southerncross

Wanted Missing VOR Skipper

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

It’s a quote from a movie. Zoolander. About male models.

 But don’t worry, irony is not a sense everybody has :) 

Image result for roflmao gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, staysail said:

You are right about the video nonsense; but not about the rule change forcing people to see women as equal in sailing. For me it does the opposite even though it may be a good thing that more women get opportunities as a result of this rule. This change gives them no opportunity to prove how good they are and they are still percieved (wrongly?) by those in control, as far less valuable than men.

Women getting a fair deal is a long way in the future and the only ways forward for women ocean sailors at present are the hard routes of single handed racing, and all-women boats. You can only not compromise their successes when there are no men on the crew. That may hopefully change in the future but we are not there yet.

If I want to see which up and coming young women can sail long offshore races better than most of their male competitors I can't see that by looking at performances in this edition of the VOR. For facts and results I can only look at the Mini scene, Mini Transat, the Figaro racing and some Class 40 events. Clarisse Cremer, Justine Mettraux, for example. Their ability is proved beyond question.

Some of the ex SCA crew also look undeniably good, e.g. Sophie, and Annie, but then SCA where they proved their capabilities was all-woman and their skipper would know as fact who were the good ones.

When a crew of 9 with a big majority of men in it does well I just can't see how that logically promotes a woman in that crew or women in general one iota in this sport where clearly quite a few women are better than many men in level playing field competion where they are sadly the small minority of participants.

I think that after this race, many will have experienced that having female crew isn’t so scary. Many being both the public and current, male crew. We know that Tienpoint for example didn’t want Annemieke for all the legs, for whatever reason. So he obviously has some issues. 

I hope they will be considered just regular, good crew, not as good female crew. It’s not easy for them to “represent all women in general” all the time, they want to just be individuals. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jonas a said:

Maybe the male crew is scared of becoming redundant ;)

Yep. Not too many men will be saying they are better than Clarisse after this years performance. Can't see an equivalent situation for any woman from this years VOR. It could well be the case one or more of the women in the crews has made the winning difference for that crew but the event gives them zero opportunity to prove it. I will be waiting to see if any male skipper gives any woman such credit .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, the crew composition quotas will be adjusted slightly for the next race!

Come the end of this race it would be interesting to hear from the boats about how they feel the crew gender balance worked out.

However given the sensitivity of the subject I fear we will only get to hear comments which are designed or scripted so as not to upset... 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, SimonN said:

i have 2 daughters and I am imagining them at the ages of, say 12 and 15 following the Volvo. I think they would be horrified by what Witty said and that it would significantly reduce the chances of them wanting to take part in a Volvo

I wouldn't underestimate the sophistication and awareness of young girls these days.  What they discuss openly on the playground amongst themselves would make your hair curl. Witty's scrotum joke would probably elicit a "meh" at best.

As the parent of a most extraordinary young girl, I am more concerned about protecting her against the dark, subversive, hidden and less defendable acts perpetrated against women than I am about crude jokes made openly in public.  I can fully appreciate wanting to shield and protect our children.  But the world is horror show and compared to what is reported in the news, the cruelty that continues on a global scale and even in our own neighborhoods, Witt's comments are barely worth mentioning.  Try explaining Myanmar.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That kind of puts it in context Southern.

Unfortunately greater awareness of the ills you allude to in your second paragraph are also those which fuel paranoia and mistrust.........

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PeterHuston said:

Interesting to read that there is a rule 69 against Witt, Hayles, the OBR and a Volvo employee.  

Linky?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

I think that after this race, many will have experienced that having female crew isn’t so scary. Many being both the public and current, male crew. We know that Tienpoint for example didn’t want Annemieke for all the legs, for whatever reason. So he obviously has some issues. 

I hope they will be considered just regular, good crew, not as good female crew. It’s not easy for them to “represent all women in general” all the time, they want to just be individuals. 

 

Is that just down to a tactical decision of not wanting/needing an extra crew member for certain legs? 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, southerncross said:

I wouldn't underestimate the sophistication and awareness of young girls these days.  What they discuss openly on the playground amongst themselves would make your hair curl. Witty's scrotum joke would probably elicit a "meh" at best.

As the parent of a most extraordinary young girl, I am more concerned about protecting her against the dark, subversive, hidden and less defendable acts perpetrated against women than I am about crude jokes made openly in public.  I can fully appreciate wanting to shield and protect our children.  But the world is horror show and compared to what is reported in the news, the cruelty that continues on a global scale and even in our own neighborhoods, Witt's comments are barely worth mentioning.  Try explaining Myanmar.

I also think that this need to protect the women in your family from bad men is a natural instinct. My own brother is very protective and have knocked down men who have openly flirted....but only if he thought it was unwanted ;) 

Of course you want your girls to be treated with kindness and respect. And they probably will be if they choose to sail. Why wouldn’t they? I have met no bad behavior from male sailors. I once sailed with an owner who shouted “get the cock out” when he meant the bow sprit. Another male crew shouted back to him that he should keep in mind that there was a female on board...and I felt a little bad, I didn’t want them to go around and give me any special treatment. I thought it was a natural metaphor and was not at all offended. 

I think 99% of the sailors are nice guys who will treat your girls just fine. 

They will however experience bad behavior in all scenes of life but so do all of us. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mad said:

Is that just down to a tactical decision of not wanting/needing an extra crew member for certain legs? 

I guess. But why just her then....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, rogerfal said:

That kind of puts it in context Southern.

Unfortunately greater awareness of the ills you allude to in your second paragraph are also those which fuel paranoia and mistrust.........

Very true.  Tough call for parents these days.  Do you toss 'em to the wolves like our parents did?  "Bugger off and don't come back til dinner time."  Or do you inject yourselves into every moment of their conscious and subconscious childhood. Fine line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NORBowGirl said:

I guess. But why just her then....

I’m not sure what the original crew line up looked like, was it always 7 plus 2 with both being rotated, or specifically as you say? 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, southerncross said:

Very true.  Tough call for parents these days.  Do you toss 'em to the wolves like our parents did?  "Bugger off and don't come back til dinner time."  Or do you inject yourselves into every moment of their conscious and subconscious childhood. Fine line.

Not an easy job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mad said:

I’m not sure what the original crew line up looked like, was it always 7 plus 2 with both being rotated, or specifically as you say? 

I don’t remember. But it was mentioned as a reason why she left that team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

Of course you want your girls to be treated with kindness and respect. And they probably will be if they choose to sail. Why wouldn’t they? I have met no bad behavior from male sailors. I once sailed with an owner who shouted “get the cock out” when he meant the bow sprit. Another male crew shouted back to him that he should keep in mind that there was a female on board...and I felt a little bad, I didn’t want them to go around and give me any special treatment. I thought it was a natural metaphor and was not at all offended. 

Yeah.  I don't think we're going to find any young women hocking their Opti's on Craigslist anytime soon because their love and passion for sailing was squashed by the "insensitive" and "morally reprehensible" comments of a Volvo Ocean Race skipper.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, PeterHuston said:

Interesting to read that there is a rule 69 against Witt, Hayles, the OBR and a Volvo employee.  

https://www.sailingillustrated.com/single-post/2017/12/04/VOR-One-hears-a-Rule-69-protest-has-been-filed-against-Scallywag-skipper-David-Witt-and-three-others-–-including-two-VOR-employees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, stief said:

Nothing (as I expect most know) on VOR  IJ  noticeboard.

I guess there must be a private noticeboard.

Worth highlighting the change in the rule from "gross misconduct" to misconduct".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, one also hears that there is another protest brewing – from a team that are alleging that Dongfeng Race Team broke the sail/gear stacking rules during Leg 2. We'll have more on all this on our Tuesdays with TFE Facebook Live netcast tomorrow at 1300 Pacific / 1600 Easter / 2100 UTC.

Are these the poles used to hold up the sails I saw somewhere?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have a quick link to the rules re the poles and stacking?

Am being lazy..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rogerfal said:

Do you have a quick link to the rules re the poles and stacking?

Am being lazy..

I think it was the start of Leg 2, maybe 1.  The commentator pointed them out.  Not even sure it was Dongfeng.  But I remember thinking to myself, "Haven't seen those before.  Must be new."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think I remember them from the last race so perhaps permitted. Will take a look at the SI's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"unnamed

3 minutes ago, rogerfal said:

Do you have a quick link to the rules re the poles and stacking?

Am being lazy..

re stacking (class rules) My quick lazy check showed:

(3)  Additional lashings no larger than 4mm in outside diameter and bungee cord no larger than 6mm in outside diameter may be used to retain equipment and lace lifelines etc. However they may not be used directly as sail or appendage control lines, or for stacking purposes other than as attachment loops on pad eyes. Clips may be fitted to the ends.

(4)  Sail stacking straps may be carried onboard provided they are not used to stack equipment other than sails, and are not used as running rigging.

(5)  Sail ties may be carried onboard provided they are not used to retain stackable equipment below deck further outboard than they would otherwise be located.

 

  1. C.5.2  MOVEABLE EQUIPMENT
    Items and equipment that may be moved for the purposes of altering trim and stability unless fixed under rule C.5.1are:

    1. (a)  Sails and battens

    2. (b)  Portable electronics

    3. (c)  Personal items and equipment

    4. (d)  Food and drink, including containers and bags

    5. (e)  Running rigging

    6. (f)  Constant wear survival suits

    7. (g)  Outriggers

    8. (h)  Stacking posts

    9. (i)  Wet weather gear

    10. (j)  Spares and tools

    11. (k)  Other equipment not specified or sealed.

    The total weight of the moveable equipment may be limited by NOR or SIs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, stief said:

And they repost the video....haha. 

It’s still funny and I can’t see anything negative in her reaction. 

I hope she will get to say her opinion in the hearing on Thursday. I’ll respect her opinion no matter what it is, I don’t care about how anybody else feel about it and especially not the old judges who probably think women are so fragile they can’t handle this. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not impressed with Sailing Illustrated. "unnamed"  VOR employees. How many does that smear? Rumoured DF protest. And I thought speculation was bad here. Pah.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

And they repost the video....haha. 

It’s still funny and I can’t see anything negative in her reaction. 

I hope she will get to say her opinion in the hearing on Thursday. I’ll respect her opinion no matter what it is, I don’t care about how anybody else feel about it and especially not the old judges who probably think women are so fragile they can’t handle this. 

Agree. And they reposted without giving credit to the source. Pah again, I say. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, stief said:

Not impressed with Sailing Illustrated. "unnamed"  VOR employees. How many does that smear? Rumoured DF protest. And I thought speculation was bad here. Pah.

Perhaps it's time VOR issued a brief statement. It would not require going into detail at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rogerfal said:

Perhaps it's time VOR issued a brief statement. It would not require going into detail at this point.

Might be a good test. The new management have been deafeningly silent for weeks now. Maybe this will get them to show us which way they will lean. Even silence will be significant. I grudgingly learned to trust Knut Frostad and Mark Turner. They said what they could more often than expected by back-room-boys standards, and so when they were silent (as Mark Turner has been recently), that was good enough for me to trust there was a good reason. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SI article has additional names. 

Quote

TOM EHMAN
CAPE TOWN – Your Ed. is reliably informed, and we have confirmed through several of our normal top sources, that a Rule 69 protest has been filed against Team Sun Hung Kai/Scallywag and their skipper David Witt (AUS), helmsman Steve Hayles, the On-Board Reporter (a VOR employee), and another person involved with the dissemination of the video in question.
[....]

 

Shotgunning rule 69 protests, including what I suspect is VOR media staff. Sounds like a lot of fun...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, stief said:

Agree. And they reposted without giving credit to the source. Pah again, I say. 

How I wish to have witnessed the discussion they had about posting it or not...the pros and cons must have been interesting. 

....or is nothing discussed at sailing illustrated when their ed is the source? 

“Hey, here’s a video of how a woman was treated very badly and we can see that she feels bad - let’s publish it”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that the article says she feels bad NORBow.  As you said that's not how it looks on the video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

How I wish to have witnessed the discussion they had about posting it or not...the pros and cons must have been interesting. 

....or is nothing discussed at sailing illustrated when their ed is the source? 

“Hey, here’s a video of how a woman was treated very badly and we can see that she feels bad - let’s publish it”

"They" have had some interesting things to say about SA before. I think this is the second, maybe third time Sailing Illustrated has "scooped" Clean in this VOR edition. Fine, let them play their journo games. "Disrepute" -- pah!

Worse though is no mention of the Magenta post process that you and Potter rightly brought up.  Nah. If we thought SA was bad for front page trolling . . . 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is a Rule 69 protest the video in itself becomes newsworthy.

No feeling about it, other than clicks and ad revenue.

 

Makes me wonder when the first OBR bleeps everything. Or the first team tries to NOR 9.10 the OBR together with the jumper. ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, rogerfal said:

Interesting that the article says she feels bad NORBow.  As you said that's not how it looks on the video.

I remember that I had a feeling that she looked baffled when I first saw it, I think it was a longer version. I then said that we can’t really tell how she felt, she might have had fun making it but figured maybe some might react negatively on it. 

No baffled looks in this shorter version though...

And we don’t know her in person so it’s hard to read her expressions. All is speculation - including what I say, of course. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree.

Hopefully we will get to see a full transcript of her view and hopefully it will be her true feelings.

Speculation on my part but I suspect she might play down her response in the interest of supporting her team.

Ideally she really doesn't care and is more interested in getting on with the racing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought one of the best bits of OBR was from James Blake aboard Akzo when he posted the divergent views of the crew after navigator/watch miscommunication that cost them some miles.  

It wasn't made up drama or tom foolery, just straight unbiased journalism about how the very real emotional swings and discourse that can occur in a race like this.  The story line continued but never as raw as in that instance. I was left hoping for more.  The story got notice with some speculation and discussion but that is what's necessary to generate interest and an intimate understanding of the race.

They've only done two legs and barring any unexpected event such as a dismasting, have already filmed and photographed just about everything there is to see aboard a 65' boat.  They'll have to dig deeper into the story.

BTW.  Sam was excellent as well.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

I remember that I had a feeling that she looked baffled when I first saw it, I think it was a longer version. I then said that we can’t really tell how she felt, she might have had fun making it but figured maybe some might react negatively on it. 

No baffled looks in this shorter version though...

And we don’t know her in person so it’s hard to read her expressions. All is speculation - including what I say, of course. 

 

I've been joking around with male and female friends, and also my partner, when they have taken it down one more level of grossness leaving me speechless and had a camera been filming, perhaps my reaction would have looked similar to Dr Clogs. It's not that the comments made offended me or made me feel uncomfortable, I just could not make a comeback.

As you say, we don't know her. We don't know what joking around happens onboard off camera and we don't know her involvement in the other joking. 

In that article the words "sexual harassment" was used... Given that the joke was asking Dr Clogs how the 2 crew members should apply the sudocream, it's the 2 crew who should be perceived as being sexually harassed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, pudge said:

From my perspective it was a painfully awkward exchange, this is completely unacceptable misconduct. This brings up a point too that there should be no boats with just 1 female onboard as she was grossly outnumbered.

I’m curious, what exactly was unacceptable in your opinion? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hoppy said:

I've been joking around with male and female friends, and also my partner, when they have taken it down one more level of grossness leaving me speechless and had a camera been filming, perhaps my reaction would have looked similar to Dr Clogs. It's not that the comments made offended me or made me feel uncomfortable, I just could not make a comeback.

 

That would probably have been my reaction too :) and I can’t hide my emotions either so I can’t play poker. 

I don’t get why the scrotum should be so offensive. It’s just a regular part of the male body and fun to play with. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I see your point Norbow, and the irony, but mine isn't about gender.

I see some heated discussion above, funni how we have different opinions on whether Witty's antics are worthy of offence to some, while the only reason we are talking about this is that some people got offended.  Nothing to do with the opinion of those here, it's the broader community that is in control on this, something that some here will not concede, or cannot understand.  Hard to tell ...

But talking about hard to tell ... just yesterday I listened to a podcast about female reaction to so called Cat Calling, Wolf Whistling or public arse slapping/touching.  Study was sone in Sydney.  They found that the overwhelming majority of females were at least slightly alarmed by it, depending on where they were at the time.  Many were concerned that they have been targeted and that the interaction may escalate.  At the same time they have been socially conditioned that the best way to deal with threatening situations was to smile and go along with it while you separate yourself from the potential aggressor.  This makes it impossible for the offending male to know whether his comments/actions have offended the women or not and gives them the impression that "all women dig it".

So on one of these boats, what option does the women have if the humour, conversation or actions makes her uncomfortable?  Clearly the women in Witty's video was not enjoying it, she was so compromised that she could not even speak, did not know what to say.  She couldn't separate herself from the situation and had no option but to go along with it.

In these boats an aware officer in charge would have intuitively sussed this and made sure that the boat culture never went anywhere near compromising situations.  But some people are the Cat Calling type and don't get this.

 

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

It’s just a regular part of the male body and fun to play with. 

LOL. You're a nut!  No pun intended.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, random said:

Yes I see your point and the irony, but mine isn't about gender.

I see some heated discussion above, funni how we have different opinions on whether Witty's antics are worthy of offence to some, while the only reason we are talking about this is that some people got offended.  Nothing to do with the opinion of those here, it's the broader community that is in control on this, something that some here will not concede, or cannot understand.  Hard to tell ...

But talking about hard to tell ... just yesterday I listened to a podcast about female reaction to so called Cat Calling, Wolf Whistling or public arse slapping/touching.  Study was sone in Sydney.  They found that the overwhelming majority of females were at least slightly alarmed by it, depending on where they were at the time.  Many were concerned that they have been targeted and that the interaction may escalate.  At the same time they have been socially conditioned that the best way to deal with threatening situations was to smile and go along with it while you separate yourself from the potential aggressor.  This makes it impossible for the offending male to know whether his comments/actions have offended the women or not and gives them the impression that "all women dig it".

So on one of these boats, what option does the women have if the humour, conversation or actions makes her uncomfortable?  Clearly the women in Witty's video was not enjoying it, she was so compromised that she could not even speak, did not know what to say.  She couldn't separate herself from the situation and had no option but to go along with it.

 

You don’t know what she felt, nobody knows but herself. 

And the video was actually talked about here long before this blew up. First negative thing I saw about it was on the magenta Facebook page and then I mentioned that here. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PC police and feminists are destroying the world in their pursuit of gender equality by trying to chain up men through fear and intimidation. They expect men to rein in their behaviour to the same standard that has been traditionally expected of women. This is just wrong...

Gender equality should be achieved by removing the chains from women, freeing them to be able to act how they please rather than how society expects them to behave. Sure, some "traditional" aspects of male behaviour should be reined in, but at the end of the day men and women should have their behaviour judged at some middle ground.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hoppy said:

PC police and feminists are destroying the world in their pursuit of gender equality by trying to chain up men through fear and intimidation. They expect men to rein in their behaviour to the same standard that has been traditionally expected of women. This is just wrong...

Gender equality should be achieved by removing the chains from women, freeing them to be able to act how they please rather than how society expects them to behave. Sure, some "traditional" aspects of male behaviour should be reined in, but at the end of the day men and women should have their behaviour judged at some middle ground.

So you are saying that the behaviour is acceptable if it only offends 50% of those watching it?  Because that's what middle ground means.

That might be ok for you but this conversation is about what might he acceptable to the potential customers of the sponsors and I can tell you that they are after more than 50%.  If you want to sell more shit you need maximum audience liking what they see.

Why is it so fucking hard for people here to see the commercial aspects of this issue?  Oh, I get it, it's because they are only capable of commenting on their own personal views.

 

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, random said:

 

Why is it so fucking hard for people here to see the commercial aspects of this issue?  Oh, I get it, it's because they are only capable of commenting on their own personal views.

 

That’s kind of the idea of an internet discussion forum. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

That would probably have been my reaction too :) and I can’t hide my emotions either so I can’t play poker. 

I don’t get why the scrotum should be so offensive. It’s just a regular part of the male body and fun to play with.

Awesome attitude, maybe you will be reminded of this and asked to demonstrate on your next crewing job. 

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, random said:

So you are saying that the behaviour is acceptable if it only offends 50% of those watching it?  Because that's what middle ground means.

If society was to move to a status of gender equality by meeting a middle ground, then the people who were truely offended would be the blue on the left and the people who found it the best joke ever would be the blue to the right.  No black and white 50%

z-300x274.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The commercial point is valid but taking things to the n'th degree if something offends anybody it is not ok.. IMO that is just as much if not more of a problem. Freedom.

Otherwise where does the line get drawn?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, random said:

In these boats an aware officer in charge would have intuitively sussed this and made sure that the boat culture never went anywhere near compromising situations.  But some people are the Cat Calling type and don't get this.

The Aware Officer?  That's just it.  There's no end to it.  What authority, what rule book can be written, outlining what will offend who in this overly sensitive environment?  Someone, somewhere will be offended by something.  The opposition is to the degree to which his nonsense has gone.  The result will be nothing of any human interest or value coming off the boats.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, random said:

Awesome attitude, maybe you will be reminded of this and asked to demonstrate on your next crewing job. 

How do you think I got my current gig...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, rogerfal said:

Otherwise where does the line get drawn?

Where ever the sponsor says.

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some hard line to draw... Hence the reason people talk about this stuff I suggest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NORBowGirl said:

How do you think I got my current gig...

I'm starting to get the idea, if that works for you, others may want to be judged on other criteria.

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, random said:

Awesome attitude, maybe you will be reminded of this and asked to demonstrate on your next crewing job. 

NORBowGirl will be welcome to crew on my boat, not for the sudocream, but her sense of humour would fit in. Most importantly having her onboard would motivate my partner to crew on some races as there would be an extra social dimension to being onboard.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hoppy said:

If society was to move to a status of gender equality by meeting a middle ground, then the people who were truely offended would be the blue on the left and the people who found it the best joke ever would be the blue to the right.  No black and white 50%

z-300x274.jpg

I'm sure Witty will use that when he faces up to the Rule 69 hearing, I'm sure that will get him off the hook.

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, random said:

Where ever the sponsor says.

Ever see what happens to a brand when it's customer base turns off of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One can hope the start of the new leg will tame this thread a bit, if anything ..

(with Dee getting 6th and witt 7th that time)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, random said:

I'm starting to get the idea, if that works for you, others may want to be judged on other criteria.

What idea? Elaborate. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, yl75 said:

One can hope the start of the new leg will tame this thread a bit, if anything ..

Shhh. It's the honeypot thread that is designed to attract the trolls and others who ran out of one-liners in the S-H and PA threads. I was just thinking how we can also attract red fonts, and free the other RTW threads. You know, get all the trolls together in one thread.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that this all happened on the boat "Scallywag" I thought we should consider some definitions of the word...

from Urban Dictionary

  • A person who is known to be a treacherous lying son-of-a-bitch, and usually smells bad. 
  • A paper chasing, gold diggin' female who is willing to give up sex in exchange for nice things. ie; jewlery, and, money. 2.A female/male who is just a low-down dirty slut, who has no shame in "fucking for nothing".
  • white Southerner supporting Reconstruction policies after  the Civil War usually for self-interest syn: scalawag 
  • a deceitful and unreliable scoundrel syn: rogue, knave, rascal, rapscallion, scalawag, varlet 
  • one who is playfully mischievous syn: imp, scamp, monkey, rascal, rapscallion, scalawag 
  • what your mom calls me when I do her in a pirates outfit doggystyle. syn: big daddy, master, king cock  

Oxford English dictionary

  • A person, typically a child, who behaves badly but in an amusingly mischievous rather than harmful way; a rascal.
  • A white Southerner who collaborated with northern Republicans during the post-Civil War reconstruction period.

 

The joke seems to me to be appropriate to how the boat is named...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I hear about what happened, the more I believe that many of you need to get your heads out of your arses. According to the reports, a group of men rehearsed a a skit that they then sprung on the only female in the crew. It doesn't matter how she reacted. it was done specifically to see how she would react. That is harassment, pure and simple.

If it had been banter that got out of hand with comments comments came out in the spur of the moment, while not acceptable, it is excusable. But make no mistake. Now it seems likely that it was premeditated and they knew what they were doing, there are absolutely no excuses. You cannot even take the reaction as evidence it is acceptable. I have watched and i cannot tell if the reaction is shock, disbelief, resigned acceptance of poor behaviour or even fully happy to be part of it, but that is irrelevant. The event that is wrong has already taken place.

Just to be clear. A premeditated attempt to get a get a reaction from a woman by using explicit and lewd material is sexual harassment. It is that simple.The reaction of the woman is irrelevant. The location is irrelevant. The fact they are a mixed crew on a racing boat is irrelevant. This is not PC gone crazy or people needing to harden up. This was sexual harassment. If you cannot get that, then you are part of the problem.

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SimonN said:

The more I hear about what happened, the more I believe that many of you need to get your heads out of your arses. According to the reports, a group of men rehearsed a a skit that they then sprung on the only female in the crew. It doesn't matter how she reacted. it was done specifically to see how she would react. That is harassment, pure and simple.

 

I don’t get why mentioning the scrotum is so offensive. I really don’t. 

Maybe it’s a European thing. And she’s Dutch! They don’t even have separate dressing rooms for men and women, they all get naked together. Half the videos from Brunel last edition couldn’t be used, because they were all naked. Wouldn’t have made the slightest difference it one of the Dutch crew were female either. 

I still stand on my personal view, that the only opinion about it I really respect is the one from Annemieke. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SimonN said:

The more I hear about what happened, the more I believe that many of you need to get your heads out of your arses. According to the reports, a group of men rehearsed a a skit that they then sprung on the only female in the crew. It doesn't matter how she reacted. it was done specifically to see how she would react. That is harassment, pure and simple.

If it had been banter that got out of hand with comments comments came out in the spur of the moment, while not acceptable, it is excusable. But make no mistake. Now it seems likely that it was premeditated and they knew what they were doing, there are absolutely no excuses. You cannot even take the reaction as evidence it is acceptable. I have watched and i cannot tell if the reaction is shock, disbelief, resigned acceptance of poor behaviour or even fully happy to be part of it, but that is irrelevant. The event that is wrong has already taken place.

Just to be clear. A premeditated attempt to get a get a reaction from a woman by using explicit and lewd material is sexual harassment. It is that simple.The reaction of the woman is irrelevant. The location is irrelevant. The fact they are a mixed crew on a racing boat is irrelevant. This is not PC gone crazy or people needing to harden up. This was sexual harassment. If you cannot get that, then you are part of the problem.

Were you on board? Do you know the banter that happened on board before the video was shot and do you know Annemieke's involvement in the banter?

As far as we know, Annemieke could be giving as good as she get's onboard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, SimonN said:

The more I hear about what happened, the more I believe......

Apart from the video please supply links for first hand reports of the incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

I don’t get why mentioning the scrotum is so offensive. I really don’t. 

Maybe it’s a European thing. And she’s Dutch! They don’t even have separate dressing rooms for men and women, they all get naked together. Half the videos from Brunel last edition couldn’t be used, because they were all naked. Wouldn’t have made the slightest difference it one of the Dutch crew were female either. 

I still stand on my personal view, that the only opinion about it I really respect is the one from Annemieke. 

It's not like the joke was asking Dr Clogs to apply the sudocream, just advice on how the crew members can apply it.

With a 10mth old daughter, I'm well versed at applying sudocream and there is most certainly 1000000% nothing sexual about it.

It does feel like there are too many people who are looking too hard to find something to be outraged about so they can rant on social media (or forums) and feel superior. Let's just agree with them that it is offensive or SH and massage in the sudocream to keep them, happy ;)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

I still stand on my personal view, that the only opinion about it I really respect is the one from Annemieke.

Which you do not have.  In the end your personal view is irrelevant, the only one that counts is that of the sponsors of the boat and the event.  We continue to have posters here under the impression that their opinion some how matters. 

Oh, then there is the annoying pesky little issue a a rule or two.  Rule 69?

Meanwhile I have a video showing how uncomfortable she appeared to be.  That expression "I was speechless" is applicable here.  She was literally speechless, looking repeatedly and self-consciously at the camera.  Squirm factor 11.

Unfortunately, if she ever made any comments on this, they would be affected by her knowledge of the extremely small professional community she works in.  Admitting that she did not like being put in that situation would be professional suicide.  But I'd like to see her prove me wrong.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FORUM...... for debate no?

And yes rules and sponsor/s will out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, random said:

 

Unfortunately, if she ever made any comments on this, they would be affected by her knowledge of the extremely small professional community she works in.  Admitting that she did not like being put in that situation would be professional suicide.  But I'd like to see her prove me wrong.

I don’t think it will be a professional suicide. I think that if she felt bad and said so, the rest of the crew would respect that and apologize. There’s no reason they would want to make one of their crew feel bad. They voluntarily sail together and not for the first time either. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well at least Sailing Illustrated has corrected parts of their story (in their post that Hayles is out)

Quote

A couple corrections to our earlier story, and some details we have since learned....

The hearing on Thursday involves only Messrs Witt and Hayle. We were told others were also protested (as we reported in our earlier story), but if they were they will not be part of Thursday's hearing. It may be that no one else was protested other than Witt and Hayles, and that we were misinformed. It wouldn't have happened if the VOR Management were transparent with protests and related information by posting to a public notice board. We have not been able to obtain a copy of the protest, at least not yet. Apparently the protest was filed during Leg 2 which ended over a week ago, and the team was not informed until after the finish. It only became public when we broke the news here on Sailing Illustrated earlier today.

We also hear that the offending (to some) video was posted to the team's section of the VOR website by a close friend of Mr Witt who serves on the Scallywag PR team. It then automatically re-posted to the VOR raw feed, without comment by VOR staff, which carries all such photos and videos coming in from the boats, almost real time. Moreover, apparently the VOR staff kept taking down the video only to find it repeatedly re-posted by the Scallywag team. No doubt this tidbit will be taken into account by the Jury, and presumably the VOR media team are reviewing their protocols. There's a lot of race left – Leg 3 of 11 starts this Sunday, Cape Town to Melbourne, 6500 miles through the rambunctious Southern Ocean.

https://www.sailingillustrated.com/single-post/2017/12/04/VOR-One-hears-that-Steve-Hayles-GBR-has-left-Team-Sun-Hung-KaiScallywag-after-a-row-with-skipper-David-Witt-AUS

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NORBowGirl said:

I don’t think it will be a professional suicide. I think that if she felt bad and said so, the rest of the crew would respect that and apologize. There’s no reason they would want to make one of their crew feel bad. They voluntarily sail together and not for the first time either. 

My partner was a nurse and one of the male nurse she worked with was pushing the boundaries of acceptable behaviour. So she took him aside and told him off in no uncertain terms and there after they had a good working relationship.

Recently she was contacted by another male former colleague asking her to make a complaint about the guys behaviour in relationship to sexual harassment. She refused because she thought his behaviour was no big deal and it was more likely the SH complaint was just to cover up that the Swedes did not like the muslim nurse but did not want to appear racist.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the preceding blather and virtue signalling has been interesting.

Who cares what the gender of the crew is as long as they are compatible and able to get the work done competently.  

Some tasks respond best to upper body strength, others to lighter weight up a spar.  

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, stief said:

That’s priceless!

they correct their article that was based on hear-say and blame the Volvo?!  How about waiting to write something until you have confirmed facts...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NORBowGirl said:

That’s priceless!

they correct their article that was based on hear-say and blame the Volvo?!  How about waiting to write something until you have confirmed facts...

where's the fun in that :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, NORBowGirl said:

I think that after this race, many will have experienced that having female crew isn’t so scary

Unless you like to make jokes...;)

2 hours ago, pudge said:

From my perspective it was a painfully awkward exchange, this is completely unacceptable misconduct. This brings up a point too that there should be no boats with just 1 female onboard as she was grossly outnumbered.

You would find my perspective about your perspective quite unacceptable, I reckon...

1 hour ago, SimonN said:

The more I hear about what happened, the more I believe that many of you need to get your heads out of your arses. According to the reports, a group of men rehearsed a a skit that they then sprung on the only female in the crew. It doesn't matter how she reacted. it was done specifically to see how she would react. That is harassment, pure and simple.

If it had been banter that got out of hand with comments comments came out in the spur of the moment, while not acceptable, it is excusable. But make no mistake. Now it seems likely that it was premeditated and they knew what they were doing, there are absolutely no excuses. You cannot even take the reaction as evidence it is acceptable. I have watched and i cannot tell if the reaction is shock, disbelief, resigned acceptance of poor behaviour or even fully happy to be part of it, but that is irrelevant. The event that is wrong has already taken place.

Just to be clear. A premeditated attempt to get a get a reaction from a woman by using explicit and lewd material is sexual harassment. It is that simple.The reaction of the woman is irrelevant. The location is irrelevant. The fact they are a mixed crew on a racing boat is irrelevant. This is not PC gone crazy or people needing to harden up. This was sexual harassment. If you cannot get that, then you are part of the problem.

She was wearing a beard for fuck's sake, she was part of it. Your whole post is an insult to intelligence except for those who may live in your imaginary world.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

That’s priceless!

they correct their article that was based on hear-say and blame the Volvo?!  How about waiting to write something until you have confirmed facts...

"John Doerr" Is that his real name?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, NORBowGirl said:

I don’t think it will be a professional suicide. I think that if she felt bad and said so, the rest of the crew would respect that and apologize. There’s no reason they would want to make one of their crew feel bad. They voluntarily sail together and not for the first time either. 

Well I think it would and history is on my side, when it comes to comments off the boat.  One side would not like being disagreed with, and the other side would be cautious about taking on someone capable of publicly outing the crew, telling stories out of school.  Lose/lose for her.

It's a whistle blower situation, they never benefit.

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, LionessRacing said:

the preceding blather and virtue signalling has been interesting.

Who cares what the gender of the crew is as long as they are compatible and able to get the work done competently.  

Some tasks respond best to upper body strength, others to lighter weight up a spar.  

 

Your first sentence, interesting, disingenuous? Yes/ No

Agree with your 2nd & 3rd sentences however the reality is there are sponsors, misconduct hearings, comments in the press media etc.etc.

Like it or not (and much of the time I don't) the way women and men behave towards one another is more under scrutiny than ever before. Well certainly in the UK...

It's a bit like "sport & politics don't mix"  - we all know the reality of that often used but seldom true phrase..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, chuso007 said:

"John Doerr" Is that his real name?

Yes

Quite high profile and experienced IJ. Has been involved in many top level events for more than one decade... And consequently has had a controversy or two deal with over the years...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, chuso007 said:

Unless you like to make jokes...;)

You would find my perspective about your perspective quite unacceptable, I reckon...

She was wearing a beard for fuck's sake, she was part of it. Your whole post is an insult to intelligence except for those who may live in your imaginary world.

implied-facepalm-implied-facepalm-demoti

  • Downvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NORBowGirl said:

I don’t get why mentioning the scrotum is so offensive. I really don’t. 

Maybe it’s a European thing. And she’s Dutch! They don’t even have separate dressing rooms for men and women, they all get naked together. Half the videos from Brunel last edition couldn’t be used, because they were all naked. Wouldn’t have made the slightest difference it one of the Dutch crew were female either. 

I still stand on my personal view, that the only opinion about it I really respect is the one from Annemieke. 

Norbowgirl, you're a shining light amongst some old-line hillbillies, who will never see the new light.

Have mercy on those poor pungent members, they are beyond Sudocrem...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone who fancies a bit of reading

World Sailing has issued a document entitled Misconduct Guidance written by a working party chaired by John Doerr

www.racingrulesofsailing.org/posts/38-world-sailing-misconduct-guide

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, rogerfal said:

Your first sentence, interesting, disingenuous? Yes/ No

 

"Interesting" is not disingenuous, a car wreck can be interesting to observe from a distance, but not something I would choose to experience. 

 

15 minutes ago, rogerfal said:

Agree with your 2nd & 3rd sentences however the reality is there are sponsors, misconduct hearings, comments in the press media etc.etc.

 

sophomoric behavior is less tolerated now than ever before in my lifetime. Whether that is net good remains to be seen. In the US, we have progressed a bit from the harassment panics of the '80s to at least a sense of due process in private companies, though the recent expulsions of public figures that they employ suggests that there has been some level of denial/acceptance of bad behavior that was well understood and is not longer tolerated. 

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites