Annie Duke Interview Controversy regarding Ladies WSOP event. - Page 19

PokeReader · #**181** 06-19-2007, 08:18 AM

I think many women are just more comfortable in these tournaments and leagues, which is a shame because it is not going to help their poker development. I think most of the women who play in WOE's do not take their poker very seriously. They play for fun, and playing with the men is not as fun for them. What I am not sure they all understand is that playing any competitive endeavor with competition that is not the best you can find does not prepare you to play you best.

I do think that the poker world can be quite sexist, but the only way to deal with it successfully is to play on its' terms and try not to be offended by what people say. The more you do that, the more you get respect and are not a target. This world looks for and attacks weakness, and women cannot ask for special protection. It is fair to ask for the same protection, but not special protection. I think this will always discourage male/female play and might result in ridiculously tight abusive language rules.

grdred944 · #**182** 06-19-2007, 12:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
hey, i know, i disagree with this concept. how should i frame my argument? oh, maybe i could use a bunch of analogies for what other events we could conceive since we have a womens event. Okay, what would be a goood analogy...oh i know, how about someone that isnt even remotely close in any way whatsoever. man, now i feel clever for having out logic'd everyone else. Obviously having a blind, 3 legged pig bracelet equates to having a womens bracelet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you need a vacation. My post could not have been more of an attempt (OK, bad at that) at humor. Go get some air.

jogsxyz · #**183** 06-20-2007, 12:03 AM

Women are having a terrible WSOP. But they're having a good day today. 1st with 3 left in event 28. 3rd with 6 left in event 29.

suzy89222 · #**184** 06-20-2007, 12:13 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Women are having a terrible WSOP. But they're having a good day today. 1st with 3 left in event 28. 3rd with 6 left in event 29.

[/ QUOTE ]

i am not disagreeing, but in all fairness, there are very few women playing events. last year, women made up less than 5%. this year it seems even less.

ShakeZula06 · #**185** 06-20-2007, 01:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fact: The existence of WoEs in an activity where women can compete as equals is degrating.

[/ QUOTE ]
no
[ QUOTE ]
Fact: They only have WoEs so that they can "have women winning bracelets" at the WSOP. In that sense, it is an insidious kind of affirmative action.

[/ QUOTE ]
no

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, isn't this a brilliant discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not brilliant at all. Even most idiots know subjective opinions can't be facts.

[/ QUOTE ]

But fortunately, you aren't like most idiots.

[/ QUOTE ]
So, lacking a counter argument, you instead go for insults? Not suprised.

ShakeZula06 · #**186** 06-20-2007, 01:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]

But.. but.. how else are you going to be able to market a female champion? Isn't that more important than obtuse principles like fair competition, a level playing field, and actual equality between men and women in one of the very few spheres it can be achieved?

[/ QUOTE ]
You have that in the other fifty-odd events. Stop bitching and moaning about nothing.

Moose · #**187** 06-20-2007, 03:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fact: The existence of WoEs in an activity where women can compete as equals is degrating.

[/ QUOTE ]
no
[ QUOTE ]
Fact: They only have WoEs so that they can "have women winning bracelets" at the WSOP. In that sense, it is an insidious kind of affirmative action.

[/ QUOTE ]
no

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, isn't this a brilliant discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not brilliant at all. Even most idiots know subjective opinions can't be facts.

[/ QUOTE ]

But fortunately, you aren't like most idiots.

[/ QUOTE ]
So, lacking a counter argument, you instead go for insults? Not suprised.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait a second.. you make a backhanded insinuation that I'm an idiot, I make a better backhanded insinutation, and I'm resorting to insults?

After all, I didn't insult you in the least. Albert Einstein is also "not like most idiots". But if you're so defensive that you choose to parse that as an insult, I can't be responsible for your low self esteem.

Moose · #**188** 06-20-2007, 03:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

But.. but.. how else are you going to be able to market a female champion? Isn't that more important than obtuse principles like fair competition, a level playing field, and actual equality between men and women in one of the very few spheres it can be achieved?

[/ QUOTE ]
You have that in the other fifty-odd events. Stop bitching and moaning about nothing.

[/ QUOTE ]

So only 2% of the events spread a very derogatory message about the skill level of female events, so it's okay? Would it have been okay if only two percent of the buses in Alabama forced Negroes to the back? Right now, the actual, normalized "gender gap" in wages is probably 2%, should the feminists stop railing to remove it because it's only 2%

One segregated bracelet event is all it takes to spread the demeaning implication that females need segregated events because they cannot compete as equals. And that's one segregated event too many.

ShakeZula06 · #**189** 06-20-2007, 05:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fact: The existence of WoEs in an activity where women can compete as equals is degrating.

[/ QUOTE ]
no
[ QUOTE ]
Fact: They only have WoEs so that they can "have women winning bracelets" at the WSOP. In that sense, it is an insidious kind of affirmative action.

[/ QUOTE ]
no

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, isn't this a brilliant discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not brilliant at all. Even most idiots know subjective opinions can't be facts.

[/ QUOTE ]

But fortunately, you aren't like most idiots.

[/ QUOTE ]
So, lacking a counter argument, you instead go for insults? Not suprised.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait a second.. you make a backhanded insinuation that I'm an idiot, I make a better backhanded insinutation, and I'm resorting to insults?

After all, I didn't insult you in the least. Albert Einstein is also "not like most idiots". But if you're so defensive that you choose to parse that as an insult, I can't be responsible for your low self esteem.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes yes we all know. However you still have no argument other then you don't like it.

ShakeZula06 · #**190** 06-20-2007, 05:49 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So only 2% of the events spread a very derogatory message about the skill level of female events, so it's okay?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yet, other then your subjective opinion, you haven't shown that it is "very derogatory".
[ QUOTE ]
One segregated bracelet event is all it takes to spread the demeaning implication that females need segregated events because they cannot compete as equals. And that's one segregated event too many.

[/ QUOTE ]
Just because you think it's demeaning, doesn't mean that's the point. Until you can show us that that's the point of the tournament, your argument is nothing but hot air. This thread really should have been over after RJ's post.