Baseball Toaster Dodger Thoughts
Help
Jon Weisman's outlet
for dealing psychologically
with the Los Angeles Dodgers
and baseball.
Frozen Toast
Search
Google Search
Web
Toaster
Dodger Thoughts
Archives

2009
02  01 

2008
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2007
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2006
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2005
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2004
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2003
12  11  10  09  08  07 
06  05  04  03  02  01 

2002
09  08  07 
About Jon
Thank You For Not ...

1) using profanity or any euphemisms for profanity
2) personally attacking other commenters
3) baiting other commenters
4) arguing for the sake of arguing
5) discussing politics
6) using hyperbole when something less will suffice
7) using sarcasm in a way that can be misinterpreted negatively
8) making the same point over and over again
9) typing "no-hitter" or "perfect game" to describe either in progress
10) being annoyed by the existence of this list
11) commenting under the obvious influence
12) claiming your opinion isn't allowed when it's just being disagreed with

Hughes and Lowe - A Small Silver Lining
2005-08-03 07:04
by Jon Weisman
Note: The Dodger Thoughts blog has moved to the Los Angeles Times.

My main concern with the story of the reported affair between Fox Television's Carolyn Hughes and Dodger pitcher Derek Lowe, which sprung at the subscription-based RonFineman.com before spreading to SportsByBrooks and L.A. Observed and finally reaching the Times and Boston Herald today, is that it gets reported as a story of adultery, not as an indictment of female reporters in the locker room.

Well - my main concern is about Lowe's kids, but after that, see above.

So far, I've been pleased. There are questions about conflict of interest being examined, and rightfully so. But two decades ago, maybe even one, there would have been plenty of snide "I told you so" remarks about women only having one reason for hanging in the clubhouse. Amid all that's sad/wrong/tawdry with the story - material that will get plenty of coverage elsewhere - it's a sign of progress that female reporters are so accepted today that this hasn't been brought up at all.

Comments (89)
Show/Hide Comments 1-50
2005-08-03 07:25:44
1.   Eric Enders
Well, it has now... ;)
2005-08-03 07:34:51
2.   Colorado Blue
I'll be interested to see if this turns into a big pay-day for Hughes... sad commentary on America's appetite for the scandulous.

I think Georgia's "runaway bride" is raking it in now at the expense of everyone involved in that episode.

Ultimately you are right Jon... the losers are Lowe's children.

2005-08-03 07:41:11
3.   Colorado Blue
2 - To be clear, I'm not attempting to single out women as the issue here.
2005-08-03 07:45:16
4.   Eric Enders
In 2002, Carolyn Hughes gave an interview about her hair. Entirely about her hair.

http://www.super-hair.net/qs-1002.html

2005-08-03 07:53:47
5.   Steve
I did not need more reasons to hate Derek Lowe. And yet, here they are.
2005-08-03 08:14:57
6.   Howard Fox
I told you so....

I believe in Title IX (?) for equal opportunities on the field, so to speak, but I think excess permissiveness in society has gone a little far, and permeates sports.

I may be old fashioned, but I am not a believer in women in the men's locker room.

What Lowe and Hughes did, that is between them and their conscience and God.

Do I feel for his kids? of course

Do I care about his personal life? not a chance

All I care is if he performs between the lines, not between the sheets.

2005-08-03 08:18:26
7.   Nick Iyengar
6: I agree 100%.
2005-08-03 08:19:59
8.   KAYVMON
4: LOL, I only had to read two lines.
2005-08-03 08:22:29
9.   Eric Enders
I may be old fashioned, but I am not a believer in women in the men's locker room.

The problem is, if you agree with that statement, then by definition, you must also agree with this one:

I may be old fashioned, but I am not a believer in women being allowed to become sports journalists.

(I don't agree with either.)

2005-08-03 08:22:30
10.   Howard Fox
Further, sports gets what it gets. For any TV station or any league to comment on or condemn this affair is hypocritical to say the least.

When was the last time an "informed" female reporter wasn't "hot"? They prance around highly competitive athletes accentuating their best physical attributes, throwing out double entendres.

That's not sports, that's sex.

2005-08-03 08:22:46
11.   Eric Enders
Don't get me started on Title IX, though -- it's basically gutted college baseball in America, in only 20 short years.
2005-08-03 08:23:16
12.   FirstMohican
Sad situation. Hope it doesn't affect his pitching.

Scott Erickson has had a larger impression on our pitching staff than any of us thought possible.

2005-08-03 08:23:49
13.   Howard Fox
9 - I don't believe in women in the men's locker room...I don't believe in men in the women's locker room
2005-08-03 08:28:56
14.   FirstMohican
13 - What's the problem? Can't work while someone of the opposite sex is naked near you?
2005-08-03 08:30:13
15.   Nick Iyengar
9:

I disagree -- I do think women can become sports journalists, but I think that allowing women into the men's locker room only encourages this kind of incident.

Women can do all number of things as sports journalists, but I don't see why they have to be allowed into the men's locker room. It's a small exception, the way I see it.

I don't think the discrimination argument holds up (I'm not saying that you're making this argument, but I bet some people will), because that argument just leads to the conclusion that there shouldn't be "men's" locker rooms. Or "men's" bathrooms, etc.

I agree with what Howard said in #13. There are men's and women's locker rooms for a reason. Men shouldn't go into the women's locker room, and women shouldn't go in to the men's, in my opinion.

2005-08-03 08:30:45
16.   Howard Fox
11 - re: Title IX, women are 50% of society, why should they not have 50% of available sports funding?

if colleges are inefficient in their use of available funds for sports, don't blame Title IX, blame the colleges

2005-08-03 08:31:24
17.   Howard Fox
14 - in a word...yes
2005-08-03 08:34:37
18.   Eric Enders
Actually, if I had my druthers, ALL reporters would be banned from locker rooms. Not because of the gender issue, just because it's a pretty extreme invasion of privacy for the players. I certainly wouldn't want a horde of people harassing me while I'm getting dressed.

It's to the point where the clubhouse, which is meant as a place where players can relax and prepare for the game, no longer serves that function. The trainer's room now does, because the media aren't allowed in there.

2005-08-03 08:35:45
19.   Howard Fox
18 - agreed
2005-08-03 08:36:32
20.   FirstMohican
17 - Interesting. To think that the sole cause of this affair is because of the access to locker rooms that female journalists have is a little short sighted. Affairs have happened since it was possible for them to happen.
2005-08-03 08:36:52
21.   Eric Enders
Women can do all number of things as sports journalists, but I don't see why they have to be allowed into the men's locker room.

Well, because that's where 80% of their job takes place. It's sort of like saying women should be allowed to become soldiers, but not set foot on military bases.

In order to make it so that female reporters can do their jobs without access to the clubhouse, you'd have to blow up the whole system -- which I actually think would be a good thing.

2005-08-03 08:37:08
22.   Nick Iyengar
#18, good point.
2005-08-03 08:40:22
23.   Howard Fox
21 - this is contrary to your beliefs in #18...
2005-08-03 08:42:44
24.   JJoeScott
Good points, Jon.

Of course, Leykis reported on this story solely as a women in the locker room issue!

I did listen to the Mason-Ireland interview with Fineman yesterday, as posted. Mostly, they questioned as to why this was "news." Fineman's point was that it involved a journalist supposed to be covering the team.

Aside from being a shi**y thing to do to your kids, I don't have a real issue with this.

Side question to Jon on a different topic: Henson reported today, "Dodger front-office executives have scratched their heads recently, wondering why Choi rarely plays despite carrying an on-base-plus-slugging percentage of .800." Can you interpret whether this is one source, multiple sources, a hint at a DePo-Tracy rift, or maybe it's not DePo at all? Thoughts?

2005-08-03 08:42:59
25.   Howard Fox
Eric, the answer is as you expressed in 18 above, the locker rooms should be a sanctuary for the athlete, whether male or female.

FirstMohican, you put half or fully naked men in rooms with sexy full figured women, what do you think will happen?

2005-08-03 08:44:10
26.   Penarol1916
16. I agree wholeheartedly, do not blame Title IX for the gutting of the small male college athletics, blame college football and its bloated scholarship requirements.
2005-08-03 08:44:24
27.   Ryan Jerz
16 Consider where most money at most schools for athletics comes from. Football. Decades of football programs being built up to support the rest of the athletic system. There are womens programs hemmoraging money, and the result is to cut men's programs to make up for it. That's entitlement, not fairness.
2005-08-03 08:46:32
28.   Nick Iyengar
#21, it's more like saying women should be allowed to join the military, but be in the front-line combat. Which I also endorse.

Here are a few things that come to mind when I think about this issue:

Why even have a "men's" locker room, if women can go in there? I don't see how calling it a men's locker room is appropriate.

Would anyone disagree if I said male reporters shouldn't be allowed in the women's locker room when they're showering, changing, etc?

Finally, I don't believe that "80%" of sports journalism takes place in a locker room. It's easy to interview a player outside the locker room. You often see interviews with players/coaches on the field before, after, and even during games, for example.

2005-08-03 08:49:03
29.   fanerman
#18,
I agree.
2005-08-03 08:50:29
30.   Nick Iyengar
Er, meant to say in #28: "it's more like saying women should be allowed to join the military, but not be in the front-line combat."
2005-08-03 08:50:45
31.   Jon Weisman
Howard, I think you're making an assumption that the only kind of awkwardness that nudity creates is between men and women. That's a faulty assumption. It assumes all men have the same attitudes/emotions and all women have the same attitudes/emotions, which is clearly not true.

I guess I jumped the gun on my optimism on this story. I'm fine with banning the media from the locker room and setting up alternatives, but I think it's wrong to attribute this one incident to women in the locker room, considering how pervasive women in the locker room are today.

24 - I'll have a separate post about Choi this morning, so hang on.

2005-08-03 08:51:07
32.   coachbean
I have aleways agreed with the sentiments of [18] the locker room should be a place where players can wash up and dress, not answer questions... Aside from a few Tracy comments on Choi and some of Erickson's stupid comments can anyone think of any actual important news or quotes that came out of the Dodger locker room this season.

Imagine what Plaschke and Simmers would feel like if Milton Bradley greeted them at their bed in the morning and as they were showering and getting dressed, Milton proceeded to give them "insight into the game"... This would be ridiculuos, but so is allowing reporters into the locker room.

2005-08-03 08:52:27
33.   Jon Weisman
28 - Nick - you've been watching too much television. On-field interviews during and after events are quite rare - and non-existent for the print media.
2005-08-03 08:52:34
34.   Howard Fox
31 - its not this one incident, its this one incident of which we are currently aware
2005-08-03 08:52:42
35.   Nick Iyengar
So if we do "[x]" we can create a link to post X?
2005-08-03 08:53:20
36.   Penarol1916
27. I would suggest that you look at the athletic budgets of most Division 1 programs and you will find that only a small percentage of all football programs do not lose money (even including money given to the programs), and thus have little left over to fund the remaining programs, they can absord some overhead costs, but they are not the funding source that many think they are.
The only athletic program at most schools that doesn't lose a lot of money is men's basketball, although women's basketball at many schools is also profitable.
So what you are saying is having any programs outside of these three are entitlement?
2005-08-03 08:53:39
37.   Howard Fox
32 - I don't think Simers would like that either
2005-08-03 08:53:59
38.   Eric Enders
Finally, I don't believe that "80%" of sports journalism takes place in a locker room. It's easy to interview a player outside the locker room.

I've been in many, many MLB clubhouses, and well, this is simply not true. The vast majority of a reporter's work takes place in the clubhouse. I wish this wasn't true, but it is.

Also, for the most part, the only journalists (using that word loosely here) with enough clout to compel players to agree to come out on the field for interviews are those working for FOX or ESPN.

Like I said, I'm in favor of banning ALL reporters from the clubhouse. But as long as male reporters are still allowed, female ones should be too. There is, quite simply, no other way for them to do their job.

2005-08-03 08:54:13
39.   Wayne Wei-siang Hsieh
It's unclear to me how much having women in men's locker rooms really encourages this sort of behavior, but I agree with those who think that all reporters should be prohibited from locker rooms altogether. It isn't a public place, and there's no reason why interviews can't easily be done in a more appropriate and public setting. Sports journalism should focus on what occurs on the field--there's no need to be able to interview dudes with their shirt off. Will Kent give more interesting comments simply because he's sitting in front of his locker. I doubt it.

Re: 24

I'm happy Henson has raised the issue. The Daily News piece billed Choi's HR as vindication of his appropriate role on the bench. Ridiculous....

WWSH

2005-08-03 08:54:20
40.   Nick Iyengar
33 - Jon, you're right...I basically get all my sports news from ESPN or the internet. I kinda assumed newspapers sort of operated the same way.
2005-08-03 08:57:31
41.   Wayne Wei-siang Hsieh
Re: 38

If that's current practice, so be it. But stadium facilities are private property, so I don't see why the teams can't decide by fiat that the locker room is off-limits and shift interviews to a more appropriate setting. Perhaps it would cause some inconvenience to the media, but I don't see how it would really be that big a deal for reporters to do their interviews in some sort of holding room outside of the dresssing room proper.

WWSH

2005-08-03 09:01:29
42.   Eric Enders
But stadium facilities are private property, so I don't see why the teams can't decide by fiat that the locker room is off-limits and shift interviews to a more appropriate setting.

Actually, almost all stadia are public property -- but you still have a good point. There is absolutely nothing preventing MLB from making locker rooms off-limits to reporters, other than media backlash.

2005-08-03 09:02:39
43.   Nick Iyengar
So the basic issue is that female newspaper reporters have to have locker room interviews, especially if they're obscure (not working for ESPN), or else they won't be able to get interviews.

I understand and stand corrected about how much journalists really need time in the locker room, but still, I think we should stop calling it a men's locker room, if women are allowed in. Would we call it a men's restroom if women were allowed in? I guess we should just say that men aren't allowed a separate locker room anymore, because female journalists have to do their jobs.

I'm not basing my argument on any kind of belief that women don't deserve to be journalists, or something (I feel I have to make a PC disclaimer here...not because of the DT atmosphere, but just because of the culture in general), but just on the simple idea that the men's locker room is the men's locker room, and I think we should just make journalism deal with it.

I don't think men should be going into the women's locker room either, like Howard said.

2005-08-03 09:03:13
44.   Jon Weisman
31 - And are all these other incidents you refer to heterosexual incidents?
2005-08-03 09:04:31
45.   Eric Enders
I love it -- Jon's interrogating himself!
2005-08-03 09:06:35
46.   JJoeScott
44 - Good point. After all, where did the New York superstar meet :-)

In all seriousness, I think we can reasonably assume that 10% of everyone in the locker room - reporters and players - are gay. I don't know any gay athletes, but I do know gay reporters ...

2005-08-03 09:07:54
47.   Jon Weisman
Oops - I meant 34!
2005-08-03 09:08:03
48.   Nick Iyengar
31- Jon, I agree that you can't by any means completely attribute Lowe's affair to simply having women in the locker room. I argue that it just contributes to the likelihood that these things will happen. Also, we'd be naive to assume that this is the only incident going on right now. So while this is being reported publicly, my guess is that there are other, similar affairs going on, about which we know nothing.
2005-08-03 09:11:13
49.   Ryan Jerz
36 The school I am associated with has three (3) men's athletic programs. Football (money-maker), basketball (huge money-maker), and baseball (break-even, thanks to some huge local donors). This same school has added soccer and softball as women's sports in the past three years, to go along with basketball, track, volleyball, swimming and diving, and cross-country. Also, in the past ten years, men's track and cross-country have been eliminated. While I understand the elimination of those sports based on their inability to support themselves, that's not the whole story. The athletic department could support them, just as they support the women's sports (softball doesn't even charge for games, and the basketball team has a hard time drawing 1,000 fans into a 12,000 seat arena), but they were eliminated to come into compliance with Title IX's scholarship equity rules. They could still be there, but they are not.

So instead of saying entitlement (that was incomplete - every sport besides the three current men's sports are entitlements, which isn't in and of itself bad), I should have said entitlement at the expense of others. And I stand by the statement that it's not fair, which is what Title IX is supposed to be.

2005-08-03 09:14:01
50.   JJoeScott
Q for Jon not asked earlier - Why do you suppose the Times chose to run this today?

It has been out there on local sports radio for the past couple of days locally, although as Colin Cowherd is noting on ESPN radio right now, since the Times has now reported it, the story is now fair game. I just don't understand the wisdom of turning this into "news" (though it is interesting to discuss among friends).

Show/Hide Comments 51-100
2005-08-03 09:15:42
51.   Ryan Jerz
How are women's locker rooms handled? Are men allowed in to WNBA, USA Soccer and the like? Just curious. Or are there just not that many people covering those games for it to matter?
2005-08-03 09:15:58
52.   Ken Arneson
In Europe, sports teams/leagues usually don't allow their coaches and players to give interviews unless they are in an interview area, with paid advertisements in the background. Any time you see a player or a coach interviewed on TV, they're always in front of an ad.

I can't imagine this trend won't reach the U.S. Then the issue will go away, not because of the rightness or wrongness of women in the locker room, but because there's more money in it that way.

2005-08-03 09:17:34
53.   Jon Weisman
50 - I don't know, but it could be as simple as they didn't have the interviews they wanted to run the story. It's not like there was any public urgency for this story to be reported. Is anyone really worse off finding this out today as opposed to last week? Honestly, there might have been a "Gee, do we have to?" mentality at the Times.

Or, they're just slow.

2005-08-03 09:22:07
54.   coachbean
Leaving the locker room commentary aside for a moment... From 6-4-2 I see that a few Dodger prospects did well last night, Delwyn Youn 4-4, James Loney 3-4 and a couple of my favorites... Travis Denker went 3-5 (although 6-4-2 reports 2 hr in Vero which I think is a mistake) appearing to pick up right where he left off with Columbus. my favorite pitching prospect JC Pimentel did alright going 5IP with 2ER and 3 Ks (not bad for a 19 year old) and Sergio Pedroza is starting to heat up after an initial slump, upon being promoted, going 2-5 with a HR. His Columbus #s are 197/274/455 with 5hr in 18G/66AB. That initial slump killed his average, but I think an Oscar Robles-like recovery is not out of the question. My qyuestion is whether Pedroza can make the jump to AA next season and possibly make the Dodger roster in 2007? It may be a stretch but other than Kemp there aren't many OF prospect in his way.
2005-08-03 09:24:52
55.   jasonungar05
I love the hypocrisy with Fox. I flipped around the dial one night and I think they had a reality show where midgets (small people, dwarfs, whatever is PC) were trying to hook up with Porn stars while wearing clown outfits.
2005-08-03 09:24:53
56.   kegtron
Sorry to revert back to the threadjack but here is a link with college sports cash revenues and expenses (overall, women's and football) for DI schools.

http://tinyurl.com/99czz

2005-08-03 09:27:50
57.   dzzrtRatt
I say amen to all those who said they'd be uncomfortable with reporters of either gender asking them questions while you're trying to get dressed. It's a weird tradition. But I doubt that's how Derek and Carolyn got started. It's not like Lowe has a bachelor pad with a hi-fi and a bottle of Courvoisier in his locker. They weren't alone in there. This seems like a side issue.

I dunno. Maybe they're right for each other. Maybe both marriages were loveless and messed up. I'm of the school that says it's a bad idea to "stay married for the kids" if you've fallen out of love. Comparing the people I know who split up a bad marriage when their children were young vs. those who "hung in there" and split only after their kids were "old enough," the evidence is overwhelming that it inflicts far more damage on a kid if you tell them when they're 15 or 20 that "your mom and I stayed together only because of you, and now we're finally splitting up." If the break-up happens when the kids are 2 or 3, the kids have ample time to adjust, they find spaces of their own in the new family units that result, and if both parents stay committed to the kids, the kids usually turn out okay. Ideally people don't reproduce unless they've got a solid marriage, but people make mistakes, so what're you gonna do?

2005-08-03 09:31:51
58.   Howard Fox
44 & 47 - it doesn't matter, hetero or homo
2005-08-03 09:38:43
59.   Jon Weisman
58 - It does with regard to your argument that the presence of female reporters in the locker room leads to immoral behavior and therefore women should be banned, but men are okay.
2005-08-03 09:41:19
60.   Steve
What makes Carolyn Hughes a reporter? If I understand right, she reads copy and hosts the Dodger Pregame show, which probably dispenses pearls of wisdom about Jason Phillips playing first base, if you want to talk about media bias. Why would this be any different if Derek Lowe ran off with, say, Alyssa Milano?
2005-08-03 09:42:45
61.   Penarol1916
49. Regardless, it is a fallacy that the football program supports the athletic department, at your school (and many others) the only program that is really that profitable to support the rest of the program. Thus, it those men's programs are not being cut at the expense of the women's programs, they are being cut at the expense of football.
2005-08-03 09:48:39
62.   Howard Fox
59 - no, if you read back, I agree with Eric that no reporters, male or female, should be allowed in either a men's locker room nor a women's locker room
2005-08-03 09:50:24
63.   Howard Fox
60 - how many of these reporters are actually reporters? this applies to male or female...
2005-08-03 09:50:49
64.   Jon Weisman
62- yes, that's the common ground. But barring that, as a second choice, I gathered that you would you ban women and not men.
2005-08-03 09:51:54
65.   Penarol1916
56. Those reports that are submitted are misleading as they keep a lot of expenses off of the football team's P&L, like travel expenses for everyone who is not a player or coach for the team, maintenence costs for the stadium, which are generally spread out over the entire athletic department regardless of use and capitalized. The expenses also do not include the academic support programs for the players as their "tutors" are generally not volunteers, but are actually there on work study.
2005-08-03 09:56:33
66.   Howard Fox
64 - just as I would ban men from womens...
2005-08-03 10:00:49
67.   Jon Weisman
66 - Right. My comment in 44 addresses the flaw in that logic.
2005-08-03 10:12:14
68.   kent
There isn't an office in this country with more than fifty employees that doesn't have at least one affair going on and it isn't because some woman saw some guy's equipment and just had to have it. Do you really believe a woman like Hughes crumbled over seeing Lowe's body as opposed to them experiencing a spark though getting to know each other at Vero? I don't know about the rest of you, but my experience has been that, for a woman, intimacy usually springs from an attraction to the man's personality, position & general appearance, not from a glimpse of his crotch.

As for Lowe's kids, dzzrtrat is right, it's better to come from a broken home than to live in one.

2005-08-03 10:22:42
69.   Brendan
35

Nick, no quote marks needed to link. it's ust this [X]

Replace the X with the number to the post. no spacing.

2005-08-03 10:25:21
70.   Brendan
68

You must be really ugly.

I kid. I kid. I'm sorry I couldn't help myself with that joke, just a joke. I'm sure you are great looking.

2005-08-03 10:33:48
71.   kent
70- You should see me in the locker room! (That's where I met my wife.)
2005-08-03 10:37:57
72.   Brendan
71

well played

2005-08-03 10:54:43
73.   Colin Li
does this mean lowe's gonna start pitching like crap again?
2005-08-03 11:03:35
74.   Xeifrank
Too bad there are people who choose to write about peoples personal business and private lives. I guess that's just the world we live in. Unfortunately! vr, Xei
2005-08-03 11:10:45
75.   Nick Iyengar
69

Cool, thanks.

2005-08-03 11:35:00
76.   kent
73- I suppose Hughes may cause him to keep it up in the zone.
2005-08-03 12:20:19
77.   bokonon42
Isn't the answer here very simple? Ban pretty reporters (of whatever sex) from the locker room.
2005-08-03 12:29:23
78.   Brendan
77

Ugly Reporters Only!! Brilliant!!!

2005-08-03 12:34:23
79.   dzzrtRatt
78 and you're saying that would've stopped Lowe from meeting Carolyn Hughes?
2005-08-03 13:05:34
80.   Eric Enders
Here's a much more extensive article on the Lowe situation from the Boston Herald. The article is so blatant in taking sides with Lowe's wife that I'd hesitate to even call it journalism. Somebody needs to give the Herald's ombudsman a call.

http://thetrack.bostonherald.com/moreTrack/view.bg?articleid=96376&format=text

Anyway, a couple of tidbits that weren't in the Times piece:

- Lowe reportedtly denied he has a relationship with Hughes

- The Red Sox are "more family oriented" and "have more family values" than the Dodgers do.

2005-08-03 13:10:48
81.   Eric Enders
Hmm... further research reveals that

- The Boston Herald was once owned by Newscorp and is still owned by a FOX executive.

- It has no ombudsman (big surprise there)

2005-08-03 14:17:33
82.   coachjpark
Does the alleged affair between our World Series pitcher and Fox Sports Network reporter create a situation in which there is a possibility it might detract from the success of the team? Yes. Do I make a judgment on personal matters if it will affect the different arm angles Derek is able to use? Yes.

(*Note: Attempt to make JT humor out of an obviously painful situation for parties involved)

2005-08-03 14:41:36
83.   FirstMohican
80/81 - "File Under: How Lowe Can You Go?"

Yeah, I expect about as much from anything affiliated with News Corp. as I do from Jim Tracy. Although, I understand News Corp.'s agenda, Tracy's I do not. =)

2005-08-03 14:58:12
84.   Spageticus
All this talk of locker room awkwardness reminds me of the most embarrassing situation I have faced in my career.

I was covering a Grizzlies vs. Celtics game three years ago for my school paper. It was mostly a feature piece on the Grizzlies, but I figured it was a good opportunity for a new experience. So I walked into the Celtics' locker room. There were two (2) women in the room, part of a gaggle of reporters interviewing Tony Delk of all people. Neither one was anywhere near a reasonable person's definition of hot/beautiful/stacked.

I was a bit intimidated initially, this being my first time in a professional locker room. I was looking around the place with my gaze a little lower than eye level, when all of a sudden I come waist to face with a showering Paul Pierce. Not wanting to convey a sense of impropriety, I looked up immediately. He was looking right at me. His face seemed to say 'Jealous.' I beat a hasty retreat.

2005-08-03 15:54:56
85.   Brendan
79

Ok really, fat hideous reporters only!

2005-08-03 16:32:14
86.   lowedown
41- The reason that interviews are conducted in the locker room in the first place is so beat writers can make their deadlines. Often, games finish pretty close to deadline, so if the teams want any coverage (which, in the end, is in their best interest) then they have to open up the locker room. If the TEAM decided that it didn't want to- or teams, across the board, got together and decided that- then players would have to be made available somewhere else within 15 or so minutes after the game. So, in response to your comment, the inconvenience would be the players...which is why this is never going to change.

43- Locker rooms are only called "mens" and "womens" in high schools/ colleges (where all sports share the same locker room) and fitness clubs. Pro teams don't call it the "mens" locker room, so to take issue with the lingo isn't necessary...in this case it's the "Dodgers locker room" (technically, clubhouse), "Visiting locker room", etc. Same goes for womens teams. It's the "Sparks" locker room, etc.

51- Locker rooms for pro womens teams operate with an all or nothing mentality. Either everyone's allowed in, or no one is. There's no gender discrimination.

60- Hughes is a reporter because she works for a news show (the Southern California Sports Report). She doesn't just "read" the news, she generates it. Asks questions, writes scripts- is responsible for a) finding out information about the team and b) passing it along to viewers who don't have access to find the information out on their own. That's pretty much the definition of a reporter.

2005-08-03 17:39:55
87.   Beth
in boston there has been plenty of "i told you so"...because it's been a poorly kept secret for years that d.lowe is a complete man-whore.
2005-08-19 16:46:45
88.   Single Donald
I am pleased that Fox didn't impose any sanctions on Carolyn Hughes. I understand she will host her own show, starting next month.It was wrong for her to get involved with a married man, but for empolyers to "forbid" dating by consenting adults is both intrusive & paternalistic! There are serious issues of privacy and free association here. I see nothing wrong with female reporters dating single, widowed, or divorced ballplayers. Concerning "objective reporting", how many writers let petty biases color their writing? As long as the reporter's articles don't become rediculous, she should be allowed to stay with the team.Still, a reasonable transfer is not a sanction, such as a fine, suspension, or dismissal. As long as the reporter can still practice her trade, with her existing employer, no harm would have been done.
2006-01-08 10:46:14
89.   Paul Adams
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard73.html

Interesting article on this it explains that it was not possible for Sam Wiche to omit all reporters from the men's locker room.

NBA policy is that the doors are open 10 minutes after a game and remain so until after the players leave. For WNBA the doors are closed after 20 minutes so that female players can change. For the NFL the doors are kept open also. So male players have no choice but to get dressed in front of female reporters.

People instinctively understand that yes we all have rights but that others may have more basis rights that conflict with and override these. Thus normally people have the right that their access not be restricted on the basis of sex but in cases where people have to shower and change the more fundemental right of privacy overrides this right of access. Thus most people would realize that the more basic right of the players overrides the right of the female reporters in this situation. If most people think for 5 seconds they can understand this.
That said in the case of interviewing players I believe some compromise could be arrived at which all accommodate reporters.

The crux of the matter is women would not be happy having to dress or even wander around with towels on them in front of strange men but these Peeping Lisa reporters insist that men should.
The issue is so clear-cut these feminists are fanatical about their own rights but have no concern about the rights of others. If someone were to breach their rights like this they would be outraged. They have a right to access the men's locker room and this overrules any possible more fundemental right the players might have.

Female sports reporters are venomous towards any discussion on the issue of locker rooms. They make comments like "We have earned this right" i.e. this arrogance is unbelievable they are saying we have earned the right to watch men naked in the locker room.
The issue is so clear cut that they cannot tolerate any discussion on it. Notice how any articles by these Eagle Eyed Reporters never focus on the fact that female athletes don't have to endure strange men going in to watch them change. They report like how great it is that these women have won the right to equality, their God given right to see men naked.

This example clearly demonstrates feminism at its worst fighting for their right to abuse the rights of men and is damaging to the interests of women and fairness in general. Eventually men become hostile to the idea of women's interests.

Players are in a difficult position they are under enough of pressure as it is if they make an issue on this they are subjected to intimidation tactics by the league. They are forced to put up with this infringement. If a team started restricting access like that the league would be down on them. Incredibly female reporters complained about Charlie Ward giving a fellow player a copy of a Wall Street Journal article by Reggie White and he was ordered not to do so by Dave Checketts. This is incredible it just shows how the feminazis can get their own way regardless of logic as they will shout louder than anyone else. The NBA and the NFL have showed complete spinelessness by not confronting properly this obvious abuse of rights of the players. Instead of sticking up for the players officials come down on Charlie Ward for giving a copy of an article to someone else.

Now few female sportswriters are going to admit being turned on in the locker so they have to say I they hate going in there and they are too busy and professional. It took many centuries for us to even accept that women had sex drives. Many players claim they are ogled by female reporters and are very frustrated by it and I have heard female reporters discussing individual player's penises it is ridiculous to say women don't look. Although here is a site which is pretty honest about some women enjoying the locker room setting.
Http://www.sensations4women.com/femReporters/

Most women are turned on by the male body its only natural, thus its only natural women would be very attracted to players who have a natural perfect build and are in peak physical health. We hear women everyday expressing admiration for the bodies of football players.

That "some guys parade around naked" argument is crap. I know some players don't mind being seen in the buff by women sure some women don't mind either but that doesn't make men stop respecting the rights of women.

Comment status: comments have been closed. Baseball Toaster is now out of business.