Your word of the day is misogynist.
I didn’t realize that Matt Garza’s statements were so important that when he says something that is viewed as offensive to women it elicits the strong response and bandwagon jumping we’re seeing from those who are acting angry or trying to make themselves sound progressive.
Rangers’ righty Garza created a controversy when he responded to Athletics’ infielder Eric Sogard executing a squeeze bunt by jawing at Sogard and then going after Sogard and his wife on Twitter. You can read about the exchange here. Baseball’s true tough guys, long since retired (Dave Parker, Ray Knight, Kevin Mitchell), are all asking in unison: “What the hell is Twitter?”
What was a silly Twitter fight turned into a flag-waving cause for those who are either declaring themselves hard-core feminists and seeing gender-based conspiracies detracting from their sports knowledge or a sycophantic agree-fest for those who don’t want to anger the aforementioned feminists. This piece on CBS Sports was emblematic of a distancing from male-female chasm. The editorial-like conclusion was as follows:
Garza needs to grow up and accept the fact he got beat on the field fair and square.
It’s a unique skill to combine elementary school simplicity with parental scolding and self-indulgent solidarity. All that’s missing is a “Nyah, nyah, nyah” at the end.
What you have is women clutching at this like the newest-latest of reasons why they’re disrespected and men who try to make sure they’re onboard and won’t be the next target of the angered masses.The race/gender card is so cheap and easy to use that few even dare to use it anymore unless they have nothing else to say or are desperately seeking attention and approval. If a person’s gender or sexual orientation is used as a reason to denigrate their opinion, it’s a pretty good bet that the person doing the denigrating isn’t all that bright to begin with. So why the over-the-top reaction?
In and of itself, this “story” is ridiculous. Garza should probably have thought twice before choosing to engage in this kind of diatribe, but he’s right in his last tweet of the day when he basically told people if they don’t like him, don’t follow. It’s that simple…unless there’s an ulterior motive. And in this case and any case in which there’s a perceived or crafted offense against a gender or group, there’s a clear ulterior motive of individuals drawing attention to themselves by latching onto this silliness to further their own ends and taking off with it like Usain Bolt at a track meet.
What we see from women who are mock-offended by Garza is another opportunity to express how unenlightened some men are as to the battle of the sexes and that statements such as those made by Garza are “hindering” their cause. Except it’s not hindering their cause. Much like Keith Hernandez’s rant about the Padres’ female trainer being in uniform in the dugout and Rob Dibble’s sexist comments in the broadcast booth, these are not men in a position of power where it matters what they say. Self-righteous political correctness is exponentially worse than political correctness. If it were a GM or an owner who said something like this, then it’s a reason to reply with a level of force. It’s Matt Garza. Unless there’s an agenda, who cares what he says?
4 thoughts on “Matt Garza’s Tweets As A Cause Célèbre For Sports Feminism And Its Poseurs”
Possibly the dumbest “analysis” I’ve ever read. Garza’s comments were undeniably sexist, made publicly, and tweeted at the woman and her husband directly. The suggestion that people shouldn’t be offended, or that Garza shouldn’t apologize, is ridiculous. “Baseballs true tough guys don’t even know what twitter is.” Seriously? Let’s ask Ty Cobb what he thought! Why? Because he’s a man! Or something.
How precisely did it offend you? Does it offend you if two regular people who aren’t MLB players and the wife of an MLB player get into a worse, more vitriolic argument? And none of that has anything to do with what I wrote. I wrote that people are using this for their own ends and the main point is that it was blown completely out of proportion. Of course it was sexist. So what? It’s Matt Garza. Who cares what he says? If Sogard has an issue with it, he can confront Garza directly without the endless commentary on what’s essentially a meaningless story.
I have no idea what your Ty Cobb analogy implies. Perhaps me having written the “dumbest ‘analysis'” you’ve ever read has somehow infected you to provide a comparison that makes no sense. Or maybe it was there to begin with and has nothing to do with me.
I knew I shouldn’t have clicked on this article’s link, but I clicked on the link. I get what I deserve for not going with my gut instinct that it would be terrible. Shame on me, I guess.
The same applies for me clicking on comment notifications.