Reply to: What a foul Munter

[vetran]

love·ly (lŭv′lē)
adj. love·li·er, love·li·est
1. Full of love; loving.
2. Inspiring love or affection.
3. Having beauty that appeals to the emotions as well as to the eye. See Synonyms at beautiful.
4. Enjoyable; delightful.
n. pl. love·lies
1. A beautiful person, especially a woman.
2. A lovely object.

Loveliness implies to me character rather than appearance. Oh she is Lovely, he is a love etc. Against 'what a handsome chap Vetran is' or 'Mich Would'

I sort of agree we tend to judge women more on appearance than competence, which sometimes is a blessing for the more attractive women.

[doodab]

Not one that's relevant to the job in hand, or one that would generally be commented on for a male presenter.

I'd disagree. TV hosts in general, aside from your Paxmans in attack dog mode, need to be charming, witty, personable individuals. It's certainly commented on if they aren't.

[d000hg]

Not one that's relevant to the job in hand

I'm not sure about that.

[mudskipper]

Is loveliness not a talent?

Not one that's relevant to the job in hand, or one that would generally be commented on for a male presenter.

[Mich the Tester]

Or perhaps Clare could be chuffed that her presenting achievements are because of her talent, not her loveliness?

From wikipedia;

Balding applied to read law at Christ's College, Cambridge but failed her interview and realised that law was not what she most wanted to do.[3] She later successfully applied to Newnham College, Cambridge and read English.[5] While at university she was President of the Cambridge Union Society in Easter 1992 and graduated in 1993 with a 2:1 honours degree.[citation needed]

From 1988 to 1993, Balding was a leading amateur flat jockey and Champion Lady Rider in 1990. She had an eating disorder during her time as a jockey.[

Right, so she's got the kind of educational background that makes her a good public speaker and presenter, and the kind of sporting background that gives her insight into what she's on about. She seems to me to be more than qualified to present sports programmes on the telly.

As for Sue Barker;

Susan "Sue" Barker, MBE (born 19 April 1956 in Paignton, Devon) is an English television presenter and former professional tennis player. During her tennis career, she won eleven WTA Tour singles titles, including one Grand Slam singles title at the 1976 French Open. She reached a career-high singles ranking of World No. 3

So she too is obviously eminently qualified to know what she's on about when talking about sport on telly.

[doodab]

Or perhaps Clare could be chuffed that her presenting achievements are because of her talent, not her loveliness?

Is loveliness not a talent?

[mudskipper]

Not that I see.

The adjective lovely can be interpreted as nice, kind, comapassionate or a hundred things other than a comment on Sue Barkers appearance. Clare Balding might be a little piqued she isn't lovely too I suppose.

Or perhaps Clare could be chuffed that her presenting achievements are because of her talent, not her loveliness?

[d000hg]

Clare Balding might be a little piqued she isn't lovely too I suppose.

Maybe she should make more of an effort.

[doodab]

Think about: (I'm making this up...!)

"The lovely Sue Barker presents Question of Sport"

"Clare Balding presents the Horse Show"

Is there a problem?

Not that I see.

The adjective lovely can be interpreted as nice, kind, comapassionate or a hundred things other than a comment on Sue Barkers appearance. Clare Balding might be a little piqued she isn't lovely too I suppose.

[d000hg]

He doesn't, I didn't get to the end of the thread.

He just knows where the line is as he constantly tiptoes up to it with some agility...

First time I've heard MF described as agile.

[speling bee]

Perhaps you could find such a thread and see?

There must be plenty of such threads about Fatty.

[mudskipper]

Yes, commenting on womens appearance is endemic, but that's because people care what women look like. One could argue that the real sexism is in the apathy shown towards mens appearance, especially when so many of them are so vain.

It's a double edged sword. Many women I know would be quite upset of no one gave a tulip what they looked like, e.g. noticed they'd had a haircut or made an effort to dress up. They would be even more upset if other women didn't notice. You can't have that situation one the one hand and live in a world where no one notices appearences on the other.

Think about: (I'm making this up...!)

"The lovely Sue Barker presents Question of Sport"

"Clare Balding presents the Horse Show"

Is there a problem?

[Dactylion]

Butt-face talks about avalanche (OK, he's not that ugly, but you get the drift...)

More plug than face - Shirley?

[doodab]

I think Bunk described the problem well. It wasn't the insult per se that was the issue, it was the fact that her being a 'munter' had nothing to do with the story. It's endemic - commenting on a woman's appearance (both good and bad) as if it adds/detracts from whatever the issue being discussed is - it's much less common with men. Think about how many have commented on Tracy Emin's appearance compared to Damien Hirst for example.

Yes, commenting on womens appearance is endemic, but that's because people care what women look like. One could argue that the real sexism is in the apathy shown towards mens appearance, especially when so many of them are so vain.

It's a double edged sword. Many women I know would be quite upset if no one gave a tulip what they looked like, e.g. noticed they'd had a haircut or made an effort to dress up. They would be even more upset if other women didn't notice. You can't have that situation one the one hand and live in a world where no one notices appearences on the other.

One could also argue the original post was about her appearance, not the story, so whether it had anything to do with the story or not is irrelevant.

Obviously this sort of thing doesn't really upset me that much as I'm not a woman, but I'm hard pressed to imagine a situation where a post arbitrarily insulting a random man would provoke a similar sort of outrage.

[mudskipper]

If I could be bothered. Men are generally insulted for different reasons as no one cares what they look like. Perhaps that should be taken into account as well.

I think Bunk described the problem well. It wasn't the insult per se that was the issue, it was the fact that her being a 'munter' had nothing to do with the story. It's endemic - commenting on a woman's appearance (both good and bad) as if it adds/detracts from whatever the issue being discussed is - it's much less common with men. Think about how many have commented on Tracy Emin's appearance compared to Damien Hirst for example.

How about: Butt-face talks about avalanche (OK, he's not that ugly, but you get the drift...)