A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Apology



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #111  
Old October 26th 20, 11:27 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
2G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,439
Default The Apology

On Monday, October 26, 2020 at 8:12:53 AM UTC-7, Michael Westbrook wrote:
I mean if you don't think you're chauvinistic by calling women "childless corporate whores" or telling them they'd be "more attractive by keeping their mouth shut", you probably wont get it?

Growing up at the gliderport, my club hosted the WSPA Seminar when I was 13. I had the opportunity to meet women from across the country with varied backgrounds and a single common interest - soaring. Since that time, my first practical test was with a female DPE, I've flown a contest in a double seater with a woman who is now an accomplished Army aviator, I've flown with a female teammate at the Junior Worlds that is now a director at one of the largest defense contractors in the country and shared thermals with several others at clubs and contests around the world. Professionally, I've worked with several corporate pilots who happen to be female as well. They come in and do their job, meet the standards as set out by the FAA - just like everyone else is expected to. Some are single, some are married, some are divorced. Some have kids, some do not. They're living their life as they see fit.

Most of the women that I have met in soaring were involved with WSPA. They've all come away with positive experiences, whether they were pre-solo or well into cross-country, contests and badges. My own daughter just turned 13 and is taking lessons. We signed her up as a member of WSPA a couple months ago and I'll be making a donation in honor of this thread to help support the next generation of "childless corporate whores" as you call them. There's a good chance a young woman that started out at the local gliderport, fostered by a WSPA seminar or scholarship could be that Captain on your next airline flight, defending our country over the skies of a foreign country or possibly the next person on the Moon or the first person on Mars. That's pretty f*#@ing awesome.

Mike Westbrook


The only people here who have used the phrase "childless corporate whores" are you and Hugh Grandstaff. If I am wrong, quote it because I have searched and could find no other references.

Tom
  #112  
Old October 26th 20, 11:47 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default The Apology

On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 5:24:47 PM UTC-5, Gregg Ballou wrote:

A lot of people don't understand how gliders stay up, if you see a problem because a woman asked a question you are projecting your sexism. You say the man is guilty because of his hat, that is a hell of a Kafka trap. Ironically the drawing is most likely from a romance novel written for women. Poor women, women have lost a lot since the 1950's if you think being a childless corporate whore is better than being a stay at home mother you need to talk to some honest women. And yes women could fly then, if they wanted to, women have been flying since long before the Wright brothers.


Tom-

Right here my friend.
  #113  
Old October 26th 20, 11:57 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default The Apology

On Monday, October 26, 2020 at 4:22:40 PM UTC-5, Cumungus wrote:
Sign the petition. http://chng.it/2qk7Cwq64Y

Yours truly,
Cumungus


I have no desire to see anyone banned from the SSA over this.

I do have a desire to point out what is unacceptable behavior and hopefully see some change. I would much rather have someone take a breath, think about the fact their actions and words can have real consequences with regard to how they are perceived, and decide that they will modify the way that they interact with their fellow human beings rather than be completely alienated from the sport and community.
  #114  
Old October 27th 20, 12:02 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
andy l
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 64
Default The Apology

On Monday, 26 October 2020 at 22:27:11 UTC, 2G wrote:
The only people here who have used the phrase "childless corporate whores" are you and Hugh Grandstaff. If I am wrong, quote it because I have searched and could find no other references.

Tom


It's clear enough where the first instance occurs

On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 23:24:47 UTC+1, Gregg Ballou wrote:
  #115  
Old October 27th 20, 12:10 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Andy Blackburn[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 608
Default The Apology

I want to add my voice to those who have already posted that they understand why the ad was so cringeworthy.

When I first skimmed over it in print it elicited a "something's not quite right" reaction in the back of my brain, but I didn't really pause to think about it (perhaps I should have). On reflection, it doesn't surprise me at all that a significant number of very accomplished women glider pilots might feel a snub at being portrayed in by the senior representatives of the sport (SSF and the Editors of Soaring) as basking in the glow of the dashing and adventuresome man who performs daring feats of airmanship that women can't even comprehend on their own - and that their trajectory in the sport is to become romantically involved with such a man. That's the obvious implication of the content of the ad - probably unintentional and based on a set of subconscious presumptions about what's nostalgic versus rubbing salt in a wound. Just because something is subconscious and counter to what a person might support explicitly doesn't make its impact less corrosive. I'd also note that it appears that the "thought bubble" was added to the retro material by whomever put the ad together so the "historical graphic" seems to have had its more objectionable presumptions reinforced by contemporary sentiments. People should think about that - it's unlikely that this ad was written as irony and even if it was, it doesn't come across that way. In either case it's a fail and a corrective statement is wholly appropriate.

Pointing out the obvious shortcomings of a not-so-subtle diminishing of women's place in our sport is not an assault of freedom or a liberal conspiracy to "cancel" men, a "PC takeover" by overly sensitive snowflakes, or anything of the sort. It's simply pointing out that these sorts of obvious to some but (apparently) oblivious to others slights get noticed and cumulatively diminish the enjoyment of those women who do participate in soaring. These representations also erode the propensity to join of 50% of the population who might consider our sport. That's hardly a group we should be writing off - their participation rate is tragically small as it stands.

A very wise person once told me "feedback is a gift". People have to screw up their courage and make an effort to provide you with an opportunity to learn and grow. Defensiveness is the enemy of understanding - and vitriolic ad hominem reactions are simply indefensible. I have to admit true astonishment at those who have run off to some woman in their life to ask "this isn't sexist, right?". That's hardly a defense of anything.

My hope is that most of us can learn something of value from this episode. I certainly have.

Andy Blackburn
9B
  #116  
Old October 27th 20, 01:23 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 281
Default The Apology

On Monday, October 26, 2020 at 7:10:07 PM UTC-4, wrote:
I want to add my voice to those who have already posted that they understand why the ad was so cringeworthy.

When I first skimmed over it in print it elicited a "something's not quite right" reaction in the back of my brain, but I didn't really pause to think about it (perhaps I should have). On reflection, it doesn't surprise me at all that a significant number of very accomplished women glider pilots might feel a snub at being portrayed in by the senior representatives of the sport (SSF and the Editors of Soaring) as basking in the glow of the dashing and adventuresome man who performs daring feats of airmanship that women can't even comprehend on their own - and that their trajectory in the sport is to become romantically involved with such a man. That's the obvious implication of the content of the ad - probably unintentional and based on a set of subconscious presumptions about what's nostalgic versus rubbing salt in a wound. Just because something is subconscious and counter to what a person might support explicitly doesn't make its impact less corrosive. I'd also note that it appears that the "thought bubble" was added to the retro material by whomever put the ad together so the "historical graphic" seems to have had its more objectionable presumptions reinforced by contemporary sentiments. People should think about that - it's unlikely that this ad was written as irony and even if it was, it doesn't come across that way. In either case it's a fail and a corrective statement is wholly appropriate.

Pointing out the obvious shortcomings of a not-so-subtle diminishing of women's place in our sport is not an assault of freedom or a liberal conspiracy to "cancel" men, a "PC takeover" by overly sensitive snowflakes, or anything of the sort. It's simply pointing out that these sorts of obvious to some but (apparently) oblivious to others slights get noticed and cumulatively diminish the enjoyment of those women who do participate in soaring. These representations also erode the propensity to join of 50% of the population who might consider our sport. That's hardly a group we should be writing off - their participation rate is tragically small as it stands.

A very wise person once told me "feedback is a gift". People have to screw up their courage and make an effort to provide you with an opportunity to learn and grow. Defensiveness is the enemy of understanding - and vitriolic ad hominem reactions are simply indefensible. I have to admit true astonishment at those who have run off to some woman in their life to ask "this isn't sexist, right?". That's hardly a defense of anything.

My hope is that most of us can learn something of value from this episode.. I certainly have.

Andy Blackburn
9B

Andy, nice interpretation of your point of view. I would like to ask you the question in reference to this depiction topic only. Are the women or men more subtly sensitive about the depiction? I was just reading something called the Woman Enemy, which pretty much came to the conclusion that 95% of sexist facts were undermined by other women. Maybe I should go back and read the, The rules Of The Feminists' Fight Club". I do not mean to rub in salt as you stated, just looking for a better understanding. Bob
  #117  
Old October 27th 20, 01:29 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Gregg Ballou[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 63
Default The Apology

On Monday, October 26, 2020 at 5:22:40 PM UTC-4, Cumungus wrote:
Sign the petition. http://chng.it/2qk7Cwq64Y

Yours truly,
Cumungus

Damn the soaring social justice cancel culture is harsh. I'm not one of those holocaust deniers, I just think the ladies overreacted to an innocent illustration.
  #118  
Old October 27th 20, 02:22 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Kimmine and Mitch Hudson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default The Apology

Just to ensure we don't get some weakened, wattered down thing at the end of this thread where people never see the true hate which has spewed from these posters, I will provide quotes, with references after the last post by either Bob or Greg for as long as it takes for this thread to go away. These quotes need to be preserved for the life of the internet, and serve as a reminder to customers, potential club members, and future employers.

"Mark, you make a great point , the apology should be from these Feminazi organizers whose mission was only to create conflict. This Femitifa approach should not be tolerated, solution, defund the WSPA as part or association with the SSA. "
-Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, Oct 20, 2020, 12:03:12

"The complaints and the sniveling apologies are appalling. And the woman in the ad would be more attractive if she had kept her mouth shut."
-Greg Ballou, Elmwood, Massachusits, Oct 21, 2020, 12:49:44

"Poor women, women have lost a lot since the 1950's if you think being a childless corporate whore is better than being a stay at home mother you need to talk to some honest women.
-Greg Ballou, Elmwood, Massachusits, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47











  #119  
Old October 27th 20, 05:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
2G
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,439
Default The Apology

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 6:22:37 AM UTC-7, Kimmine and Mitch Hudson wrote:
Just to ensure we don't get some weakened, wattered down thing at the end of this thread where people never see the true hate which has spewed from these posters, I will provide quotes, with references after the last post by either Bob or Greg for as long as it takes for this thread to go away. These quotes need to be preserved for the life of the internet, and serve as a reminder to customers, potential club members, and future employers.

"Mark, you make a great point , the apology should be from these Feminazi organizers whose mission was only to create conflict. This Femitifa approach should not be tolerated, solution, defund the WSPA as part or association with the SSA. "
-Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, Oct 20, 2020, 12:03:12

"The complaints and the sniveling apologies are appalling. And the woman in the ad would be more attractive if she had kept her mouth shut."
-Greg Ballou, Elmwood, Massachusits, Oct 21, 2020, 12:49:44

"Poor women, women have lost a lot since the 1950's if you think being a childless corporate whore is better than being a stay at home mother you need to talk to some honest women.
-Greg Ballou, Elmwood, Massachusits, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47


Just to balance this:

"Few men are 'pigs'. But those few might cloud the perception of swine." Cindy B
  #120  
Old October 27th 20, 05:50 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Dan Marotta
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,601
Default The Apology

Tony,

To answer your question, I use my email client, Thunderbird, and Eternal
September newsreader.Â* It works exactly like email.Â* If there's a thread
I don't want to see, I simply right click on the topic and select
"Ignore Thread".Â* Done!Â* Likewise, I can choose to not see postings from
any particular contributor.

I don't know if you can do that using a web-based interface.

Dan

On 10/27/2020 1:27 AM, Tony wrote:
Dear Brothers, Dear Sisters:

I'm so sorry for trying to participate in this discussion. Damn this new interface. Please tell me how to stop receiving updates?! Else I will try to kill my Googlesomethingidentity . Or if everyone were to get over it or roll inverted and pull hard...?

May all be well and happy.


--
Dan, 5J
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Apology Bob Gardner Piloting 2 January 4th 05 06:51 PM
Apology Curtis Soaring 0 October 20th 04 03:44 PM
Apology Curtis Rotorcraft 0 October 20th 04 03:43 PM
Apology Curtis Restoration 0 October 20th 04 03:42 PM
Apology Curtis Products 0 October 20th 04 03:30 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.