11/21/24
September 13, 2010
Jets Investigated for Harassment of Female Reporter: The NFL is investigating whether New York Jets players and one coach harassed Mexican TV reporter Ines Sainz during practice Saturday, running a drill to attempt to collide with her and greeting her with derisive hoots and catcalls later in the locker room. New York Post sportswriter Bart Hubbuch tweeted about "harmless antics" during the practice (as opposed to the locker room) and had this final take: "I'm not defending Jets' behavior, but her outfit was extremely provocative and inappropriate for the setting." (It appears he later deleted these messages.)
A Jets forum has a nice sampling of her wardrobe choices.
Sainz may have been dressed like every other woman on Mexican television, but I'm surprised that the Jets made a big deal about it. These are pro football players. Surely they've seen good-looking women dressed provocatively before.
posted by rcade at 08:45 AM on September 13, 2010
I don't think even pro football players have seen many butts like that in jeans like those.
posted by bdaddy at 09:25 AM on September 13, 2010
I don't think even pro football players have seen many butts like that in jeans like those.
There just aren't many butts that can look like that in jeans.
posted by BornIcon at 09:47 AM on September 13, 2010
Our best known brand of cheap sandwich bread is named Wonder.
Mexico's best known brand of cheap sandwich bread is named Bimbo.
And it just gets better from there.
Good thing Sainz wasn't parading around the old Meadowlands. The Jets' "show us your tits" crowd over there would have sung the national anthem for her.
Presumably, those fans have migrated over to the new stadium, so there's always a chance for some future memorable moments.
posted by beaverboard at 09:49 AM on September 13, 2010
"I'm not defending Jets' behavior, but her outfit was extremely provocative and inappropriate for the setting."
Disgusting.
Nothing better than blaming the victim.
posted by grum@work at 11:25 AM on September 13, 2010
Nothing better than blaming the victim.
Victim?
Victim of her own circumstance maybe. You don't flaunt a piece of ribeye in front of a lion and become surprised when it pounces on it and you just don't wear provacative clothing in front of a testosterone fueled locker room and expect to hear crickets.
Apparently people forgot that this is the same reporter who wore a wedding dress to a press conference in 2008 and asked Patriots QB Tom Brady to marry her.
Like I said, I do not condone the Jets behaviour but in a professional setting, how about dressing the part?
posted by BornIcon at 11:36 AM on September 13, 2010
First, I don't know the whole story.
Second, if the reporter was interested in covering the team and nothing else she'd dress appropriately. I am not condoning any verbal abuse she received, and certainly think the players are out of line, but it'd be a lot easier to resolve the whole situation by applying some common sense.
From a Y chromosome point of view, it's like a man walking into a gay bar wearing nothing but a Speedo and a feather boa expecting nobody to notice.
Third, I (and the majority of others) had never heard of this reporter before, now we have. Perhaps this was the original goal.
posted by cixelsyd at 11:43 AM on September 13, 2010
Waaaa....waaaa...seriously. I have become part of her intention.....I now know the name Ines Sainz and she is a reporter and of Mexican descent and from the stories being conveyed she is a beautiful and very attractive woman. Prior to the headlines, I would have thought Ines Sainz was the name of a river that curved seductively somewhere in Mexico.
posted by bobsnafu at 12:14 PM on September 13, 2010
... you just don't wear provacative clothing in front of a testosterone fueled locker room and expect to hear crickets.
That's pathetic reasoning. These are adult professionals in their work environment. They should act accordingly, regardless of what a reporter was wearing.
As for the wedding dress stunt, it was typical Super Bowl media day foolishness.
Nothing better than blaming the victim.
I'm a casual acquaintance of Hubbuch. We competed against each other in high school journalism competitions and our dads were coworkers. He's also a friend of a friend. I wish he'd write in detail about this incident to clarify what he was saying. I don't think he meant to suggest that it was her fault that she was harassed. Most of his tweets were about some on-the-field stuff she appeared to take in good humor.
posted by rcade at 12:19 PM on September 13, 2010
Well, this thread is depressing.
posted by tron7 at 12:21 PM on September 13, 2010
That's pathetic reasoning. These are adult professionals in their work environment. They should act accordingly, regardless of what a reporter was wearing.
Yes, and if you dress like the whores you see in NYC, perhaps you'll be viewed as one. The sampling of her photos makes it clear -- she sees her path to stardom as wearing provocative clothes and flaunting her sexuality.
So it's the Jets' fault they noticed it?
posted by wfrazerjr at 12:32 PM on September 13, 2010
That's pathetic reasoning. These are adult professionals in their work environment. They should act accordingly, regardless of what a reporter was wearing.
Yes, and if you dress like the whores you see in NYC, perhaps you'll be viewed as one.
Thank you!
I'm not saying what the Jets did was right but com'on now, you just said it yourself.
Professionals.
If she wants to be treated as a professional, she should try dressing the part. Now I wasn't there to see what she was wearing but from the pics of her on the sidelines of other sporting events, I can take pretty wild guess that it was similar attire.
posted by BornIcon at 01:14 PM on September 13, 2010
So to recap, attractive women are not allowed to wear anything flattering or anything form-fitting less they be harassed while doing their jobs. Also, they should know that this is their own fault.
posted by bperk at 01:27 PM on September 13, 2010
I'm confused here too - wearing jeans qualifies as dressing like a whore now? The woman has a great figure so that means she's supposed to wear loose fitting grannie clothes? I see no pics of her on a sideline in a mini skirt, short shorts, or anything like that.
posted by MW12 at 01:32 PM on September 13, 2010
I think this story was already discussed just with a different name.
Ines needs to decide what she wants. If she wants to be a credible reporter, thats fine. If she wants to me a model(I hope for playboy). Fine
I know that dressing like she does doesnt mean she should be harrassed, but this is also not her first rodeo. This is an attempt to get her name out there and mission accomplished. She probably did not get the job due to her insight and knowledge and knows that, but you dont see the MNF crew in tank tops and speedos. You want to be a credible journalist, portray one.
posted by Debo270 at 01:48 PM on September 13, 2010
Here's a picture of what Sainz was wearing:
A whore flaunting her sexuality? Jesus Christ. You might as well hold up a sign that says you're still not over a bad breakup.
Sainz was doing on-camera work. Clearly, the network she works for is comfortable with her attire.
If she wants to be treated as a professional, she should try dressing the part.
BornIcon's Law: In any given situation, the probability a professional athlete is to blame is zero.
If the Jets are professionals, it shouldn't matter what she was wearing. If Sainz had walked into any place I worked dressed in painted-on jeans, we wouldn't have behaved like belligerent adolescent frat boys to her face. We would have done the professional thing and snickered after she left.
posted by rcade at 02:03 PM on September 13, 2010
Ines needs to decide what she wants. If she wants to be a credible reporter, thats fine. If she wants to me a model(I hope for playboy). Fine
This cover should answer where she falls on the journalist vs. model question:
posted by rcade at 02:13 PM on September 13, 2010
BornIcon's Law: In any given situation, the probability a professional athlete is to blame is zero.
Oh stop it rcade! Apparently you skipped over the part where I clearly don't excuse their behavior in an attempt to make a point.
What she's wearing doesn't make her a whore but there's just no way that a red blooded heterosexual man would not look at her with lust in their eyes when you consider what she wears on the sidelines.
posted by BornIcon at 02:14 PM on September 13, 2010
Yes, and if you dress like the whores you see in NYC, perhaps you'll be viewed as one.
Clearly, you've never seen the whores in NYC.
posted by goddam at 02:16 PM on September 13, 2010
Apparently you skipped over the part where I clearly don't excuse their behavior in an attempt to make a point.
Fair enough. I agree with you that her attire was unprofessional by our media standards.
posted by rcade at 02:31 PM on September 13, 2010
So to recap, attractive women are not allowed to wear anything flattering or anything form-fitting less they be harassed while doing their jobs. Also, they should know that this is their own fault.
Ridiculous -- you can't have it both ways.
Sainz has very blatantly chosen the path of using her sexuality to gain fame. She's certainly allowed to wear whatever she chooses -- bikini, wedding dress or skin-tight jeans -- to her job if her employer thinks that's okay.
But let's stop saying men are then at fault for having a good look and maybe making a few comments. I'll repeat it -- you want to dress like a stripper and act like a stripper, people are probably going to view you as a stripper and treat you as such. Women need to get over hanging out body parts for men to ogle -- and then getting pissed when men look at them or make comments.
I really don't care about what she chooses to wear because I don't view Sainz as a reporter. She's nothing more than "The Naked Cowboy" or Elvira, Mistress of the Night -- someone making their trade on being partially naked.
Sainz was doing on-camera work. Clearly, the network she works for is comfortable with her attire.
Then clearly the Jets should be comfortable with how their players reacted to a woman who plays at being a reporter and spends much of her time half-clothed.
Clearly, you've never seen the whores in NYC.
Clearly, you haven't looked at much of Sainz's wardrobe.
A whore flaunting her sexuality? Jesus Christ. You might as well hold up a sign that says you're still not over a bad breakup.
Rcade, is it just you that gets to turn comments personal in here, or can we all do it with impunity?
posted by wfrazerjr at 02:32 PM on September 13, 2010
Rcade, is it just you that gets to turn comments personal in here, or can we all do it with impunity?
I was having some fun with the ridiculousness of your position.
Your use of the term "whore" and your false characterization that Sainz was "half-clothed," "partially naked" and acting like a stripper make you sound like a gender warrior.
If you don't want people to make comments, don't speak in such a provocative manner.
posted by rcade at 03:00 PM on September 13, 2010
Sainz downplayed the alleged mistreatment in an on-air piece last night: "In my opinion, I never felt attacked, nor that they reacted grossly toward me. I arrived in the locker room and there were comments and games. One of the other reporters came up to me and apologized for what was happening, but I thought [the players] were joking around."
posted by rcade at 03:09 PM on September 13, 2010
..you sound like a gender warrior.
Is that in any relation to Xena: Warrior Princess?
posted by BornIcon at 03:22 PM on September 13, 2010
But let's stop saying men are then at fault for having a good look and maybe making a few comments. I'll repeat it -- you want to dress like a stripper and act like a stripper, people are probably going to view you as a stripper and treat you as such. Women need to get over hanging out body parts for men to ogle -- and then getting pissed when men look at them or make comments.
I think women should be able to have it both ways. I don't think it is at all too much to ask for men to not go into full on out drool mode everytime they see an attractive woman. A woman who chooses to be sexy at times or shows her sexy side on different occasions still deserves to be treated with respect.
posted by bperk at 03:22 PM on September 13, 2010
I think women should be able to have it both ways.
So if women are allowed in a locker room full of half naked male athletes, shouldn't men be allowed in a locker room full of half naked women athletes? Fair is fair, right?
I call dibs in interviewing Serena Williams.
posted by BornIcon at 03:33 PM on September 13, 2010
Not judging by this comment thread, BI.
posted by kokaku at 03:34 PM on September 13, 2010
You know, it's not illegal for me to walk into a gun shop wearing a ski mask. I just have the good sense not to do it, because I don't want to get shot. Just sayin...
posted by MeatSaber at 03:36 PM on September 13, 2010
You know, it's not illegal for me to walk into a gun shop bank wearing a ski mask.
Sounds better.
posted by BornIcon at 03:46 PM on September 13, 2010
So if women are allowed in a locker room full of half naked male athletes, shouldn't men be allowed in a locker room full of half naked women athletes? Fair is fair, right?
According to this link, which appears to be quoting a submission to the Romenesko media news site, "Reporters of both sexes are allowed in WNBA locker rooms, but no players shower and dress until reporters have left (or they do so in a separate, off-limits area)."
You know, it's not illegal for me to walk into a gun shop wearing a ski mask.
There are laws in some states that prohibit wearing masks, hoods and other identity concealing attire in public. They arrested Tampa's Street Batman for this a couple years ago.
posted by rcade at 03:47 PM on September 13, 2010
They arrested Tampa's Street Batman for this a couple years ago.
That's just hilarious! A bootleg Batman.
posted by BornIcon at 03:49 PM on September 13, 2010
Please tell me he was wearing hockey pants...
posted by MeatSaber at 04:15 PM on September 13, 2010
Your use of the term "whore" and your false characterization that Sainz was "half-clothed," "partially naked" and acting like a stripper make you sound like a gender warrior.
As I said earlier to someone else, you apparently haven't looked much at her pictures. Maybe not that day, but I'm guessing it's not like her body of work is unknown to the players.
I guess I also didn't see how I said anything directly to you to warrant that response or make a judgment on my personal life. Must have been hidden in there somewhere and I missed it -- I'll check harder next time.
If you don't want people to make comments, don't speak in such a provocative manner.
or
If you don't want people to make comments, don't speak dress in such a provocative manner.
posted by wfrazerjr at 05:02 PM on September 13, 2010
Clearly, you haven't looked at much of Sainz's wardrobe.
Nope, nor do I care. Just going by what she wore at the time in question. I've had bosses of mine wear more provocative outfits than that.
posted by goddam at 06:13 PM on September 13, 2010
Sainz has very blatantly chosen the path of using her sexuality to gain fame. She's certainly allowed to wear whatever she chooses -- bikini, wedding dress or skin-tight jeans -- to her job if her employer thinks that's okay.
But let's stop saying men are then at fault for having a good look and maybe making a few comments. I'll repeat it -- you want to dress like a stripper and act like a stripper, people are probably going to view you as a stripper and treat you as such. Women need to get over hanging out body parts for men to ogle -- and then getting pissed when men look at them or make comments.
I really don't care about what she chooses to wear because I don't view Sainz as a reporter. She's nothing more than "The Naked Cowboy" or Elvira, Mistress of the Night -- someone making their trade on being partially naked.
Sorry Frazey - don't mean to pile on, but really? She can't be sexy AND credible? Ever? You're either one or the other and one is contemptible? I don't think that's right.
And this - But let's stop saying men are then at fault for having a good look and maybe making a few comments. - is really only half right. You can have a good look for sure. But I'd be wary to suggest you then have license to start making comments.
For instance, if you were the Jets right tackle and wondered by saying something like "Hey honey, if you don't like the attention, maybe you shouldn't have dressed like a WHORE," I might not consider her outfit as tasteless as your attitude.
Now, if you were flirting with her and making semi-inappropriate jokes, that's another. And if you came over and whispered in my ear "Sweet merciful crap, doesn't she just look like the best damn roller coaster in this whole big fucking blue amusement park!" then we'd be okay.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 06:21 PM on September 13, 2010
As I said earlier to someone else, you apparently haven't looked much at her pictures. Maybe not that day, but I'm guessing it's not like her body of work is unknown to the players.
She's covered a few Super Bowls, but this was apparently the first time she'd covered the Jets. She was there to interview Mark Sanchez because he's a Latino NFL star.
I linked to her pictures, so I am obviously aware of them. I just think they have jack shit to do with this incident, unless Jets players make a habit of using Google during practice.
If you don't want people to make comments, don't speak dress in such a provocative manner.
That was my point. The she-was-provocative argument is a weak defense for boorish behavior.
I'm no fan of Mike Florio, but he does a good job of shooting down the idea that if Sainz encouraged or even appreciated the Jets' behavior it is OK. "It's a common phenomenon in many workplaces. If the male employees are saying objectively inappropriate things to a female employee who invites the comments and never complains, other employees who witness the conduct legitimately can be offended, and they can become victims of actionable sexual harassment."
I guess I also didn't see how I said anything directly to you to warrant that response or make a judgment on my personal life.
It was not intended to be as personal as you are taking it. I found it incredibly offensive that a woman in a sexual harassment discussion would be described as a "whore" because of how she was dressed and responded accordingly.
posted by rcade at 06:37 PM on September 13, 2010
Sure she can be sexy and credible. The question at hand -- is she? We certainly have the evidence she is the former, because that's what she's working hard to put out there. Is she credible? Well, if you show up to a press conference in a wedding dress and ask one of the subjects to marry you, I'm guessing you gave up on the credible route a while back.
I'll ask this question -- let's say that instead of dressing the way she does, Sainz walked into a locker room and said, "Look at my full breasts and hot ass!" What would your reaction be to that, and how is it at all different from wearing clothing you know are created in essence to say exactly the same thing?
posted by wfrazerjr at 06:40 PM on September 13, 2010
The she-was-provocative argument is a weak defense for boorish behavior.
In your eyes, it is. In mine, the behaviour is reprehensible, but also understandable. You and I would not do it, but I can't say the same thing for other people. If you don't wish to expereince the behaviour, perhaps rather than expecting idiots to change, you should do so yourself.
It was not intended to be as personal as you are taking it. I found it incredibly offensive that a woman in a sexual harassment discussion would be described as a "whore" because of how she was dressed and responded accordingly.
You might as well hold up a sign that says you're still not over a bad breakup.
Yes, you're right -- how could I have ever taken that personally, considering you quoted me above it?
posted by wfrazerjr at 06:44 PM on September 13, 2010
I don't get the 'whore' label we're throwing around. Yes, I've looked at the pictures. Go to any mall and you'll see tweens dressing more provocative.
BornIcon's Law: In any given situation, the probability a professional athlete is to blame is zero.
Gold baby, gold!
posted by justgary at 06:45 PM on September 13, 2010
Go to any mall and you'll see tweens dressing more provocative.
I wasn't aware that provocatively dressed tweens in malls are interviewing professional football players these days. Interesting.
posted by BornIcon at 07:14 PM on September 13, 2010
Sure she can be sexy and credible. The question at hand -- is she?
I think it's cringe-inducing for a journalist covering an NFL team to dress in some of the things she's worn on the sidelines. Her Jets outfit, at least from the back, is borderline.
Yes, you're right -- how could I have ever taken that personally, considering you quoted me above it?
I've already answered this twice. I was having some fun with the ridiculously over-the-top position you have taken, which now involves describing some behavior as "reprehensible, but also understandable." Dude. Really?
Whenever I hear a guy throwing around words like "whore" to describe a woman, I think to myself, "Sorry about your divorce, man."
That kind of thinking has clearly gotten me into some trouble here. I apologize.
posted by rcade at 07:18 PM on September 13, 2010
I'll repeat it -- you want to dress like a stripper and act like a stripper, people are probably going to view you as a stripper and treat you as such.
The main problem with that line of argument is that it's premised on a subjective predetermination of what makes a person "like a stripper" or "like a New York whore". (And "you know it when you see it" doesn't really help here, before anyone tries it.)
Anyway, this is a tricky one. If you look at Sainz' main line of sporting work, it's fairly clear that she's not there simply as eye candy, but she also does spots that are wrapped up in bikini shots and ogling. That's a reflection on a culture that's frankly more chauvinistic in many ways than the US, but which seems to cope with the idea that a footballer will look her up and down, then answer her questions.
On the other hand, the culturally-embedded role of women in American football has long been to dress in skimpy outfits and dance on the sidelines for the entertainment of the crowd, and the travails of female sideline reporters are a testament to how slow that is to change. So you have an implicit "professional" dress code for women which can be summarised as "what Erin Andrews wears", but which hasn't stopped people from stalking Andrews, creating websites devoted to T&A pictures of her, or offering lurid descriptions of sexual fantasies involving her.
Put simply, the chauvinism that permeates big-league American sport is different from the chauvinism that permeates Latin American sport, and this little teapot-tempest is just an illustration of it.
posted by etagloh at 07:20 PM on September 13, 2010
Is she credible? Well, if you show up to a press conference in a wedding dress and ask one of the subjects to marry you, I'm guessing you gave up on the credible route a while back.
See also: "Well, I'm guessing that if you show up on a reality dancing show..."
You have declared, to your own satisfaction, based upon one stunt on a day devoted to stunts from non-privileged media outlets, that Sainz is nothing more than secondary genitalia with a microphone. Well, good for you.
In fact, it was Ines Gomes Mont who did the stunt proposal. But, y'know, they're all Mexicans, what's the difference?
(No, really, BornIcon, they are two separate people.)
posted by etagloh at 07:26 PM on September 13, 2010
I wasn't aware that provocatively dressed tweens in malls are interviewing professional football players these days. Interesting.
My point was that while she wasn't dressed professionally she certainly wasn't dressed like a whore by today's standards. Not even close.
I have absolutely no idea what your point is, but then I rarely do.
posted by justgary at 07:27 PM on September 13, 2010
I have absolutely no idea what your point is, but then I rarely do.
Considering I had no clue as to why you brought up that you can "[g]o to any mall and you'll see tweens dressing more provocative", I guess we're even.
My point was that this is supposed to be a professional journalist, not some 'tween' eating a Auntie Anne's Cinna-Bun at the food court after buying a mood ring from Claire's.
posted by BornIcon at 07:34 PM on September 13, 2010
In fact, it was Ines Gomes Mont who did the stunt proposal. But, y'know, they're all Mexicans, what's the difference?
(No, really, BornIcon, they are two separate people.)
My mistake. I googled her name and that's what came up.
And I sure as hell don't know what the 'But, y'know, they're all Mexicans, what's the difference?' crack is considering that I am latino.
posted by BornIcon at 07:42 PM on September 13, 2010
Considering that I had no clue as to why you brought up that you can "[g]o to any mall and you'll see tweens dressing more provocative", I guess we're even.
1. She was called a whore for her attire. 2. Her attire is modest compared to what even high school girls wear to the mall. 3. Therefore, calling her a whore for her attire is BS.
I'm not sure how else to put that for you to wrap your brain around, nor do I understand how your point contradicts, or even has any relation to what I said. Perhaps you should go back to making comments like this:
You don't flaunt a piece of ribeye in front of a lion and become surprised when it pounces on it
That seems to be your comfort zone.
posted by justgary at 07:42 PM on September 13, 2010
While your comfort zone is...what? Talking about provocatively dressed tweens in malls?
You can step off your soap box anytime considering I never called her a whore. I really don't even have a problem with the way she dresses but if she expects to be treated like a professional, she should start dressing like one.
posted by BornIcon at 07:48 PM on September 13, 2010
My mistake. I googled her name and that's what came up.
And thus you started the "well, she's clearly just tits, ass and a microphone" line of criticism.
Personally, I don't think you can throw around terms like "testosterone fueled" and "red blooded heterosexual" as immunity shields: like I said earlier, there is an embedded chauvinism to American football culture that isn't as prevalent in other male-dominated sports, placing women in roles where they gratify competitors and spectators.
Anyway, you and wfrazerjr should come up with a dress code for female reporters and send it to Roger Goodell, just so that we all know how the ladies should be properly attired on the practice field.
posted by etagloh at 08:03 PM on September 13, 2010
In fact, it was Ines Gomes Mont who did the stunt proposal.
I thought that was Ines Sainz too after reading it somewhere today. Thanks for the correction.
posted by rcade at 08:09 PM on September 13, 2010
And thus you started the "well, she's clearly just tits, ass and a microphone" line of criticism.
I really don't appreciate you putting in quotes something that I clearly did not say. That's just sloppy or ignorant on your part but I'll let you choose.
As for the dress code for professional female reporters, how about professional?
I thought that was Ines Sainz too after reading it somewhere today.
How about that? I wasn't the only one.
posted by BornIcon at 08:10 PM on September 13, 2010
That's just sloppy or ignorant on your part but I'll let you choose.
How about I let you choose whether you're whining or just unaware that quotation marks have multiple grammatical uses?
As for the dress code for professional female reporters, how about professional?
Nah, not going to suffice. Spell it out. What do you have in mind as "professional" attire for a female sports reporter at a practice session?
posted by etagloh at 08:21 PM on September 13, 2010
The only person that seems to be whining is you. First you make some half assed and lame remark about Ines Gomes Mont being Mexican and how there's a difference not realizing that I'm latino. Now you want to try and school me on the meaning of grammatical symbols when you clearly don't know the proper usage of them.
As for the dress code, your the one with your panties in a bunch so why don't you try and enlighten us?
posted by BornIcon at 08:31 PM on September 13, 2010
...(Amazing how two people speaking the same language don't understand each other. This thread is great! Keep it up!)
Carry on...
posted by BoKnows at 08:42 PM on September 13, 2010
Nah, I'm speaking english while this dude speaks nonsense...fluently.
posted by BornIcon at 08:43 PM on September 13, 2010
My apologies for not doing my due diligence on the two women. However, this:
But, y'know, they're all Mexicans, what's the difference?
is fucking inexcusable. Have your differences with me all you like, but to infer I'm a racist on that basis?
You're an ass.
posted by wfrazerjr at 08:59 PM on September 13, 2010
I feel like I'm the only person here who watches Spanish language TV occasionally and is not surprised by the '80s-tight jeans on Ines Sainz.
posted by rcade at 09:05 PM on September 13, 2010
I didn't know it was Spanish, I never turned the volume up.
posted by tommybiden at 09:17 PM on September 13, 2010
Have your differences with me all you like, but to infer I'm a racist on that basis?
Exactly my point! And as soon as I said that I am latino, he had to try and find something else to beef about. What a joke!
Oh, I'm not surprised at all rcade, I'm with you. I watch Univison in the mornings to see Jackie Guerrido and it's not just for the weather.
posted by BornIcon at 09:19 PM on September 13, 2010
I know legality has no place in these discussions, but the Jets organization is opening themselves up to accusations of supporting a hostile work environment lawsuit if they tacitly or otherwise allow this sort of behavior to occur.
To whit, it doesn't especially matter legally if the reporter in questions takes offense (though she apparently didn't). Let's say the lady who cleans the locker rooms when everyone goes home reads about this and it causes her severe stress whenever the players are still around. She could file a grievance. Since there seems to be ample evidence that this occurred, she'd have a pretty tight case. It doesn't especially matter if it was aimed at her or not.
In regards to professionalism, Ms. Sainz was very likely hired by her station because of her appearance. How she dresses as a professional for her show is sort of between her and them. To whit, if her station wants her to dress the way she dresses (and I'm sure they do or she'd be wearing something else), then she is dressing professionally. Just like I am dressing professionally every Friday when I wear the loudest aloha print shirt I can find.
That said, the Jets organization may well be (I believe) in their rights to dictate that reporters in the locker rooms conform to certain fashion standards. They apparently haven't dictated this, but I suspect reporters would toe the fashion line if Jets management (or the NFL in general) laid it down.
The Jets players are employees of the Jets organization. When they are at their place of work, they need to conform to the standards of the organization. Unless the standards of the Jets' organization is that woman should be treated the way they treated Ms. Sainz, they were likely in violation of company standards. In fact, in light of Sexual Harassment laws, I'd be very surprised if they weren't in violation of company standards.
In conclusion, the unprofessional behavior here was on the part of certain members of the Jets team. They are grown men, not snarling animals, and have the ability to control their reaction to stimulus. In a way, assuming that they are incapable of reining in their base instincts merely because they happen to play football as a profession is doing them a disservice.
posted by Joey Michaels at 09:19 PM on September 13, 2010
You're an ass.
Oh, I'm bothered. Go and split a pitcher at Hooter's with BornIcon while you come up with that professional dress code for female sports reporters, then come back and tell us what it is.
The exchange with Rick Sanchez on CNN fills out the backstory, which basically suggests that Sainz wasn't particularly bothered at the time, but other reporters were offended on her behalf. Presumably this fizzles out, and we'll return to the status quo of sports radio hosts playing jocks about it and (other) sports bloggers discussing which sideline reporter they'd most like to see naked.
posted by etagloh at 10:06 PM on September 13, 2010
Go and split a pitcher at Hooter's with BornIcon while you come up with that professional dress code for female sports reporters, then come back and tell us what it is.
Is that really your attempt at being witty? Well stop it! You're just plain lame now and it's a sad sight.
Let it go.
posted by BornIcon at 10:19 PM on September 13, 2010
but the Jets organization is opening themselves up to accusations of supporting a hostile work environment lawsuit if they tacitly or otherwise allow this sort of behavior to occur.
She doesn't work for the Jets.
posted by tselson at 10:49 PM on September 13, 2010
I think it's more than a bit stupefying that we can argue for hours about the attire of a woman reporting on the sidelines at a Jets practice, when if she was wearing leotards, a halter top and carrying pom-poms to cheer on the boys, it wouldn't even warrant a mention.
It's only okay to be sexy when you're a prop, girls! If you actually talk to the men folk, you better present yourself as a sexless automoton to maintain the majesty of my fragile kingdom. This is called respect. Because sports journalism is serious business. Not like Entertainment journalism or politics... or every other brand of journalism. Which is to say TV. You know, where all the beautiful womens is at.
Besides, the Jets should have definitely have been focusing more at that practice, you STUPID MORONS... 65 yards!?!? 65 YARDS Sanchize! Just fucking awful terrible jerkface rotten. You complete asshat.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:59 PM on September 13, 2010
She doesn't work for the Jets.
...which is legally irrelevant here. As I mentioned in my example, if a member of the Jets organization feels like their ability to work with the organization is effected by this behavior, then a hostile work environment can be legally proven by this behavior.
posted by Joey Michaels at 11:02 PM on September 13, 2010
You're just plain lame now and it's a sad sight.
Pro-jec-tion. Since you've decided that certain ways of dressing are not "professional" enough for female sports reporters on the practice field or in the locker room, you either already have in mind what counts as "professional" and aren't prepared to tell us, or you're just talking out of your ass.
Nobody has asserted that Sainz failed the "professionalism" test based upon the questions she asked Mark Sanchez. I do think that Barry Petchesky makes a valid point that she was an unfamiliar presence in a locker room that grants access to a number of female journalists with the Jets beat (including Tara Sullivan) and was treated differently as a result, but that's a reflection on the baseline attitude towards women in that environment.
For the fucking record, I do not think you or wfrazerjr are racists. I do think that you're living up to every dumb kneejerking bovine jock stereotype.
posted by etagloh at 11:05 PM on September 13, 2010
you STUPID MORONS... 65 yards!?!? 65 YARDS Sanchize! Just fucking awful terrible jerkface rotten. You complete asshat.
They were, as one announcer pointed out, historically inept.
How do they get rid of Thomas Jones, Alan Faneca and Leon Washington and expect to ground and pound like last year? Did they not notice Greene's fumbling issues?
Just pathetic.
posted by cjets at 11:07 PM on September 13, 2010
...which is legally irrelevant here. As I mentioned in my example, if a member of the Jets organization feels like their ability to work with the organization is effected by this behavior, then a hostile work environment can be legally proven by this behavior.
She's not a member of the Jets organization. A hostile work environment is only applicable to her employer. Legally the Jets were just being rude. A hostile work environment is one which allows or encourages/does not discourage, sexual harassment to take place, in an environment controlled by the employer.
Bperk, explain. (Please:)
posted by tselson at 11:15 PM on September 13, 2010
Besides, the Jets should have definitely have been focusing more at that practice, you STUPID MORONS... 65 yards!?!? 65 YARDS Sanchize! Just fucking awful terrible jerkface rotten. You complete asshat.
Did you have a little money on the Jets tonight, Weedy ?
posted by tommybiden at 11:24 PM on September 13, 2010
She's not a member of the Jets organization. A hostile work environment is only applicable to her employer. Legally the Jets were just being rude. A hostile work environment is one which allows or encourages/does not discourage, sexual harassment to take place, in an environment controlled by the employer.
Serious question:
So, I can say, "nice ass" (or other relevant body part) to the Fed-Ex woman when she comes into my company's office, and that is okay ?
Even though it is her work environment ?
This is presuming that no one in the employ of my company has any issue with the comment.
posted by tommybiden at 11:33 PM on September 13, 2010
She's not a member of the Jets organization. A hostile work environment is only applicable to her employer.
The person being harassed doesn't have to be an employee. The person doing the harassing doesn't even have to be an employee. If there's a "hostile work environment," any employee subjected to it can sue. There are numerous cases pursued against companies when non-employees sexually harass employees.
posted by rcade at 11:54 PM on September 13, 2010
So, I can say, "nice ass" (or other relevant body part) to the Fed-Ex woman when she comes into my company's office, and that is okay ?
Unless you want to be sexist, you have to say it to FedEx men also.
posted by rcade at 11:54 PM on September 13, 2010
The person being harassed doesn't have to be an employee. The person doing the harassing doesn't even have to be an employee. If there's a "hostile work environment," any employee subjected to it can sue. There are numerous cases pursued against companies when non-employees sexually harass employees.
This.
It doesn't matter that she isn't a member of the Jets' organization. The people who would have grounds to sue the Jets are current employees who feel like the players treatment of the reporter made the workplace hostile for them.
Which is what I said the first two times, too.
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:06 AM on September 14, 2010
Even though it is her work environment ?
This is presuming that no one in the employ of my company has any issue with the comment.
She could report this to her employer and her employer would need to find somebody else to make work deliveries to your office. Her employer has no legal responsibility for how another company's employees behave. Though, again, if your company had a pattern of this sort of behavior it could royally screw them further on down the line.
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:09 AM on September 14, 2010
The person being harassed doesn't have to be an employee. The person doing the harassing doesn't even have to be an employee. If there's a "hostile work environment," any employee subjected to it can sue. There are numerous cases pursued against companies when non-employees sexually harass employees.
You are missing the point of what is legally sexual harassment and what is considered a hostile work environment. They both revolve around the employer.
Sexual Harassment only occurs when power is invoked. For example:
I'm the manager at a fast food restaurant. I tell you I can get you off the fry station if you go out with me later. Or, you can stay on the fry station and clean the shitter, if you don't.
A hostile work environment would occur if I, as said manager routinely allowed other employees/managers to comment on your nice ass, tits, package etc. Routinely allowed derogatory sexually charged comments/behavior to go unpunished or encouraged. AND THEN an actual case of Sexual Harassment occurred. Now, I would be guilty of creating a hostile environment.
If I as said manager sent you say to the Jets to sell our fast food catering business and the people whom I sent you to commented on your nice ass, package whatever. They are simply rude.
If I send you with your nice package/ass/etc. and tell you to dress scantily to sell our cheese sticks to a group of unsupervised convicted rapists, I could be held liable for many things should you get raped. As I should have or could have could have known that I was putting you in a dangerous position.
Hostile work environment/sexual harassment are neither of them. Entirely different.
So, I can say, "nice ass" (or other relevant body part) to the Fed-Ex woman when she comes into my company's office, and that is okay ?
If you want to be an asshole, sure.
posted by tselson at 12:18 AM on September 14, 2010
It doesn't matter that she isn't a member of the Jets' organization. The people who would have grounds to sue the Jets are current employees who feel like the players treatment of the reporter made the workplace hostile for them.
Which is what I said the first two times, too.
Okay, I didn't realize we were just talking about current Jets employees who have since been made to feel like the players treatment of the reporter made their workplace hostile. F-me. You wanted legal and choose to ignore it. Cool beans.
posted by tselson at 12:22 AM on September 14, 2010
Her employer has no legal responsibility for how another company's employees behave.
I'm confused as all get out. Admittedly.
posted by tselson at 12:24 AM on September 14, 2010
Every time I've ever had to learn this stuff, all that mattered was hostile work environment + upset employee = trouble. The Jets and the NFL certainly acted like this was a big deal today. Perhaps they remember the Knicks employee a jury awarded $11.6 million in punitive damages after she accused Isaiah Thomas of behaving inappropriately.
posted by rcade at 12:26 AM on September 14, 2010
All that mattered was hostile work environment + upset employee = trouble. The Jets and the NFL certainly acted like this was a big deal today.
Look "hostile work environment" is legally defined. It's not just a layman's term. "Upset employee" doesn't apply to the Jets. She is NOT their employee, she cannot claim that she was subjected to a hostile work environment based on their actions.
Because...Her employer has no legal responsibility for how another company's employees behave.
Accuse them of being assholes, accuse them of being chauvinists, fine. Just because they were rude doesn't mean they became her employer.
Just because a UPS person walks into your office doesn't mean it's their place of employment/work environment. Just because they walk into the office doesn't mean they are your employee for 15 seconds.
That actually means something, legally.
The person being harassed doesn't have to be an employee. The person doing the harassing doesn't even have to be an employee.
That's just not correct. Read above.
Sexual Harassment only occurs when power is invoked. The person doing the harassment doesn't have to be an employee...it has to be your employer, or someone who has a definitive role in your active employment.
posted by tselson at 12:49 AM on September 14, 2010
From the EEOC's facts about sexual harassment:
"The harasser can be the victim's supervisor, an agent of the employer, a supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or a non-employee."
"The victim does not have to be the person harassed but could be anyone affected by the offensive conduct."
So as I said, the harasser doesn't have to be an employee and the victim doesn't have to be the person harassed. We all know that Sainz is not a Jets employee. When Joey brought this up, his hypothetical example of a claimant was the lady who cleans the locker room.
posted by rcade at 01:33 AM on September 14, 2010
Oh, I'm bothered.
You should be if your shit is weak enough that you feel justified throwing out the racism card for no reason.
posted by wfrazerjr at 08:19 AM on September 14, 2010
Unless you want to be sexist, you have to say it to FedEx men also.
Obviously, especially Chico.
If you want to be an asshole, sure.
It was a hypothetical situation, but I understand what you're saying.
I'm confused as all get out. Admittedly.
You and me both.
posted by tommybiden at 10:06 AM on September 14, 2010
Just for kicks, I did a quick search to see if I could find any high end sports coverage from Inez - she's obviously all about content and her choice of attire at the Jets practice was due to her business attire being lost with her luggage.
posted by cixelsyd at 10:32 AM on September 14, 2010
Is that really your attempt at being witty? Well stop it! You're just plain lame now and it's a sad sight.
Saying doesn't make it so.
posted by yerfatma at 11:14 AM on September 14, 2010
Saying doesn't make it so.
By all means, if lame attempt at wit is your thing I'm not stopping you from being entertained by it. That reminds me, doesn't Dane Cook have a show coming up too?
posted by BornIcon at 11:44 AM on September 14, 2010
In retrospect, I think it's clear that she was an agent of the Ravens paid to distract the Jets.
Mission Accomplished.
posted by cjets at 11:56 AM on September 14, 2010
I have a question for those playing the "she asked for it" card. If your tween daughter goes to the mall wearing something other than a burlap sack and a bag over her head, and some guys pull some stunt such as (choose as many as you like) lobbing popcorn at her proto-cleavage, making sexually suggestive remarks, calling her a "whore", or generally behaving like a "lion with a ribeye" in front of it, would you say that she'd asked for it? Would you tell her that? What will you say to her when she points out that her twin brother does not need to wear a bag in public to avoid harassment? How will you explain to her that you've made a world where he has freedoms that she does not?
posted by lil_brown_bat at 12:22 PM on September 14, 2010
that you feel justified throwing out the racism card for no reason.
Yeah, no reason at all, as long as you don't count how you and BornIcon jumped on Sainz for the actions of a completely different reporter at that network.
I'm happy attributing it to you both being jock assholes: it's not as if you don't have past form here to back that one up.
posted by etagloh at 12:29 PM on September 14, 2010
Get over yourself etagloh! You're making a complete asshat of yourself over a subject that isn't even that serious anyways. She laughed it off and that's the end of it. Move on, next subject.
posted by BornIcon at 12:54 PM on September 14, 2010
a subject that isn't even that serious anyways. She laughed it off and that's the end of it.
That's just it though. Sometimes it is nothing, sometimes the woman feels compelled to laugh it off and act like it doesn't bother her because she has to put up with it to keep her job. Kind of sucks that any woman who wants to be a locker room reporter has to be ok with locker room talk.
posted by yerfatma at 01:00 PM on September 14, 2010
I disagree that this is something to laugh off even if Sainz did (which I don't think it true). She was embarrassed and other reporters took it seriously enough to report it to the Jets and the NFL. Plus, there are a lot of female reporters out there, and they have to work much harder for respect than their male counterparts. The mindset that women only dress in clothes to provoke responses from men is part of the problem.
posted by bperk at 01:03 PM on September 14, 2010
I do understand what you mean fatty because there is a double standard when it comes to women in general. The difference here is that it wasn't as if she just laughed it off to save face while in the presence of the Jets, she went on her show and told her audience that it was all a joke and she had no problem with what went on.
The mindset that women only dress in clothes to provoke responses from men is part of the problem.
And to believe that there are women out there who do dress provocatively to not illicit a response from the opposite sex is being naive.
posted by BornIcon at 01:05 PM on September 14, 2010
Kind of sucks that any woman who wants to be a locker room reporter has to be ok with locker room talk
???
That's as ridiculous as saying it kind of sucks that doctors need to see blood - it goes with the territory. Don't like it, do something else.
I think you meant to say a woman who wants to be a sports reporter doesn't by default agree to be verbally or otherwise abused, on that point I agree.
posted by cixelsyd at 01:10 PM on September 14, 2010
I blame Joe Namath.
posted by Debo270 at 01:27 PM on September 14, 2010
posted by BornIcon at 01:35 PM on September 14, 2010
Clinton Portis in a radio interview about women in the locker room: "You put a woman and you give her a choice of 53 athletes, somebody got to be appealing to her. You know, somebody got to spark her interest, or she's gonna want somebody. I don't know what kind of woman won't, if you get to go and look at 53 men's packages. And you're just sitting here, saying 'Oh, none of this is attractive to me.'"
posted by rcade at 02:08 PM on September 14, 2010
If your tween daughter goes to the mall wearing something other than a burlap sack and a bag over her head, and some guys pull some stunt such as (choose as many as you like) lobbing popcorn at her proto-cleavage, making sexually suggestive remarks, calling her a "whore", or generally behaving like a "lion with a ribeye" in front of it, would you say that she'd asked for it?
Easy. You sit little suzy down and you say:
"Don't be a victim of her own circumstance. Don't flaunt a piece of ribeye in front of a lion and become surprised when it pounces on it and you just don't wear provacative clothing in a mall full of testosterone filled men."
In conclusion, the unprofessional behavior here was on the part of certain members of the Jets team. They are grown men, not snarling animals, and have the ability to control their reaction to stimulus. In a way, assuming that they are incapable of reining in their base instincts merely because they happen to play football as a profession is doing them a disservice.
posted by Joey Michaels
This. The idea that a bunch of grown men can't control themselves from making comments because a woman reporter wears her jeans a little too tight is depressing. But we're dealing with athletes that have been given special status and forgiven of almost anything their entire lives as long as they perform on the field.
posted by justgary at 03:22 PM on September 14, 2010
cixelsyd:
That's as ridiculous as saying it kind of sucks that doctors need to see blood - it goes with the territory. Don't like it, do something else.
I think that the phrase "locker room talk", in this context, was not used to mean "any speech that is said in a locker room" (which would match your doctor/blood analogy), but vulgar and harassing speech that is directed at a woman because she is a woman. The former does indeed go with the territory; the latter is gratuitous.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 04:22 PM on September 14, 2010
But we're dealing with athletes that have been given special status and forgiven of almost anything their entire lives as long as they perform on the field.
What was Rex Ryan's excuse?
posted by bperk at 06:55 PM on September 14, 2010
What was Rex Ryan's excuse?
This entire thread was worth it for that burn.
posted by Joey Michaels at 07:35 PM on September 14, 2010
Clinton Portis in a radio interview
He's since been scolded by the league and his team and has apologized.
posted by yerfatma at 12:29 PM on September 15, 2010
Dave Chapelle says it better than I can.
posted by wfrazerjr at 05:05 AM on September 17, 2010
posted by tselson at 12:27 AM on September 18, 2010
Not to discredit or belittle what is being reported but have you seen Ines Sainz or the outfits she wears? My God she is hot! I love Brazil!