Message Received

Tomorrow, the CBC will start broadcasting the While the Men Watch audio feed. I wrote down my feelings last week, and they are unchanged. Mostly unchanged.

I said that I don't hate on women, but the more that I see of these women, the more I dislike what they are doing and what they represent. It is not the vapid Cosmo-style commentary. Okay, it is not only the vapid Cosmo-style commentary that is making me hate them. It is this thinly veiled campaign to misrepresent what they are offering and acting slighted and victimized and surprised in the process.

Last Wednesday, the CBC announced the partnership with this tweet:

 

A co-worker said this was a great incentive on behalf of the CBC to grow an audience. I had to explain to him that the language of this tweet is divisive, alienating and patronizing. What wasn't apparent to my co-worker was not missed by a vast number of women and men alike that expressed shock and disgust in seeing our national public broadcaster promote such an obviously offensive error in judgement.

The day after the announcement, CBC Television's Executive Director of Studio and Unscripted Programming Julie Bristow was on Toronto radio avoiding questions about whether or not this was appropriate and pushing the fact that the women currently employed by CBC Sports, including Hockey Night in Canada's Cassie Campbell-Pascall are all publicly enthusiastic about the potential of While the Men Watch. 

Since then, While the Men Watch hosts Jules Mancuso and Lena Sutherland have been all over the CBC and I've been noticing an unsettling repetition of phrases and key words that can only have been set out in as an initiative to stem the growing concern that the CBC is violating its own "Policy 1.1.3:Guidelines on Sex-Role Portrayal". 

In articles, in an interview with Gord Stellick, and literally wandering the streets of Toronto with a camera asking people "Don't you think this is a good idea?" the refrains of "casual", "alternative" and "X's and O's" are stated as deliberately as the previous sentiment "for women" is now being avoided. Also being avoided by the CBC are any specific references to the terribly backward articles on the While the Men Watch blog, which are coincidentally what appear to be drawing the most ire in reference to the hosts themselves.

It's a transparent attempt by the CBC to change the "official message" while retaining the publicity that the notoriety has gained. Lena and Jules, revelling in the protection, have become blatantly smug about the powerlessness of their detractors and this is a very unattractive thing to behold.

Taste is subjective. What happens when this show airs and some people love it and some people hate it is irrelevant. The CBC enthusiastically introduced this project by implying that women do not watch sports. Now they are making their spokespeople enthusiastically endorse this thing using language dictated to them in a memo. This is corrupting the credibility and fondness for CBC's on-air personalities developed over the length of a career, and the doubt that has been created will not soon be erased.

Bravo, CBC. You changed the message. Sexist pigs to pigheadedly obtuse. Message received.

THIS IS NOT OKAY

They call it the female perspective. I call bullshit. CBC has announced that during the Stanley Cup Final they are going to be offering an audio feed of something called While The Men Watch. Lena Sutherland and Jules Mancuso have been doing online commentary over popular sporting events that they describe as "sports commentary that women actually want to hear."

I had never heard of these women before today, and when a co-worker pointed out this Deadspin article to me I thought, that could be fun, but when I read this:

“In all seriousness, there is no shortage of talented female sportscasters out there who we respect. We just think it's more fun to talk about why so many gorgeous players come from Welland Ontario and why they all skate around with scotch tape holding up their socks. “

I was livid. Now, I am not in the business of hating on women and I'd be lying if I told you that I did not ogle the men on the ice, especially as the playoffs go on and they start getting all beardy and rugged Mmmmm.... So I really had to think. What is making me so angry?

These women call themselves “Sex in the City meets Hockey Night” and their commentary centres around fashion, sex and wilfully misunderstanding the rules of the game, or acting as if they don't understand what is going on because they perceive this to be clever or funny. I can't fault these women for doing what they are doing. They fully own up to what they are selling- but here's the problem- I'm not buying. This is not “sports commentary that women actually want to hear.” I can say this because I am a woman.

Now I could have happily gone on ignoring these two but CBC had to go ahead and legitimize this nonsense as “sports commentary that women actually want to hear” and this is not okay.

It is offensive to intimate that women need a special dumbed-down, sexed-up feed in order to appreciate, tolerate or sit through a hockey game and this is not okay.

It is offensive to suggest that given the choice, I would rather listen to two women that are working to preserve every antiquated assault on good sense and self esteem that Cosmo has to offer over your own very fine, skilled and qualified announcers and this is not okay.

It is extremely, unbelievably offensive to tell other people that this is sports commentary that I actually want to hear because when you say this about me YOU MAKE ME LOOK LIKE AN ASSHOLE and this is DEFINITELY NOT OKAY.

Eleanor Roosevelt famously said “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.” The CBC may have made me angry, but I do not accept their premise. I will however, accept their apology.

DAN

 

Dan seemed innocuous. He was the first to respond to my half filled out ad, telling me, “You need to change your picture, dear. Guys wont respond if they can't see your eyes.” The picture that I had chosen was a favourite from a recent vacation, hours after arriving in Paris and about to tuck into an amazing dessert. I love this picture because the expression of joy and glee on my face is so earnest, and because my hair looks so fantastic. He was right though. I was staring down at my food and as soon as I changed the photo to one where I was staring into the camera I began to get a lot more hits.

 

To thank Dan for his advice, I accepted his invitation to coffee. It was a Friday night and I chose a place downtown that was well lit and well attended for the occasion of my first internet date. His profile didn't say much specific about him. He mentioned having written several screenplays, but his personality and interests were vaguely described. I wasn't excited about Dan, but I was excited by the possibilities the medium promised and anxious to get started on my adventure. I viewed this as a practise date, but left myself open to opportunity. You never know!

Dan was waiting for me in his blue jacket when I got there. He had already bought himself a coffee so I got in line and bought one for myself and we settled into a booth. Those first few minutes were awkward. All that nervous energy, and not knowing where to begin. 

 

 

 

 

  

And that is pretty much how it went. The date lasted an hour. He told me that he gets his movies from the library and that he recently went through a very dark period. It was a crap first date, but walking home I felt oddly exhilarated by the possibility that the next one might not be, and I couldn't wait to find out.