This is all stupid young male trash talk. Guys same the same crap about other guys.
The only objectionable word I find in that @HarvestMoon1 is the word “confirmed”. That implies to me someone is stating a confirmation that a woman has STD’s and if not true would seem libelous to me.
OK, so what surfaced this year that made Harvard take this action? That’s the point I’m confused about. And if there is a document from this year would Harvard not know who the commenters are?
This is what has been widely reported in multiple media outlets
Each woman was assigned a hypothetical sexual “position” in addition to her position on the soccer field.
“She seems relatively simple and probably inexperienced sexually, so I decided missionary would be her preferred position,” the author wrote about one woman. “Doggy style,” “The Triple Lindy,” and “cowgirl” were listed as possible positions for other women.
The report also assigned lewd nicknames and number ratings to each player.
So no @Proudpatriot and @MassDaD68 , I am not speculating or making things up.
I never said it was a crime, but I do think it is offensive enough for the college to take action
I only read The Crimson article. Nevertheless I see institutions of higher education to be places where free speech should be protected even if that speech is boorish and immature.
There is a contemporaneous discussion going on about this on the Ivy League Sports web board. That board appears to be populated primarily by men, either parents of current athletes, former athletes or just alums who are fans. This board, on the other hand, seems primarily populated by non athlete women, whether parents &/or admissions advisors.
The difference in the way this situation is percieved is very striking. Both boards seem to have their share of posters who support and oppose Harvard’s action. But the language, tone and scope is very different. Just thought it was interesting, FWIW.
Harvard is a private university that gets to decide the standards of behavior acceptable in it’s own community. If one of the men wants to litigate the team’s right to continue this practice based on free speech they are entitled to do so. I do not think it would be a successful case.
@wisteria100 Yes. I think we are all in agreement with you that we find it offensive.
Actually the other article
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2016/11/4/soccer-suspended-scouting-report-harvard/
said this:
Since it is directed at specific women, not just women in general, this could be perceived as harassment. I agree that there is a fine line, but harassment is not permitted and a hostile work (or school) environment is not allowed either. There certainly could be an argument made as to this promoting a hostile environment for the women’s soccer team. This goes beyond casual locker room discussion of “hotness”.
For those that think this is protected free speech, where do you draw the line between free speech and harassment/hostile environment? I generally agree with free speech protections and find the micro-aggression concerns raised on some campuses to be a bit much, but this does not seem to fall in that category.
Further, as a private university Harvard certainly has the right to set standards of behavior for those that have the privilege of representing their school on the playing field. They are not stopping these men from their free speech, but they won’t let them represent Harvard if they want to behave this way.
I would say since the women apparently didn’t even know about it until the case broke it could not be classified as harassment.
IMO ugly speech is simply ugly. Not more than that.
The main problem I have with this decision is that it punishes way too many innocent students. If I understand the situation correctly, 1 member of the 2012 team produced and circulated the offensive scouting report about the 2012 women’s team. Then, it appears that 1 member of the 2016 team found it, thought it was amusing, and circulated the 2012 report to current team members with the suggestion they update it. Of those students, 2 jokingly responded to that suggestion with “Haha” sort of answers–but not with any derogatory comments of their own about current women soccer team members. So worse case scenario, only 3 member of the 2016 student soccer team deserve any reprimand or consequences. Yet the whole team is being punished. It seems to me an overreaction.
But now they know about it, including the current women players.
The NCAA also has sportsmanship and ethical requirements. This certainly would seem to violate the standard of respect toward other athletes.
But what offense was committed by the current men’s team against the current women’s team? One male soccer player circulated an old document about former students that was offensive. So punish that player–not the entire team.
^^
Apparently it was an annual sort of thing:
Yes, but Harvard can “know about” it and act in a rational manner. No I don’t think it reaches “harassment” since the 2012 freshman didn’t even know about it until almost 2017. IMO the coaches should have been able to handle this with the guys involved and with guidance from administration since I agree it’s an ethical and respect issue. The chosen action was, again IMO, a bit of a hammer approach. Again, I like to think that people in the business of educating ( supposedly “elite” level people in the business of educating) would know how to educate.
Robert Scalise is a pretty impressive guy with a lifelong involvement in college athletics. He is married to a former Harvard athlete and currently has a daughter competing on one of Harvard’s teams. I don’t think he shares your perspective.
@mom2and Further, as a private university Harvard certainly has the right to set standards of behavior for those that have the privilege of representing their school on the playing field. They are not stopping these men from their free speech, but they won’t let them represent Harvard if they want to behave this way.
Exactly! I agree with you 100%
It’s like an ethics clause when celebs/athletes do product endorsements. They are free to say whatever they want, but if it reflects poorly on the brand, then they are out.
As for punishing all for the sins of a few - time to be mature and if you see something say something! Wasn’t that Billy Bush’s problem. He went along with the whole thing and paid the price.
I don’t see these soccer comments as much different from the Trump/Bush tape really. Demeaning to women. Such an outcry on Trump (deservedly so), but why the love for these Harvard guys? I’m not saying lock 'em up, or throw them out, but missing a few soccer games and making them an example is not too harsh
The punishment may have been made more stringent because it appears that team members lied about the report during the investigation. Perhaps if the team had been honest about it’s existence from the beginning and any authors still on the team had come forward with their roles then maybe the whole team would not have suffered.
Well obviously someone clued in the Crimson–probably one or more of the 2016 team members. If all or most of the 2016 team made their own scouting report, then this is fair. But I don’t see that in the two articles I read. It seems that one young man circulated the old report and two teammates joked about it.
I’m sure he is, but that doesn’t necessarily mean I have to agree with him. There are plenty of impressive people I may not agree with. I believe I saw in one of the early NYT articles that Scalise also said he hoped it would be contained within the college community which I do agree with, plenty of options short of making it public by cutting the season. Probably would have been a wise move whether or not it extended after the 2012 season.
@TheGFG
ok - I kind of see what you are saying about women needing to respond in a way that doesn’t reward boorish behavior. BUT, at the same time why can’t we teach our sons that the said behavior, is wrong, unacceptable, not to be tolerated. Why can’t fathers and mothers teach this early and often at home? And not the father half-heartedly teaching with a wink, wink and by the way in her day, mom had a great rack kind of way. Teach in a serious, under no circumstances is it appropriate for you to talk about women this way. And as bystanders we also need to close it down. Just as if you were in the company of someone making a racial slur, a lot of folks would politely try to interject, when these comments about women come up, we need to do the same.