doing and for larger societal and population level patterns.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Sep 16 04:07:22
”I personally find defending her inane claims of sexism to be damaging to your cause. Even if there's truth to men getting away with more (which I still doubt, but it's hard to study, as the vast majority of players tend to be well behaved) ... do you really want to be defending this sort of shitty behaviour?”

Seb loves to look at non representative samples of humans, dive down to a fraction of that group and find something close to a relative anecdote and paint the entire world with it. Then he will accuse you of doing that same thing and call you a sexist and racist. Without irony.
hood
Member
Sun Sep 16 04:30:50
I wonder what the chances are of seb being a woman beater? With how hard he virtue signals (ugh, I feel dirty using that term), I'd say it's gotta be above 10%. Maybe 25%?

I'd give him an outside shot at being a Harvey Weinstein.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Sep 16 04:39:54
Yes, there is this strong sense of self flagellation in his conspiratorial paranoid pattern seeking, that one can not shake off so easily.
Nekran
Member
Sun Sep 16 06:06:49
I disagree with that.

I do agree that there is widespread sexism in society. Many things have been considered common sense and normal for so long, that it has become hard to change perspective. I do think Seb is right in that regard.

However, there's always a danger of pushing too much in the opposite direction... not everything is sexism. This was a sad display of unsportsmanlike behaviour that deserves no defense.
Seb
Member
Sun Sep 16 07:19:49
Nekran:

I personally find the generally impossible burden to consider racism or sexism far more dammaging.

And I think anyone who looks at me and goes "hmm, guess I'd better not believe sexism is a major systemic issue" probably didn't believe that in the first place and isn't going to be pursuaded anyway.

This started as a discussion on the cartoon, so surprised you are so focused on the infraction, as though the validity of the infraction justifies the wider behaviour.

You say if they are laxer to men they should be harsher. Yes. I think you are rather implicitly personalising and extending the argument here. I'm not suggesting Carlos Ramos is quietly waiting to deliberately penalise women. Nor am I saying she definitely shouldn't have been awarded the point. Im saying overall it looks the classic example of bias both in the judgement and coversage. And the correct response might be to review if the leniency shown men means the rules are tighter than they need be.

Nim:

What's the statistically correct number of samples that could physically drawn from "Carlos Ramos decision to award a coaching warning in Serena Williams match against Naomi Osaka" that would be sufficient to prove or disprove the hypothesis as to whether he's biased?

Honestly, rather given up pursuading you of anything. Ypur bad faith having been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt enough times now.

Hood:
Virtue signalling being a very strange term. Firstly, who am I trying to signal to? I'm just not that into you and Nim. Secondly it presupposes that people should not act on their beliefs.

What are the likihoids that you and Nim are women beaters? You consistently post and comments railing against women's rights, and when all is said and done, most wife beaters are overt misogynists, rather than overcompensating.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Sep 16 09:44:39
Tsk tsk tsk. Seb would get lost in a shoe box.

You are claiming there are ”patterns” in behavior, at the population level that would require statistical data, at the individual level observational data. Neither have been presented.
Seb
Member
Sun Sep 16 12:25:14
Nim:

There is no amount of statistical data that would ever prove definitively that a given sample was an example of bias. Something I pointed out earlier and you dishonestly avoided by pretending I said something entirely different though you obviously knew otherwise.

Seb
Member
Sun Sep 16 12:27:34
As for data regarding systemic bias - I've presented in the past. For example, the Git Hub study. You failed to understand it, addressing entirely different arguments, engaged in argument citing spurious statistical critiques which you admitted to knowing didn't apply.

There comes a point where there is no point presenting evidence to people who are so obviously arguing in bad faith Nim. In any case, it amounts to providing proof that the moon isn't made of cheese. There is plenty there Nim, I don't need to spoon feed you.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share