All-Star "males - Minimize Exaggerated Or Theatrical Movements"

[Rudags]

Who run the world.....Boys!!!!!

I think that song is a bit too theatrical for choreography.

 

[lilpapsgirl]

I think that song is a bit too theatrical for choreography.

My thoughts exactly.


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?2hikwi

 

[ACEDAD]

The ACLU Intake counselor I have been working with is transferring everything I presented to someone higher up at the ACLU. They called today to let me know I will be hearing back from someone on Monday regarding the issue. They basically said since they took everything down and sent out the email regarding they are going to review it - everything is pretty much at a stand still.

GLAAD called back! They let me know they have had some other phone calls about it and several people are currently working on the issue. They knew that the USASF pulled everything down. They are waiting to see what the USASF's next move is before they take their next step. Apparently the Los Angeles GLAAD has someone who used to cheer on staff.

Lets hope for a public apology soon.

Has anyone else heard anything back from anyone? The lawyer I talked to made a connection between what was said and because they singled out a group of individuals because of a physical characteristic that they have no choice in. It would be discriminatory.

Is an apology all you're seeking?

I agree that the language was offensive and silly. But I'm not sure that going to the ACLU and GLAAD was the right answer.

Maybe if you asked for an apology/correction and didn't get it....

I would generally only hope those groups would need to be involved if the comments were intended to be hurtful. While we may debate the thought process of the whole announcement, I seriously doubt you could find that the board of the USASF intended the release to be hurtful.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Rudags]

Is an apology all you're seeking?

I agree that the language was offensive and silly. But I'm not sure that going to the ACLU and GLAAD was the right answer.

Maybe if you asked for an apology/correction and didn't get it....

I would generally only hope those groups would need to be involved if the comments were intended to be hurtful. While we may debate the thought process of the whole announcement, I seriously doubt you could find that the board of the USASF intended the release to be hurtful.

Just my thoughts.

I had numerous people contact me, and I do feel, with that wording, it was discriminatory. And hey - it didnt hurt to see what I thought as advice from these groups. If they think there is no merit, then I suppose they will tell me that and we'll be on our merry way.

I have asked for a PUBLIC apology to be made. Nothing yet, but I do understand they are busy and probably double checking semantics. I don't think that the person that wrote this is homophobic - but I do feel the corporation that wrote this has an image in mind that limits how they want males to act and be portrayed.

I really do think a public apology is necessary to make this problem go away and to regain any sort of relationship with the USASF again.

 

[Babs]

Is an apology all you're seeking?

I agree that the language was offensive and silly. But I'm not sure that going to the ACLU and GLAAD was the right answer.

Maybe if you asked for an apology/correction and didn't get it....

I would generally only hope those groups would need to be involved if the comments were intended to be hurtful. While we may debate the thought process of the whole announcement, I seriously doubt you could find that the board of the USASF intended the release to be hurtful.

Just my thoughts.

I do think it is worth investigating. While I agree the USASF board probably did not intend for it to be hurtful, it appears they did intend for it to be binding.

 

[ACEDAD]

I had numerous people contact me, and I do feel, with that wording, it was discriminatory. And hey - it didnt hurt to see what I thought as advice from these groups. If they think there is no merit, then I suppose they will tell me that and we'll be on our merry way.

I have asked for a PUBLIC apology to be made. Nothing yet, but I do understand they are busy and probably double checking semantics. I don't think that the person that wrote this is homophobic - but I do feel the corporation that wrote this has an image in mind that limits how they want males to act and be portrayed.

I really do think a public apology is necessary to make this problem go away and to regain any sort of relationship with the USASF again.

But was it "illegally" discriminatory?

And even if they do have a behavior in mind, I'm not sure that's a bad thing. I'm pretty sure all governing bodies of sports have a behavior policy.

Keep in mind that I think the language was very ham-handed. But I just don't think the intent was there. And I just hate the idea of getting outside legal beagles sniffing around.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

I do think it is worth investigating. While I agree the USASF board probably did not intend for it to be hurtful, it appears they did intend for it to be binding.

What do you mean by binding?

 

[Rudags]

But was it "illegally" discriminatory?

And even if they do have a behavior in mind, I'm not sure that's a bad thing. I'm pretty sure all governing bodies of sports have a behavior policy.

Keep in mind that I think the language was very ham-handed. But I just don't think the intent was there. And I just hate the idea of getting outside legal beagles sniffing around.

I can't answer if it was 'illegally discriminatory' as I am not a lawyer.

What I can answer, is that I think a simple apology could go a long way. The proper persons have been contacted about my thoughts on an apology. I don't think that an apology will mean they admit to a 'homophobic' error if worded correctly. Apologize for the semantics and say it wasn't the intention. I get what they were GETTING at. All they had to do was add 'males AND females. However, the message that was portrayed was not that of a good one.

 

[King]

But was it "illegally" discriminatory?

And even if they do have a behavior in mind, I'm not sure that's a bad thing. I'm pretty sure all governing bodies of sports have a behavior policy.

Keep in mind that I think the language was very ham-handed. But I just don't think the intent was there. And I just hate the idea of getting outside legal beagles sniffing around.

Illegal? Probably not. Terrible PR if in the wrong hands. Imagine of a personality got ahold of it. What if Ellen took an interest?

 

[Babs]

What do you mean by binding?

Merely that these were put out as rules, not suggestions.

 

[JumpingJackFlash]

I can't answer if it was 'illegally discriminatory' as I am not a lawyer.

What I can answer, is that I think a simple apology could go a long way. The proper persons have been contacted about my thoughts on an apology. I don't think that an apology will mean they admit to a 'homophobic' error if worded correctly. Apologize for the semantics and say it wasn't the intention. I get what they were GETTING at. All they had to do was add 'males AND females. However, the message that was portrayed was not that of a good one.

And that takes me back to thinking, who are these people at USASF? To put out that statement the way they did, not one of them thought about the repercussions of it. We all took it as a derogatory comment in a NY minute.

 

[ACEDAD]

Illegal? Probably not. Terrible PR if in the wrong hands. Imagine of a personality got ahold of it. What if Ellen took an interest?

I completely understand that. It was stupid. You think ACLU and GLAAD are the right hands?

Kyle has the right to do as he sees fit. I just think the firestorm of opinion from the athletes, coaches and parents was generating results.

 

[Rudags]

I completely understand that. It was stupid. You think ACLU and GLAAD are the right hands?

Kyle has the right to do as he sees fit. I just think the firestorm of opinion from the athletes, coaches and parents was generating results.

Next time I'll sit back and not stand up for something I feel is wrong.

 

[Just-a-Mom]

Merely that these were put out as rules, not suggestions.

The "etiquette and appearance" pages were not rules though. Just guidelines. So they weren't anything that would be enforced... just suggestions. The rules were the things about tumbling, ages, crop tops. The things about behavior and the thing about the males being less dramatic were on the guidelines "chart" (for lack of a better word). If they hadn't pulled it all down I could link and explain it better. But the comment about males, while grossly offensive, wasn't an actual rule. BAD timing to put them all out as a package, as I think many people were confused that they were all rules, but they were 2 separate documents.

 

[Rudags]

I completely understand that. It was stupid. You think ACLU and GLAAD are the right hands?

Kyle has the right to do as he sees fit. I just think the firestorm of opinion from the athletes, coaches and parents was generating results.

I guess I feel that if its TRUELY not an issue, then no one has anything to worry about. I will be told "This is not an issue" and I'll have to get over it. wouldn't be the first thing the USASF presented I had to get over.