The Apology

[[email protected]]

Recently there was an apology issued from the SSA and the SSF and Editor for a so called offensive interpretation of the depiction of a historical portrayal of a young lady and a glider pilot on a previous edition of Soaring magazine. After reading the complaints from the women associated with the WSPA I decided it is now time to voice the other side of the story.
That depiction reminded me of the 1970's when I met my wife at the Kendall Gliderport in Miami . I was flying my Std. Cirrus and she was a student pilot for gliders. So to say that that depiction was sexist is completely ridiculous. The SSA should have never apologized because of an orchestrated attack on the publication , Editor, and the SSF.
The complainants are without merit, totally offbase and have a directive in place that only undermines the overall objective of the SSA, SSF, and Editor. You would think that this bunch of misfits, have no understanding of how this is an inclusive activity and not directed by any one gender.
Ladies, listen up, much has been done by the SSA and others to support women in the sport of flying gliders. Let me take a moment and share a story with you about compassion and inclusion.
During the past year we has a lady member whom became sick from a serious stage of cancer, a few of us at our club took notice and understood the severity of the situation and made it possible for this lady to achieve her goal of becoming a CFIG. We made sure that this was done at no cost, and guess what, she completed her CFIG even while on chemotherapy.
Sorry that you think the SSA must apologize for your mis-interpretation and misguided effort . I think that the lack of cognizance is appalling. Bob Youngblood

[[email protected]]

Can someone post a scan of the ad in question? I saw the complaints in the recent magazine edition but had already discarded the offending magazine and apparently didn't take notice of the ad when I read it. I'd just like to see what all of the hubbub is about before drawing any conclusion.

On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 5:11:19 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> Recently there was an apology issued from the SSA and the SSF and Editor for a so called offensive interpretation of the depiction of a historical portrayal of a young lady and a glider pilot on a previous edition of Soaring magazine. After reading the complaints from the women associated with the WSPA I decided it is now time to voice the other side of the story.
> That depiction reminded me of the 1970's when I met my wife at the Kendall Gliderport in Miami . I was flying my Std. Cirrus and she was a student pilot for gliders. So to say that that depiction was sexist is completely ridiculous. The SSA should have never apologized because of an orchestrated attack on the publication , Editor, and the SSF.
> The complainants are without merit, totally offbase and have a directive in place that only undermines the overall objective of the SSA, SSF, and Editor. You would think that this bunch of misfits, have no understanding of how this is an inclusive activity and not directed by any one gender.
> Ladies, listen up, much has been done by the SSA and others to support women in the sport of flying gliders. Let me take a moment and share a story with you about compassion and inclusion.
> During the past year we has a lady member whom became sick from a serious stage of cancer, a few of us at our club took notice and understood the severity of the situation and made it possible for this lady to achieve her goal of becoming a CFIG. We made sure that this was done at no cost, and guess what, she completed her CFIG even while on chemotherapy.
> Sorry that you think the SSA must apologize for your mis-interpretation and misguided effort . I think that the lack of cognizance is appalling. Bob Youngblood

[Jim N]

Try this:

http://ourdigitalmags.com/publication/?m=32960&i=667760&p=16

If anyone finds this old ad offensive they must be having a really hard time coping with day to day "stuff"

Jim

[2G]

On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 4:05:39 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> Can someone post a scan of the ad in question? I saw the complaints in the recent magazine edition but had already discarded the offending magazine and apparently didn't take notice of the ad when I read it. I'd just like to see what all of the hubbub is about before drawing any conclusion.
>
> On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 5:11:19 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> > Recently there was an apology issued from the SSA and the SSF and Editor for a so called offensive interpretation of the depiction of a historical portrayal of a young lady and a glider pilot on a previous edition of Soaring magazine. After reading the complaints from the women associated with the WSPA I decided it is now time to voice the other side of the story.
> > That depiction reminded me of the 1970's when I met my wife at the Kendall Gliderport in Miami . I was flying my Std. Cirrus and she was a student pilot for gliders. So to say that that depiction was sexist is completely ridiculous. The SSA should have never apologized because of an orchestrated attack on the publication , Editor, and the SSF.
> > The complainants are without merit, totally offbase and have a directive in place that only undermines the overall objective of the SSA, SSF, and Editor. You would think that this bunch of misfits, have no understanding of how this is an inclusive activity and not directed by any one gender.
> > Ladies, listen up, much has been done by the SSA and others to support women in the sport of flying gliders. Let me take a moment and share a story with you about compassion and inclusion.
> > During the past year we has a lady member whom became sick from a serious stage of cancer, a few of us at our club took notice and understood the severity of the situation and made it possible for this lady to achieve her goal of becoming a CFIG. We made sure that this was done at no cost, and guess what, she completed her CFIG even while on chemotherapy.
> > Sorry that you think the SSA must apologize for your mis-interpretation and misguided effort . I think that the lack of cognizance is appalling. Bob Youngblood

I would like to know what page it was on because I couldn't find it (I will scan it if I know where to look).

Tom

[2G]

On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 5:21:25 PM UTC-7, Jim N wrote:
> Try this:
>
> http://ourdigitalmags.com/publication/?m=32960&i=667760&p=16
>
> If anyone finds this old ad offensive they must be having a really hard time coping with day to day "stuff"
>
> Jim

That ad actually reflects reality. I have had many a conversation answering the question posed in the ad, mostly to other guys. Somebody's gain is turned up WAY TOO HIGH!

Tom

[[email protected]]

On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 7:21:25 PM UTC-5, Jim N wrote:
> Try this:
>
> http://ourdigitalmags.com/publication/?m=32960&i=667760&p=16
>
> If anyone finds this old ad offensive they must be having a really hard time coping with day to day "stuff"


Anybody got a link to the actual complaint?

[[email protected]]

In my 47 years of soaring flight, (28 years in hang gliding, 20 in sailplanes) I have received thousands of queries about the advisability/possibility/safety etc. of flying without an engine. Most of the questions were asked by men, but a significant number were asked by women. Invariably the questioner was someone who simply had no knowledge of the sport at all, and were under the assumption that an aircraft simply could not fly without propulsion.

Often, a few minutes of explanation about flight dynamics and the ability to recognize energy sources in the atmosphere would educate the interested party sufficiently. Some actually were intrigued enough to pursue the concept to the point of taking a ride, taking lessons and even getting a license. A few continued to the point of adding ratings and I am proud to say that at several dozen of the initial questions resulted in military or commercial careers.

If simply answering an innocent question about a topic about which you have knowledge is somehow insulting, due to an insecure and suspicious attitude that the person asking feels inferior, then I suggest that anybody with any technical experience with anything from particle physics to auto mechanics is going to be castigated by the allegedly offended party.

In my mind, I think that those who complained about the ad in Soaring owe an apology to the person they first asked for information about flying sailplanes. And their Instructors, mentors, tow pilots and friends who ever gave them valuable advice.

[MNLou]

Perhaps the issue was not with the question but the "love story" comment at the bottom?

I would like more info as I try hard to be sensitive to any sexism. I admit that I didn't catch any issue when this was originally published.

Lou

[xcnick]

Perhaps it is because I was titillated by the artist rendition of the time period's women. The reality is the ladies were good sticks and way hotter!

https://photos.app.goo.gl/d9QWyP4H3jCZYrUYA

[B BRIONES]

I love America. I was born here, but having grown up in a country where the culture clearly defines and embraces the "Macho" man image, the ad in question does "NOT even faze me". I my opinion, men and women are built different and each has their own strengths and weaknesses. I guess that makes men & women equal but different at the same time. I also believe that men and women are superior in their respective areas but will never be the same.... I love being the "Alpha" at home, even though my wife disagrees with me on this.

To deviate a bit... Americans (specially the younger generation(s) following the greatest American Generation), in my opinion have become weak and lost focus on what is important, wasting time on petty stuff. While America is "still" the greatest nation on earth, if Americans does not wake up soon, we will end up in a nightmare...

[joel!!!!@yahoo,com]

On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 5:29:29 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 5:21:25 PM UTC-7, Jim N wrote:
> > Try this:
> >
> > http://ourdigitalmags.com/publication/?m=32960&i=667760&p=16
> >
> > If anyone finds this old ad offensive they must be having a really hard time coping with day to day "stuff"
> >
> > Jim
> That ad actually reflects reality. I have had many a conversation answering the question posed in the ad, mostly to other guys. Somebody's gain is turned up WAY TOO HIGH!
>
> Tom
Tongue firmly planted in cheek " could this not be another QAnon theory? Yes "He" has turned the country on its head.

[Charles Petersen[_2_]]

On Tuesday, 20 October 2020 12:25:47 UTC-4, joel!!!!@yahoo,com wrote:
> On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 5:29:29 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> > On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 5:21:25 PM UTC-7, Jim N wrote:
> > > Try this:
> > >
> > > http://ourdigitalmags.com/publication/?m=32960&i=667760&p=16
> > >
> > > If anyone finds this old ad offensive they must be having a really hard time coping with day to day "stuff"
> > >
> > > Jim
> > That ad actually reflects reality. I have had many a conversation answering the question posed in the ad, mostly to other guys. Somebody's gain is turned up WAY TOO HIGH!
> >
> > Tom
> Tongue firmly planted in cheek " could this not be another QAnon theory? Yes "He" has turned the country on its head.

There's gonna be whiplash when this political correctness finally swings the other way.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 9:28:34 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> In my 47 years of soaring flight, (28 years in hang gliding, 20 in sailplanes) I have received thousands of queries about the advisability/possibility/safety etc. of flying without an engine. Most of the questions were asked by men, but a significant number were asked by women. Invariably the questioner was someone who simply had no knowledge of the sport at all, and were under the assumption that an aircraft simply could not fly without propulsion.
>
> Often, a few minutes of explanation about flight dynamics and the ability to recognize energy sources in the atmosphere would educate the interested party sufficiently. Some actually were intrigued enough to pursue the concept to the point of taking a ride, taking lessons and even getting a license. A few continued to the point of adding ratings and I am proud to say that at several dozen of the initial questions resulted in military or commercial careers.
>
> If simply answering an innocent question about a topic about which you have knowledge is somehow insulting, due to an insecure and suspicious attitude that the person asking feels inferior, then I suggest that anybody with any technical experience with anything from particle physics to auto mechanics is going to be castigated by the allegedly offended party.
>
> In my mind, I think that those who complained about the ad in Soaring owe an apology to the person they first asked for information about flying sailplanes. And their Instructors, mentors, tow pilots and friends who ever gave them valuable advice.
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. The term Femitifa is derived from the Antifa approach to creating conflict and empowering sexist views that server their own agenda.

[Guy Byars[_5_]]

> The term Femitifa is derived from the Antifa approach to creating conflict and empowering sexist views that server their own agenda.

When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 2:13:22 PM UTC-4, Guy Byars wrote:
> > The term Femitifa is derived from the Antifa approach to creating conflict and empowering sexist views that server their own agenda.
> When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Sorry for the big fingers, it only serves their own agenda.

[Tony[_7_]]

On Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 3:33:08 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 2:13:22 PM UTC-4, Guy Byars wrote:
> > > The term Femitifa is derived from the Antifa approach to creating conflict and empowering sexist views that server their own agenda.
> > When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
> Sorry for the big fingers, it only serves their own agenda.
Actually I think the person wearing the helmet looks pretty butch in spite of the obvious use of cosmetics... Maybe that's what offends people!

[[email protected]]

Here are the feedback letters concening this.

The 3rd and 4th had the patience to clearly explain the issue.


https://mydigitalpublication.com/publication/?i=674598&article_id=3770489&view=articleBrowser&ver=html5

Basically instead of welcoming women, the ad brought back memories of days when women were supposed to be worshipping pilots instead of being pilots.

With hindsight, perhaps SSF could have run same picture with the lady having just piloted a glider 1000k, the guy astonished with the no engine thing, and the tag line talking about the love of flying?

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 5:06:01 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Here are the feedback letters concening this.
>
> The 3rd and 4th had the patience to clearly explain the issue.
>
>
> https://mydigitalpublication.com/publication/?i=674598&article_id=3770489&view=articleBrowser&ver=html5
>
> Basically instead of welcoming women, the ad brought back memories of days when women were supposed to be worshipping pilots instead of being pilots.
>
> With hindsight, perhaps SSF could have run same picture with the lady having just piloted a glider 1000k, the guy astonished with the no engine thing, and the tag line talking about the love of flying?
Stu, let me take a moment and ask each of these women the basic question, what have you done for soaring? They have certainly benefitted from the exposure to soaring and I will never judge their ability, only their judgement.
This topic really is disturbing, what these females have done is dig a big hole, I don't think they have a shovel big enough to dig their way out.

[xcnick]

Whatever the problem is I'm listening.

Back to reality of era, here is she is third from the left with Eleanor Roosevelt. Closest to the camera with USA on her sleeve is Ann Woods who just told Mrs. President: “In England, the ladies get equal pay as the men.� Look at Eleanor's smile. This first was two lifetimes ago, but it is still an issue in the USA.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/oFCcTozLaaAZURdVA

[[email protected]]

> This topic really is disturbing, what these females have done is dig a big hole, I don't think they have a shovel big enough to dig their way out.

The complaint, which sadly required the explaination for this old guy see the harm in what seemed harmless, seems a valid, constructive suggestion for improvement. We definitely want more women pilots and being tone deaf in this area is not helping this end.

Your proposed question seems counterproductive.

[Dan Marotta]

What these people don't seem to understand is that that was the common
behavior, belief, and attitude of the era.Â* I'm not saying it's either
good or bad, just that it was.Â* Getting upset today over something that
happened decades ago, and was mainstream at the time, is simply someone
wanting to stir up bad feelings.Â* These are the same people who claim
that Thomas Jefferson was a bad person.

On 10/20/2020 3:05 PM, wrote:
> Here are the feedback letters concening this.
>
> The 3rd and 4th had the patience to clearly explain the issue.
>
>
> https://mydigitalpublication.com/publication/?i=674598&article_id=3770489&view=articleBrowser&ver=html5
>
> Basically instead of welcoming women, the ad brought back memories of days when women were supposed to be worshipping pilots instead of being pilots.
>
> With hindsight, perhaps SSF could have run same picture with the lady having just piloted a glider 1000k, the guy astonished with the no engine thing, and the tag line talking about the love of flying?
>

--
Dan, 5J

[MNLou]

Whoa - I think some people need to take a deep breath and do some research.

Some of the women who wrote in have been contributing to SSA in a big way for years.

Not to mention that the current Chair of the SSA is a woman.

I believe the proper response is to understand why someone was offended and determine how to prevent it in the future.

We don't get to determine is someone should be offended. Our job is to respect their feelings.

And, if the Editor and the Chair of the SSF think they needed to apologize, I'll take their lead.

Lou

PS - I think Thomas Jefferson was a great founder. Flawed but great.

[Dan Marotta]

I've met both complainant and the SSA President, both at the WSPA
seminar at Black Forest in the early 90s and got along just fine with both.

As to respect, what about those of us who are offended by their
complaints?Â* So feel free to apologize for yourself, but not for me.

On 10/20/2020 5:49 PM, MNLou wrote:
> Whoa - I think some people need to take a deep breath and do some research.
>
> Some of the women who wrote in have been contributing to SSA in a big way for years.
>
> Not to mention that the current Chair of the SSA is a woman.
>
> I believe the proper response is to understand why someone was offended and determine how to prevent it in the future.
>
> We don't get to determine is someone should be offended. Our job is to respect their feelings.
>
> And, if the Editor and the Chair of the SSF think they needed to apologize, I'll take their lead.
>
> Lou
>
> PS - I think Thomas Jefferson was a great founder. Flawed but great.

--
Dan, 5J

[[email protected]]

>Â* Getting upset today over something that
> happened decades ago, and was mainstream at the time, is simply someone
> wanting to stir up bad feelings.Â*


Agreed that this old stuff happened in the mainstream in the 40's and best water under the bridge today, even if bad by today's standards. Wanting to stir up bad feelings because of it not productive.

The complaint seems about the same stuff unfortunately happening today.

[Steve Bralla]

I'm offended by the people that are offended by by the people that are offended by the SSF ad. Now you can be offended by my offence.

[Bella Smolder]

On Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 9:09:27 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> I'm offended by the people that are offended by by the people that are offended by the SSF ad. Now you can be offended by my offence.
So is that the triple dog dare?

[danlj]

On Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 7:09:17 PM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> I've met both complainant and the SSA President, both at the WSPA
> seminar at Black Forest in the early 90s and got along just fine with both.
>
> As to respect, what about those of us who are offended by their
> complaints? So feel free to apologize for yourself, but not for me.
> On 10/20/2020 5:49 PM, MNLou wrote:
> > Whoa - I think some people need to take a deep breath and do some research.
> >
> > Some of the women who wrote in have been contributing to SSA in a big way for years.
> >
> > Not to mention that the current Chair of the SSA is a woman.
> >
> > I believe the proper response is to understand why someone was offended and determine how to prevent it in the future.
> >
> > We don't get to determine if someone should be offended. Our job is to respect their feelings.
> >
> > And, if the Editor and the Chair of the SSF think they needed to apologize, I'll take their lead.
> >
> > Lou
> >
> > PS - I think Thomas Jefferson was a great founder. Flawed but great.
> --
> Dan, 5J

The most telling aspect of this thread is that almost all the respondents are men, and almost all the men seem completely blank ("without empathy") regarding how this ad could feel demeaning to a woman. This cluelessness is, I think, the main point for many women. Dan Marotta gets it. Congratulations, Dan!

[Paul B[_2_]]

> The most telling aspect of this thread is that almost all the respondents are men,
Well most readers and posters on this list are men, so no surprise there

> and almost all the men seem completely blank ("without empathy")
Or they are just utterly sick of the virtue signalling that they are exposed to

> This cluelessness is, I think, the main point for many women.
Well, unless the women are in a position of a Tardis, they can not be easily offended by something that has yet to be written.

Like Dan, I believe that you cannot, or rather should not, redo history.

Paul

[xcnick]

History is women pilots have lowered themselves to product promotions, but not like the artist rendering. Here is a real advertisement.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/bce6wB4zJMAozWF96

https://photos.app.goo.gl/ZrXsXRiHEfK7QjYv7

> Like Dan, I believe that you cannot, or rather should not, redo history.
>
> Paul

[John Godfrey (QT)[_2_]]

On Tuesday, October 20, 2020 at 6:16:38 PM UTC-4, xcnick wrote:
> Whatever the problem is I'm listening.
>
> Back to reality of era, here is she is third from the left with Eleanor Roosevelt. Closest to the camera with USA on her sleeve is Ann Woods who just told Mrs. President: “In England, the ladies get equal pay as the men.� Look at Eleanor's smile. This first was two lifetimes ago, but it is still an issue in the USA.
>
> https://photos.app.goo.gl/oFCcTozLaaAZURdVA

You could stop digging (before you get to China).

[xcnick]

Not sure I understand, but I did put photos instead of illustrations with my fake news. Digging would be to offend everyone. Like: Why are you surprised the women spoke up? Any bitch who straps on a parachute, smack pack and an InReach is more of a man than most of you posers who try to cut the line to give carnival rides to tourists.

On Wednesday, October 21, 2020 at 5:54:16 AM UTC-7, John Godfrey (QT) wrote:

> You could stop digging (before you get to China).

[John Godfrey (QT)[_2_]]

On Wednesday, October 21, 2020 at 10:22:38 AM UTC-4, xcnick wrote:
> Not sure I understand, but I did put photos instead of illustrations with my fake news. Digging would be to offend everyone. Like: Why are you surprised the women spoke up? Any bitch who straps on a parachute, smack pack and an InReach is more of a man than most of you posers who try to cut the line to give carnival rides to tourists.
>
> On Wednesday, October 21, 2020 at 5:54:16 AM UTC-7, John Godfrey (QT) wrote:
>
> > You could stop digging (before you get to China).

Sorry, directed at Bob Y.

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

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.

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, October 21, 2020 at 1:03:07 PM UTC-4, John Godfrey (QT) wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 21, 2020 at 10:22:38 AM UTC-4, xcnick wrote:
> > Not sure I understand, but I did put photos instead of illustrations with my fake news. Digging would be to offend everyone. Like: Why are you surprised the women spoke up? Any bitch who straps on a parachute, smack pack and an InReach is more of a man than most of you posers who try to cut the line to give carnival rides to tourists.
> >
> > On Wednesday, October 21, 2020 at 5:54:16 AM UTC-7, John Godfrey (QT) wrote:
> >
> > > You could stop digging (before you get to China).
> Sorry, directed at Bob Y.
John, the women whom complained need to dig very deep to come out the other side to redeem themselves. Oh my, what
a tangled web they wove.

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

There are situations where some overreact to an imagined slight or insult. This is not one of those situations.

Multiple long-standing members took the time to write to complain about an ad that troubled them. I think Soaring/SSA responded appropriately in responding.

What was socially acceptable in the past is not always acceptable today. I consider myself to be fairly enlightened. That said, over the years, I've managed to offend several female friends with insensitive remarks, and even lost one friend as a result. I didn't mean any harm. But these women were troubled enough to call me on it. I'm glad they explained why my remarks weren't appropriate because I didn't always "get it" and it allowed me to apologize and to try to improve.

The nearly universal response by the men on this thread is a perfect illustration of how far we have to go. Has political correctness gone too far? In some cases, yes. But those of us in the majority (and in soaring, men by far outnumber women) need to put a little effort into trying to understand why some of those in the minority might be offended by ads like this, not criticize and further insult them.

Chip Bearden
JB
SSA member since 1965

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

Is it ancient sexism that got the girl's fired up, or is the real reason they are mad because the soaring scene doesn't have men like the guy in the advertisement?

[[email protected]]

Kumbaya, y'all. Give Peace a chance. He ain't heavy, he's my brother.

Feel free to chime in with some meaningless politically correct slogan from your childhood.

[Tango Eight]

On Wednesday, October 21, 2020 at 10:42:32 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Kumbaya, y'all. Give Peace a chance. He ain't heavy, he's my brother.
>
> Feel free to chime in with some meaningless politically correct slogan from your childhood.

Who the hell looks at the characters in advertisements and thinks that they portray anything significant w.r.t the general state of man- or womanhood or (even weirder) that it somehow reflects on their *personal* '

[Tango Eight]

On Thursday, October 22, 2020 at 7:32:46 PM UTC-4, Tango Eight wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 21, 2020 at 10:42:32 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > Kumbaya, y'all. Give Peace a chance. He ain't heavy, he's my brother.
> >
> > Feel free to chime in with some meaningless politically correct slogan from your childhood.
Who the hell looks at the characters in advertisements and thinks that they portray anything significant w.r.t the general state of man- or womanhood or (even weirder) that it somehow reflects on their *personal* man- or womanhood? That's just making a problem out of nothing.

I think a few people could join me in a nice tall cold drink of "Harden the F--- Up". Your lives will be infinitely more enjoyable for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKavLUAiRWs

T8

[[email protected]]

Saw a great T-shirt:

"You think it's offensive.

I think it's funny.

That's why I'm happier than you."

[Linda Chism]

Hello, the ladies’ letters to the SSA were comments about a clumsy ad.
Your reactions to them in this thread say a lot about each of you.

Could each of you who belittled these ladies please post which club/site you are affiliated with so that I can, like, avoid ever soaring/towing there and not have to deal with you.

If you’re going to be a dumb****, be proud. Bring it.

Cheers, Linda

[2G]

On Thursday, October 22, 2020 at 8:58:54 PM UTC-7, Linda Chism wrote:
> Hello, the ladies’ letters to the SSA were comments about a clumsy ad.
> Your reactions to them in this thread say a lot about each of you.
>
> Could each of you who belittled these ladies please post which club/site you are affiliated with so that I can, like, avoid ever soaring/towing there and not have to deal with you.
>
> If you’re going to be a dumb****, be proud. Bring it.
>
> Cheers, Linda

Oh, now the nuclear bomb - thanks A LOT, Linda.

[Rakel]

On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 12:01:47 AM UTC-4, 2G wrote:
.... not have to deal with you.
> >
> > If you’re going to be a dumb****, be proud. Bring it.
> >
> > Cheers, Linda


This thread has gone too far. Can we all just get back to flying gliders, please.

Can this thread be locked, somehow?

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, October 22, 2020 at 11:58:54 PM UTC-4, Linda Chism wrote:
> Hello, the ladies’ letters to the SSA were comments about a clumsy ad.
> Your reactions to them in this thread say a lot about each of you.
>
> Could each of you who belittled these ladies please post which club/site you are affiliated with so that I can, like, avoid ever soaring/towing there and not have to deal with you.
>
> If you’re going to be a dumb****, be proud. Bring it.
>
> Cheers, Linda
Certainly people are entitled to contrasting points of view, I for one enjoy reading others viewpoints with the hope of learning how others express their views on the same topic. In some instances people agree and others disagree, but in most cases the differences are enlightening and constructive.
I find it difficult to accept that the complaints to the SSA, SSF, and Editor could have resulted in anything different. Your reference to the depiction as clumsy is certainly an opinion that you are entitled to, but don't chastise others for a different point of view. Reverting to the old boycott theory of punishment will further taint others opinions, it reminds me of my younger days playing baseball in the playground when little Johnny would take his ball and go home if things did not go his way.
So Linda here is my offer, please come to Vero Beach for a well needed vacation, you can stay here at the house, enjoy our hospitality, including great meals, good wine and rum, a nice clean bed and plenty of space for relaxing and enjoying you stay. As a bonus I will let you fly my sailplane off my strip and I personally will give you a great tow. Bob Youngblood

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

On Thursday, October 22, 2020 at 11:58:54 PM UTC-4, Linda Chism wrote:
> Hello, the ladies’ letters to the SSA were comments about a clumsy ad.
> Your reactions to them in this thread say a lot about each of you.
>
> Could each of you who belittled these ladies please post which club/site you are affiliated with so that I can, like, avoid ever soaring/towing there and not have to deal with you.
>
> If you’re going to be a dumb****, be proud. Bring it.
>
> Cheers, Linda
Men are tired of this nonsense, threatening to stay away sounds too good to be true.

[xcnick]

I am a man who is not tired of women. Get on course and bring it ladies! Never see enough female xc pilots. God bless the women instructors and tow pilots, but what a thrill it was to hear Kathy on the radio ripping the Whites and scoring speed points for her club. It would be great if all women could be subservient and get my slippers and a beer, but soaring gals have a long history of being just a bit different so I will take you all as you come. Here is Emmi von Roretz, Hanna Reich, and Joan Price. I think the middle one was a bit pushy, the word Nazi comes to mind.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/DT7SCmnxeGMcYiMo7

On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 6:32:32 AM UTC-7, Gregg Ballou wrote:

> Men are tired of this nonsense, threatening to stay away sounds too good to be true.

[Dan Marotta]

I think Shakespeare said it nicely with the title of one of his plays:Â*
"Much Ado About Nothing".

On 10/23/2020 8:07 AM, xcnick wrote:
> I am a man who is not tired of women. Get on course and bring it ladies! Never see enough female xc pilots. God bless the women instructors and tow pilots, but what a thrill it was to hear Kathy on the radio ripping the Whites and scoring speed points for her club. It would be great if all women could be subservient and get my slippers and a beer, but soaring gals have a long history of being just a bit different so I will take you all as you come. Here is Emmi von Roretz, Hanna Reich, and Joan Price. I think the middle one was a bit pushy, the word Nazi comes to mind.
>
> https://photos.app.goo.gl/DT7SCmnxeGMcYiMo7
>
> On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 6:32:32 AM UTC-7, Gregg Ballou wrote:
>
>> Men are tired of this nonsense, threatening to stay away sounds too good to be true.

--
Dan, 5J

[B BRIONES]

It's "Boys versus Girls" all over again or "Boys will always be Boys"...who wins?
Political correctness has castrated the American men:(

On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 7:44:23 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
> I think Shakespeare said it nicely with the title of one of his plays:
> "Much Ado About Nothing".

[Dan Marotta]

Not me.

On 10/23/2020 9:22 AM, B BRIONES wrote:
> It's "Boys versus Girls" all over again or "Boys will always be Boys"...who wins?
> Political correctness has castrated the American men:(
>
> On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 7:44:23 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
>> I think Shakespeare said it nicely with the title of one of his plays:
>> "Much Ado About Nothing".

--
Dan, 5J

[[email protected]]

Wow, a lot of emotions got stirred up here.

Let me see if I can understand how this ad could have been interpreted by the women who complained.

The background poster looks like something from the 50's, the glorious time for men, when women were second class citizens.

The questions being asked by the women "What? No engine? But how?" imply that she's just another dumb blonde, who cannot possibly understand the technical intricacies of motorless flight. Contrast that with the male pilot, whose head gear alone tells us all we need to know about his piloting skills and expertise in flight mechanics.

The caption "Beginning brilliant new love story - Swept Off Her Feet" could imply that there's no point in trying to explain all these intricacies to a women because that would distract her from her main purpose which she can only find in the bedroom and in the kitchen.

With this in mind, I fully agree with Chip and I totally understand and support Linda.

Cheers,
Doug

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 4:35:00 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Wow, a lot of emotions got stirred up here.
>
> Let me see if I can understand how this ad could have been interpreted by the women who complained.
>
> The background poster looks like something from the 50's, the glorious time for men, when women were second class citizens.
>
> The questions being asked by the women "What? No engine? But how?" imply that she's just another dumb blonde, who cannot possibly understand the technical intricacies of motorless flight. Contrast that with the male pilot, whose head gear alone tells us all we need to know about his piloting skills and expertise in flight mechanics.
>
> The caption "Beginning brilliant new love story - Swept Off Her Feet" could imply that there's no point in trying to explain all these intricacies to a women because that would distract her from her main purpose which she can only find in the bedroom and in the kitchen.
>
> With this in mind, I fully agree with Chip and I totally understand and support Linda.
>
> Cheers,
> Doug
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.

[andy l]

On Thursday, 22 October 2020 at 03:09:29 UTC+1, Gregg Ballou wrote:
> Is it ancient sexism that got the girl's fired up, or is the real reason they are mad because the soaring scene doesn't have men like the guy in the advertisement?

There could be yet another possible way to look at this.

After all the words are in a thinks bubble, not actual speech

Maybe this is a first date. She is the pilot, he knows this, and has put on the hat as a whimsical joke, but a couple more attempted jokes have come out a bit crass, and she's just imagining what he's going to say next ...

[2G]

On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 1:35:00 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> Wow, a lot of emotions got stirred up here.
>
> Let me see if I can understand how this ad could have been interpreted by the women who complained.
>
> The background poster looks like something from the 50's, the glorious time for men, when women were second class citizens.
>
> The questions being asked by the women "What? No engine? But how?" imply that she's just another dumb blonde, who cannot possibly understand the technical intricacies of motorless flight. Contrast that with the male pilot, whose head gear alone tells us all we need to know about his piloting skills and expertise in flight mechanics.
>
> The caption "Beginning brilliant new love story - Swept Off Her Feet" could imply that there's no point in trying to explain all these intricacies to a women because that would distract her from her main purpose which she can only find in the bedroom and in the kitchen.
>
> With this in mind, I fully agree with Chip and I totally understand and support Linda.
>
> Cheers,
> Doug

So, are you also going to take names and excommunicate pilots who disagree with you/Linda?

Tom

[Steve Bralla]

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.

I'd like to nominate Gregg Ballou for the RAS Phyllis Shapley award.
Only stay at home mothers are honest women and the rest are childless corporate whores. Wow! what group do women running glider ports fall into?

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

You know what's fun?

Being a CD with an archived copy of this thread.

See you guys in Moriarty for Sports Class!!!!!!

Hugh Grandstaff

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 9:53:06 PM UTC-5, Hugh Grandstaff wrote:
> You know what's fun?
>
> Being a CD with an archived copy of this thread.
>
> See you guys in Moriarty for Sports Class!!!!!!
>
> Hugh Grandstaff

*Club Class

[[email protected]]

Ya know, I think every time I have brought up the soaring community I have had nothing but good things to say, after reading a disgusting thread like this, I wish I never clicked the link to this post.

Grow up boys, and remember who brought home first place at worlds this year...

P.S. Why can't RAS follow the same rule of no politics at a glider club?!?!

[2G]

On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 8:11:12 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> Ya know, I think every time I have brought up the soaring community I have had nothing but good things to say, after reading a disgusting thread like this, I wish I never clicked the link to this post.
>
> Grow up boys, and remember who brought home first place at worlds this year...
>
> P.S. Why can't RAS follow the same rule of no politics at a glider club?!?!

Ah, yet another net censor. This thread concerned a FULL-PAGE apology printed in Soaring, which we pay for, so it IS fair game. Don't read the posts if you don't like it, but STOP telling us to stop posting.

Tom

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

On Friday, October 23, 2020 at 10:53:06 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> You know what's fun?
>
> Being a CD with an archived copy of this thread.
>
> See you guys in Moriarty for Sports Class!!!!!!
>
> Hugh Grandstaff
Let's all think about that for a bit.

[Dan Marotta]

So...Â* Does the Camel cigarette ad featuring Betty Skelton offend any
men?Â* Certainly not me!Â* I saw the ad which looks like a full page from
a comic book at the Santa Rosa, NM airport.Â* I was so tickled by it that
I looked her up.Â* I'd say she accomplished a lot more than a lot of the men.

Here's a link to the ad.Â* It's a bit difficult to read...
https://www.ebay.com/itm/1948-CAMEL-Cigarettes-Pilot-BETTY-SKELTON-Comic-Smoking-Retro-VINTAGE-AD-/174121210320

On 10/23/2020 2:34 PM, wrote:
> Wow, a lot of emotions got stirred up here.
>
> Let me see if I can understand how this ad could have been interpreted by the women who complained.
>
> The background poster looks like something from the 50's, the glorious time for men, when women were second class citizens.
>
> The questions being asked by the women "What? No engine? But how?" imply that she's just another dumb blonde, who cannot possibly understand the technical intricacies of motorless flight. Contrast that with the male pilot, whose head gear alone tells us all we need to know about his piloting skills and expertise in flight mechanics.
>
> The caption "Beginning brilliant new love story - Swept Off Her Feet" could imply that there's no point in trying to explain all these intricacies to a women because that would distract her from her main purpose which she can only find in the bedroom and in the kitchen.
>
> With this in mind, I fully agree with Chip and I totally understand and support Linda.
>
> Cheers,
> Doug

--
Dan, 5J

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

> Let's all think about that for a bit.

Which part should we all be thinking about for a bit, Gregg?

The part where you suggested that professional women are "childless corporate whores?"
The part where you said the woman in the ad "would be more attractive if she kept her mouth shut?"
The part where another poster described the women who took the time to write to express their perspective on the ad as "femnazi's" and suggested defunding the WSPA?

I'm just curious, as there is A LOT to think about there.

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 12:40:15 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > Let's all think about that for a bit.
> Which part should we all be thinking about for a bit, Gregg?
>
> The part where you suggested that professional women are "childless corporate whores?"
> The part where you said the woman in the ad "would be more attractive if she kept her mouth shut?"
> The part where another poster described the women who took the time to write to express their perspective on the ad as "femnazi's" and suggested defunding the WSPA?
>
> I'm just curious, as there is A LOT to think about there.
The part where you insinuated that ones RAS social justice rating will affect one's score. You don't think that won't affect pilots desire to race when you are CD?

[Mike Brooks]

On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 12:18:19 PM UTC-5, Gregg Ballou wrote:
> On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 12:40:15 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > > Let's all think about that for a bit.
> > Which part should we all be thinking about for a bit, Gregg?
> >
> > The part where you suggested that professional women are "childless corporate whores?"
> > The part where you said the woman in the ad "would be more attractive if she kept her mouth shut?"
> > The part where another poster described the women who took the time to write to express their perspective on the ad as "femnazi's" and suggested defunding the WSPA?
> >
> > I'm just curious, as there is A LOT to think about there.
> The part where you insinuated that ones RAS social justice rating will affect one's score. You don't think that won't affect pilots desire to race when you are CD?

I'll look forward to flying at any contest I'm able to where Hugh Grandstaff is CD.
Odds are I won't see you there.

Mike Brooks
XL5

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 12:18:19 PM UTC-5, Gregg Ballou wrote:

> > I'm just curious, as there is A LOT to think about there.
> The part where you insinuated that ones RAS social justice rating will affect one's score. You don't think that won't affect pilots desire to race when you are CD?

You mean people knowing they have a CD that isn't afraid to say its unacceptable to call professional women "childless corporate whores", say things like a woman would be "more attractive if she kept her mouth shut", or make comparisons of women to Nazis?

Yeah, that sounds terrible. I'm sure most people will hate that. Not calling women "whores" is a pretty radical position to take these days. I'm probably in the minority on that one.

You see, Gregg, you are not the victim here. Neither are the other men posting about how women should "get over it." Don't attempt to play one.

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 12:40:15 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > Let's all think about that for a bit.
> Which part should we all be thinking about for a bit, Gregg?
>
> The part where you suggested that professional women are "childless corporate whores?"
> The part where you said the woman in the ad "would be more attractive if she kept her mouth shut?"
> The part where another poster described the women who took the time to write to express their perspective on the ad as "femnazi's" and suggested defunding the WSPA?
>
> I'm just curious, as there is A LOT to think about there.
Hugh, the term is Feminazi, it is a pejorative that refers to women as strong willed whom demand social equity and equality. Personally, I am a huge advocate of social equity between genders and race. What I do not support is the efforts of the feminazi movement to make every aspect of their perceived sexist displays as an opportunity to advance their agenda at the expense of others. In this case it was the SSA, SSF and the Editor. Do I believe that the apologies should have been issued, NO, what should have happened is that the targeted victims should have simply explained the actual meaning of the illustration. Yes, the SSA, SSF and the Editor were targeted, make no mistake about it.
Now about defunding the WSPA, I would do that tomorrow, it should be combined into the general soaring community and not hold separate classifications.. combine all contestants into a single group, "Glider Pilots". I know of several female pilots that would hold their own against men, like Linda said, "Bring It ON". Last time I looked the female glider pilots were flying white gliders and not pink.
As for me, I owe no apology, I have extended an invitation to Linda that I hope she accepts, but she will have to clean up her vulgarity.

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

> Hugh, the term is Feminazi, it is a pejorative that refers to women as strong willed whom demand social equity and equality. Personally, I am a huge advocate of social equity between genders and race. What I do not support is the efforts of the feminazi movement to make every aspect of their perceived sexist displays as an opportunity to advance their agenda at the expense of others. In this case it was the SSA, SSF and the Editor. Do I believe that the apologies should have been issued, NO, what should have happened is that the targeted victims should have simply explained the actual meaning of the illustration. Yes, the SSA, SSF and the Editor were targeted, make no mistake about it.
> Now about defunding the WSPA, I would do that tomorrow, it should be combined into the general soaring community and not hold separate classifications. combine all contestants into a single group, "Glider Pilots". I know of several female pilots that would hold their own against men, like Linda said, "Bring It ON". Last time I looked the female glider pilots were flying white gliders and not pink.
> As for me, I owe no apology, I have extended an invitation to Linda that I hope she accepts, but she will have to clean up her vulgarity.

Bob-

I'm sorry that women expressing their displeasure with an advertisement and then being taken seriously is such a threat to your way of life that you would continue to refer to them as "nazis".

Now, have you ever considered that the WSPA exists because of the fact that there are people in this world who find their way of life threatened over something as simple as women being taken seriously when they voice a complaint? So seriously in fact that they will invent incendiary terms relating them Nazi's and Fascists?

Probably not. Because you are used to being taken seriously when you complain about things.

-Hugh

[Waveguru]

"When we believe or say we have been offended, we usually mean we feel insulted, mistreated, snubbed, or disrespected. And certainly clumsy, embarrassing, unprincipled, and mean-spirited things do occur in our interactions with other people that would allow us to take offense. However, it ultimately is impossible for another person to offend you or to offend me. Indeed, believing that another person offended us is fundamentally false. To be offended is a choice we make; it is not a condition inflicted or imposed upon us by someone or something else."

David A. Bednar

Boggs

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

Bob with the women pilot outrage over an illustration of a normal woman asking a normal man a common soaring related question how many men are going to be willing to help out at future WSPA events? The chance of giving offense to that crowd is demonstrably astronomical. You don't need to defund the WSPA the ladies likely killed it off themselves.

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 5:44:25 PM UTC-5, Waveguru wrote:
> "When we believe or say we have been offended, we usually mean we feel insulted, mistreated, snubbed, or disrespected. And certainly clumsy, embarrassing, unprincipled, and mean-spirited things do occur in our interactions with other people that would allow us to take offense. However, it ultimately is impossible for another person to offend you or to offend me. Indeed, believing that another person offended us is fundamentally false. To be offended is a choice we make; it is not a condition inflicted or imposed upon us by someone or something else."
>
> David A. Bednar
>
> Boggs

Boggs-

So just to be clear, are you saying that it's a woman's fault for being offended when somebody calls them a Nazi, a childless corporate whore, says that they would be more attractive if they kept their mouth shut, or says that they wish that all women would bring them their slippers and beer?

Or are you saying that all of these guys getting offended that women are offended shouldn't be offended?

-Hugh

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 5:54:58 PM UTC-5, Gregg Ballou wrote:
> Bob with the women pilot outrage over an illustration of a normal woman asking a normal man a common soaring related question how many men are going to be willing to help out at future WSPA events? The chance of giving offense to that crowd is demonstrably astronomical. You don't need to defund the WSPA the ladies likely killed it off themselves.

Gregg-

Actually, the chances of giving offense to "that crowd" as you put it are not astronomical provided that you

1) don't refer to professional women as "childless corporate whores";
2) don't tell them they would be more attractive with their mouth's shut;
3) don't use terms relating them to nazi's or fascists, and finally;
4) treat them with the same dignity and respect you would any other person or pilot.

I recognize that this will be a massive shift in lifestyle for you and Bob, but I'm sure you are up to the task if you put your mind to it.

Oh, and you guys do realize that the WSPA is completely independent of the SSA? Right?

-Hugh

[Mike Brooks]

On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 5:54:58 PM UTC-5, Gregg Ballou wrote:
> Bob with the women pilot outrage over an illustration of a normal woman asking a normal man a common soaring related question how many men are going to be willing to help out at future WSPA events? The chance of giving offense to that crowd is demonstrably astronomical. You don't need to defund the WSPA the ladies likely killed it off themselves.

Gregg -

I helped crew when SoaringNV hosted the 2015 WSPA Seminar at Minden. Had a great time and met some fine folks, as you do at glider meets. If the opportunity arises, I'll be happy to do so again.

Mike

[Waveguru]

I believe that a person has a choice to be offended or not. I don't believe that it is acceptable to call people names. It is a lazy way to debate an issue.

“The more easily you get offended, the less developed you are as a human being.�
― Robert Celner

"Every day we have plenty of opportunities to get angry, stressed or offended. But what you're doing when you indulge these negative emotions is giving something outside yourself power over your happiness. You can choose to not let little things upset you." Joel Osteen

"When you are spiritually connected, you are not looking for occasions to be offended, and you are not judging and labeling others. You are in a state of grace in which you know you are connected to God and thus free from the effects of anyone or anything external to yourself." Wayne Dyer

Boggs

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 5:51:31 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > Hugh, the term is Feminazi, it is a pejorative that refers to women as strong willed whom demand social equity and equality. Personally, I am a huge advocate of social equity between genders and race. What I do not support is the efforts of the feminazi movement to make every aspect of their perceived sexist displays as an opportunity to advance their agenda at the expense of others. In this case it was the SSA, SSF and the Editor. Do I believe that the apologies should have been issued, NO, what should have happened is that the targeted victims should have simply explained the actual meaning of the illustration. Yes, the SSA, SSF and the Editor were targeted, make no mistake about it.
> > Now about defunding the WSPA, I would do that tomorrow, it should be combined into the general soaring community and not hold separate classifications. combine all contestants into a single group, "Glider Pilots". I know of several female pilots that would hold their own against men, like Linda said, "Bring It ON". Last time I looked the female glider pilots were flying white gliders and not pink.
> > As for me, I owe no apology, I have extended an invitation to Linda that I hope she accepts, but she will have to clean up her vulgarity.
> Bob-
>
> I'm sorry that women expressing their displeasure with an advertisement and then being taken seriously is such a threat to your way of life that you would continue to refer to them as "nazis".
>
> Now, have you ever considered that the WSPA exists because of the fact that there are people in this world who find their way of life threatened over something as simple as women being taken seriously when they voice a complaint? So seriously in fact that they will invent incendiary terms relating them Nazi's and Fascists?
>
> Probably not. Because you are used to being taken seriously when you complain about things.
>
> -Hugh
Hugh, please do not speculate about my way of life, actually it is very good, I worked for it! Feminazi is not a term as offensive as sexist, you need to really understand the term and origin before you speculate on the offensive use of it. When I see a way of life threatened by such a few that only have the purpose of supporting their own agenda I take notice and respond. You may go ahead and drink the Cool-Aid, but I will stand on firm ground and look at things objectively. So what is the difference in the complainant's using the word sexist and me referring to them as Feminazis? I guess when I refer to those as Feminazis, those whom want equality, it is in your opinion sexist. I appreciate your opinion, thank you very much, Bob

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

> >
So what is the difference in the complainant's using the word sexist and me referring to them as Feminazis?

Just going out on a limb here, but probably the "Nazi" part.

-Hugh

[Steve Bralla]

From Wikipedea about Goddwins law.
There are many corollaries to Godwin's law, some considered more canonical (by being adopted by Godwin himself)[3] than others.[1] For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that, when a Hitler comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever made the comparison loses whatever debate is in progress.[8] This principle is itself frequently referred to as Godwin's law.[9]

[John Godfrey (QT)[_2_]]

On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 7:36:52 PM UTC-4, Steve Bralla wrote:
> From Wikipedea about Goddwins law.
> There are many corollaries to Godwin's law, some considered more canonical (by being adopted by Godwin himself)[3] than others.[1] For example, there is a tradition in many newsgroups and other Internet discussion forums that, when a Hitler comparison is made, the thread is finished and whoever made the comparison loses whatever debate is in progress.[8] This principle is itself frequently referred to as Godwin's law.[9]

What a really sad state of affairs that most of the posters in this thread show absolutely no evidence of empathy (i.e. the capacity to see things through other's eyes) wrt the complainers. Very disappointing to me. The ad was bad enough in that it pours salt on open wounds, the "mansplaining" of the posters is off the wall.

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

> What a really sad state of affairs that most of the posters in this thread show absolutely no evidence of empathy (i.e. the capacity to see things through other's eyes) wrt the complainers. Very disappointing to me. The ad was bad enough in that it pours salt on open wounds, the "mansplaining" of the posters is off the wall.

Totally agree that's bad, John. But I'm more concerned, oh, I don't know, about the fact that we have people on here:

1) calling women "childless corporate whores" without any remorse
2) saying a woman would "look better if she kept her mouth shut"
3) indicating that the women who took the time to voice their discomfort should apologize to effectively everyone they have ever encountered in aviation
4) asking each of the women that voiced their discomfort "what they had done for soaring"
5) said "what these females have done is dig a big hole, I don't think they have a shovel big enough to dig their way out."
6) said "It would be great if all women could be subservient and get my slippers and a beer"
7) oh...and the whole nazi/fascist rhetoric.

All of this because there were women who said "I didn't like that ad for these reasons."

People on here compared women to Nazis, Fascists, whores, and wished they were more subservient because they were willing to voice their discomfort about an advertisement.

I'll say that again.

People on here compared women to Nazis, Fascists, whores, and wished they were more subservient because they were willing to voice their discomfort about an advertisement.

And not a single person who made those statements has said "maybe that was over the line." Not one of them.

That's what I'm concerned about.

[andy l]

On Saturday, 24 October 2020 at 22:51:31 UTC+1, wrote:
> > Hugh, the term is Feminazi, it is a pejorative that refers to women as strong willed whom demand social equity and equality. Personally, I am a huge advocate of social equity between genders and race. What I do not support is the efforts of the feminazi movement to make every aspect of their perceived sexist displays as an opportunity to advance their agenda at the expense of others. In this case it was the SSA, SSF and the Editor. Do I believe that the apologies should have been issued, NO, what should have happened is that the targeted victims should have simply explained the actual meaning of the illustration. Yes, the SSA, SSF and the Editor were targeted, make no mistake about it.
> > Now about defunding the WSPA, I would do that tomorrow, it should be combined into the general soaring community and not hold separate classifications. combine all contestants into a single group, "Glider Pilots". I know of several female pilots that would hold their own against men, like Linda said, "Bring It ON". Last time I looked the female glider pilots were flying white gliders and not pink.
> > As for me, I owe no apology, I have extended an invitation to Linda that I hope she accepts, but she will have to clean up her vulgarity.
> Bob-
>
> I'm sorry that women expressing their displeasure with an advertisement and then being taken seriously is such a threat to your way of life that you would continue to refer to them as "nazis".
>
> Now, have you ever considered that the WSPA exists because of the fact that there are people in this world who find their way of life threatened over something as simple as women being taken seriously when they voice a complaint? So seriously in fact that they will invent incendiary terms relating them Nazi's and Fascists?
>
> Probably not. Because you are used to being taken seriously when you complain about things.
>
> -Hugh

With respect to the last point, I really can't see why most people would take this person's complaints seriously

It's almost like a satirical spoof, sending up such misogynistic attitudes, except apparently sincere

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

We could debate whether the SSF ad was an unfortunate attempt at retro advertising--along the lines of "show her it's a man's world [with Van Heusen ties]"--that fell flat or if it were something more objectionable and sinister. It almost doesn't matter. In the old days, if we inadvertently offended or insulted someone, the obligatory response was to apologize, listen to the other person, and promise to learn and do better in the future. How quaint.

[Cindy Brickner]

On Saturday, October 24, 2020 at 8:19:12 PM UTC-7, andy l wrote:

> > > Now about defunding the WSPA,
Tough to do. The ladies raise their own funds, very effectively.
(And with support from some fellows who see assisting women into pilot roles as worthwhile.)
And the ladies grow their membership in WSPA too.


> With respect to the last point, I really can't see why most people would take this person's complaints seriously
> It's almost like a satirical spoof, sending up such misogynistic attitudes, except apparently sincere

These persons.... plural. And plenty publicly, and repetitively.

I have seen female pilot prejudice myself, first-hand and ugly, on many occasions.
Perhaps the most entertaining was wandering into a glider FBO (~20 years ago), at
a prestigious western soaring site, and being asked if I would like to peruse the
glider jewelry counter.
I was staring at the rental rates and thinking about flying while a customer of mine
completed a glider pre-buy inspection.
"While "your guy" is flying, maybe you'd like to choose a bauble as compensation?"
I was first surprised I wasn't recognized, then realized that in my glider contest T-shirt,
I was in the minority -- still -- and being treated like a non-pilot perhaps non-customer.
Rather than become a flaming witch, I demurred. The lady tow/glider pilot with me got outside
without busting her seams, and asked why I went so low key.
I said it wasn't worth the fight that day. I was on a rare road trip, and wanted to relax.
Thoughtless, unintentional, myopic -- but a prejudicial view of women in his lobby.

I am warmed by the long term male friends who at least ( and several with much more effort)
posted to say that it was worth listening to hurt feelings. To make an effort
to understand. A few posted who I might enjoy meeting and befriending.
Personally, I read right past the ad. Perhaps I have become teflon-coated
and inured to the possibility that men and women will view each other as equals.

Do I like strident and contentious confrontations over perceptions in all of society now?
No.
Do I think the letters by women in Soaring were 'pushing an agenda"?
Only one of awareness, and expressing dismay.
Do I like the escalation/aggravation that this thread will create amongst males and females?
No.
Do I think the soaring population is so vast that it can suffer these internal slaps with zero repercussions?
No. At the least, it will hurt some friendships.


Mostly, I concentrate on teaching new people to soar. I try to make them feel safe
as a student, free to ask any questions without ridicule. Even today, I said several times,
"I don't know -- is a safe answer." I was blessed to have two men and two women
( one a 13 year old girl) as early students. 6 flights, one a soaring flight of 1.2 hrs,
and climb rates of 300-500 fpm. Two hawks and a gaggle of buzzards. The teenager
got to dance across the thermal from her host/friend while he climbed the 1-26.
She videoed it.
Those are the moments I hold in close and dear.
The rest I try to let blow away on the dust.

I don't care about correct attribution of the aphorism,
but maybe this is why women have avoided this thread.
Don't wrestle with the pigs. You just get dirty and they like it.

Few men are 'pigs'. But those few might cloud the perception of swine.

Cindy B

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, October 25, 2020 at 2:02:22 AM UTC-4, Chip Bearden wrote:
> We could debate whether the SSF ad was an unfortunate attempt at retro advertising--along the lines of "show her it's a man's world [with Van Heusen ties]"--that fell flat or if it were something more objectionable and sinister. It almost doesn't matter. In the old days, if we inadvertently offended or insulted someone, the obligatory response was to apologize, listen to the other person, and promise to learn and do better in the future. How quaint.
>
> I read Bob's outraged howls that the women who complained to the SSA were threatening the existence of his way of life:
>
> * ...an orchestrated attack on the publication , Editor, and the SSF. [an obvious conspiracy; the Russians? Chinese? Iranians?]
> * The complainants are without merit, totally offbase and have a directive in place that only undermines the overall objective of the SSA, SSF, and Editor. [see "obvious conspiracy"; maybe we should refer this to the FBI]
> * You would think that this bunch of misfits, have no understanding of how this is an inclusive activity and not directed by any one gender. ["Damnit, woman, do you not understand English? Get it through your sensitive skull that we're inclusive!"]
>
> I waited for someone to slap him down for being more over the top than the letters themselves. Instead, this whole affair turned out to be a litmus test that revealed much more about male pilots' cluelessness, resentment, and anger at women than the ad did about women's allegedly delicate sensitivities:
>
> * Somebody's gain is turned up WAY TOO HIGH! [read: "Calm down, little lady, we were just having some fun"]
> * ...due to an insecure and suspicious attitude that the person asking feels inferior [if women weren't so insecure, this wouldn't be a problem]
> * ...have become weak and lost focus on what is important, wasting time on petty stuff [yeah, this mutual respect stuff is pretty f***ing petty]
> * ...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. [see "obvious conspiracy" theory, above; hey, maybe Nancy Pelosi is behind it]
> * ...pretty butch [that didn't take long; the women writing in must be shrill, angry, man-hating Lesbians]
> * ...what have you done for soaring? [I'll leave others to list the many female SSA members who have made enormous contributions as instructors, tow pilots, club members, SSA directors and officers, competitors, world record holders, gliderport owners/operators, and contest organizers, just to mention a few]
> * ...what these females have done is dig a big hole, I don't think they have a shovel big enough to dig their way out. [true, an enormous hole has been dug, but not by the women who wrote in to register their concern]
> * Getting upset today over something that happened decades ago, and was mainstream at the time, is simply someone wanting to stir up bad feelings. [insert alternative advert with a joke about limiting soaring clubs to whites only because, hey, segregation was mainstream decades ago]
>
> Then, like a drunken frat party gone bad, things got mean:
>
> * Any bitch who straps on a parachute... [finally, the "b" word! can the "c" word be far behind?]
> * "You think it's offensive. I think it's funny. [should be fun next year sitting around the fire at New Castle exchanging hilarious jokes about women, Pollacks, blacks, Mexicans, Asians, Muslims, Jews, etc.]
> * Oh, now the nuclear bomb - thanks A LOT, Linda. So, are you also going to take names and excommunicate pilots who disagree with you/Linda? [translation: "I don't give a f*** if you're angry, Linda; get your ass in that towplane and give me a tow"; very smooth, Tom]
> * Reverting to the old boycott theory of punishment will further taint others opinions... [since when is it a boycott for one individual to decline to do business with a bunch of giggling, sophomoric, misogynistic, semi-literate, yuk-yuk, redneck louts? (relax, boys, I was just joking, sorry if you took offense)]
> * And the woman in the ad would be more attractive if she had kept her mouth shut. [I'll have to remember that technique, Gregg--tell her she's ugly and she'll shut up]
>
> And then more wisdom from the same source:
>
> * Men are tired of this nonsense, threatening to stay away sounds too good to be true. [I suspect you'll be a lot happier now after expressing your views, Gregg]
>
> Several others objected but most just piled on.
>
> * "Much Ado About Nothing" [first prize for Most Succinct Cluelessness]
> * The reality is the ladies were good sticks and way hotter! [if you're worried that you might have offended a female pilot, telling her she's hot is a guaranteed get-out-of-jail-free card; trust me!]
> * ...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. [this is wrong on so many levels that I can't even begin to explain it, but it wouldn't be a discussion about gender roles if some man didn't use the term "whore". I'm waiting for "slut" to make its appearance, perhaps to describe any woman presumptuous enough to aspire to a career instead of sitting at home cooking for her hubby, grateful for all he has done for her.]
>
> And then there's the "I ain't never had no complaints" defense:
> * "I've met both complainant and the SSA President, both at the WSPA seminar at Black Forest in the early 90s and got along just fine with both."
>
> If only these guys knew what was being said about them behind their backs.. One evening at a contest some years ago, I listened incredulously as a top-ranked pilot explained how his daughter, a successful professional, avoided discrimination by simply refusing to put up with it. He was amazed that women were getting so upset about something that was so easy to blunt. I looked over at several women competing in the contest and they just smiled. But as soon as this pilot left, they exploded in scornful laughter and indignation at how totally out of touch this guy was with what goes on in the workplace and society. He's highly thought of, a very good pilot, and has done much for soaring. But in his mind, discrimination and harrassment apparently only occur if women allow it. I'm sure these two successful career women have dealt with discrimination and harrassment in one form or another a lot. But I also suspect they choose to keep quiet and "get along just fine" with male pilots because they don't want to rock the boat or get labeled with any of the words and phrases above.
>
> In my humble opinion, the SSF ad was likely a well-intentioned effort that misfired, and one that the SSA moved swiftly to address. But this thread is one of the most embarrassing things I've ever read in my 55 years in soaring. For many of those years, I've acknowledged that the notion that soaring pilots are an exceptionally fine group glosses over the reality that our sport has all types--including jerks--just like any other sport or activity. But I've never seen a worse public display by so many male soaring pilots as I've seen here.
>
> I'm not perfect. I've made my share of insensitive, offensive remarks. That said, I think political correctness and wokeness have gone too far in some cases. But then I read something like this and realize we have a LONG way to go.
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB
Please let me issue an apology for referring to the women whom objected to the caption in the magazine as misfits, my choice of words was incorrect and I should have used the word radicals, for that mistake I truly apologize.
Often different points of view, or perspectives are overlooked just by pure mistake, but the consensus that the SSA and others were insensitive is not correct. I have spoken with several women about this depiction and the assertion that it was insensitive and sexist and the findings are to the contrary. Of about 20 or so women whom I have shown the depiction to and also the complaints not a single woman has see the sexist depiction of the print.
For your information my wife is a sailplane pilot, single engine pilot and multi engine pilot. She was hired once to help defend a lawsuit brought about by the plaintiff who asserted that the aircraft was beyond the individuals capability causing him and his instructor passenger to perish in a nice King Air. When approached she was told of the incident and asked to fly and do the same maneuvers as the lost pilots. She never looked at this as sexist, she looked at it as an opportunity.
Now you are certainly entitled to make any remarks that you seem appropriate in regard to my original post, I will not apologize for my opinions, nor do I expect you to apologize for yours, we just look at things differently.
What I do think is that we agree on some of the issues that were exposed in this thread, the pendulum has swung way too far in both directions. I remember seeing the pink Cadillac and the Mary Kay sign on the door, I guess that those are now sexist? Or what about the day when the decision was made to have bi-gender restrooms and then the sign was placed above the urinal for all men to lower the seat when finished, shouldn't the sign have read, Ladies, please raise the seat when you are finished. Would that not have been more appropriate in this world void of sexism.
I towed probably 15 gliders yesterday, both genders, not once did I say to myself or others as to their abilities because of their gender. As I looked at the mirrors I was more concerned about their safety than I was mine! Oh, and by the way, I think my wife is a member of the WSPA, she will outwork any male at the club, move gliders in and out of the hangar, and gets in her fiberglass glider just like yours and can fly as well or better than any male counterpart.
SO, I hope you and others that disagree have a better understanding about different perceptions. I wish you well, stay healthy and enjoy flying your sailplane. Bob

[xcnick]

This picture is the earliest picture I can find of the gang of girls, 1939 Wiesbaden. Hard to imagine just a generation later, but the women in the picture had to fight for the vote, equal pay, and other important human rights. However I always wondered what they were thinking when they quietly endured face to face discrimination. One day I asked the woman on the far left and she said: “living well is my best revenge.�

https://photos.app.goo.gl/rDrC7aLiV5rkXpKf7

[John Godfrey (QT)[_2_]]

On Sunday, October 25, 2020 at 6:40:46 AM UTC-4, xcnick wrote:
> This picture is the earliest picture I can find of the gang of girls, 1939 Wiesbaden. Hard to imagine just a generation later, but the women in the picture had to fight for the vote, equal pay, and other important human rights. However I always wondered what they were thinking when they quietly endured face to face discrimination. One day I asked the woman on the far left and she said: “living well is my best revenge.�
>
> https://photos.app.goo.gl/rDrC7aLiV5rkXpKf7

What Cindy, Hugh and Chip said (and much more articulately and on point than my try).

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

On Sunday, October 25, 2020 at 6:40:46 AM UTC-4, xcnick wrote:
> This picture is the earliest picture I can find of the gang of girls, 1939 Wiesbaden. Hard to imagine just a generation later, but the women in the picture had to fight for the vote, equal pay, and other important human rights. However I always wondered what they were thinking when they quietly endured face to face discrimination. One day I asked the woman on the far left and she said: “living well is my best revenge.�
>
> https://photos.app.goo.gl/rDrC7aLiV5rkXpKf7
Exactly women have been flying since the beginning of flying. Women flying in modern times are not pioneers, they are just pilots. And to be outraged over that illustration is almost as retarded as defending the outrage.

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

> Exactly women have been flying since the beginning of flying. Women flying in modern times are not pioneers, they are just pilots. And to be outraged over that illustration is almost as retarded as defending the outrage.

So that makes it ok to refer to them as "childless corporate whores" and say that they would be more attractive if they kept their mouth's shut, Gregg?

[Go Soaring]

You really can see why they send Borat to the US of A to make films. Some
of you really are the gift that just keeps giving.

Oh, I know he's not real. !!!!!







At 16:34 25 October 2020, Hugh Grandstaff wrote:
>
>> Exactly women have been flying since the beginning of flying. Women
>flying in modern times are not pioneers, they are just pilots. And to be
>outraged over that illustration is almost as retarded as defending the
>outrage.
>
>So that makes it ok to refer to them as "childless corporate whores" and
>say that they would be more attractive if they kept their mouth's shut,
>Gregg?
>

[Cindy Brickner]

"that they would be more attractive if they kept their mouth's shut, XXXX?"

I opened my mouth, and it was suggested this would be a way to redirect
the triple dog dare . . . . .

If you have been offended either way in this thread,
you should know you have an option for a more productive outcome,
rather than spewing dissonance.

https://tinyurl.com/y6n9sxzk

WSPA is always thankful for contributions. They can be general, or specific
to any WSPA program. WSPA has no paid staff, and is a 501 c)3 organization.
https://womensoaring.org/

Thank you to my many male and female customers, students and friends over the years.
Many generous people have given time, equipment and dollars to my pilotage.
Without their love of soaring, I wouldn't have been able to make a living in
this sport for many years.

Cindy B

[B BRIONES]

Chip,

"...have become weak and lost focus on what is important, wasting time on petty stuff [yeah, this mutual respect stuff is pretty f***ing petty]"

1. There is no need to use swear words to make your point (asterisks do not hide the real word).

2. I have not and will not support anything that promotes disrespecting women.

3. I do not think there was any "malicious attempt" by the ad submitter to squeeze in a sexist nostalgic ad. Nowadays, everyone is super conscious not to do anything to offend anyone, where even innocent things may be deemed evil.

4. I showed my wife the image and she did NOT find anything objectionable with it.

5. And yes, I still stand firmly by my opinion "...have become weak and lost focus on what is important, wasting time on petty stuff". -> America, as a nation is destroying itself from within. We will NOT need our enemies (Russia, Iran, N Korea, etc.) to do it for us. If there is anything to worry, whine, or complain about, there are much bigger things than the image in question.

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

> Chip,
> "...have become weak and lost focus on what is important, wasting time on petty stuff [yeah, this mutual respect stuff is pretty f***ing petty]"
> 1. There is no need to use swear words to make your point (asterisks do not hide the real word).
>
> 2. I have not and will not support anything that promotes disrespecting women.
>
> 3. I do not think there was any "malicious attempt" by the ad submitter to squeeze in a sexist nostalgic ad. Nowadays, everyone is super conscious not to do anything to offend anyone, where even innocent things may be deemed evil.
>
> 4. I showed my wife the image and she did NOT find anything objectionable with it.
>
> 5. And yes, I still stand firmly by my opinion "...have become weak and lost focus on what is important, wasting time on petty stuff". -> America, as a nation is destroying itself from within. We will NOT need our enemies (Russia, Iran, N Korea, etc.) to do it for us. If there is anything to worry, whine, or complain about, there are much bigger things than the image in question.

Just to make sure I clearly understand your positions here:

A group of women write to the editors of a small magazine expressing their displeasure at an advertisement. They are taken seriously, and a considerate apology is published in the same magazine.

-"America has lost focus on what is important and is wasting time on petty stuff! America, as a nation is destroying itself from within. We will NOT need our enemies (Russia, Iran, N Korea, etc.) to do it for us. If there is anything to worry, whine, or complain about, there are much bigger things than the image in question."

Somebody uses asterisks in place of writing what you consider fowl language (because clearly the word was duck...see what I did there?)

-"THERE IS NO NEED TO USE SWEAR WORDS TO MAKE YOUR POINT"

People on here compared women to Nazis, Fascists, whores, and wished they were more subservient because they were willing to voice their discomfort about an advertisement.

-"........................"

Did I get that right?

[xcnick]

Dan emailed me about the women in the picture. Sorry buddy, but couldn't get through your spam filter. However:

This is a group photo at a gathering of women soaring pilots for a building workshop. They are holding a rudder that has yet to be covered. These ladies are from many nations making me think their loyalty to each other is greater than the dangerous nationalism sweeping the world at this time.

There was only one true femanazi. But man, did she have a nice whip!

https://photos.app.goo.gl/18NbBTdNCugviDLt6

https://photos.app.goo.gl/3WqHnp1p3Epz1itZ7

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

Unhappy with this discussion? (tired doesn't count) Vaguely troubled by some of the things said but worried about losing your "man" card by defending a bunch of shrill, hypersensitive harpies determined to knock down the SSA on the way to installing AOC in the White House and rolling up the U.S. as the next bastion of socialism, presaging North Korea's annexation of California? [OK, I might have gotten a little carried away].

Uncomfortable with the message that women are welcome in soaring only so long as they're attractive (I should probably have listed this last), undemanding, non-threatening, and grateful?

No need to post anything or go on record. This is America: you can BUY your way out of feeling guilty. Make a contribution to the WSPA. Cindy's post has the link (above).

Yeah, I know some of you already did in the recent past. The difference? This donation will not specifically be earmarked for the U.S. Team. That was easy: we all knew they had a good chance of getting on the medal stand in Australia (which was the case).

This would be for women who don't [yet] make the headlines. They're just ordinary people interested in soaring who enjoy the company of other soaring pilots who have faced similar challenges. And after some of the disturbing opinions expressed in this thread, I'm sure many of them would be reassured that the majority of male soaring pilots are welcoming, even if we occasionally stumble unintentionally.

Chip Bearden
JB

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, October 25, 2020 at 5:39:06 PM UTC-4, Chip Bearden wrote:
> Unhappy with this discussion? (tired doesn't count) Vaguely troubled by some of the things said but worried about losing your "man" card by defending a bunch of shrill, hypersensitive harpies determined to knock down the SSA on the way to installing AOC in the White House and rolling up the U.S. as the next bastion of socialism, presaging North Korea's annexation of California? [OK, I might have gotten a little carried away].
>
> Uncomfortable with the message that women are welcome in soaring only so long as they're attractive (I should probably have listed this last), undemanding, non-threatening, and grateful?
>
> No need to post anything or go on record. This is America: you can BUY your way out of feeling guilty. Make a contribution to the WSPA. Cindy's post has the link (above).
>
> Yeah, I know some of you already did in the recent past. The difference? This donation will not specifically be earmarked for the U.S. Team. That was easy: we all knew they had a good chance of getting on the medal stand in Australia (which was the case).
>
> This would be for women who don't [yet] make the headlines. They're just ordinary people interested in soaring who enjoy the company of other soaring pilots who have faced similar challenges. And after some of the disturbing opinions expressed in this thread, I'm sure many of them would be reassured that the majority of male soaring pilots are welcoming, even if we occasionally stumble unintentionally.
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB
Chip, you got more than carried away, you fell into the trap. No need to apologize, you obviously are a good person with your own perceptions, we all have those. Go ahead and slap me down, it has been done before, we met many years ago and I always reflected on your mild gentlemanly personality.
I do not feel any differently about your love for soaring, or your advocation of what we both enjoy, I hope you feel no differently about me. My main objective has been to advance the activity of soaring, hopefully I have done a pretty good job of that. Of those whom know me will tell you that I have soaring in my best interest and not my personal agenda.
I could always take my toys and go home, but advancing and giving back seems to be my agenda at this stage of life. Hopefully after tomorrow I can say Just look at what we did, I will explain later, not on this forum, but privately.
Making assertations of sexism had no place in soaring, that agenda went out a long time ago and that is what most are saying. Many continue to bloviate and cast many views of disparity, but actually we are all on the same page. I think no less of you , I hope you feel no less of me, we just share opposite opinions. I did tow again today and the female, no, I will say lady did better than anyone. Bob

[Tango Eight]

On Sunday, October 25, 2020 at 3:11:38 AM UTC-4, Cindy Brickner wrote:

> I have seen female pilot prejudice myself, first-hand and ugly, on many occasions.
> Perhaps the most entertaining was wandering into a glider FBO (~20 years ago), at
> a prestigious western soaring site, and being asked if I would like to peruse the
> glider jewelry counter.
> I was staring at the rental rates and thinking about flying while a customer of mine
> completed a glider pre-buy inspection.
> "While "your guy" is flying, maybe you'd like to choose a bauble as compensation?"
> I was first surprised I wasn't recognized, then realized that in my glider contest T-shirt,
> I was in the minority -- still -- and being treated like a non-pilot perhaps non-customer.
> Rather than become a flaming witch, I demurred. The lady tow/glider pilot with me got outside
> without busting her seams, and asked why I went so low key.
> I said it wasn't worth the fight that day. I was on a rare road trip, and wanted to relax.
> Thoughtless, unintentional, myopic -- but a prejudicial view of women in his lobby.

Next time, try it my way: warmly and without a trace of annoyance introduce yourself.

T8

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

> Next time, try it my way: warmly and without a trace of annoyance introduce yourself.
>
> T8

Evan, next time, try it the new enlightened way: warmly and without a trace of condescension or presumption, inquire of Cindy for more details about what happened and how she conducted herself that day before judging (and insulting) her. Your assumption that this was somehow her fault says everything about what's wrong with this thread.

Years ago (OK, decades), I showed up for a big spring contest with my new ASW 24 after being out of soaring for a few years. I had met the contest manager in the past but he didn't seem to remember me because when I asked about tiedown spots, he brushed me off fairly rudely. I was a little startled but, hey, this was his contest so I stepped back. About that time, Rudy Mozer came rushing over and greeted me like a long-lost friend (which we were; we went back to the 1960s). All of a sudden, the contest manager was treating me like a VIP. :) I thought it was funny. But if every time I showed up for a contest I had to explain I was a pilot and not a spectator, it would probalby get old pretty soon. I hope I would behave properly each time but I also hope I would be forgiven for occasionally expressing frustration, not that anything Cindy said implied that she did so in this case.

Chip Bearden
JB

[Tango Eight]

On Sunday, October 25, 2020 at 8:18:50 PM UTC-4, Chip Bearden wrote:
> > Next time, try it my way: warmly and without a trace of annoyance introduce yourself.
> >
> > T8
> Evan, next time, try it the new enlightened way: warmly and without a trace of condescension or presumption, inquire of Cindy for more details about what happened and how she conducted herself that day before judging (and insulting) her. Your assumption that this was somehow her fault says everything about what's wrong with this thread.
>
> Years ago (OK, decades), I showed up for a big spring contest with my new ASW 24 after being out of soaring for a few years. I had met the contest manager in the past but he didn't seem to remember me because when I asked about tiedown spots, he brushed me off fairly rudely. I was a little startled but, hey, this was his contest so I stepped back. About that time, Rudy Mozer came rushing over and greeted me like a long-lost friend (which we were; we went back to the 1960s). All of a sudden, the contest manager was treating me like a VIP. :) I thought it was funny. But if every time I showed up for a contest I had to explain I was a pilot and not a spectator, it would probalby get old pretty soon. I hope I would behave properly each time but I also hope I would be forgiven for occasionally expressing frustration, not that anything Cindy said implied that she did so in this case.
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB

Hey Chip:

You are imagining a whole truckload of stuff that just ain't true.

My suggestion to Cindy was honest, forthright and made in 100% good faith. I have done just as I have suggested myself (slights can happen to men too, as your own experience confirms). It worked great. I have witnesses.

T8

[Brian Lott]

Hey, do you guys remember the good old days? You know, when all the controversy seemed to surround somebody named Sean?

[dale bush]

On Sunday, October 25, 2020 at 10:13:29 PM UTC-7, Brian Lott wrote:
> Hey, do you guys remember the good old days? You know, when all the controversy seemed to surround somebody named Sean?


The ad could best described as tone deaf. That was obviously not the intent, but it was the result. Male chauvinism is often subtle, and men are not particularly skilled in recognizing its presence. Pointing out chauvinistic behavior is the role of women, and that is what happened here. I say bravo! for them and shame on their detractors.

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

On Monday, October 26, 2020 at 2:24:34 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Sunday, October 25, 2020 at 10:13:29 PM UTC-7, Brian Lott wrote:
> > Hey, do you guys remember the good old days? You know, when all the controversy seemed to surround somebody named Sean?
> The ad could best described as tone deaf. That was obviously not the intent, but it was the result. Male chauvinism is often subtle, and men are not particularly skilled in recognizing its presence. Pointing out chauvinistic behavior is the role of women, and that is what happened here. I say bravo! for them and shame on their detractors.

What is chauvinistic about the ad? If that ad is unacceptable in Soaring magazine then how can they publish any images of humans? If a women solos and there is a post flight photo of a male instructor congratulating her would that be as bad as the ad? Worse? How would anyone but these few women know a photo was offensive before publishing? I look forward to Soaring magazine with blue dots over the heads of people that have made soaring achievements and pixelated fuzziness on the canopies of flying gliders. Maybe not blue dots those are from the 80's and might offend, instead NPC emoticons over everyone's head. NPC emoticons are more with the times and more appropriate for our community.

[Michael Westbrook[_2_]]

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

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

On Monday, October 26, 2020 at 11:12:53 AM UTC-4, 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
That is a lot of words Mike, now try again and explain what is chauvinistic about the ad in Soaring magazine. Anyone? Not my responses, the original ad, what was chauvinistic about the original Soaring ad that set these women off? Spell it out. Since the ad was outrageous enough to generate multiple complaints it should be easy to explain. Even if I am unable to get it you may enlighten some other RAS readers and win new allies.

[Kimmine and Mitch Hudson]

This thread absolutely boggles my mind. Many on here use a response that sounds a lot like "I have a black friend". As men, we have to accept the fact that until we walk a mile in the shoes of someone who has "Been there, done that" we will NEVER "get it". So, when someone finds something like that advertisement offensive, what we do is look at it from the best angle we can, try to understand, and accept that maybe it is. There is a reason that you can no longer find Br'er Rabbit, Tom and Jerry, or Dukes of Hazard on TV. My generation may have loved them as kids, however, looking back in hindsight, they are incredibly offensive and have no place in society any more. Just like this advertisement.

I can remember being at a national contest, and someone walking up to some very good friends of mine and asking "Do you ladies work"? I turned around and walked away because I knew this person was about to get destroyed by two extreemly accomplished women who had achieved more in their lives than anyone standing there at that moment. I wish I would have heard the rest of the conversation, but these ladies didn't need me to stand up for them.


Gregg, based on your comments, I can tell you that you, sir, are welcome to leave our community. I don't care how much you have done for it, this thread just set you back 60 years in time and showed you do not have the capability to learn. As a pilot, always being willing to learn something is paramont to safety, no matter what your experience. You have not shown this. Additionally, I will do everything in my power to make sure that you are never welcome at any contest I host, any club or flying location that I fly at, or a part of any orginization that I am also a member of. I may not be able to stop any of this, but I'll sure give it my best attempt to try. Your lack of capability to learn and general attitude cause the label of "Crappy pilot" let alone the comments about "Corperate whore" and "Feminazi" which just lable you as generally ignorant. I can only take solace in the fact that I am young enough I will probobly outlive you, and you will take your miserable attitude to the grave with you where it belongs.

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

> That is a lot of words Mike, now try again and explain what is chauvinistic about the ad in Soaring magazine. Anyone? Not my responses, the original ad, what was chauvinistic about the original Soaring ad that set these women off? Spell it out. Since the ad was outrageous enough to generate multiple complaints it should be easy to explain. Even if I am unable to get it you may enlighten some other RAS readers and win new allies.


From the link that someone posted very early in this thread, which contained one of the letters to Soaring: "that ad brought back memories of days when women were supposed to be worshipping pilots instead of being pilots."

That's one thing that's chauvinistic about it. I'll go out on a limb and admit that I read right by the ad the first time. It wasn't nearly as outrageous as some things I've seen. I missed it, as did many others, including some women.

But I understand why it resonated the wrong way with other women. As Dale said, it was tone deaf. So I think the SSA was right in acknowledging the mistake and promising to do better. End of story until Bob launched this thread with his tirade about Feminazis undermining everything the SSA stands for.

[Michael Westbrook[_2_]]

Greg, there was a full page in Soaring explaining the issue along with an apology. There have been several on here offering an explanation to those who asked. If you don't get it yet... I'm now positive you won't just because others say it again and again. I'd say that's fine if you don't see something deeper in an ad. Everyone has a different experience and world-view, so in that case I'd expect someone mature would move on and say, "I don't get it but whatever, lets go fly gliders".

The bigger problem is that yourself and others who didn't read anything into an advertisement, do think that its ok to call women "childless whores", "Feminazis"and that they "would be more attractive if they kept their mouth shut". So right now, the problem isn't Soaring magazine that offered an explanation and apology. It's you.

[Kimmine and Mitch Hudson]

Exactly, Mike. Well said. Also, Chip, thanks so much for your great perspective. A true gentleman. Donation to WSPA, who helped my mom as well as many of my friends with getting involved in soaring forthcoming from me as well.

-Mitch Hudson

[xcnick]

If you want to see more of the old pictures and read stories which start: “There I was, thought I was going to die.� I recommend the book: Naomi the Aviatrix. https://www.amazon.com/Naomi-Aviatrix-Nick-Thomas/dp/1453883851

Her diary covers parachuting in Sir Alan Cobham's Air Circus, soaring prewar England and Germany, and ferrying warbirds around barrage balloons with no radio in English weather.

Sexism is not mentioned much in her diary of 1935 to 1945. However when put in contrast to the feminist she became in the 1950's and on, it speaks volumes to the fact sexism became harder to endure.

Naomi and Rosy the Riveter found themselves out of work because of sentiments suggested in the advertisements of the time. The 1950's represents an enormous setback for women.

In later life Naomi felt equal pay the most important cause. Imagine going to work and accepting your co-worker makes more money because of his or her genitalia.

However, during the war, when she became the first woman on the planet to receive equal pay, she thought other's were more important.

Monday, 24 May 1943. Saw in the papers that as from the 1st of next month women pilots are to get the same pay as the men. Hurray! Sent Mum and Kitty 5 pounds each on the strength of it, but postdated as I won’t have the money till June 1st. Naturally I am pleased to be getting more pay, but I would be still more pleased if instead of paying us more, they were to bring single men down to our level and give the balance to married men with families according to the number of their children.

It is still legal to pay women less. I tried, but HR is run by women. My life was hell for years after that.

Amazon has the book at only five bucks. They screwed me again. All proceeds go to a bald old man with nothing to show for his life except milk crates full of soaring magazines.

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

On Monday, October 26, 2020 at 1:32:12 PM UTC-4, xcnick wrote:
> If you want to see more of the old pictures and read stories which start: “There I was, thought I was going to die.� I recommend the book: Naomi the Aviatrix. https://www.amazon.com/Naomi-Aviatrix-Nick-Thomas/dp/1453883851
>
> Her diary covers parachuting in Sir Alan Cobham's Air Circus, soaring prewar England and Germany, and ferrying warbirds around barrage balloons with no radio in English weather.
>
> Sexism is not mentioned much in her diary of 1935 to 1945. However when put in contrast to the feminist she became in the 1950's and on, it speaks volumes to the fact sexism became harder to endure.
>
> Naomi and Rosy the Riveter found themselves out of work because of sentiments suggested in the advertisements of the time. The 1950's represents an enormous setback for women.
>
> In later life Naomi felt equal pay the most important cause. Imagine going to work and accepting your co-worker makes more money because of his or her genitalia.
>
> However, during the war, when she became the first woman on the planet to receive equal pay, she thought other's were more important.
>
> Monday, 24 May 1943. Saw in the papers that as from the 1st of next month women pilots are to get the same pay as the men. Hurray! Sent Mum and Kitty 5 pounds each on the strength of it, but postdated as I won’t have the money till June 1st. Naturally I am pleased to be getting more pay, but I would be still more pleased if instead of paying us more, they were to bring single men down to our level and give the balance to married men with families according to the number of their children.
>
> It is still legal to pay women less. I tried, but HR is run by women. My life was hell for years after that.
>
> Amazon has the book at only five bucks. They screwed me again. All proceeds go to a bald old man with nothing to show for his life except milk crates full of soaring magazines.
Exactly I pointed out earlier in this thread that women have been flying since the beginning. Pioneering balloon flying and parachute jumps(from balloons and later airplanes) were made by women there is female aviation history going back hundreds of years. So if the complaint is that a circa 1950's ad "... brought back memories of days when women were supposed to be worshipping pilots instead of being pilots." That is patently false, plenty of female flyers since the beginning of flying, and no their history isn't a secret, the outrage is wrong and ridiculous.

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

> Exactly I pointed out earlier in this thread that women have been flying since the beginning. Pioneering balloon flying and parachute jumps(from balloons and later airplanes) were made by women there is female aviation history going back hundreds of years. So if the complaint is that a circa 1950's ad "... brought back memories of days when women were supposed to be worshipping pilots instead of being pilots." That is patently false, plenty of female flyers since the beginning of flying, and no their history isn't a secret, the outrage is wrong and ridiculous.

Did you point that out before or after you referred to professional women as childless corporate whores and said that the woman in the ad would be more attractive with their mouth shut?

Just wanted to make sure you get credit for pointing out that stuff too, Gregg.

[Tony[_5_]]

It is not my position to decide how someone else feels.

I too am married to a female glider pilot. Leah is also a "Childless Corporate Whore" and WSPA member (former board member). She benefitted immensely in her early flying career by attending a seminar at Air Saililng. I didn't ask her how she felt about the ad. Her feelings about the ad do not change the fact that many people who wrote in to Soaring did not appreciate it. I thought SSA & SSF did a very good job of addressing the problem. I hope that the letter writers feel the same way.

I hope that WSPA is selling "Childless Corporate Whore" T-shirts soon. That's gold.

RAS holds a special place in my heart as it was my primary outlet for soaring reporting and information during my early days as a glider pilot. Many long time contributors probably are happy that I've moved on LOL. Every now and then there's a nasty thread like this that makes me sad. Remember folks.. If you can't say something nice don't say anything at all. It's not that hard. Be Nice.

[Cumungus]

Sign the petition. http://chng.it/2qk7Cwq64Y

Yours truly,
Cumungus

[[email protected]]

On Monday, October 26, 2020 at 5:22:40 PM UTC-4, Cumungus wrote:
> Sign the petition. http://chng.it/2qk7Cwq64Y
>
> Yours truly,
> Cumungus
Comungus, I was in court all morning taking care of business, when all was said and done the local glider club will benefit from my directed donation of all funds collected. Let me ask you, what have you done.

[2G]

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

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

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.

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

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.

[andy l]

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:

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

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

[[email protected]]

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

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

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.

[Kimmine and Mitch Hudson]

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

[2G]

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

[Dan Marotta]

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

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 9:22:37 AM UTC-4, 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
Looking at things through a different perspective is usually educational and enlightening. According to the Oxford dictionary the term Feminazi is American slang meaning "Strong Willed Woman". The term Feminazi originated more than two decades ago prior to your favorite radio host Rush Limbaugh using it in his first book, "The Way Things Ought To Be". Actually professor Tom Hazlett a regarded professor of economics from the University Of California Davis coined the term. In the words of a female author the term is described as an exaggerated description of a woman's right to advocate so ardently for gender equality that she becomes harshly domineering, dictatorial or intolerant.
MS or modern sexism measures covert or subtle form of sexism, IMHO the depiction was either overt or blatant, the radicals perceived it as blatant and then the complaints were registered, at that point the apologies were written and all hell broke out.
I mentioned earlier that my wife was involved with defense lawsuit against Beechcraft, she was chosen to go through the same program as the perished pilot. The question was asked of me did I think she was chosen because she was a female and that would be one step higher than a chimp for the defense, mind you, it was a female that asked that question. My reply was direct and to the point, "My Wife Took That As An Opportunity, Not Taking Would Have Done More Damage To Her Advancements In Female Aviation, sorry you do not feel the same way.
In an earlier post Dan mentioned the removal of the sexist pictures from the workplace except for the boob clock. I had a similar experience when a young Feminazi demanded that a wall picture of a B-17 with great nose art of a big boob sexy lady be removed from a mans office. Fortunately she was not successful, the picture was of the B-17 that his father gave his life for in WWll. Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
Let me close this by saying, there is such thing as cause and effect, Taking something completely out of context and making it a bigger issue that it should be is the real problem .
I probably have said enough on this issue, I hope that I have enlightened you and a few others . Bob Youngblood

[Kimmine and Mitch Hudson]

Just a quick recap for everyones Google search pleasure.

"Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
-Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2:43PM

"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

-Mitch

[Kimmine and Mitch Hudson]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 2:58:49 PM UTC-6, Kimmine and Mitch Hudson wrote:
> Just a quick recap for everyones Google search pleasure.
> "Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
> -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2:43PM
> "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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47
> -Mitch

*Edit: Incorrect spelling was pointed out to me, by a woman. So I fixed my crap. Sorry for spelling errors.. :-)

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 5:04:06 PM UTC-4, Kimmine and Mitch Hudson wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 2:58:49 PM UTC-6, Kimmine and Mitch Hudson wrote:
> > Just a quick recap for everyones Google search pleasure.
> > "Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
> > -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2:43PM
> > "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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47
> > -Mitch
>
> *Edit: Incorrect spelling was pointed out to me, by a woman. So I fixed my crap. Sorry for spelling errors.. :-)
Why bother not anyone cares, I do not use spell check either

[Freddie]

The original ad was an unfortunate mis-step. I am proud of how swiftly and respectfully the SSA and SSF handled the situation.
Some of the posts in this thread however are absolutely inappropriate. The dis-service done to our community as a whole by those posts are far more damaging than the original error to which good faith efforts are being made to rectify, learn, and move forward.
I am extremely glad there are people here willing to call out these action and those that made them. I hope this will stand as a record and push people towards the reality that all of us in some aspect or another would do well to open our minds and be willing to listen to one another. And that we will not stand for this kind of behavior in our community.

If you have a problem with the SSA and SSF's decision to fix a true mistake and include a group of our soaring family that deserves every ounce of respect as anyone else, I would beg you to take some time away from the keyboard to really reflect on what you are advocating for here. There is no plot or organized attack going on.. there is nothing to lose and only positive change to gain by the apology that sparked this thread. None of us want to admit that we may have improper visions of what's going on. But if culture is going to advance in a positive way then individuals must also change.. and that is quite often the hardest part.

- Freddie, Y4

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 5:04:06 PM UTC-4, Kimmine and Mitch Hudson wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 2:58:49 PM UTC-6, Kimmine and Mitch Hudson wrote:
> > Just a quick recap for everyones Google search pleasure.
> > "Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
> > -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2:43PM
> > "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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47
> > -Mitch
>
> *Edit: Incorrect spelling was pointed out to me, by a woman. So I fixed my crap. Sorry for spelling errors.. :-)
Kimmine, I will ask you one question, please tell the group what have you done to advance soaring in the last several years. I will be glad to tell you what I have done that benefited both genders. I anxiously await your answer. Bob

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

You mean taking a simple apology and turning it into a public usenet thread with 130 posts and 4400 views, filled with whiny, bitter "I'm offended that you're offended that I was staring at you boobs!" resentments and personal, name-calling vitriol?

Yeah, that is making it into an issue that it never should've been. Since when have kindness, empathy and consideration become fodder for grievance culture? None of the notes to the Editor about the ad contained that kind of distasteful commentary. They expressed that the ad bothered them and why. So out of proportion!

I think you guys really picked the wrong hill to die on.

Andy Blackburn
9B

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 1:43:25 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> Let me close this by saying, there is such thing as cause and effect, Taking something completely out of context and making it a bigger issue that it should be is the real problem .

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

Yesterday, I said I was done. Sorry, but this thread just cracked the list of the Ten Most Viewed RAS Discussions in the past 12 months. Unfortunately, it's also now at the top of my personal list of the most embarrassing and dispiriting discussions in the over 50 years I've been involved in soaring..

I feel like we're speaking two different languages. One post this morning attempts to compare Bob Youngblood's and Gregg Ballou's insulting and misogynistic invectives with Cindy Brickner's assertion that although not all men behave abominably, the few who do make the rest of the male gender look bad. Based on what I've seen in this thread, I actually think Cindy was being kind.

Almost as astonishing to me is that most offenders chose to double down rather than reconsider and "walk back" their earlier statements. The latest effort involves trying to justify the use of the term "Feminazi" and concludes with "she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time."

No, Bob, IMO, looking discretely may not be sexist but talking about it this way DEFINITELY is. You're not far away from "but Your Honor, she was asking for it with the way she dressed!"

Take a look at the movie "The Accused", for which Jodie Foster won an Oscar.. It's about a horrific gang rape of a woman who dressed and behaved provocatively, which is obviously WAY beyond anything that has occurred here so don't start bleating that I'm out of control. There's an interesting bit of trivia:

"Following the test screenings, the film received the lowest scores in the history of Paramount. According to [producer Sherry] Lansing, "The audience thought that Jodie's character deserved the rape." The studio executives wanted to put the film on the shelf and were looking for ways to prevent it from being released. Lansing asked for another screening with just women, which was far more successful. Of the 20 women in the room, 18 had experience with rape — either they or someone they knew had been raped. When tested again months later, it was given one of the highest scores in studio's history."

The point is that men and women think about things differently. I don't pretend to be an expert. And it's frustrating as hell sometimes. But when a woman tells me she's offended or hurt because of something that I or someone else did, I try to understand. Sometimes, if we're lucky, I explain what I meant and she explains why she reacted the way she did and we move on, both wiser. But much of the time we just see things from different perspectives, partly because women are different but also because their lives are very different. Men make jokes about how they'd love it if women oggled them and made lewd comments about their bodies. They probably wouldn't appreciate it, however, if they were in a maximum security prison and big, burly convicts were making the same comments. Perspective and disparate power matter.

I'll close by focusing on something you said in your response to me.

"Making assertations of sexism had no place in soaring, that agenda went out a long time ago and that is what most are saying. Many continue to bloviate and cast many views of disparity, but actually we are all on the same page."

No, Bob, we're clearly NOT on the same page. Making assertions of sexism DOES have a place in soaring just as should assertions of racism or discrimination or injustice of any kind if they occur. That I haven't seen this before says less about soaring, I fear, than it does about the way I have naively believed most of us really do share common values.

The rules of civilized society aren't suspended just because we're involved in a wonderful sport. Using soaring as a platform for every imagined slight or to advance your own agenda at the expense of others? No, none of us wants that. But calling out offensive behavior? Yes. And from what started out as reasonable objections to an unfortunate ad, the most offensive behavior has come from some of the posters on this thread.

I like 9B's comment: you guys really picked the wrong hill to die on. And that's what's happening every time one of you tries to justify your behavior..

Chip Bearden
JB

[Mike Brooks]

I concur with Chip and Andy - well said.

Mitch (and Kimmine) hardly need me to defend them; but I think they are a bit too modest to respond to your above request, Bob. Also, not sure why you are addressing Kimmine here - but for a start, she worked registration and retrieve desks at 2019 US Club Nats. I like that because I land out frequently. Whenever I see her at a contest, she is working in some capacity to make it happen. As for Mitch - and please correct me if I'm wrong, this is off the top of my head - he crewed for the US team at the 35th Worlds in Poland. As well, I know he has made available his time and personal glider to be used by the US Junior squad.

I don't think this is a good hill either, Bob.

Mike Brooks
XL5

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 7:54:10 PM UTC-4, Mike Brooks wrote:
> I concur with Chip and Andy - well said.
>
> Mitch (and Kimmine) hardly need me to defend them; but I think they are a bit too modest to respond to your above request, Bob. Also, not sure why you are addressing Kimmine here - but for a start, she worked registration and retrieve desks at 2019 US Club Nats. I like that because I land out frequently. Whenever I see her at a contest, she is working in some capacity to make it happen. As for Mitch - and please correct me if I'm wrong, this is off the top of my head - he crewed for the US team at the 35th Worlds in Poland. As well, I know he has made available his time and personal glider to be used by the US Junior squad.
>
> I don't think this is a good hill either, Bob.
>
> Mike Brooks
> XL5
Mike , I will address that to both parties, Mitch and Kimmine. They, I will say they because as you stated I should reply to both of them, so I will ask them the same question. No Andy, don't bury my heart at wounded knee. I have been objective to the complaints since they first appeared.
Chip has personally attacked me along with a few others, but they have offered no substantive defense for which they continue to solidify their position. Kimmine and Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies. The problem lies within a group that caused huge divide within our, and I stress our beloved community. I know a bit more than you might think about the ramifications of the depiction, that does not make it right or wrong.
This reminds me of those whom want everything to be politically correct, maybe everyone needs to take a big breathe and look at the ramifications. Mike, Kimmine, Mitch, Freddie, Chip, and Anderson, whom seems to be the most logical of the group, who created the distraction and did it support the consequences? I will await the answer.
I do not agree with their dispersions as to whom is tearing this apart, look into the mirror and see if those recognize anyone.

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

> Mike , I will address that to both parties, Mitch and Kimmine. They, I will say they because as you stated I should reply to both of them, so I will ask them the same question. No Andy, don't bury my heart at wounded knee. I have been objective to the complaints since they first appeared.
> Chip has personally attacked me along with a few others, but they have offered no substantive defense for which they continue to solidify their position. Kimmine and Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies. The problem lies within a group that caused huge divide within our, and I stress our beloved community. I know a bit more than you might think about the ramifications of the depiction, that does not make it right or wrong.
> This reminds me of those whom want everything to be politically correct, maybe everyone needs to take a big breathe and look at the ramifications. Mike, Kimmine, Mitch, Freddie, Chip, and Anderson, whom seems to be the most logical of the group, who created the distraction and did it support the consequences? I will await the answer.
> I do not agree with their dispersions as to whom is tearing this apart, look into the mirror and see if those recognize anyone.

Anybody else just sitting there staring at their screen going "what in the hell did I just read?"

Bob. I was really hoping for an "Aha!" moment from you where you stopped for a second and went "yeah, ok, maybe its alright for people that think differently from me to express an opinion, and it may be possible that people with different life experiences than me possibly have valid issues with things that I don't consider to be offensive."

At this point I'll be happy (well, not happy, slightly less disappointed in humanity as a whole) if you stop using words that include "nazi" in them to describe women.

Can you do that? Look, we can treat it like a twelve step program. Let's just get through the next 24 hours. Together. You can do it. I believe in you.. I believe in humanity.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 8:56:03 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > Mike , I will address that to both parties, Mitch and Kimmine. They, I will say they because as you stated I should reply to both of them, so I will ask them the same question. No Andy, don't bury my heart at wounded knee.. I have been objective to the complaints since they first appeared.
> > Chip has personally attacked me along with a few others, but they have offered no substantive defense for which they continue to solidify their position. Kimmine and Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies. The problem lies within a group that caused huge divide within our, and I stress our beloved community. I know a bit more than you might think about the ramifications of the depiction, that does not make it right or wrong.
> > This reminds me of those whom want everything to be politically correct, maybe everyone needs to take a big breathe and look at the ramifications. Mike, Kimmine, Mitch, Freddie, Chip, and Anderson, whom seems to be the most logical of the group, who created the distraction and did it support the consequences? I will await the answer.
> > I do not agree with their dispersions as to whom is tearing this apart, look into the mirror and see if those recognize anyone.
> Anybody else just sitting there staring at their screen going "what in the hell did I just read?"
>
> Bob. I was really hoping for an "Aha!" moment from you where you stopped for a second and went "yeah, ok, maybe its alright for people that think differently from me to express an opinion, and it may be possible that people with different life experiences than me possibly have valid issues with things that I don't consider to be offensive."
>
> At this point I'll be happy (well, not happy, slightly less disappointed in humanity as a whole) if you stop using words that include "nazi" in them to describe women.
>
> Can you do that? Look, we can treat it like a twelve step program. Let's just get through the next 24 hours. Together. You can do it. I believe in you. I believe in humanity.
Hugh, isn't that what I have said all along, it is all about perception, you need to read my post.

[Kimmine and Mitch Hudson]

Nah, let's just go with inability to learn. Here, let me recap for everyone:

"Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies."
-Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, 27 October, 2020, 6:37

"Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
-Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2020, 2:43PM

"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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 9:41:05 PM UTC-4, Kimmine and Mitch Hudson wrote:
> Nah, let's just go with inability to learn. Here, let me recap for everyone:
> "Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies."
> -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, 27 October, 2020, 6:37
> "Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
> -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2020, 2:43PM
> "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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47
Kimmine and Mitch, Please stay on topic and respond to the original question that I asked of you. Your post continue to remind me to the format of the Feminist Fight Club. Please expand your horizons and stay focused on the questions.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 9:41:05 PM UTC-4, Kimmine and Mitch Hudson wrote:
> Nah, let's just go with inability to learn. Here, let me recap for everyone:
> "Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies."
> -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, 27 October, 2020, 6:37
> "Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
> -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2020, 2:43PM
> "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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47
I have really enjoyed having you in the batters box. here it is after 10 on the East Coast, must go watch a bit of Fox News, fair and balanced and get ready to work in the mango grove in the morning. Hope you have a wonderful evening and stay safe. Bob

[2G]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 5:56:03 PM UTC-7, Hugh Grandstaff wrote:
> > Mike , I will address that to both parties, Mitch and Kimmine. They, I will say they because as you stated I should reply to both of them, so I will ask them the same question. No Andy, don't bury my heart at wounded knee.. I have been objective to the complaints since they first appeared.
> > Chip has personally attacked me along with a few others, but they have offered no substantive defense for which they continue to solidify their position. Kimmine and Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies. The problem lies within a group that caused huge divide within our, and I stress our beloved community. I know a bit more than you might think about the ramifications of the depiction, that does not make it right or wrong.
> > This reminds me of those whom want everything to be politically correct, maybe everyone needs to take a big breathe and look at the ramifications. Mike, Kimmine, Mitch, Freddie, Chip, and Anderson, whom seems to be the most logical of the group, who created the distraction and did it support the consequences? I will await the answer.
> > I do not agree with their dispersions as to whom is tearing this apart, look into the mirror and see if those recognize anyone.
>
> Anybody else just sitting there staring at their screen going "what in the hell did I just read?"
>
> Bob. I was really hoping for an "Aha!" moment from you where you stopped for a second and went "yeah, ok, maybe its alright for people that think differently from me to express an opinion, and it may be possible that people with different life experiences than me possibly have valid issues with things that I don't consider to be offensive."
>
> At this point I'll be happy (well, not happy, slightly less disappointed in humanity as a whole) if you stop using words that include "nazi" in them to describe women.
>
> Can you do that? Look, we can treat it like a twelve step program. Let's just get through the next 24 hours. Together. You can do it. I believe in you. I believe in humanity.

Maybe you can also tell us about why it is disrespectful to call us males "pigs."

Tom

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

> I have really enjoyed having you in the batters box. here it is after 10 on the East Coast, must go watch a bit of Fox News, fair and balanced and get ready to work in the mango grove in the morning. Hope you have a wonderful evening and stay safe. Bob

Bob, I'm really proud of you. That's two posts, no fascist or nazi undertones. This is what progress looks like.

Thanks for this. We'll get through it, brother. Together. I'll be here for you.

[Kimmine and Mitch Hudson]

Nah. It's just time to close out this thread. So we'll go ahead and keep this near the top (or bottom) of your reader as the case my be so people in 10-15-20 years can continue to be horrified by a very small minority of the behavior displayed here. Also, if they dig a bit deeper, they will know that, like anything in life, 90% of the people in Soaring are genuinely good, respectful people.

"Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies."
-Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, 27 October, 2020, 6:37

"Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
-Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2020, 2:43PM
î—“

"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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47

[andy l]

On Wednesday, 28 October 2020 at 01:57:16 UTC, wrote:
> Kimmine and Mitch, Please stay on topic and respond to the original question that I asked of you. Your post continue to remind me to the format of the Feminist Fight Club. Please expand your horizons and stay focused on the questions.

Maybe those quotes don't need repeating as an unpleasant reminder, or maybe they do, as this argument has extended well beyond comment on the original trigger and responses, and now itself includes offensive remarks made here

And someone flatly denied one of those remarks was made, thereby more or less asserting quotes of it had been dishonestly invented.

Now, instead of saying, oh, my mistake, thanks for pointing out it was there all along, the denier avoided any comment on that poimt and has switched to being combative with points against other posts as if equally poor. They aren't.

If we are guilty so are you is not a clever defence consistent with previously having denied guilt.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 10:25:21 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > I have really enjoyed having you in the batters box. here it is after 10 on the East Coast, must go watch a bit of Fox News, fair and balanced and get ready to work in the mango grove in the morning. Hope you have a wonderful evening and stay safe. Bob
> Bob, I'm really proud of you. That's two posts, no fascist or nazi undertones. This is what progress looks like.
>
> Thanks for this. We'll get through it, brother. Together. I'll be here for you.
Thanks Hugh, I must say it was a hard days work today getting all my mango and avocado trees trimmed and fertilized but the results next summer will be rewarding. I know that this has been a delicate subject, those feminazi radicals turned the bowl upside down. I have appreciated everyone's opinions, even Chip who continued to get personal.
I was quiet surprised that there was no comment on the origin that I explained about the term Feminazi, all some could do is throw manure on the wall and hope some of it sticks. Andy was the only person whom posted that wanted to or was capable of engaging in constructive dialogue.
Now, I guess it is time to let the pony ride, I sure wish Lewis Grizzard was still with us , I bet he would be writing a book about this event, the title would probably be "Those Melons Sure Look Good."
Before I close the curtain let me say that it has certainly been a pleasure engaging in this topic . Not often do we engage in dialogue as constructive as this, even in spite of what K&M say. Loosen up, we all have bigger fish to fry. May your soaring be rewarding, your life be enjoyable and may soaring continue to advance and be enjoyable to all of us no matter what our perceptions are. Bob Youngblood, beautiful Vero Beach, Florida

[Ron Gleason]

On Wednesday, 28 October 2020 13:32:08 UTC-6, wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 10:25:21 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> > > I have really enjoyed having you in the batters box. here it is after 10 on the East Coast, must go watch a bit of Fox News, fair and balanced and get ready to work in the mango grove in the morning. Hope you have a wonderful evening and stay safe. Bob
> > Bob, I'm really proud of you. That's two posts, no fascist or nazi undertones. This is what progress looks like.
> >
> > Thanks for this. We'll get through it, brother. Together. I'll be here for you.
> Thanks Hugh, I must say it was a hard days work today getting all my mango and avocado trees trimmed and fertilized but the results next summer will be rewarding. I know that this has been a delicate subject, those feminazi radicals turned the bowl upside down. I have appreciated everyone's opinions, even Chip who continued to get personal.
> I was quiet surprised that there was no comment on the origin that I explained about the term Feminazi, all some could do is throw manure on the wall and hope some of it sticks. Andy was the only person whom posted that wanted to or was capable of engaging in constructive dialogue.
> Now, I guess it is time to let the pony ride, I sure wish Lewis Grizzard was still with us , I bet he would be writing a book about this event, the title would probably be "Those Melons Sure Look Good."
> Before I close the curtain let me say that it has certainly been a pleasure engaging in this topic . Not often do we engage in dialogue as constructive as this, even in spite of what K&M say. Loosen up, we all have bigger fish to fry. May your soaring be rewarding, your life be enjoyable and may soaring continue to advance and be enjoyable to all of us no matter what our perceptions are. Bob Youngblood, beautiful Vero Beach, Florida

Yes I believe it is time for

kumbaya, kumbaya

https://www.definitions.net/definition/kumbaya


...... was originally associated with human and spiritual unity, closeness and compassion, and it still is, but more recently it is also cited or alluded to in satirical or cynical ways which suggest false moralizing, hypocrisy, or naively optimistic views of the world and human nature.

[Doug B[_2_]]

I just spent more than an hour reading through this thread and I just want to add a couple of observations.

I can understand why the ad was offensive to some women. It's really a no brainer if you put yourself in their shoes.

I can just as well understand why their complaints and the subsequent apology may be offensive to someone holding conservative views, who feels that the freedom of speech is under attack by the woke crowd of overly sensitive liberal snowflakes.

THe common thread here is that people become overly sensitive when they see that their concerns aren't being heard, understood and validated.

I wish that all of us could turn our sensitivities down a notch. It would help smooth things out in the SSA and beyond.

Doug

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

The statement referred to the ones who act like pigs by (among other things) referring to women who are employed as "childless corporate whores". It isn't a general statement about all men, it's conditional on piggish behavior - that's what the word "few" referred to. She even used it twice in case you missed it the first time.

I still think you guys have chosen to die on the wrong hill.

Andy

On Tuesday, October 27, 2020 at 7:08:28 PM UTC-7, 2G wrote:
> Maybe you can also tell us about why it is disrespectful to call us males "pigs."
>
> Tom

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

Hey, Bob, we actually agree on something! I did get personal. :) In my defense, it's pretty hard not to when the debate is over what someone says, does, and believes and not whether FLARM should be mandatory in contests or if remote thermal detection devices should be banned, or even who should be the next president of the United States.

I would have been OK debating whether some of the letters were a bit confrontational or counterproductive. There are ways to gently register a concern that help promote an open dialogue and a satisfactory compromise.

Quickly, however, the real debate became not whether the complaints and SSA's response were justified but whether your response (and others like it) was acceptable. You led off by alluding to an orchestrated attack on the SSA.. By the next day, you had graduated to referring to the women who had complained as Feminazis, among other things. Gregg raised the ante with "childless corporate whore", which seems destined to follow him forever given his unrepentant posture.

Maybe I'm "overly sensitive" but when I see someone referring to people I know using a form of the term Nazi, it's pretty inflammatory. Like you, however, I looked up the word. Wikipedia (flawed, but at least it collects multiple references) defines Feminazi as "a pejorative term for feminists which was popularized by politically conservative American radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh." The Oxford Dictionary of American Slang says "it refers (pejoratively) to "a committed feminist or a strong-willed woman".

On that basis, although juxtaposing "Nazi" and "feminist" is questionable to me, I wouldn't accuse you of wanting to cleanse the world of women by force to make room for a [short-lived and sexually frustrated] master race of Floridian men.

But there's the word "perjorative", which means "expressing contempt or disapproval". That's not calculated to lead to productive debate.

Further into the Wikipedia entry, there's discussion about Feminazi being used "to marginalize any feminist as a hardline, uncompromising manhater." That's a pretty disparaging depiction, especially combined with being viewed with contempt.

So, yeah, my disagreement with you (and some others) IS personal. As I said, we could debate whether some or all of the letters to the SSA were appropriate or even if SSA's response was reasonable. I think it was even though, in Doug's terms, I'm a generally conservative guy who DOES worry, a lot, that "the freedom of speech is under attack by the woke crowd of overly sensitive liberal snowflakes." I live in the never-never world of AOC and NYC Mayor Bill DeBlasio so I'm primed to push back at a lot of what I consider social justice overreaches.

But not this one, especially not once the Feminazi comments started. You weren't the only one, but this was your thread and you carried the torch.

I also disagree this was a constructive dialogue. I think it dragged all of us down and probably didn't change any minds.

But I have few regrets. I may have lost some friends but given what I read here in the past few days, if I have, then they're not the men I thought they were.

BTW, This discussion is poised to, in a few hours, move into 9th place on the list of Top Ten RAS Discussions in the past 12 months (and likely for 2020). That is a remarkably depressing fact and one I would never have thought possible.

Chip Bearden
JB

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 6:36:42 PM UTC-4, Chip Bearden wrote:
> Hey, Bob, we actually agree on something! I did get personal. :) In my defense, it's pretty hard not to when the debate is over what someone says, does, and believes and not whether FLARM should be mandatory in contests or if remote thermal detection devices should be banned, or even who should be the next president of the United States.
>
> I would have been OK debating whether some of the letters were a bit confrontational or counterproductive. There are ways to gently register a concern that help promote an open dialogue and a satisfactory compromise.
>
> Quickly, however, the real debate became not whether the complaints and SSA's response were justified but whether your response (and others like it) was acceptable. You led off by alluding to an orchestrated attack on the SSA. By the next day, you had graduated to referring to the women who had complained as Feminazis, among other things. Gregg raised the ante with "childless corporate whore", which seems destined to follow him forever given his unrepentant posture.
>
> Maybe I'm "overly sensitive" but when I see someone referring to people I know using a form of the term Nazi, it's pretty inflammatory. Like you, however, I looked up the word. Wikipedia (flawed, but at least it collects multiple references) defines Feminazi as "a pejorative term for feminists which was popularized by politically conservative American radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh." The Oxford Dictionary of American Slang says "it refers (pejoratively) to "a committed feminist or a strong-willed woman".
>
> On that basis, although juxtaposing "Nazi" and "feminist" is questionable to me, I wouldn't accuse you of wanting to cleanse the world of women by force to make room for a [short-lived and sexually frustrated] master race of Floridian men.
>
> But there's the word "perjorative", which means "expressing contempt or disapproval". That's not calculated to lead to productive debate.
>
> Further into the Wikipedia entry, there's discussion about Feminazi being used "to marginalize any feminist as a hardline, uncompromising manhater." That's a pretty disparaging depiction, especially combined with being viewed with contempt.
>
> So, yeah, my disagreement with you (and some others) IS personal. As I said, we could debate whether some or all of the letters to the SSA were appropriate or even if SSA's response was reasonable. I think it was even though, in Doug's terms, I'm a generally conservative guy who DOES worry, a lot, that "the freedom of speech is under attack by the woke crowd of overly sensitive liberal snowflakes." I live in the never-never world of AOC and NYC Mayor Bill DeBlasio so I'm primed to push back at a lot of what I consider social justice overreaches.
>
> But not this one, especially not once the Feminazi comments started. You weren't the only one, but this was your thread and you carried the torch.
>
> I also disagree this was a constructive dialogue. I think it dragged all of us down and probably didn't change any minds.
>
> But I have few regrets. I may have lost some friends but given what I read here in the past few days, if I have, then they're not the men I thought they were.
>
> BTW, This discussion is poised to, in a few hours, move into 9th place on the list of Top Ten RAS Discussions in the past 12 months (and likely for 2020). That is a remarkably depressing fact and one I would never have thought possible.
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB
Chip, I will not opine on the thread itself, I respect your opinion, I appreciate your perception and I am also thankful that you were the only one to further research the term. Just yesterday I concluded a lengthy legal ordeal that was cast upon me by what I would call the F word, not the 4 letter word but the 8 letter word that you did your research on, I commend you for looking into the origin and meaning. At the end of the day the largest donation ever was directed to the soaring club here in Vero. I cannot say much because of the confidentially agreement signed, I can say this, I gave it all to the club! Very few are aware of the event, I guess if you went as far to look up the F term you could find it.
I think that we agree to disagree, no disrespect intended. Your friend , Bob Youngblood

[2G]

On Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 3:59:06 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 6:36:42 PM UTC-4, Chip Bearden wrote:
> > Hey, Bob, we actually agree on something! I did get personal. :) In my defense, it's pretty hard not to when the debate is over what someone says, does, and believes and not whether FLARM should be mandatory in contests or if remote thermal detection devices should be banned, or even who should be the next president of the United States.
> >
> > I would have been OK debating whether some of the letters were a bit confrontational or counterproductive. There are ways to gently register a concern that help promote an open dialogue and a satisfactory compromise.
> >
> > Quickly, however, the real debate became not whether the complaints and SSA's response were justified but whether your response (and others like it) was acceptable. You led off by alluding to an orchestrated attack on the SSA. By the next day, you had graduated to referring to the women who had complained as Feminazis, among other things. Gregg raised the ante with "childless corporate whore", which seems destined to follow him forever given his unrepentant posture.
> >
> > Maybe I'm "overly sensitive" but when I see someone referring to people I know using a form of the term Nazi, it's pretty inflammatory. Like you, however, I looked up the word. Wikipedia (flawed, but at least it collects multiple references) defines Feminazi as "a pejorative term for feminists which was popularized by politically conservative American radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh." The Oxford Dictionary of American Slang says "it refers (pejoratively) to "a committed feminist or a strong-willed woman".
> >
> > On that basis, although juxtaposing "Nazi" and "feminist" is questionable to me, I wouldn't accuse you of wanting to cleanse the world of women by force to make room for a [short-lived and sexually frustrated] master race of Floridian men.
> >
> > But there's the word "perjorative", which means "expressing contempt or disapproval". That's not calculated to lead to productive debate.
> >
> > Further into the Wikipedia entry, there's discussion about Feminazi being used "to marginalize any feminist as a hardline, uncompromising manhater.." That's a pretty disparaging depiction, especially combined with being viewed with contempt.
> >
> > So, yeah, my disagreement with you (and some others) IS personal. As I said, we could debate whether some or all of the letters to the SSA were appropriate or even if SSA's response was reasonable. I think it was even though, in Doug's terms, I'm a generally conservative guy who DOES worry, a lot, that "the freedom of speech is under attack by the woke crowd of overly sensitive liberal snowflakes." I live in the never-never world of AOC and NYC Mayor Bill DeBlasio so I'm primed to push back at a lot of what I consider social justice overreaches.
> >
> > But not this one, especially not once the Feminazi comments started. You weren't the only one, but this was your thread and you carried the torch.
> >
> > I also disagree this was a constructive dialogue. I think it dragged all of us down and probably didn't change any minds.
> >
> > But I have few regrets. I may have lost some friends but given what I read here in the past few days, if I have, then they're not the men I thought they were.
> >
> > BTW, This discussion is poised to, in a few hours, move into 9th place on the list of Top Ten RAS Discussions in the past 12 months (and likely for 2020). That is a remarkably depressing fact and one I would never have thought possible.
> >
> > Chip Bearden
> > JB
> Chip, I will not opine on the thread itself, I respect your opinion, I appreciate your perception and I am also thankful that you were the only one to further research the term. Just yesterday I concluded a lengthy legal ordeal that was cast upon me by what I would call the F word, not the 4 letter word but the 8 letter word that you did your research on, I commend you for looking into the origin and meaning. At the end of the day the largest donation ever was directed to the soaring club here in Vero. I cannot say much because of the confidentially agreement signed, I can say this, I gave it all to the club! Very few are aware of the event, I guess if you went as far to look up the F term you could find it.
> I think that we agree to disagree, no disrespect intended. Your friend , Bob Youngblood

That this ad was objectionable to all women is, simply, not true. I showed it to my wife and she thought it was cute, and others here have noted a similar reaction. A few, or one, women should not be allowed to speak for ALL women. A quarter-page ad was addressed with a FULL PAGE apology, totally out of proportion with the "crime." I, for one, object to being called a "pig," but am not expecting an apology.

Tom

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

If you read my post I never called any specific person or female pilots 'childless corporate whores' I defined a group of women that way just as I defined another group of women as 'mothers.' I wonder if using '...employees' instead of '...whores' would have been less offensive, I doubt it. The comparison between mothers and childless corporate handmaidens is telling If you look at decades of research you will find that women's happiness levels have never been lower, women are losing badly(by happiness standards) in modern times. With the exception of about three glider pilots in the entire world, men are no longer sexist. And no I don't believe women are more free now, as I've pointed out several times women have been flying since the beginning of flying, so what have they gained? The ability to start internet virtue signaling outrage spirals among men. That isn't making women happier. What is the difference between the apology illustration and a current year picture of a male pilot answering a soaring related question from a female? The woman in the apology illustration could have learned to fly, same as a woman that walks onto a gliderport tomorrow. The women that complained were wrong and the Soaring magazine apology was wrong. And everyone here defending those actions are not trying to convince me that the complaint and apology were acceptable they are trying to convince themselves.

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

On Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 8:26:00 PM UTC-4, 2G wrote:
2G wrote:

>That this ad was objectionable to all women is, simply, not true.

I was just saying how Bob and I finally agreed on something. And now I agree with you, too. I mean, is that crazy or not? You're right. The ad wasn't objectionable to every woman. Just like what you said wasn't offensive to every man.


>I showed it to my wife and she thought it was cute, and others here have noted a similar reaction.

Tell the truth, Tom. What's your answer to "honey, does this dress make my butt look big?" Yeah, I thought so. This is what focus groups are for.


> A quarter-page ad was addressed with a FULL PAGE apology, totally out of proportion with the "crime."

I dunno, Tom. From my time on the SSA Board, I recall that the magazine and Web site are always actively looking for content. That ad/apology got more readers and comments than almost anything else published in print or online this year. You guys have any other ideas?


> I, for one, object to being called a "pig," but am not expecting an apology.

Yeah, that's probably not gonna happen. But don't worry. The actual quote was "few men are pigs". She might have had someone else in mind. I mean, it's possible.


This is fun, Tom! Keep those jokes coming. By midnight Pacific Time, this discussion should have reached 8th on the 2020 Most-Viewed-RAS-Discussions hit parade. Top-Five status is probably out of reach but if you troll this a little more, we have a shot at 7th, which would knock out "Paraglider pilot missing in eastern Nevada" by...2G.

Oops.

Chip Bearden
JB

[biff the dotard]

> I have really enjoyed having you in the batters box. here it is after 10 on the East Coast, must go watch a bit of Fox News, fair and balanced and get ready to work in the mango grove in the morning. Hope you have a wonderful evening and stay safe. Bob

It's so good that Old Blood clarified that he's off to watch Fox News, in case anyone thought he would be tuning into Rachel Maddow. "Fair and balanced," he cracks. Being wrong, clueless, and sardonically proud of it all - the hat trick of being a Faux News viewer. So when he took time off from his very busy mango/avocado farmin' and soaring contributin' day to opine on the SSA/SSF mea culpa, and then the usual supporting cast of dinosaurs chimed in, a stink practically wafted out from my screen. We've seen it before: the insensitivity and intolerance toward the "Other". Sexism is just one facet. They just can't understand why anyone would object to the "Make Sexism in Aviation Great Again" SSF ad.

Then an unexpected thing happened. Out of a turd sprouted a beautiful and vibrant flower of moral enlightenment. I'm surprised and encouraged by the massing of intelligent, articulate, and sustained opposition to the chauvinistic sentiments that initially propelled this thread. Yes - call a spade a spade. Hold bigots accountable for their bigotry and don't let them gaslight reality when they get pushback. If this could happen more consistently on RAS, it would be a better place to visit, and the dinosaurs will eventually go extinct.

I should apologize to the real dinosaurs, whose extinction was not their fault. Scientific evidence suggests their extinction 66 million years ago had nothing to do with the terminal ignorance and hubris that afflict their modern-day relatives.

[Hugh Grandstaff[_3_]]

> If you read my post I never called any specific person or female pilots 'childless corporate whores' I defined a group of women that way just as I defined another group of women as 'mothers.' I wonder if using '...employees' instead of '...whores' would have been less offensive, I doubt it. The comparison between mothers and childless corporate handmaidens is telling If you look at decades of research you will find that women's happiness levels have never been lower, women are losing badly(by happiness standards) in modern times. With the exception of about three glider pilots in the entire world, men are no longer sexist. And no I don't believe women are more free now, as I've pointed out several times women have been flying since the beginning of flying, so what have they gained? The ability to start internet virtue signaling outrage spirals among men. That isn't making women happier.. What is the difference between the apology illustration and a current year picture of a male pilot answering a soaring related question from a female? The woman in the apology illustration could have learned to fly, same as a woman that walks onto a gliderport tomorrow. The women that complained were wrong and the Soaring magazine apology was wrong. And everyone here defending those actions are not trying to convince me that the complaint and apology were acceptable they are trying to convince themselves.

You also said "And the woman in the ad would be more attractive if she had kept her mouth shut. "

Oh, and Gregg?

The "return" key is on the right side of the keyboard. It's just above then "shift" key and below the "\" key.

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 12:10:04 AM UTC-4, Gregg Ballou wrote:

> I wonder if using '...employees' instead of '...whores' would have been less offensive

Is that a trick question? I think someone told me you work in HR but that's probably not true. In fact, you must not work in the corporate world at all, Gregg. Or if you do (well, did), you might be thinking about other career paths right now.


> With the exception of about three glider pilots in the entire world, men are no longer sexist.

Which three did you have in mind? There are a bunch of candidates from this thread alone. Maybe we can vote on it. Elections can be a lot of fun! And you seem to enjoy campaigning. :D


> And everyone here defending those actions are not trying to convince me that the complaint and apology were acceptable they are trying to convince themselves.

You're right, Gregg. We all want to be like you. [pause]

BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!! Sorry, I couldn't help myself. You can't feed me a line like that.

Keep those jokes coming, guys! Only 300+ more views to take over 7th place on the 2020 RAS Most-Viewed-Discussion leaderboard. If every bitter, miserable, angry, vindictive, conspiratorial, childless corporate whore on this newsgroup looks at this thread once or twice, we could be there sometime today. ;) Or maybe those three sexist guys could each view it 100+ times. Nah, that's not really sporting. We should earn that honor the right away--by making sure EVERYONE in soaring reads this stuff...all over the world!

Chip Bearden
JB

[Michael Westbrook[_2_]]

Gregg,

I would assume that the group of women you are addressing includes the specific women who wrote into Soaring? While you may not agree with their view, they exist and many of us know these specific women and respect them. So to spout out general pejoratives towards these members of our community is unacceptable as many of us have tried to point out from many different angles.

I'm sure that the soaring world is better in some ways from support Bob and yourself have provided through instruction, tows and donations. That however does not give you a free pass to call women "childless corporate whores" or tell them they'd "be more attractive if they kept their mouth shut".

I'm positive the gainfully employed women I know, that again can be single or married and with or without kids are happy that they can make that decision for themselves. They're happy that they can make the choice to fly or not. They're happy that they can be married to a great person. Or single, rather than possibly be at home raising the kids for you and maybe allowed to fly on weekends.

Soaring is a small world and we haven't met but one day we might or there's a good chance we already have some soaring friends in common. I think one problem is the ability to type out whatever pops in your head on a keyboard and think its ok. I'm guessing if you met these women in real life you wouldn't say it to their face. I'm guessing it wouldn't be ok for someone to say these things about your wife or daughter if she asked for mutual respect - even if you didn't understand her view. Lets try to have some common decency and respect towards our female colleagues whether we are standing right next to them or conversing online.

Mike

[glidergeek]

This whole thread is dismal at the least, pathetic not at the most. You all have fallen victim of modern day self condemnation.

[Kimmine and Mitch Hudson]

Looks like it’s time for another review. This time, however let’s look at the good in the world first, followed by the obvious minority in order to have a more comprehensive overview. I would like to show that, like anything else in society, the good will most always outweigh the bad, though will not always be the least noisy. Hang in there, ladies!

I’m sorry I don’t have time to track down who all the good folks are, and I realize many of you repeatedly posted many more positive things than what I am recapping, I just want to show the sheer numbers here. Also to the good folks, I apologize for not giving you proper credit. However, believe me, most everyone appreciates it.

-Mitch Hudson, Erie, Colorado

THE GOOD


“The complaint, which sadly required the explaination for this old guy see the harm in what seemed harmless, seems a valid, constructive suggestion for improvement. We definitely want more women pilots and being tone deaf in this area is not helping this end. Your proposed question seems counterproductive.�

, Oct 20, 2020, 4:38:02 PMÂ*

“Whoa - I think some people need to take a deep breath and do some research. Some of the women who wrote in have been contributing to SSA in a big way for years. Not to mention that the current Chair of the SSA is a woman.

I believe the proper response is to understand why someone was offended and determine how to prevent it in the future. We don't get to determine is someone should be offended. Our job is to respect their feelings. And, if the Editor and the Chair of the SSF think they needed to apologize, I'll take their lead.�

-MNLou, Oct 20, 2020, 5:49:32 PMÂ*


“Agreed that this old stuff happened in the mainstream in the 40's and best water under the bridge today, even if bad by today's standards. Wanting to stir up bad feelings because of it not productive.

The complaint seems about the same stuff unfortunately happening today.�
, Oct 20, 2020, 6:54:06 PMÂ*

“The most telling aspect of this thread is that almost all the respondents are men, and almost all the men seem completely blank ("without empathy") regarding how this ad could feel demeaning to a woman. This cluelessness is, I think, the main point for many women.�

-danlj, Oct 20, 2020, 10:43:57 PM

“The nearly universal response by the men on this thread is a perfect illustration of how far we have to go. Has political correctness gone too far? In some cases, yes. But those of us in the majority (and in soaring, men by far outnumber women) need to put a little effort into trying to understand why some of those in the minority might be offended by ads like this, not criticize and further insult them.�

-Chip Bearden, Boonton Township, NJ, Oct 21, 2020, 7:06:44 PM


“Let me see if I can understand how this ad could have been interpreted by the women who complained. The background poster looks like something from the 50's, the glorious time for men, when women were second class citizens. The questions being asked by the women "What? No engine? But how?" imply that she's just another dumb blonde, who cannot possibly understand the technical intricacies of motorless flight. Contrast that with the male pilot, whose head gear alone tells us all we need to know about his piloting skills and expertise in flight mechanics. The caption "Beginning brilliant new love story - Swept Off Her Feet" could imply that there's no point in trying to explain all these intricacies to a women because that would distract her from her main purpose which she can only find in the bedroom and in the kitchen.
With this in mind, I fully agree with Chip and I totally understand and support Linda.�
, Oct 23, 2020, 2:35:00 PMÂ*

“I'd like to nominate Gregg Ballou for the RAS Phyllis Shapley award.
Only stay at home mothers are honest women and the rest are childless corporate whores. Wow! what group do women running glider ports fall into?"
, Oct 23, 2020, 8:19:37 PM

“Ya know, I think every time I have brought up the soaring community I have had nothing but good things to say, after reading a disgusting thread like this, I wish I never clicked the link to this post.

Grow up boys, and remember who brought home first place at worlds this year..�

-Collin Shea, Ft. Worth, TX, Oct 23, 2020, 9:11:12 PM

“I'm sorry that women expressing their displeasure with an advertisement and then being taken seriously is such a threat to your way of life that you would continue to refer to them as "nazis".

Now, have you ever considered that the WSPA exists because of the fact that there are people in this world who find their way of life threatened over something as simple as women being taken seriously when they voice a complaint? So seriously in fact that they will invent incendiary terms relating them Nazi's and Fascists?

Probably not. Because you are used to being taken seriously when you complain about things.�

-Hugh Grandstaff, Huntsville, Alabama, Oct 24, 2020, 3:51:31 PM

“What a really sad state of affairs that most of the posters in this thread show absolutely no evidence of empathy (i.e. the capacity to see things through other's eyes) wrt the complainers. Very disappointing to me. The ad was bad enough in that it pours salt on open wounds, the "mansplaining" of the posters is off the wall.�

-John Godfrey, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, Oct 24, 2020, 6:48:34 PM

“This picture is the earliest picture I can find of the gang of girls, 1939 Wiesbaden. Hard to imagine just a generation later, but the women in the picture had to fight for the vote, equal pay, and other important human rights. However I always wondered what they were thinking when they quietly endured face to face discrimination. One day I asked the woman on the far left and she said: “living well is my best revenge.�

-xcnick, Oct 25, 2020, 4:40:46 AM

“The ad could best described as tone deaf. That was obviously not the intent, but it was the result. Male chauvinism is often subtle, and men are not particularly skilled in recognizing its presence. Pointing out chauvinistic behavior is the role of women, and that is what happened here. I say bravo! for them and shame on their detractors.�

, Oct 26, 2020, 12:24:34 AM

“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, Mansfield, Texas, Oct 26, 2020, 9:12:53 AM

“I too am married to a female glider pilot. Leah is also a "Childless Corporate Whore" and WSPA member (former board member). She benefitted immensely in her early flying career by attending a seminar at Air Saililng. I didn't ask her how she felt about the ad. Her feelings about the ad do not change the fact that many people who wrote in to Soaring did not appreciate it. I thought SSA & SSF did a very good job of addressing the problem. I hope that the letter writers feel the same way.

I hope that WSPA is selling "Childless Corporate Whore" T-shirts soon. That's gold.

RAS holds a special place in my heart as it was my primary outlet for soaring reporting and information during my early days as a glider pilot. Many long time contributors probably are happy that I've moved on LOL. Every now and then there's a nasty thread like this that makes me sad. Remember folks.. If you can't say something nice don't say anything at all. It's not that hard. Be Nice.�

-Tony Condon, Wichita, Kansas, Oct 26, 2020, 2:17:33 PM

"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.�

-Andy Blackburn, San Carlos, California, Oct 26, 2020, 5:10:07 PM

“The original ad was an unfortunate mis-step. I am proud of how swiftly and respectfully the SSA and SSF handled the situation.
Some of the posts in this thread however are absolutely inappropriate. The dis-service done to our community as a whole by those posts are far more damaging than the original error to which good faith efforts are being made to rectify, learn, and move forward.
I am extremely glad there are people here willing to call out these action and those that made them. I hope this will stand as a record and push people towards the reality that all of us in some aspect or another would do well to open our minds and be willing to listen to one another. And that we will not stand for this kind of behavior in our community.

If you have a problem with the SSA and SSF's decision to fix a true mistake and include a group of our soaring family that deserves every ounce of respect as anyone else, I would beg you to take some time away from the keyboard to really reflect on what you are advocating for here. There is no plot or organized attack going on.. there is nothing to lose and only positive change to gain by the apology that sparked this thread. None of us want to admit that we may have improper visions of what's going on. But if culture is going to advance in a positive way then individuals must also change.. and that is quite often the hardest part.�

-Freddie, Ft. Worth, Texas, Oct 27, 2020, 4:22:33 PM

“I concur with Chip and Andy - well said�

-Mike Brooks, Houston, Texas, Oct 27, 2020, 5:54:10 PM

“I just spent more than an hour reading through this thread and I just want to add a couple of observations.

I can understand why the ad was offensive to some women. It's really a no brainer if you put yourself in their shoes.�

, Oct 28, 2020, 2:01:13 PM

“Then an unexpected thing happened. Out of a turd sprouted a beautiful and vibrant flower of moral enlightenment. I'm surprised and encouraged by the massing of intelligent, articulate, and sustained opposition to the chauvinistic sentiments that initially propelled this thread. Yes - call a spade a spade. Hold bigots accountable for their bigotry and don't let them gaslight reality when they get pushback. If this could happen more consistently on RAS, it would be a better place to visit, and the dinosaurs will eventually go extinct.�

-biff the dotard, Oct 28, 2020, 10:31:34 PM

THE BAD (AND UGLY)


"Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies."
-Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, 27 October, 2020, 6:37

"Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
-Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2020, 2:43PM

"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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47

“A few, or one, women should not be allowed to speak for ALL women. A quarter-page ad was addressed with a FULL PAGE apology, totally out of proportion with the "crime." I, for one, object to being called a "pig," but am not expecting an apology.�

-Tom Seim, Richland, Washington, Oct 28, 2020, 6:26:00 PM

“So feel free to apologize for yourself, but not for me.�

-Dan Marotta, Moriarty, New Mexico, Oct 20, 2020, 6:09:17 PMÂ*

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 11:39:29 AM UTC-4, Kimmine and Mitch Hudson wrote:
> Looks like it’s time for another review. This time, however let’s look at the good in the world first, followed by the obvious minority in order to have a more comprehensive overview. I would like to show that, like anything else in society, the good will most always outweigh the bad, though will not always be the least noisy. Hang in there, ladies!
>
> I’m sorry I don’t have time to track down who all the good folks are, and I realize many of you repeatedly posted many more positive things than what I am recapping, I just want to show the sheer numbers here. Also to the good folks, I apologize for not giving you proper credit. However, believe me, most everyone appreciates it.
>
> -Mitch Hudson, Erie, Colorado
>
> THE GOOD
>
>
> “The complaint, which sadly required the explaination for this old guy see the harm in what seemed harmless, seems a valid, constructive suggestion for improvement. We definitely want more women pilots and being tone deaf in this area is not helping this end. Your proposed question seems counterproductive.�
>
> , Oct 20, 2020, 4:38:02 PM
>
> “Whoa - I think some people need to take a deep breath and do some research. Some of the women who wrote in have been contributing to SSA in a big way for years. Not to mention that the current Chair of the SSA is a woman.
>
> I believe the proper response is to understand why someone was offended and determine how to prevent it in the future. We don't get to determine is someone should be offended. Our job is to respect their feelings. And, if the Editor and the Chair of the SSF think they needed to apologize, I'll take their lead.�
>
> -MNLou, Oct 20, 2020, 5:49:32 PM
>
>
> “Agreed that this old stuff happened in the mainstream in the 40's and best water under the bridge today, even if bad by today's standards. Wanting to stir up bad feelings because of it not productive.
>
> The complaint seems about the same stuff unfortunately happening today.�
> , Oct 20, 2020, 6:54:06 PM
>
> “The most telling aspect of this thread is that almost all the respondents are men, and almost all the men seem completely blank ("without empathy") regarding how this ad could feel demeaning to a woman. This cluelessness is, I think, the main point for many women.�
>
> -danlj, Oct 20, 2020, 10:43:57 PM
>
> “The nearly universal response by the men on this thread is a perfect illustration of how far we have to go. Has political correctness gone too far? In some cases, yes. But those of us in the majority (and in soaring, men by far outnumber women) need to put a little effort into trying to understand why some of those in the minority might be offended by ads like this, not criticize and further insult them.�
>
> -Chip Bearden, Boonton Township, NJ, Oct 21, 2020, 7:06:44 PM
>
>
> “Let me see if I can understand how this ad could have been interpreted by the women who complained. The background poster looks like something from the 50's, the glorious time for men, when women were second class citizens. The questions being asked by the women "What? No engine? But how?" imply that she's just another dumb blonde, who cannot possibly understand the technical intricacies of motorless flight. Contrast that with the male pilot, whose head gear alone tells us all we need to know about his piloting skills and expertise in flight mechanics. The caption "Beginning brilliant new love story - Swept Off Her Feet" could imply that there's no point in trying to explain all these intricacies to a women because that would distract her from her main purpose which she can only find in the bedroom and in the kitchen.
> With this in mind, I fully agree with Chip and I totally understand and support Linda.�
> , Oct 23, 2020, 2:35:00 PM
>
> “I'd like to nominate Gregg Ballou for the RAS Phyllis Shapley award.
> Only stay at home mothers are honest women and the rest are childless corporate whores. Wow! what group do women running glider ports fall into?"
> , Oct 23, 2020, 8:19:37 PM
>
> “Ya know, I think every time I have brought up the soaring community I have had nothing but good things to say, after reading a disgusting thread like this, I wish I never clicked the link to this post.
>
> Grow up boys, and remember who brought home first place at worlds this year.�
>
> -Collin Shea, Ft. Worth, TX, Oct 23, 2020, 9:11:12 PM
>
> “I'm sorry that women expressing their displeasure with an advertisement and then being taken seriously is such a threat to your way of life that you would continue to refer to them as "nazis".
>
> Now, have you ever considered that the WSPA exists because of the fact that there are people in this world who find their way of life threatened over something as simple as women being taken seriously when they voice a complaint? So seriously in fact that they will invent incendiary terms relating them Nazi's and Fascists?
>
> Probably not. Because you are used to being taken seriously when you complain about things.�
>
> -Hugh Grandstaff, Huntsville, Alabama, Oct 24, 2020, 3:51:31 PM
>
> “What a really sad state of affairs that most of the posters in this thread show absolutely no evidence of empathy (i.e. the capacity to see things through other's eyes) wrt the complainers. Very disappointing to me.. The ad was bad enough in that it pours salt on open wounds, the "mansplaining" of the posters is off the wall.�
>
> -John Godfrey, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, Oct 24, 2020, 6:48:34 PM
>
> “This picture is the earliest picture I can find of the gang of girls, 1939 Wiesbaden. Hard to imagine just a generation later, but the women in the picture had to fight for the vote, equal pay, and other important human rights. However I always wondered what they were thinking when they quietly endured face to face discrimination. One day I asked the woman on the far left and she said: “living well is my best revenge.�
>
> -xcnick, Oct 25, 2020, 4:40:46 AM
>
> “The ad could best described as tone deaf. That was obviously not the intent, but it was the result. Male chauvinism is often subtle, and men are not particularly skilled in recognizing its presence. Pointing out chauvinistic behavior is the role of women, and that is what happened here. I say bravo! for them and shame on their detractors.�
>
> , Oct 26, 2020, 12:24:34 AM
>
> “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, Mansfield, Texas, Oct 26, 2020, 9:12:53 AM
>
> “I too am married to a female glider pilot. Leah is also a "Childless Corporate Whore" and WSPA member (former board member). She benefitted immensely in her early flying career by attending a seminar at Air Saililng. I didn't ask her how she felt about the ad. Her feelings about the ad do not change the fact that many people who wrote in to Soaring did not appreciate it. I thought SSA & SSF did a very good job of addressing the problem.. I hope that the letter writers feel the same way.
>
> I hope that WSPA is selling "Childless Corporate Whore" T-shirts soon. That's gold.
>
> RAS holds a special place in my heart as it was my primary outlet for soaring reporting and information during my early days as a glider pilot. Many long time contributors probably are happy that I've moved on LOL. Every now and then there's a nasty thread like this that makes me sad. Remember folks. If you can't say something nice don't say anything at all. It's not that hard. Be Nice.�
>
> -Tony Condon, Wichita, Kansas, Oct 26, 2020, 2:17:33 PM
>
> "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.�
>
> -Andy Blackburn, San Carlos, California, Oct 26, 2020, 5:10:07 PM
>
> “The original ad was an unfortunate mis-step. I am proud of how swiftly and respectfully the SSA and SSF handled the situation.
> Some of the posts in this thread however are absolutely inappropriate. The dis-service done to our community as a whole by those posts are far more damaging than the original error to which good faith efforts are being made to rectify, learn, and move forward.
> I am extremely glad there are people here willing to call out these action and those that made them. I hope this will stand as a record and push people towards the reality that all of us in some aspect or another would do well to open our minds and be willing to listen to one another. And that we will not stand for this kind of behavior in our community.
>
> If you have a problem with the SSA and SSF's decision to fix a true mistake and include a group of our soaring family that deserves every ounce of respect as anyone else, I would beg you to take some time away from the keyboard to really reflect on what you are advocating for here. There is no plot or organized attack going on.. there is nothing to lose and only positive change to gain by the apology that sparked this thread. None of us want to admit that we may have improper visions of what's going on. But if culture is going to advance in a positive way then individuals must also change.. and that is quite often the hardest part.�
>
> -Freddie, Ft. Worth, Texas, Oct 27, 2020, 4:22:33 PM
>
> “I concur with Chip and Andy - well said�
>
> -Mike Brooks, Houston, Texas, Oct 27, 2020, 5:54:10 PM
>
> “I just spent more than an hour reading through this thread and I just want to add a couple of observations.
>
> I can understand why the ad was offensive to some women. It's really a no brainer if you put yourself in their shoes.�
>
> , Oct 28, 2020, 2:01:13 PM
>
> “Then an unexpected thing happened. Out of a turd sprouted a beautiful and vibrant flower of moral enlightenment. I'm surprised and encouraged by the massing of intelligent, articulate, and sustained opposition to the chauvinistic sentiments that initially propelled this thread. Yes - call a spade a spade. Hold bigots accountable for their bigotry and don't let them gaslight reality when they get pushback. If this could happen more consistently on RAS, it would be a better place to visit, and the dinosaurs will eventually go extinct.�
>
> -biff the dotard, Oct 28, 2020, 10:31:34 PM
>
> THE BAD (AND UGLY)
> "Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies."
> -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, 27 October, 2020, 6:37
>
> "Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
> -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2020, 2:43PM
>
> "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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47
> “A few, or one, women should not be allowed to speak for ALL women. A quarter-page ad was addressed with a FULL PAGE apology, totally out of proportion with the "crime." I, for one, object to being called a "pig," but am not expecting an apology.�
>
> -Tom Seim, Richland, Washington, Oct 28, 2020, 6:26:00 PM
>
> “So feel free to apologize for yourself, but not for me.�
>
> -Dan Marotta, Moriarty, New Mexico, Oct 20, 2020, 6:09:17 PM
K&M, just look what you did, "I'll Be Back". with the next chapter of the Apology, Chapter 2, "The Cult Invasion".

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

* * * * * *
WE DID IT! "The Apology" is now the 7th-most-viewed RAS Posting of 2020!
* * * * * *

How awesome is that?!?!?! I'd like to thank the SSA, RAS readers, my family..... Wait, this wasn't my thread. I should let Bob Youngblood make the speech. Maybe he and Gregg Ballou and Tom Seim can come up to accept their 7th-place trophy.

What, you say 7th place is the 6th loser? Sorry you feel that way but there were over 1,100 discussions this year so this is no small feat.

Just a suggestion, Bob: ditch "The Apology, Chapter 2" idea. Sequels are never as good as the original.

What a remarkable achievement, especially since almost NOTHING in the thread actually related to soaring. I know it was difficult at times. Some of you were up late working on your postings. You even involved your families to get objective research ("honey, I was thinking we could get away to a nice romantic bed & breakfast this weekend, maybe do some antiquing and wine tasting, you don't think this ad is sexist, do you?").

It was tough. But if it were easy, anyone could have done it. Be proud! Without you, "The Apology" could have been just another cooky, offensive diatribe gathering dust in ignominy at the bottom of the list with Daryl Kabatoof's "If I Were Mayor of Saskatoon" and "Mary, Monkey, Sun, Tree and Penis Whoreshippers".

WHOA!!! Two threads that both mention "whores". Is that eerie, or what?

We can't all be winners, of course. There were some casualties as "The Apology" shot through the list like Doug Jacobs through a weekend club contest. Among them: "Gliding risk...." (a personal fave, though it slipped to 10th). And "How About Story Time", Hank Nixon's marvelous interlude last spring that helped navigate us away from the divisiveness in the early days of the pandemic--sort of a virtual round of kumbaya.

Sorry, Hank; unlike "The Apology", your posting--now 11th--actually had something to do with soaring so it seems kinda unfair. But the fans have spoken.

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 1:04:44 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> > If you read my post I never called any specific person or female pilots 'childless corporate whores' I defined a group of women that way just as I defined another group of women as 'mothers.' I wonder if using '...employees' instead of '...whores' would have been less offensive, I doubt it. The comparison between mothers and childless corporate handmaidens is telling If you look at decades of research you will find that women's happiness levels have never been lower, women are losing badly(by happiness standards) in modern times. With the exception of about three glider pilots in the entire world, men are no longer sexist. And no I don't believe women are more free now, as I've pointed out several times women have been flying since the beginning of flying, so what have they gained? The ability to start internet virtue signaling outrage spirals among men. That isn't making women happier. What is the difference between the apology illustration and a current year picture of a male pilot answering a soaring related question from a female? The woman in the apology illustration could have learned to fly, same as a woman that walks onto a gliderport tomorrow. The women that complained were wrong and the Soaring magazine apology was wrong. And everyone here defending those actions are not trying to convince me that the complaint and apology were acceptable they are trying to convince themselves.
> You also said "And the woman in the ad would be more attractive if she had kept her mouth shut. "
>
The biology of attraction is not changed by the political correctness of the moment. You being an emotional tampon for women pilots does not make you more attractive to women.

[Doug B[_2_]]

> The biology of attraction is not changed by the political correctness of the moment. You being an emotional tampon for women pilots does not make you more attractive to women.

I don't think anyone in this thread has changed anyone else's mind, not for the lack of trying. Regardless, the overall trend is towards more progressive views, one funeral at a time.

Doug

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 8:23:51 PM UTC-4, Chip Bearden wrote:
> * * * * * *
> WE DID IT! "The Apology" is now the 7th-most-viewed RAS Posting of 2020!
> * * * * * *
>
> How awesome is that?!?!?! I'd like to thank the SSA, RAS readers, my family.... Wait, this wasn't my thread. I should let Bob Youngblood make the speech. Maybe he and Gregg Ballou and Tom Seim can come up to accept their 7th-place trophy.
>
> What, you say 7th place is the 6th loser? Sorry you feel that way but there were over 1,100 discussions this year so this is no small feat.
>
> Just a suggestion, Bob: ditch "The Apology, Chapter 2" idea. Sequels are never as good as the original.
>
> What a remarkable achievement, especially since almost NOTHING in the thread actually related to soaring. I know it was difficult at times. Some of you were up late working on your postings. You even involved your families to get objective research ("honey, I was thinking we could get away to a nice romantic bed & breakfast this weekend, maybe do some antiquing and wine tasting, you don't think this ad is sexist, do you?").
>
> It was tough. But if it were easy, anyone could have done it. Be proud! Without you, "The Apology" could have been just another cooky, offensive diatribe gathering dust in ignominy at the bottom of the list with Daryl Kabatoof's "If I Were Mayor of Saskatoon" and "Mary, Monkey, Sun, Tree and Penis Whoreshippers".
>
> WHOA!!! Two threads that both mention "whores". Is that eerie, or what?
>
> We can't all be winners, of course. There were some casualties as "The Apology" shot through the list like Doug Jacobs through a weekend club contest. Among them: "Gliding risk...." (a personal fave, though it slipped to 10th). And "How About Story Time", Hank Nixon's marvelous interlude last spring that helped navigate us away from the divisiveness in the early days of the pandemic--sort of a virtual round of kumbaya.
>
> Sorry, Hank; unlike "The Apology", your posting--now 11th--actually had something to do with soaring so it seems kinda unfair. But the fans have spoken.
>
> RANKED BY # OF VIEWS
> 1. What have we learned from all this? (Gold)
> 2. Best Overall Motorglider available today? (Silver)
> 3. My September 2017 visit to GP Gliders (Bronze)
> 4. Which 18m FES sailplane to buy? (Honorable Mention)
> 5. Fatal Towplane Accident 5-9-20
> 6. Js3 jet catastrophic failure.
> 7. The Apology
> 8. Paraglider pilot missing in eastern Nevada
> 9. 27 crash at Ely?
> 10. Gliding risk....
> 11. How About Story Time
>
> NEWS FLASH: An "under the radar" award as "The Apology" nearly reaches the medal stand in the "number of posts" category for audience participation!!! This wasn't just a few guys talking back and forth for a week trolling for votes, although it sometimes seemed like that. Take a look:
>
> RANKED BY # OF POSTS
> 1. What have we learned from all this? (Gold)
> 2. Fatal Towplane Accident 5-9-20 (Silver)
> 3. Best Overall Motorglider available today? (Bronze)
> 4. The Apology (Honorable Mention)
>
> And on the subject of what did we learn from all of this? As far as I can tell, not a f*#@ing thing. :(
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB
Chip, get help quick, call your psychiatrist, get some Doxepin and combine with Sineguan it might help with your heat oppressed delusions. Now I am working on chapter three," The Posse Wore Lipstick And Drove A Prius". I have a list of characters for each chapter, chapter two, "The Cult Invasion", Kammine plays Sandra Fluke.

[2G]

On Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 9:22:36 PM UTC-7, Chip Bearden wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 8:26:00 PM UTC-4, 2G wrote:
> 2G wrote:
>
> >That this ad was objectionable to all women is, simply, not true.
>
> I was just saying how Bob and I finally agreed on something. And now I agree with you, too. I mean, is that crazy or not? You're right. The ad wasn't objectionable to every woman. Just like what you said wasn't offensive to every man.
>
>
> >I showed it to my wife and she thought it was cute, and others here have noted a similar reaction.
>
> Tell the truth, Tom. What's your answer to "honey, does this dress make my butt look big?" Yeah, I thought so. This is what focus groups are for.
>
>
> > A quarter-page ad was addressed with a FULL PAGE apology, totally out of proportion with the "crime."
>
> I dunno, Tom. From my time on the SSA Board, I recall that the magazine and Web site are always actively looking for content. That ad/apology got more readers and comments than almost anything else published in print or online this year. You guys have any other ideas?
>
>
> > I, for one, object to being called a "pig," but am not expecting an apology.
>
> Yeah, that's probably not gonna happen. But don't worry. The actual quote was "few men are pigs". She might have had someone else in mind. I mean, it's possible.
>
>
> This is fun, Tom! Keep those jokes coming. By midnight Pacific Time, this discussion should have reached 8th on the 2020 Most-Viewed-RAS-Discussions hit parade. Top-Five status is probably out of reach but if you troll this a little more, we have a shot at 7th, which would knock out "Paraglider pilot missing in eastern Nevada" by...2G.
>
> Oops.
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB

How can you say WHO Cindy was referring to? It was clear to me that she was referring to all males who disagreed with her as "pigs."

And, then, you insulted my wife by implying that she was being dishonest. I think you owe her an apology.

Tom

[2G]

On Thursday, October 29, 2020 at 8:39:29 AM UTC-7, Kimmine and Mitch Hudson wrote:
> Looks like it’s time for another review. This time, however let’s look at the good in the world first, followed by the obvious minority in order to have a more comprehensive overview. I would like to show that, like anything else in society, the good will most always outweigh the bad, though will not always be the least noisy. Hang in there, ladies!
>
> I’m sorry I don’t have time to track down who all the good folks are, and I realize many of you repeatedly posted many more positive things than what I am recapping, I just want to show the sheer numbers here. Also to the good folks, I apologize for not giving you proper credit. However, believe me, most everyone appreciates it.
>
> -Mitch Hudson, Erie, Colorado
>
> THE GOOD
>
>
> “The complaint, which sadly required the explaination for this old guy see the harm in what seemed harmless, seems a valid, constructive suggestion for improvement. We definitely want more women pilots and being tone deaf in this area is not helping this end. Your proposed question seems counterproductive.�
>
> , Oct 20, 2020, 4:38:02 PMÂ*
>
> “Whoa - I think some people need to take a deep breath and do some research. Some of the women who wrote in have been contributing to SSA in a big way for years. Not to mention that the current Chair of the SSA is a woman.
>
> I believe the proper response is to understand why someone was offended and determine how to prevent it in the future. We don't get to determine is someone should be offended. Our job is to respect their feelings. And, if the Editor and the Chair of the SSF think they needed to apologize, I'll take their lead.�
>
> -MNLou, Oct 20, 2020, 5:49:32 PMÂ*
>
>
> “Agreed that this old stuff happened in the mainstream in the 40's and best water under the bridge today, even if bad by today's standards. Wanting to stir up bad feelings because of it not productive.
>
> The complaint seems about the same stuff unfortunately happening today.�
> , Oct 20, 2020, 6:54:06 PMÂ*
>
> “The most telling aspect of this thread is that almost all the respondents are men, and almost all the men seem completely blank ("without empathy") regarding how this ad could feel demeaning to a woman. This cluelessness is, I think, the main point for many women.�
>
> -danlj, Oct 20, 2020, 10:43:57 PM
>
> “The nearly universal response by the men on this thread is a perfect illustration of how far we have to go. Has political correctness gone too far? In some cases, yes. But those of us in the majority (and in soaring, men by far outnumber women) need to put a little effort into trying to understand why some of those in the minority might be offended by ads like this, not criticize and further insult them.�
>
> -Chip Bearden, Boonton Township, NJ, Oct 21, 2020, 7:06:44 PM
>
>
> “Let me see if I can understand how this ad could have been interpreted by the women who complained. The background poster looks like something from the 50's, the glorious time for men, when women were second class citizens. The questions being asked by the women "What? No engine? But how?" imply that she's just another dumb blonde, who cannot possibly understand the technical intricacies of motorless flight. Contrast that with the male pilot, whose head gear alone tells us all we need to know about his piloting skills and expertise in flight mechanics. The caption "Beginning brilliant new love story - Swept Off Her Feet" could imply that there's no point in trying to explain all these intricacies to a women because that would distract her from her main purpose which she can only find in the bedroom and in the kitchen.
> With this in mind, I fully agree with Chip and I totally understand and support Linda.�
> , Oct 23, 2020, 2:35:00 PMÂ*
>
> “I'd like to nominate Gregg Ballou for the RAS Phyllis Shapley award.
> Only stay at home mothers are honest women and the rest are childless corporate whores. Wow! what group do women running glider ports fall into?"
> , Oct 23, 2020, 8:19:37 PM
>
> “Ya know, I think every time I have brought up the soaring community I have had nothing but good things to say, after reading a disgusting thread like this, I wish I never clicked the link to this post.
>
> Grow up boys, and remember who brought home first place at worlds this year.�
>
> -Collin Shea, Ft. Worth, TX, Oct 23, 2020, 9:11:12 PM
>
> “I'm sorry that women expressing their displeasure with an advertisement and then being taken seriously is such a threat to your way of life that you would continue to refer to them as "nazis".
>
> Now, have you ever considered that the WSPA exists because of the fact that there are people in this world who find their way of life threatened over something as simple as women being taken seriously when they voice a complaint? So seriously in fact that they will invent incendiary terms relating them Nazi's and Fascists?
>
> Probably not. Because you are used to being taken seriously when you complain about things.�
>
> -Hugh Grandstaff, Huntsville, Alabama, Oct 24, 2020, 3:51:31 PM
>
> “What a really sad state of affairs that most of the posters in this thread show absolutely no evidence of empathy (i.e. the capacity to see things through other's eyes) wrt the complainers. Very disappointing to me.. The ad was bad enough in that it pours salt on open wounds, the "mansplaining" of the posters is off the wall.�
>
> -John Godfrey, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, Oct 24, 2020, 6:48:34 PM
>
> “This picture is the earliest picture I can find of the gang of girls, 1939 Wiesbaden. Hard to imagine just a generation later, but the women in the picture had to fight for the vote, equal pay, and other important human rights. However I always wondered what they were thinking when they quietly endured face to face discrimination. One day I asked the woman on the far left and she said: “living well is my best revenge.�
>
> -xcnick, Oct 25, 2020, 4:40:46 AM
>
> “The ad could best described as tone deaf. That was obviously not the intent, but it was the result. Male chauvinism is often subtle, and men are not particularly skilled in recognizing its presence. Pointing out chauvinistic behavior is the role of women, and that is what happened here. I say bravo! for them and shame on their detractors.�
>
> , Oct 26, 2020, 12:24:34 AM
>
> “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, Mansfield, Texas, Oct 26, 2020, 9:12:53 AM
>
> “I too am married to a female glider pilot. Leah is also a "Childless Corporate Whore" and WSPA member (former board member). She benefitted immensely in her early flying career by attending a seminar at Air Saililng. I didn't ask her how she felt about the ad. Her feelings about the ad do not change the fact that many people who wrote in to Soaring did not appreciate it. I thought SSA & SSF did a very good job of addressing the problem.. I hope that the letter writers feel the same way.
>
> I hope that WSPA is selling "Childless Corporate Whore" T-shirts soon. That's gold.
>
> RAS holds a special place in my heart as it was my primary outlet for soaring reporting and information during my early days as a glider pilot. Many long time contributors probably are happy that I've moved on LOL. Every now and then there's a nasty thread like this that makes me sad. Remember folks. If you can't say something nice don't say anything at all. It's not that hard. Be Nice.�
>
> -Tony Condon, Wichita, Kansas, Oct 26, 2020, 2:17:33 PM
>
> "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.�
>
> -Andy Blackburn, San Carlos, California, Oct 26, 2020, 5:10:07 PM
>
> “The original ad was an unfortunate mis-step. I am proud of how swiftly and respectfully the SSA and SSF handled the situation.
> Some of the posts in this thread however are absolutely inappropriate. The dis-service done to our community as a whole by those posts are far more damaging than the original error to which good faith efforts are being made to rectify, learn, and move forward.
> I am extremely glad there are people here willing to call out these action and those that made them. I hope this will stand as a record and push people towards the reality that all of us in some aspect or another would do well to open our minds and be willing to listen to one another. And that we will not stand for this kind of behavior in our community.
>
> If you have a problem with the SSA and SSF's decision to fix a true mistake and include a group of our soaring family that deserves every ounce of respect as anyone else, I would beg you to take some time away from the keyboard to really reflect on what you are advocating for here. There is no plot or organized attack going on.. there is nothing to lose and only positive change to gain by the apology that sparked this thread. None of us want to admit that we may have improper visions of what's going on. But if culture is going to advance in a positive way then individuals must also change.. and that is quite often the hardest part.�
>
> -Freddie, Ft. Worth, Texas, Oct 27, 2020, 4:22:33 PM
>
> “I concur with Chip and Andy - well said�
>
> -Mike Brooks, Houston, Texas, Oct 27, 2020, 5:54:10 PM
>
> “I just spent more than an hour reading through this thread and I just want to add a couple of observations.
>
> I can understand why the ad was offensive to some women. It's really a no brainer if you put yourself in their shoes.�
>
> , Oct 28, 2020, 2:01:13 PM
>
> “Then an unexpected thing happened. Out of a turd sprouted a beautiful and vibrant flower of moral enlightenment. I'm surprised and encouraged by the massing of intelligent, articulate, and sustained opposition to the chauvinistic sentiments that initially propelled this thread. Yes - call a spade a spade. Hold bigots accountable for their bigotry and don't let them gaslight reality when they get pushback. If this could happen more consistently on RAS, it would be a better place to visit, and the dinosaurs will eventually go extinct.�
>
> -biff the dotard, Oct 28, 2020, 10:31:34 PM
>
> THE BAD (AND UGLY)
>
>
> "Mitch objected to the term Feminatzi, when that term was explained both have not commented. I have no problem defending this hill, as stated before, I have no apologies."
> -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, 27 October, 2020, 6:37
>
> "Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in a n extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
> -Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2020, 2:43PM
>
> "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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47
>
> “A few, or one, women should not be allowed to speak for ALL women. A quarter-page ad was addressed with a FULL PAGE apology, totally out of proportion with the "crime." I, for one, object to being called a "pig," but am not expecting an apology.�
>
> -Tom Seim, Richland, Washington, Oct 28, 2020, 6:26:00 PM
>
> “So feel free to apologize for yourself, but not for me.�
>
> -Dan Marotta, Moriarty, New Mexico, Oct 20, 2020, 6:09:17 PMÂ*

Perhaps you can explain to me why it is acceptable to you to call men "pigs.."

Tom

[Kenn Sebesta]

I can't help but be saddened by this thread. RAS has developed a reputation for general toxicity, and this outdated masculine toxicity on display furthers the impression.

It is extremely disturbing that B. Youngblood is exposing the next generation of glider pilots to this attitude. The program directors at his club might want to sit him down for a real-life intervention,Â*so that he can understand how extremely harmful this is to the future of our sport. Certainly donating time, energy, and money counts for something, but it smacks of a Harvey Weinstein defense to say that these past contributions justify the ongoing damage.

Excellent points have been made by so many other posters, and I don't want to repeat them in detail. One sticks out, however, and that's, "As a pilot, always being willing to learn something is paramont[sic] to safety, no matter what your experience." Truer words have not been spoken.Â*

Consider what it means to be flying in the vicinityÂ*of someone who is so hidebound on not progressing and so stubborn in their world-view. The reckless attitude toward others we are witnessing here on the ground is certainly the same attitude carried into the air. In an emergency, will these pilots second-guess a woman? In an ADM capacity, will they disregard safety advice if it's not delivered by an older white male? If they physically hurt someone through their ignorance, will they take any more responsibility for it than they are for the emotional pain they are causing here and now?

If you are in a club with any of these men, please reach out to your club officers and fellow members so that you can stage interventions-- sometimes it's only in person thatÂ*aggressors can understand how badly they've hurt others. It is crucially important that we come together as a community to stamp this out before it does any moreÂ*harm. It's far more widespread than I think any of us realized. I hope the SSA can work with the WSAP to devote future articles to tackling this subject head-on.

A big shout-out to those who have consistently and eloquently pressed the point that accidental and intentional degradation of women is wholly unacceptable. Keep up the good fight.

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 10:31:14 PM UTC-5, Kenn Sebesta wrote:
> I can't help but be saddened by this thread. RAS has developed a reputation for general toxicity, and this outdated masculine toxicity on display furthers the impression.
>
> It is extremely disturbing that B. Youngblood is exposing the next generation of glider pilots to this attitude. The program directors at his club might want to sit him down for a real-life intervention, so that he can understand how extremely harmful this is to the future of our sport. Certainly donating time, energy, and money counts for something, but it smacks of a Harvey Weinstein defense to say that these past contributions justify the ongoing damage.
>
> Excellent points have been made by so many other posters, and I don't want to repeat them in detail. One sticks out, however, and that's, "As a pilot, always being willing to learn something is paramont[sic] to safety, no matter what your experience." Truer words have not been spoken.
>
> Consider what it means to be flying in the vicinity of someone who is so hidebound on not progressing and so stubborn in their world-view. The reckless attitude toward others we are witnessing here on the ground is certainly the same attitude carried into the air. In an emergency, will these pilots second-guess a woman? In an ADM capacity, will they disregard safety advice if it's not delivered by an older white male? If they physically hurt someone through their ignorance, will they take any more responsibility for it than they are for the emotional pain they are causing here and now?
>
> If you are in a club with any of these men, please reach out to your club officers and fellow members so that you can stage interventions-- sometimes it's only in person that aggressors can understand how badly they've hurt others. It is crucially important that we come together as a community to stamp this out before it does any more harm. It's far more widespread than I think any of us realized. I hope the SSA can work with the WSAP to devote future articles to tackling this subject head-on.
>
> A big shout-out to those who have consistently and eloquently pressed the point that accidental and intentional degradation of women is wholly unacceptable. Keep up the good fight.
Kenn, it would be my pleasure to have you to represent the soaring community for your much wanted intervention. Opportunities like this present themselves too infrequently, only then can you get someone to open their ears, and shut their mouth. Enlightening the most intelligent and delusional can be accomplished, I promise to fulfill that opportunity. As you made reference to the post that you were always willing to learn , you will not be disappointed.
Please book the flight ASAP, I will pay for the trip down. Bob

[John Dezzutti[_4_]]

BOB PLEASE JUSt STOP

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

On Sunday, November 1, 2020 at 10:31:14 PM UTC-5, Kenn Sebesta wrote:
> I can't help but be saddened by this thread. RAS has developed a reputation for general toxicity, and this outdated masculine toxicity on display furthers the impression.
>
> It is extremely disturbing that B. Youngblood is exposing the next generation of glider pilots to this attitude. The program directors at his club might want to sit him down for a real-life intervention, so that he can understand how extremely harmful this is to the future of our sport. Certainly donating time, energy, and money counts for something, but it smacks of a Harvey Weinstein defense to say that these past contributions justify the ongoing damage.
>
> Excellent points have been made by so many other posters, and I don't want to repeat them in detail. One sticks out, however, and that's, "As a pilot, always being willing to learn something is paramont[sic] to safety, no matter what your experience." Truer words have not been spoken.
>
> Consider what it means to be flying in the vicinity of someone who is so hidebound on not progressing and so stubborn in their world-view. The reckless attitude toward others we are witnessing here on the ground is certainly the same attitude carried into the air. In an emergency, will these pilots second-guess a woman? In an ADM capacity, will they disregard safety advice if it's not delivered by an older white male? If they physically hurt someone through their ignorance, will they take any more responsibility for it than they are for the emotional pain they are causing here and now?
>
> If you are in a club with any of these men, please reach out to your club officers and fellow members so that you can stage interventions-- sometimes it's only in person that aggressors can understand how badly they've hurt others. It is crucially important that we come together as a community to stamp this out before it does any more harm. It's far more widespread than I think any of us realized. I hope the SSA can work with the WSAP to devote future articles to tackling this subject head-on.
>
> A big shout-out to those who have consistently and eloquently pressed the point that accidental and intentional degradation of women is wholly unacceptable. Keep up the good fight.

Kenn you think disagreeing with some women over the offensiveness of a piece of art is bad ADM. Lolz

[Paul B[_2_]]

Mr Sebesta

I feel you should re-read your post to see that your contribution is worse than any other contribution in this thread. It is crafted to inflict maximum possible reputational damage and is largely based on many strawman arguments and replete with fashionable put downs, such as: "and this outdated masculine toxicity", I am sure that may bring few likes on Twitter, but if you wish to be saddened less, do you not think, it would be productive to bring people around by the voracity of your argument, rather than tired cliché?

Do you really think that "the next generation of glider pilots" is not capable of making up their own minds and do not need your intervention to smooth their path through life? How condescending of you to think that you have to do it for them. I also note how careful you are to tie the name of the previous poster to his crime of speaking his mind. Was it to make sure that as many readers as possible will see his crime and think less of him and to maximise his humiliation? I am not sure what he said and I do not care. I and your hypothetical "next generation of glider pilots" are perfectly capable of making up our own minds.

And then you went one better. You have smeared him by associating him with Harvey Weinstein. Well done, I can see that you are truly gifted in bringing "the general toxicity� of RAS down.

And then the strawman argument: Somebody that does not share your views could not be a safe pilot and we should not share the skies with them. Really?

The utter character assassination you have deployed here is contemptable. Statements such as "the reckless attitude toward others on the ground is certainly the same attitude carried into the air." So how exactly do you know that? You are condemning someone on nothing more than your say so. Then you go on "If they physically hurt someone through their ignorance", so now you have escalated to physical harm, without a skerrick of evidence. Yes I can see that you are trying hard to minimise the "toxicity" of RAS.

I was born and lived the first part of my life in a communist country, I found it both astounding and utterly frightening how well you have mastered their language, eg:
“someone who is so hidebound on not progressing and so stubborn in their world-view� might have progressed to :should be moved to a re-education camp, to realise what his world view should be.
“please reach out to your club officers and fellow members so that you can stage interventions� and “come together as a community to stamp this out before it does any more harm�. Well we used to have committees in large dwellings that would do precisely that. Often on nothing more than a suspicion or a deliberate report by someone who did not like you. In my opinion, that is precisely what you are attempting to do.

So to summarise, in my judgement, you are a contemptible person who enjoys hurting others in order to make himself feel morally superior.

Paul Bart



On Monday, 2 November 2020 at 1:31:14 pm UTC+10, Kenn Sebesta wrote:
> I can't help but be saddened by this thread. RAS has developed a reputation for general toxicity, and this outdated masculine toxicity on display furthers the impression.
>
> It is extremely disturbing that B. Youngblood is exposing the next generation of glider pilots to this attitude. The program directors at his club might want to sit him down for a real-life intervention, so that he can understand how extremely harmful this is to the future of our sport. Certainly donating time, energy, and money counts for something, but it smacks of a Harvey Weinstein defense to say that these past contributions justify the ongoing damage.
>
> Excellent points have been made by so many other posters, and I don't want to repeat them in detail. One sticks out, however, and that's, "As a pilot, always being willing to learn something is paramont[sic] to safety, no matter what your experience." Truer words have not been spoken.
>
> Consider what it means to be flying in the vicinity of someone who is so hidebound on not progressing and so stubborn in their world-view. The reckless attitude toward others we are witnessing here on the ground is certainly the same attitude carried into the air. In an emergency, will these pilots second-guess a woman? In an ADM capacity, will they disregard safety advice if it's not delivered by an older white male? If they physically hurt someone through their ignorance, will they take any more responsibility for it than they are for the emotional pain they are causing here and now?
>
> If you are in a club with any of these men, please reach out to your club officers and fellow members so that you can stage interventions-- sometimes it's only in person that aggressors can understand how badly they've hurt others. It is crucially important that we come together as a community to stamp this out before it does any more harm. It's far more widespread than I think any of us realized. I hope the SSA can work with the WSAP to devote future articles to tackling this subject head-on.
>
> A big shout-out to those who have consistently and eloquently pressed the point that accidental and intentional degradation of women is wholly unacceptable. Keep up the good fight.

[Kenn Sebesta]

Mr. Bart--

I spent a fair amount of my life in a post-communist country, I have seen some of what you talk about.Â*Sighetu MarmaÈ›iei was a terrible place. However, I've also seen how chauvinistic Eastern Europe still is, and the challenges my female friends had to advance their careers in that corrosive atmosphere.

So if the hill anyone wants to die on is littered with "feminazi", "whore", and commands for women to "keep their mouth shut", then I am afraid the reputation damage is purely self-inflicted.

And if we're equating political dissidents being murdered in places like Sighet Prison with club members respectfully sitting a pilot down and saying "let's talk about your impact on women", I don't know there's a lot I have to say to that.Â*

There are two ways these old stereotypes change: the sad way, one lonely funeral at a time (as another poster pointed out). Or the happy way, by finding a path so that a lifetime of wisdom isn't spoiled by being unable to evolve with the times.

[Kenn Sebesta]

> Kenn, it would be my pleasure to have you to represent the soaring community... book the flight ASAP, I will pay for the trip down.

Bob--

I really appreciate the offer. I admire that you don't hesitate to donate money and time to the gliding community.

Could I make a counter-proposal to send someone else in my stead? There are pilots who have been working on these issues for a long time, and they will be better, more eloquent advocates.

[[email protected]]

On Monday, October 19, 2020 at 6:11:19 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> Recently there was an apology issued from the SSA and the SSF and Editor for a so called offensive interpretation of the depiction of a historical portrayal of a young lady and a glider pilot on a previous edition of Soaring magazine. After reading the complaints from the women associated with the WSPA I decided it is now time to voice the other side of the story.
> That depiction reminded me of the 1970's when I met my wife at the Kendall Gliderport in Miami . I was flying my Std. Cirrus and she was a student pilot for gliders. So to say that that depiction was sexist is completely ridiculous. The SSA should have never apologized because of an orchestrated attack on the publication , Editor, and the SSF.
> The complainants are without merit, totally offbase and have a directive in place that only undermines the overall objective of the SSA, SSF, and Editor. You would think that this bunch of misfits, have no understanding of how this is an inclusive activity and not directed by any one gender.
> Ladies, listen up, much has been done by the SSA and others to support women in the sport of flying gliders. Let me take a moment and share a story with you about compassion and inclusion.
> During the past year we has a lady member whom became sick from a serious stage of cancer, a few of us at our club took notice and understood the severity of the situation and made it possible for this lady to achieve her goal of becoming a CFIG. We made sure that this was done at no cost, and guess what, she completed her CFIG even while on chemotherapy.
> Sorry that you think the SSA must apologize for your mis-interpretation and misguided effort . I think that the lack of cognizance is appalling. Bob Youngblood
At this time I would like to request that there NO further post to this thread. We have all made our points, expressed our perceptions and personal attacks. I do not look at this as a winning or losing debate and at times I saw unfortunate post from people whom I have a lot of respect for, I hope they feel the same about me.
May I ask each one of you to throw the pen and paper down take a deep breathe say to ourselves that we have something in common. Enjoy your life, continue the wonderful adventure of sailplane flying and most of all stay healthy. My final words on this subject. If you wish to opine do so privately. Bob Youngblood, Vero Beach, Florida.

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

(BUMP)

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. Just before I posted, this deplorable thread was roughly 30 views (out of 6500) from moving into 6th place on the most-viewed-discussions-on-RAS rankings for 2020! As the U.S. presidential election just demonstrated, every vote (view) counts. And unlike that election, we can keep voting as many times as we want. :)

Tantalyzingly, it's only a few hundred views away from Top 5 status. So keep clicking.

Chip Bearden
JB

[2G]

On Friday, November 6, 2020 at 8:38:53 AM UTC-8, Chip Bearden wrote:
> (BUMP)
>
> Sorry, I couldn't help myself. Just before I posted, this deplorable thread was roughly 30 views (out of 6500) from moving into 6th place on the most-viewed-discussions-on-RAS rankings for 2020! As the U.S. presidential election just demonstrated, every vote (view) counts. And unlike that election, we can keep voting as many times as we want. :)
>
> Tantalyzingly, it's only a few hundred views away from Top 5 status. So keep clicking.
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB

It's deplorable all right: you called my wife a liar and STILL haven't apologized.

Tom

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

On Friday, November 6, 2020 at 6:40:32 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> It's deplorable all right: you called my wife a liar and STILL haven't apologized.
>
> Tom

This discussion is full of remarks that beg for an apology, none of which has been forthcoming. So I'll go first. Some context:

[Tom] > > >I showed [the ad] to my wife and she thought it was cute, and others here have noted a similar reaction.

[Chip] > > Tell the truth, Tom. What's your answer to "honey, does this dress make my butt look big?" Yeah, I thought so. This is what focus groups are for.

[Tom] > And, then, you insulted my wife by implying that she was being dishonest. I think you owe her an apology.

I think I implied--by using a humorous-but-admittedly sexist analogy that many men in relationships with women are familiar with--that your wife might well have told you what you wanted to hear to be diplomatic or to protect your ego or to avoid an animated discussion.

But I don't know her so if my use of humor hurt or offended her, then I apologize.

Now it's your turn, dude.

I suggest you start by apologizing to Mike Westbrook and Hugh Grandstaff for saying they were the only ones who had used the phrase "childless corporate whores". That was factually untrue and you owe those guys an apology.

If we can close this out with apologies on both sides, however small, MAYBE then we can feel like we made some progress. Otherwise, this embarrassment is now the 6th-most-viewed RAS discussion of 2020 with a good chance of making the top 5. The mind boggles. :)

Chip Bearden
JB

[John Godfrey (QT)[_2_]]

On Friday, November 6, 2020 at 7:04:47 PM UTC-5, Chip Bearden wrote:
> On Friday, November 6, 2020 at 6:40:32 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> > It's deplorable all right: you called my wife a liar and STILL haven't apologized.
> >
> > Tom
>
> This discussion is full of remarks that beg for an apology, none of which has been forthcoming. So I'll go first. Some context:
>
> [Tom] > > >I showed [the ad] to my wife and she thought it was cute, and others here have noted a similar reaction.
>
> [Chip] > > Tell the truth, Tom. What's your answer to "honey, does this dress make my butt look big?" Yeah, I thought so. This is what focus groups are for.
>
> [Tom] > And, then, you insulted my wife by implying that she was being dishonest. I think you owe her an apology.
>
> I think I implied--by using a humorous-but-admittedly sexist analogy that many men in relationships with women are familiar with--that your wife might well have told you what you wanted to hear to be diplomatic or to protect your ego or to avoid an animated discussion.
>
> But I don't know her so if my use of humor hurt or offended her, then I apologize.
>
> Now it's your turn, dude.
>
> I suggest you start by apologizing to Mike Westbrook and Hugh Grandstaff for saying they were the only ones who had used the phrase "childless corporate whores". That was factually untrue and you owe those guys an apology.
>
> If we can close this out with apologies on both sides, however small, MAYBE then we can feel like we made some progress. Otherwise, this embarrassment is now the 6th-most-viewed RAS discussion of 2020 with a good chance of making the top 5. The mind boggles. :)
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB

Thanks for leading JB. I knew you had that contest id for a reason (private joke).

[2G]

On Friday, November 6, 2020 at 4:04:47 PM UTC-8, Chip Bearden wrote:
> On Friday, November 6, 2020 at 6:40:32 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> > It's deplorable all right: you called my wife a liar and STILL haven't apologized.
> >
> > Tom
>
> This discussion is full of remarks that beg for an apology, none of which has been forthcoming. So I'll go first. Some context:
>
> [Tom] > > >I showed [the ad] to my wife and she thought it was cute, and others here have noted a similar reaction.
>
> [Chip] > > Tell the truth, Tom. What's your answer to "honey, does this dress make my butt look big?" Yeah, I thought so. This is what focus groups are for.
>
> [Tom] > And, then, you insulted my wife by implying that she was being dishonest. I think you owe her an apology.
>
> I think I implied--by using a humorous-but-admittedly sexist analogy that many men in relationships with women are familiar with--that your wife might well have told you what you wanted to hear to be diplomatic or to protect your ego or to avoid an animated discussion.
>
> But I don't know her so if my use of humor hurt or offended her, then I apologize.
>
> Now it's your turn, dude.
>
> I suggest you start by apologizing to Mike Westbrook and Hugh Grandstaff for saying they were the only ones who had used the phrase "childless corporate whores". That was factually untrue and you owe those guys an apology.
>
> If we can close this out with apologies on both sides, however small, MAYBE then we can feel like we made some progress. Otherwise, this embarrassment is now the 6th-most-viewed RAS discussion of 2020 with a good chance of making the top 5. The mind boggles. :)
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB

Chip, I insisted on an apology, not because I thought you were being serious, (I knew you weren't), but to demonstrate how ridiculous this whole situation has become. These days, you can literally be fired for telling a joke.. We all need to get a grip.

BTW, I DIDN'T say that 'Mike Westbrook and Hugh Grandstaff were the only ones who had used the phrase "childless corporate whores".' Go check it out: I said that I "could not find" any other references after doing a search, which I did.

Tom

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

On Sunday, November 8, 2020 at 5:58:55 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:

> BTW, I DIDN'T say that 'Mike Westbrook and Hugh Grandstaff were the only ones who had used the phrase "childless corporate whores".' Go check it out: I said that I "could not find" any other references after doing a search, which I did.

[on 26 October, responding to Mike Westbrook, 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, add me to your rapidly accumulating list of apologies owed. But if you have only one apology in you, then I yield my position to Mike and Hugh. :)

Chip Bearden
JB

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

S C O R E !!!!!!!

In the past few minutes, this embarassing discussion has quietly (poetic license) moved into FIFTH PLACE (5th) on the 2020 Most-Viewed RAS Discussions list.

We're only a couple of hundred views out of 3rd--yes, THIRD PLACE!!! With Tom's assistance, we can do it!! Keep those clicks/views coming, folks. You're witnessing history being made. ;-)

Chip Bearden
JB

[andy l]

On Sunday, 8 November 2020 at 22:58:55 UTC, 2G wrote:
> BTW, I DIDN'T say that 'Mike Westbrook and Hugh Grandstaff were the only ones who had used the phrase "childless corporate whores".' Go check it out: I said that I "could not find" any other references after doing a search, which I did.
>
> Tom

.. Try reading it in a forum format, such as Google groups
.. Most browsers have a Find in page search function
.. 49 instances of a certain word by now, including in quotes, and the first instance stands out well enough.

More to the point now, since some of us helped with finding the phrase in question, you haven't acknowledged with any thanks or other qualifying comment, such as you don't know how you missed it, thus leaving space for some here to feel your assertion may not have been entirely in good faith and some level of denial continues.

[andy l]

On Monday, 9 November 2020 at 00:27:33 UTC, andy l wrote:
> On Sunday, 8 November 2020 at 22:58:55 UTC, 2G wrote:
> > BTW, I DIDN'T say that 'Mike Westbrook and Hugh Grandstaff were the only ones who had used the phrase "childless corporate whores".' Go check it out: I said that I "could not find" any other references after doing a search, which I did.
> >
> > Tom
> . Try reading it in a forum format, such as Google groups
> . Most browsers have a Find in page search
> . 49 instances of a certain word by now, including in quotes, and the first instance stands out well enough.
>
> More to the point now, since some of us helped with finding the phrase in question, you haven't acknowledged with any thanks or other qualifying comment, such as you don't know how you missed it, thus leaving space for some here to feel your assertion may not have been entirely in good faith and some level of denial continues.

[andy l]

On Monday, 9 November 2020 at 00:27:33 UTC, andy l wrote:
> . 49 instances of a certain word by now, including in quotes, and the first instance stands out well enough.
>
Out of date already

[2G]

On Sunday, November 8, 2020 at 4:22:50 PM UTC-8, Chip Bearden wrote:
> S C O R E !!!!!!!
>
> In the past few minutes, this embarassing discussion has quietly (poetic license) moved into FIFTH PLACE (5th) on the 2020 Most-Viewed RAS Discussions list.
>
> We're only a couple of hundred views out of 3rd--yes, THIRD PLACE!!! With Tom's assistance, we can do it!! Keep those clicks/views coming, folks. You're witnessing history being made. ;-)
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB

Chip, if it moves up the ladder it will be because of YOU beating a dead horse.

Tom

[2G]

On Sunday, November 8, 2020 at 4:27:33 PM UTC-8, andy l wrote:
> On Sunday, 8 November 2020 at 22:58:55 UTC, 2G wrote:
> > BTW, I DIDN'T say that 'Mike Westbrook and Hugh Grandstaff were the only ones who had used the phrase "childless corporate whores".' Go check it out: I said that I "could not find" any other references after doing a search, which I did.
> >
> > Tom
>
> . Try reading it in a forum format, such as Google groups
> . Most browsers have a Find in page search function
> . 49 instances of a certain word by now, including in quotes, and the first instance stands out well enough.
>
> More to the point now, since some of us helped with finding the phrase in question, you haven't acknowledged with any thanks or other qualifying comment, such as you don't know how you missed it, thus leaving space for some here to feel your assertion may not have been entirely in good faith and some level of denial continues.

More beating of a dead horse - they provided the quote and that was the end of it for me.

Tom

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

On Monday, November 9, 2020 at 9:56:56 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:

> Chip, if it moves up the ladder it will be because of YOU beating a dead horse.
>
> Tom

WE DID IT!!! Sometime yesterday, 10 Nov 2020, this post--ironically titled "The Apology"--shot into THIRD PLACE (3rd) for "Most Viewed RAS Discussions for 2020". Bronze Medal position!!! (in Google Groups, assumed to be representative of other views via Usenet providers/newsreader clients).

Un-freaking-believable. The post had almost nothing to do with soaring apart from being sparked by an apology in Soaring magazine that was deemed a craven capitulation to nefarious forces undermining all that is sacred in our sport. It concluded with the abject refusal of one sullen poster to apologize for anything. In between were condescending and insulting protestations by others that the original "offense" (with much debate over whether it was, in fact, offensive) was blown way out of proportion. Total views just in Google Groups alone were almost 7,300.

My whole perspective on the men and women in U.S. soaring is different today than when this thread kicked off three weeks ago. I concede that I've kept it going the past few days because I don't think we should forget what was said here. This was not a spirited debate over which flight computer is better or the use of ASTs in contests where we close by good-naturedly agreeing to disagree. Rather, this discussion revealed a funadmental difference in the way we respect each other in soaring.

Having seen this discussion reach the podium position and acknowledging that no one who posted seems to have changed their minds, I'm signing off. But don't stop re-reading and/or contributing on my account.

Chip Bearden
JB

[Dan Marotta]

On 11/10/20 10:57 PM, Chip Bearden wrote:
> On Monday, November 9, 2020 at 9:56:56 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
>
>> Chip, if it moves up the ladder it will be because of YOU beating a dead horse.
>>
>> Tom
>
> WE DID IT!!! Sometime yesterday, 10 Nov 2020, this post--ironically titled "The Apology"--shot into THIRD PLACE (3rd) for "Most Viewed RAS Discussions for 2020". Bronze Medal position!!! (in Google Groups, assumed to be representative of other views via Usenet providers/newsreader clients).
>
> Un-freaking-believable. The post had almost nothing to do with soaring apart from being sparked by an apology in Soaring magazine that was deemed a craven capitulation to nefarious forces undermining all that is sacred in our sport. It concluded with the abject refusal of one sullen poster to apologize for anything. In between were condescending and insulting protestations by others that the original "offense" (with much debate over whether it was, in fact, offensive) was blown way out of proportion. Total views just in Google Groups alone were almost 7,300.
>
> My whole perspective on the men and women in U.S. soaring is different today than when this thread kicked off three weeks ago. I concede that I've kept it going the past few days because I don't think we should forget what was said here. This was not a spirited debate over which flight computer is better or the use of ASTs in contests where we close by good-naturedly agreeing to disagree. Rather, this discussion revealed a funadmental difference in the way we respect each other in soaring.
>
> Having seen this discussion reach the podium position and acknowledging that no one who posted seems to have changed their minds, I'm signing off. But don't stop re-reading and/or contributing on my account.
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB
>
Keep it up, Chip. Your continuous score keeping posts seem to be what
will eventually run this one to the top spot! Great job. Congratulations.

Time to move on, don'tcha think?

--
Dan
5J

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, November 11, 2020 at 11:43:14 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> On 11/10/20 10:57 PM, Chip Bearden wrote:
> > On Monday, November 9, 2020 at 9:56:56 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> >
> >> Chip, if it moves up the ladder it will be because of YOU beating a dead horse.
> >>
> >> Tom
> >
> > WE DID IT!!! Sometime yesterday, 10 Nov 2020, this post--ironically titled "The Apology"--shot into THIRD PLACE (3rd) for "Most Viewed RAS Discussions for 2020". Bronze Medal position!!! (in Google Groups, assumed to be representative of other views via Usenet providers/newsreader clients).
> >
> > Un-freaking-believable. The post had almost nothing to do with soaring apart from being sparked by an apology in Soaring magazine that was deemed a craven capitulation to nefarious forces undermining all that is sacred in our sport. It concluded with the abject refusal of one sullen poster to apologize for anything. In between were condescending and insulting protestations by others that the original "offense" (with much debate over whether it was, in fact, offensive) was blown way out of proportion. Total views just in Google Groups alone were almost 7,300.
> >
> > My whole perspective on the men and women in U.S. soaring is different today than when this thread kicked off three weeks ago. I concede that I've kept it going the past few days because I don't think we should forget what was said here. This was not a spirited debate over which flight computer is better or the use of ASTs in contests where we close by good-naturedly agreeing to disagree. Rather, this discussion revealed a funadmental difference in the way we respect each other in soaring.
> >
> > Having seen this discussion reach the podium position and acknowledging that no one who posted seems to have changed their minds, I'm signing off. But don't stop re-reading and/or contributing on my account.
> >
> > Chip Bearden
> > JB
> >
> Keep it up, Chip. Your continuous score keeping posts seem to be what
> will eventually run this one to the top spot! Great job. Congratulations.
>
> Time to move on, don'tcha think?
>
> --
> Dan
> 5J
Good point Dan, wait until Chip sees the next chapter, I know that you have a preview.

[2G]

On Wednesday, November 11, 2020 at 4:05:06 PM UTC-8, wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 11, 2020 at 11:43:14 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
> > On 11/10/20 10:57 PM, Chip Bearden wrote:
> > > On Monday, November 9, 2020 at 9:56:56 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> > >
> > >> Chip, if it moves up the ladder it will be because of YOU beating a dead horse.
> > >>
> > >> Tom
> > >
> > > WE DID IT!!! Sometime yesterday, 10 Nov 2020, this post--ironically titled "The Apology"--shot into THIRD PLACE (3rd) for "Most Viewed RAS Discussions for 2020". Bronze Medal position!!! (in Google Groups, assumed to be representative of other views via Usenet providers/newsreader clients).
> > >
> > > Un-freaking-believable. The post had almost nothing to do with soaring apart from being sparked by an apology in Soaring magazine that was deemed a craven capitulation to nefarious forces undermining all that is sacred in our sport. It concluded with the abject refusal of one sullen poster to apologize for anything. In between were condescending and insulting protestations by others that the original "offense" (with much debate over whether it was, in fact, offensive) was blown way out of proportion. Total views just in Google Groups alone were almost 7,300.
> > >
> > > My whole perspective on the men and women in U.S. soaring is different today than when this thread kicked off three weeks ago. I concede that I've kept it going the past few days because I don't think we should forget what was said here. This was not a spirited debate over which flight computer is better or the use of ASTs in contests where we close by good-naturedly agreeing to disagree. Rather, this discussion revealed a funadmental difference in the way we respect each other in soaring.
> > >
> > > Having seen this discussion reach the podium position and acknowledging that no one who posted seems to have changed their minds, I'm signing off. But don't stop re-reading and/or contributing on my account.
> > >
> > > Chip Bearden
> > > JB
> > >
> > Keep it up, Chip. Your continuous score keeping posts seem to be what
> > will eventually run this one to the top spot! Great job. Congratulations.
> >
> > Time to move on, don'tcha think?
> >
> > --
> > Dan
> > 5J
> Good point Dan, wait until Chip sees the next chapter, I know that you have a preview.

It sounds like Chip has given up on trying to change people's minds by brow-beating them. Good - I am OUTTA HERE!

[Kenn Sebesta]

As this thread winds down, I agree with Kimmine and Mitch Hudson, it's important that it not be buried what Chip and so many others have been concerned about. Here are the relevant quotes:

"Yet she was the Feminazi that came to the office most every day with her very revealing tits exposing in an extremely revealing top, I could not help just taking a look at those puppies from time to time. In your eyes I guess that made me a sexist.
-Bob Youngblood (aka ), Vero Beach, Florida, October 27th, 2020, 2:43PM

"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, Massachusetts, 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, Massachusetts, Oct 23, 2020, 4:24:47

“A few, or one, women should not be allowed to speak for ALL women. A quarter-page ad was addressed with a FULL PAGE apology, totally out of proportion with the "crime." I, for one, object to being called a "pig," but am not expecting an apology.�

-Tom Seim (aka 2G), Richland, Washington, Oct 28, 2020, 6:26:00 PM

“So feel free to apologize for yourself, but not for me.�

-Dan Marotta, Moriarty, New Mexico, Oct 20, 2020, 6:09:17 PM

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

On Wednesday, November 11, 2020 at 11:19:53 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> It sounds like Chip has given up on trying to change people's minds by brow-beating them. Good - I am OUTTA HERE!

Sorry, Tom Seim, I hope you recover soon from feeling "browbeaten". In my defense, mostly what I did recently was simply put your most recent words up against your previous statements. It's not my fault if you can't keep track of what you say. :D

Speaking of which, I found a really funny one from many years ago. Maybe it's a different 2G. He owned a DG400, too. What a coincidence! Or was this you?

On Sunday, February 6, 2005 at 12:42:22 AM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> It always amazes me, but doesn't surprise me, that those who believe
> that others are assholes don't realize that they, themselves, are
> behaving as assholes.

This is profound stuff, Tom!

Dan Marotta, I concede that a #1 rating for this embarrassment was always out of reach. We'd need 1,400 more views to overtake the 2020 leader. That honor goes to (drum roll) "What have we learned from all this?", by none other than Bob Youngblood, the OP of "The Apology." Neither discussion had much to do with soaring. Bob has made some good contributions on RAS (and to soaring) but he does seem to be of the "There's no such thing as bad publicity" school. :(

So 3rd place on 2020's Most-Viewed-RAS-Discussions list will have to do, assuming Bob doesn't launch another controversial posting in the next six weeks that rockets to the top.

I haven't been pumping "The Apology" for my amusement. OK, maybe just a little given how easy it is to poke fun at Tom. ;) No, I kept hoping, like Diogenes looking for an honest man, that just ONE person would say something like "I have to admit my initial reaction to this affair was 'much ado about nothing'. But this discussion has made me more aware of how the things we say and do can impact others who have different perspectives. Soaring is a small enough world and we need to respect each other."

Yeah, pretty naive.

Chip Bearden
JB

PS: For the record, the 2nd-most-viewed RAS thread this year, also out of reach, is "Best Overall Motorglider available today?" This was an interesting discussion kicked off by Nick Kennedy and a good example of how useful RAS can be.

[[email protected]]

On Thursday, November 12, 2020 at 11:36:12 AM UTC-5, Chip Bearden wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 11, 2020 at 11:19:53 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> > It sounds like Chip has given up on trying to change people's minds by brow-beating them. Good - I am OUTTA HERE!
> Sorry, Tom Seim, I hope you recover soon from feeling "browbeaten". In my defense, mostly what I did recently was simply put your most recent words up against your previous statements. It's not my fault if you can't keep track of what you say. :D
>
> Speaking of which, I found a really funny one from many years ago. Maybe it's a different 2G. He owned a DG400, too. What a coincidence! Or was this you?
>
> On Sunday, February 6, 2005 at 12:42:22 AM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> > It always amazes me, but doesn't surprise me, that those who believe
> > that others are assholes don't realize that they, themselves, are
> > behaving as assholes.
>
> This is profound stuff, Tom!
>
> Dan Marotta, I concede that a #1 rating for this embarrassment was always out of reach. We'd need 1,400 more views to overtake the 2020 leader. That honor goes to (drum roll) "What have we learned from all this?", by none other than Bob Youngblood, the OP of "The Apology." Neither discussion had much to do with soaring. Bob has made some good contributions on RAS (and to soaring) but he does seem to be of the "There's no such thing as bad publicity" school. :(
>
> So 3rd place on 2020's Most-Viewed-RAS-Discussions list will have to do, assuming Bob doesn't launch another controversial posting in the next six weeks that rockets to the top.
>
> I haven't been pumping "The Apology" for my amusement. OK, maybe just a little given how easy it is to poke fun at Tom. ;) No, I kept hoping, like Diogenes looking for an honest man, that just ONE person would say something like "I have to admit my initial reaction to this affair was 'much ado about nothing'. But this discussion has made me more aware of how the things we say and do can impact others who have different perspectives. Soaring is a small enough world and we need to respect each other."
>
> Yeah, pretty naive.
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB
>
> PS: For the record, the 2nd-most-viewed RAS thread this year, also out of reach, is "Best Overall Motorglider available today?" This was an interesting discussion kicked off by Nick Kennedy and a good example of how useful RAS can be.


Chip, I had once decided to not respond to this thread, but I could not help myself after seeing you go back to the well for more punch. First of all you seem to think people owe an apology for their comments, yes, some were a bit over the top. Let me go back to the very beginning when I posted this thread, it was for a specific soaring related event. You took my reference to the complainants as Feminazi self serving females with an agenda contrary to the purpose of the advertisement as an opinion that should not be heard. My initial reaction was, NOT too much about nothing.
I could have really made you go ballistic with a comment like, "Those Feminazi Radicals Wanted To Beat Their Tow Pilot To A Bloody Pulp With Their High Heels Shoved In His Mouth Like An Apple In The Mouth Of A Roasted Pig"!
When I get finished writing this new book, "FGPA". I hope I will be the best fundraiser that the WSPA has ever seen.
Checking out for the last time, I promise! Bob

[Chip Bearden[_2_]]

On Thursday, November 12, 2020 at 4:23:52 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> When I get finished writing this new book, "FGPA". I hope I will be the best fundraiser that the WSPA has ever seen.
> Checking out for the last time, I promise! Bob

I wouldn't want to speak for the WSPA but if "FGPA" stands for Feminazi Glider Pilots Association, you might want to check with them before you spend any money publishing or promoting your book as a fundraiser. ;)

>First of all you seem to think people owe an apology for their comments, yes, some were a bit over the top.

I do, Bob. Your acknowledgement that some were "a bit over the top" is a start--and more than anyone else has offered. Thank you.

I see what you're doing, though. You want to own the top TWO most-viewed RAS discussions of 2020! In the past 24 hours, "The Apology" has closed the gap by 350 views and is now only 800 views behind #2. You're on your own now, however.

Chip Bearden
JB

[2G]

On Thursday, November 12, 2020 at 8:36:12 AM UTC-8, Chip Bearden wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 11, 2020 at 11:19:53 PM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> > It sounds like Chip has given up on trying to change people's minds by brow-beating them. Good - I am OUTTA HERE!
> Sorry, Tom Seim, I hope you recover soon from feeling "browbeaten". In my defense, mostly what I did recently was simply put your most recent words up against your previous statements. It's not my fault if you can't keep track of what you say. :D
>
> Speaking of which, I found a really funny one from many years ago. Maybe it's a different 2G. He owned a DG400, too. What a coincidence! Or was this you?
>
> On Sunday, February 6, 2005 at 12:42:22 AM UTC-5, 2G wrote:
> > It always amazes me, but doesn't surprise me, that those who believe
> > that others are assholes don't realize that they, themselves, are
> > behaving as assholes.
>
> This is profound stuff, Tom!
>
> Dan Marotta, I concede that a #1 rating for this embarrassment was always out of reach. We'd need 1,400 more views to overtake the 2020 leader. That honor goes to (drum roll) "What have we learned from all this?", by none other than Bob Youngblood, the OP of "The Apology." Neither discussion had much to do with soaring. Bob has made some good contributions on RAS (and to soaring) but he does seem to be of the "There's no such thing as bad publicity" school. :(
>
> So 3rd place on 2020's Most-Viewed-RAS-Discussions list will have to do, assuming Bob doesn't launch another controversial posting in the next six weeks that rockets to the top.
>
> I haven't been pumping "The Apology" for my amusement. OK, maybe just a little given how easy it is to poke fun at Tom. ;) No, I kept hoping, like Diogenes looking for an honest man, that just ONE person would say something like "I have to admit my initial reaction to this affair was 'much ado about nothing'. But this discussion has made me more aware of how the things we say and do can impact others who have different perspectives. Soaring is a small enough world and we need to respect each other."
>
> Yeah, pretty naive.
>
> Chip Bearden
> JB
>
> PS: For the record, the 2nd-most-viewed RAS thread this year, also out of reach, is "Best Overall Motorglider available today?" This was an interesting discussion kicked off by Nick Kennedy and a good example of how useful RAS can be.

Hey Chip, you said you were "signing off," which I took to mean you weren't going to post to this thread anymore. Couldn't let it go, could you? Now you are bringing up 15 year-old posts (which happens to be as true today as it was 15 years ago, but is IRRELEVANT to this thread). Your compulsion on this topic is disturbing - shades of OCD...

Tom

[Gregg Ballou[_2_]]

If this thread hits number one will folks feel the sport of soaring is tainted forever? That would be nearly as pathetic as being offended by the illustration.