Torneo Comex Apertura 2003 Playoffs

Discussion in 'Mexico' started by Deleted USer, Nov 3, 2003.

  1. Deleted USer

    Deleted USer Member+

    Jan 7, 2001
    # Equipo JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Pumas 16 9 4 3 27 18 9 31
    2 Tigres 15 9 3 3 32 17 15 30
    3 Pachuca 16 7 6 3 23 18 5 27
    4 Tecos 16 8 3 5 25 21 4 27
    5 Atlante 16 7 5 4 26 17 9 26
    6 América 16 7 4 5 29 22 7 25
    7 Necaxa 16 6 7 3 21 17 4 25
    8 Santos 16 6 6 4 35 25 10 24
    9 Toluca 15 7 3 5 26 18 8 24
    10 Morelia 16 7 2 7 21 24 -3 23
    11 Irapuato 16 6 4 6 22 28 -6 22
    12 Monterrey 16 5 6 5 29 27 2 21
    13 Cruz Azul 16 5 6 5 21 24 -3 21
    14 Veracruz 16 6 3 7 27 32 -5 21
    15 Chivas 16 6 2 8 25 26 -1 20
    16 Jaguares 16 5 4 7 20 31 -11 19
    17 Puebla 16 4 5 7 20 24 -4 17
    18 Atlas 16 4 3 9 26 30 -4 15
    19 San Luis 16 2 5 9 19 30 -11 11
    20 Gallos Blancos 16 1 3 12 15 40 -25 6


    Grupo 1 JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Pachuca 16 7 6 3 23 18 5 27
    2 Toluca 15 7 3 5 26 18 8 24
    3 Monterrey 16 5 6 5 29 27 2 21
    4 Puebla 16 4 5 7 20 24 -4 17
    5 Atlas 16 4 3 9 26 30 -4 15

    Grupo 2 JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Pumas 16 9 4 3 27 18 9 31
    2 Tecos 16 8 3 5 25 21 4 27
    3 América 16 7 4 5 29 22 7 25
    4 Santos 16 6 6 4 35 25 10 24
    5 Gallos Blancos 16 1 3 12 15 40 -25 6

    Grupo 3 JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Tigres 15 9 3 3 32 17 15 30
    2 Morelia 16 7 2 7 21 24 -3 23
    3 Cruz Azul 16 5 6 5 21 24 -3 21
    4 Jaguares 16 5 4 7 20 31 -11 19
    5 San Luis 16 2 5 9 19 30 -11 11

    Grupo 4 JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Atlante 16 7 5 4 26 17 9 26
    2 Necaxa 16 6 7 3 21 17 4 25
    3 Irapuato 16 6 4 6 22 28 -6 22
    4 Veracruz 16 6 3 7 27 32 -5 21
    5 Chivas 16 6 2 8 25 26 -1 20
     
  2. Deleted USer

    Deleted USer Member+

    Jan 7, 2001
    Queretaro & San Luis: mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.

    Atlas: If toluca or santos acquire one more point, they are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs

    Jaguares: If they lose one more game, they will be mathematically eliniated

    The rest of the teams are still in the hunt.

    week 17 next weekend and 18 teams are fighting for a playoff spot. After next weekend, we can expect 4-6 teams to be mathematically eliminated.

    should be an interesting run.
     
  3. Deleted USer

    Deleted USer Member+

    Jan 7, 2001
    If Toluca wins this tuesday... puebla is out
     
  4. mejulian

    mejulian New Member

    Oct 20, 2003
    Mexico City
    I'm surprised and glad of seeing Pumas that high. I hope we can have a nice final round and finally get the championship after so many years of frustrations.
     
  5. Deleted USer

    Deleted USer Member+

    Jan 7, 2001
    Tigres classified today over its win against Toluca
     
  6. amanzo81

    amanzo81 Member

    Apr 30, 2003
    home
    Club:
    Club América
    Rematch?

    So if the standings remain the same as they are now, America would face off with toluca in the repechage?
     
  7. Deleted USer

    Deleted USer Member+

    Jan 7, 2001
    Re: Rematch?

    assume this was the last week... this is how it would go down

    1 Tigres 16 10 3 3 33 17 16 33
    2 Pumas 16 9 4 3 27 18 9 31
    3 Pachuca 16 7 6 3 23 18 5 27
    4 Tecos 16 8 3 5 25 21 4 27
    5 Atlante 16 7 5 4 26 17 9 26
    6 América 16 7 4 5 29 22 7 25
    7 Necaxa 16 6 7 3 21 17 4 25
    8 Santos 16 6 6 4 35 25 10 24
    9 Toluca 16 7 3 6 26 19 7 24
    10 Morelia 16 7 2 7 21 24 -3 23
    11 Irapuato 16 6 4 6 22 28 -6 22
    12 Monterrey 16 5 6 5 29 27 2 21
    13 Cruz Azul 16 5 6 5 21 24 -3 21
    14 Veracruz 16 6 3 7 27 32 -5 21
    15 Chivas 16 6 2 8 25 26 -1 20
    16 Jaguares 16 5 4 7 20 31 -11 19
    17 Puebla 16 4 5 7 20 24 -4 17
    18 Atlas 16 4 3 9 26 30 -4 15
    19 San Luis 16 2 5 9 19 30 -11 11
    20 Gallos Blancos 16 1 3 12 15 40 -25 6


    Grupo 1 JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Pachuca 16 7 6 3 23 18 5 27
    2 Toluca 16 7 3 6 26 19 7 24
    3 Monterrey 16 5 6 5 29 27 2 21
    4 Puebla 16 4 5 7 20 24 -4 17
    5 Atlas 16 4 3 9 26 30 -4 15

    Grupo 2 JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Pumas 16 9 4 3 27 18 9 31
    2 Tecos 16 8 3 5 25 21 4 27

    3 América 16 7 4 5 29 22 7 25
    4 Santos 16 6 6 4 35 25 10 24

    5 Gallos Blancos 16 1 3 12 15 40 -25 6

    Grupo 3 JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Tigres 16 10 3 3 33 17 16 33
    2 Morelia 16 7 2 7 21 24 -3 23
    3 Cruz Azul 16 5 6 5 21 24 -3 21
    4 Jaguares 16 5 4 7 20 31 -11 19
    5 San Luis 16 2 5 9 19 30 -11 11

    Grupo 4 JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Atlante 16 7 5 4 26 17 9 26
    2 Necaxa 16 6 7 3 21 17 4 25

    3 Irapuato 16 6 4 6 22 28 -6 22
    4 Veracruz 16 6 3 7 27 32 -5 21
    5 Chivas 16 6 2 8 25 26 -1 20

    Reclassification games

    [6] America v [10] Morelia [x]
    [8]Santos v [9]Toluca [y]

    America & Santos win

    [1] Tigres v [8] Santos
    [2] Pumas v [7] Necaxa
    [3] Pachuca v [6] America
    [4] Tecos v [5] Atlante

    America & Toluca win

    [1] Tigres v [9] Toluca (8th by defualt)
    [2] Pumas v [7] Necaxa
    [3] Pachuca v [6] America
    [4] Tecos v [5] Atlante

    Toluca & Morelia win

    [1] Tigres v [10] Morelia (8th by defualt)
    [2] Pumas v [9] Toluca (7th by defualt)
    [3] Pachuca v [7] Necaxa (6th by defualt)
    [4] Tecos v [5] Atlante

    Santos & Morelia win

    [1] Tigres v [10] Morelia (8th by defualt)
    [2] Pumas v [9] Santos (7th by defualt)
    [3] Pachuca v [7] Necaxa (6th by defualt)
    [4] Tecos v [5] Atlante
     
  8. Deleted USer

    Deleted USer Member+

    Jan 7, 2001
    who o you huys think will make the playoffs.. reclassification is really part of the playoffs... so what i am asking... who do you see in the quarters???
     
  9. sidspaceman

    sidspaceman Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 20, 2002
    AMÉRICA DE CALI
    Club:
    America de Cali
    Nat'l Team:
    Colombia
    # Equipo JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Tigres 17 11 3 3 35 17 18 36
    2 Pumas 17 10 4 3 31 21 10 34
    3 Pachuca 17 8 6 3 25 18 7 30
    4 Tecos 17 9 3 5 27 22 5 30
    5 Santos 17 7 6 4 37 26 11 27
    6 Atlante 17 7 6 4 28 19 9 27
    7 Necaxa 17 6 8 3 21 17 4 26
    8 América 17 7 4 6 30 24 6 25
    9 Toluca 17 7 3 7 26 21 5 24
    10 Cruz Azul 17 6 6 5 23 25 -2 24
    11 Morelia 17 7 3 7 23 26 -3 24
    12 Chivas 17 7 2 8 27 27 0 23
    13 Monterrey 17 5 7 5 29 27 2 22
    14 Irapuato 17 6 4 7 23 30 -7 22
    15 Veracruz 17 6 3 8 30 36 -6 21
    16 Jaguares 17 5 4 8 20 33 -13 19
    17 Atlas 17 5 3 9 28 30 -2 18
    18 Puebla 17 4 5 8 21 26 -5 17
    19 San Luis 17 2 5 10 19 32 -13 11
    20 Gallos Blancos 17 1 3 13 16 42 -26 6







    Grupo 1 PJ V E D G GR DIF PTS
    Pachuca 17 8 6 3 25 18 7 30
    Toluca 17 7 3 7 26 21 5 24
    Monterrey 17 5 7 5 29 27 2 22
    Atlas 17 5 3 9 28 30 -2 18
    Puebla 17 4 5 8 21 26 -5 17

    Grupo 2 PJ V E D G GR DIF PTS
    UNAM 17 10 4 3 31 21 10 34
    Tecos 17 9 3 5 27 22 5 30
    Santos 17 7 6 4 37 26 11 27
    América 17 7 4 6 30 24 6 25
    Querétaro 17 1 3 13 16 42 -26 6

    Grupo 3 PJ V E D G GR DIF PTS
    Tigres 17 11 3 3 35 17 18 36
    Cruz Azul 17 6 6 5 23 25 -2 24
    Morelia 17 7 3 7 23 26 -3 24
    Chiapas 17 5 4 8 20 33 -13 19
    San Luis 17 2 5 10 19 32 -13 11

    Grupo 4 PJ V E D G GR DIF PTS
    Atlante 17 7 6 4 28 19 9 27
    Necaxa 17 6 8 3 21 17 4 26
    Guadalajara 17 7 2 8 27 27 0 23
    Irapuato 17 6 4 7 23 30 -7 22
    Veracruz 17 6 3 8 30 36 -6 21
     
  10. Deleted USer

    Deleted USer Member+

    Jan 7, 2001
    Re: Re: Rematch?

    # Equipo JJ JG JE JP GF GC DIF PTS
    1 Tigres 17 11 3 3 35 17 18 36
    2 Pumas 17 10 4 3 31 21 10 34
    3 Pachuca 17 8 6 3 25 18 7 30
    4 Tecos 17 9 3 5 27 22 5 30
    5 Santos 17 7 6 4 37 26 11 27
    6 Atlante 17 7 6 4 28 19 9 27
    7 Necaxa 17 6 8 3 21 17 4 26
    8 América 17 7 4 6 30 24 6 25
    9 Toluca 17 7 3 7 26 21 5 24
    10 Cruz Azul 17 6 6 5 23 25 -2 24
    11 Morelia 17 7 3 7 23 26 -3 24
    12 Chivas 17 7 2 8 27 27 0 23
    13 Monterrey 17 5 7 5 29 27 2 22
    14 Irapuato 17 6 4 7 23 30 -7 22
    15 Veracruz 17 6 3 8 30 36 -6 21
    16 Jaguares 17 5 4 8 20 33 -13 19
    17 Atlas 17 5 3 9 28 30 -2 18
    18 Puebla 17 4 5 8 21 26 -5 17
    19 San Luis 17 2 5 10 19 32 -13 11
    20 Gallos Blancos 17 1 3 13 16 42 -26 6

    Grupo 1 PJ V E D G GR DIF PTS
    Pachuca 17 8 6 3 25 18 7 30
    *Toluca 17 7 3 7 26 21 5 24
    Monterrey 17 5 7 5 29 27 2 22
    Atlas 17 5 3 9 28 30 -2 18
    Puebla 17 4 5 8 21 26 -5 17

    Grupo 2 PJ V E D G GR DIF PTS
    UNAM 17 10 4 3 31 21 10 34
    Tecos 17 9 3 5 27 22 5 30

    *Santos 17 7 6 4 37 26 11 27
    *América 17 7 4 6 30 24 6 25
    Querétaro 17 1 3 13 16 42 -26 6

    Grupo 3 PJ V E D G GR DIF PTS
    Tigres 17 11 3 3 35 17 18 36
    *Cruz Azul 17 6 6 5 23 25 -2 24
    Morelia 17 7 3 7 23 26 -3 24
    Chiapas 17 5 4 8 20 33 -13 19
    San Luis 17 2 5 10 19 32 -13 11

    Grupo 4 PJ V E D G GR DIF PTS
    Atlante 17 7 6 4 28 19 9 27
    Necaxa 17 6 8 3 21 17 4 26

    Guadalajara 17 7 2 8 27 27 0 23
    Irapuato 17 6 4 7 23 30 -7 22
    Veracruz 17 6 3 8 30 36 -6 21

    Reclassification games

    [5] Santos v [10] Cruz Azul [x]
    [8]America v [9]Toluca [y]

    Santos & America win

    [1] Tigres v [8] America
    [2] Pumas v [7] Necaxa
    [3] Pachuca v [6] Atlante
    [4] Tecos v [5] Santos

    Santos & Toluca win

    [1] Tigres v [9] Toluca [8 by defualt]
    [2] Pumas v [7] Necaxa
    [3] Pachuca v [6] Atlante
    [4] Tecos v [5] Santos

    America & Cruz Azul

    [1] Tigres v [10] Cruz Azul(8th by defualt)
    [2] Pumas v [8] America (7th by defualt)
    [3] Pachuca v [7] Necaxa (6th by defualt)
    [4] Tecos v [6] Atlante (5th by defualt)

    Cruz Azul & Toluca win

    [1] Tigres v [10] Cruz Azul (8th by defualt)
    [2] Pumas v [9] Toluca (7th by defualt)
    [3] Pachuca v [7] Necaxa (6th by defualt)
    [4] Tecos v [6] Atlante (5th by defualt)
     
  11. fdp

    fdp Red Card

    Oct 24, 2001
    Females on referee staff...

    I didn't want to start a new thread so I am posting this here.

    Is anyone watching the Cruz Azul - Veracruz match.

    I noticed that there is a woman linesman.

    Whats up with that?

    Is she the only one in the league?

    Call me old fashioned but there are two places I don't want to see women. One is on the altar at church and the other is on the futbol pitch during a mens game.

    Is there not some womens games in Mexico she could take part in?
     
  12. uclacarlos

    uclacarlos Member+

    Aug 10, 2003
    east coast
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    I won't call you old-fashioned. Just sexist.

    Yo me pregunto: ?que necesidad sirven los huevos para levantar la hostia? ?Ayudan para el equilibrio?
     
  13. ricv56

    ricv56 New Member

    Jan 4, 2003
    Bellflower
    keep asking yourself, they're obviously not doing much more than that for you.

    ricv56
     
  14. sidspaceman

    sidspaceman Moderator
    Staff Member

    Feb 20, 2002
    AMÉRICA DE CALI
    Club:
    America de Cali
    Nat'l Team:
    Colombia
    TABLA GENERAL
    # CLUB JJ JG JE JP GF GC DF PTS
    1 Tigres 18 11 4 3 36 18 18 37
    2 U.N.A.M. 18 10 5 3 33 23 10 35
    3 Pachuca 18 9 6 3 26 18 8 33
    4 U.A.G. 18 9 4 5 29 24 5 31
    5 Atlante 18 8 6 4 30 19 11 30
    6 Necaxa 18 7 8 3 22 17 5 29
    7 Santos 18 7 7 4 38 27 11 28
    8 Toluca 18 8 3 7 31 21 10 27
    9 Guadalajara 18 8 2 8 28 27 1 26
    10 América 18 7 4 7 30 25 5 25
    11 Monarcas 18 7 4 7 24 27 -3 25
    12 Cruz Azul 18 6 6 6 25 28 -3 24
    13 Veracruz 18 7 3 8 33 38 -5 24
    14 Monterrey 18 5 7 6 29 28 1 22
    15 Irapuato 18 6 4 8 23 31 -8 22
    16 Puebla F.C. 18 5 5 8 22 26 -4 20
    17 Jaguares 18 5 5 8 21 34 -13 20
    18 Atlas 18 5 3 10 28 31 -3 18
    19 San Luis 18 2 5 11 19 37 -18 11
    20 Queretaro 18 1 3 14 16 44 -28 6



    TABLA POR GRUPOS
    GRUPO 1 G1 | G2 | G3 | G4
    CLUB JJ JG JE JP GF GC DF PTS
    Pachuca 18 9 6 3 26 18 8 33
    Toluca 18 8 3 7 31 21 10 27
    Monterrey 18 5 7 6 29 28 1 22
    Puebla F.C. 18 5 5 8 22 26 -4 20
    Atlas 18 5 3 10 28 31 -3 18

    GRUPO 2 G1 | G2 | G3 | G4
    CLUB JJ JG JE JP GF GC DF PTS
    U.N.A.M. 18 10 5 3 33 23 10 35
    U.A.G. 18 9 4 5 29 24 5 31
    Santos 18 7 7 4 38 27 11 28
    América 18 7 4 7 30 25 5 25
    Queretaro 18 1 3 14 16 44 -28 6

    GRUPO 3 G1 | G2 | G3 | G4
    CLUB JJ JG JE JP GF GC DF PTS
    Tigres 18 11 4 3 36 18 18 37
    Monarcas 18 7 4 7 24 27 -3 25
    Cruz Azul 18 6 6 6 25 28 -3 24
    Jaguares 18 5 5 8 21 34 -13 20
    San Luis 18 2 5 11 19 37 -18 11

    GRUPO 4 G1 | G2 | G3 | G4
    CLUB JJ JG JE JP GF GC DF PTS
    Atlante 18 8 6 4 30 19 11 30
    Necaxa 18 7 8 3 22 17 5 29
    Guadalajara 18 8 2 8 28 27 1 26
    Veracruz 18 7 3 8 33 38 -5 24
    Irapuato 18 6 4 8 23 31 -8 22
     
  15. Don Boppero 3000

    Don Boppero 3000 DNALMQNLGLLMX!

    Jan 15, 2001
    The Fullerton Hotel Chicago
    Club:
    Club América
    Nat'l Team:
    Mexico
    LOL!


    HOT DAMN!
     
  16. Don Boppero 3000

    Don Boppero 3000 DNALMQNLGLLMX!

    Jan 15, 2001
    The Fullerton Hotel Chicago
    Club:
    Club América
    Nat'l Team:
    Mexico
    Re: Females on referee staff...

    This goes for all sports.
     
  17. uclacarlos

    uclacarlos Member+

    Aug 10, 2003
    east coast
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    Spectacular, incredibly unpredictible and creative comeback...

    I see you didn't have the balls to address my arguments, so I'll make the point even more obvious: No me importa ni un pepino quien sea el arbitro con tal de ser competente. Whereas a woman would have difficulty competing in an elite male league, due to strength and height, these are NOT characteristics that factor into being a ref.
     
  18. Levante

    Levante Member+

    Jul 28, 2001
    Women.........

    They have a place on the field to ref and on the altar.

    With the sex scandals hitting the Catholic Church harder than a Filipino hitting M.A. Barrera drastic changes will have to come about the church's policies....i.e. priests allowed to marry, women priests etc. etc.
     
  19. ricv56

    ricv56 New Member

    Jan 4, 2003
    Bellflower
    you sure do talk about balls a lot, compensate much?

    you didn't make an argument, you came into a forum you don't regularly post in and, based on one sentence, pithily labeled someone a sexist.

    in fact, i disagree with fdp and agree with you, how's about that? i have no problem seeing female linesmen (or female clergy), they should do be able to do both jobs if qualified, and understand that physical characteristics aren't in any way prohibitive of them doing a good job. however, i post here regularly, and even despite his comment, know that i don't know fdp well enough to label him a sexist.

    or maybe i'm just not the kind of guy that needs to call someone a sexist to feel better about himself.

    ricv56
     
  20. Deleted USer

    Deleted USer Member+

    Jan 7, 2001
    uclacarlos

    dont start with sexist machismo bullshyt.

    i am against it for one reason and one reason alone..

    it is very common for players to go confront the linesman. When the press or fans see a player screaming or yelling at the linesman and/or ref, they percieve it to be a players yelling to a ref. But ifthat if a player does go yell and argue with a women linesman/ref, you will have the press and feminist groups label that player as a lowlife excuse for a man that yells at women. It has happened before (not in professional forum but in amatuer). SO where is the equality they speak of and demand??? THey want them to get the job but try to protect them becuase of thier gender? If they want equality, then let it be all the way or nothing.
     
  21. uclacarlos

    uclacarlos Member+

    Aug 10, 2003
    east coast
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    Yeah... b/c he said something sexist that is indicative of someone who is a sexist. Just like I post in other forums about how certain attitudes and stereotypes are racist.

    Nada que ver. Plain and simple, I work w/ far too many women that have to deal w/ this kind of attitude. It makes them less productive and less happy. Mala onda crea...
     
  22. uclacarlos

    uclacarlos Member+

    Aug 10, 2003
    east coast
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    I was actually criticizing the religion more than anything. :)
    Seems like 2 reasons, not one.
    1. danger to the female ref.
    2. hypocrisy inherent by those that will inevitably attack a player who attacks a ref.

    Shouldn't we criticize a player for attacking a ref period, regardless of gender? How is this a bad thing? Any decent league protects its refs no matter what and sanctions inappropriate behavior towards them no matter how bad they are. That's not a double standard as far as the administration is concerned.

    So society has yet another double standard when it comes to gender roles. Add one to the thousands...
     
  23. ricv56

    ricv56 New Member

    Jan 4, 2003
    Bellflower
    hey, to each his own, but if you really feel like someone's attitude is problematic, which i figure in this case, given your seemingly perjorative use of the word sexist, and you wanted to make any sort of contribution that would help, maybe you would ask "what's with the attitude?" as opposed to saying *essentially* "based on one sentence i've seen you write, i'm going to call you a sexist."

    regardless of how you want to couch it or justify it, by saying it's indicative of a sexist attitude or a person with sexist attitudes, it amounts to little more than name-calling. if you want to take someone to task for a supposedly myopic attitude, be it sexist or racist, do it right or don't do it at all.

    ricv56
     
  24. uclacarlos

    uclacarlos Member+

    Aug 10, 2003
    east coast
    Club:
    FC Barcelona
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    So if somebody said, "There's only 2 places that I wanna see a beaner: doing the dishes or in jail", should I reconsider how I 'couch' my objection?

    I know that what he said wasn't "that bad" to some ppl, but considering all the abuse women take (sexual, physical, mental) etc., given the fact that these problems end up affecting more than just the individual victims (our mothers, sisters, wives, girlfriends, co-workers, neighbors all have an effect on all of us; even families w/ daughters are more prone to divorce b/c of the social pressures inflicted upon women/girls), given that this attitude is part and parcel w/ issues that affect women's health (and our taxes by extension), I think that it's entirely appropriate to call someone out for nefarious attitudes.

    And 'sexist' indeed is pejorative, not seemingly.

    You're right, though. I definitely could have gone about it in a more constructive matter.

    I honestly expected ppl would have more of a problem w/ the vulgar reference to the host.
     
  25. ricv56

    ricv56 New Member

    Jan 4, 2003
    Bellflower
    personally, if I was to hear someone make a statement like that, I wouldn't respond by calling her a racist. Perhaps we disagree about this, but it seems to be incredibly unlikely that anyone who would utter a phrase like that would be affected in the least by having the accusation of racism levied against them.

    On top of that, I don't see much of a difference between calling the person making the offending statement a racist. There is a difference in degree, certainly, but like I said before, if that's all that's said in response, in the end, it amounts to little more than name-calling.

    It seems to me you're making a bit of a leap here. Having a preference for who a person sees working the lines of a soccer match can develop into or be symptomatic of abuse of women, however, that does not mean that it's always the case. A preference like that has a long way to go before it turns into abuse.

    In addition, the act of determining what exactly a nefarious attitude is, is an act of ongoing judgement, and one that isn't always agreed upon. As such, it creates an issue over who gets to decide what attitudes are nefarious and how people whose opinions and preferences are deemed to be nefarious are to be dealt with. Objectivity, in as much as it's something that can be practiced by human beings, doesn't exist, definitely not in qualitatitve stuff like this anyway. That is to say that no matter how aware people become or how much effort people make to practice fairness as far as issues like this go, preferences that some perceive as sexist will always exist, mainly because of differences of opinion and perception.

    I used seemingly for a couple of reasons, I didn't want to be presumptuous and take liberties with your use of the word, and, depending on the context, the word itself is not always a pejorative.

    ricv56
     

Share This Page