Shane Sutton - Team Sky coach

[Dan2016]

Re: Re:

maybe it's just more crazy feminazis are on a rampage of totalitarian thoughtcrime punishment...

In the case of Sutton, as the evidence accumulates it seems increasingly likely that this is not the case. On the other hand, when it comes to what happened to Tim Hunt, the caricature you draw is far nearer the truth.

I'd agree with both the above. The difference however is actually nothing to do with sexism for me, but bullying. Hunt wasn't bullying. From all I've read, Sutton was. I'm pretty indifferent as to what gender is being bullied. It's unacceptable either way.

Sadly, the more time passes and the more Sky seem to be carrying on regardless with their endless winning classics and stage races alike, the more it seems as if SDB and his cronies will brazen it out because there isn't, after all, the appetite to 'cut off the withered arm' and see the whole 'Royal Mint' and 'Medal Factory' mythology being trashed.

I find it utterly perplexing why the current Cheese at BC is under any pressure when he's only been around 6 months. FFS - go after the reputations of the people who did the damage, not some poor idiot who's inherited the mess (albeit that he may well have done little to change it.)

Yep, agreed, a pattern of bullying, a toxic working environment. The sexism was part of that picture.

Lots of faces to sexism as you know. I don't know at what point Hunt was brought into this but it's a completely different case and a complete distraction, in my opinion anyway.

And looks like Gollum and his merry men are brazening it out. Hopefully at the very least all of this has raised some awareness though. Maybe signs of this with the British swimmers now speaking out about the same behaviours. Corporate bullies everywhere. There's a book I've been meaning to get on this, a study on the typical personality types at the head of large organisations, the conclusion being that they would predominantly meet the clinical diagnosis criteria for psychopathy (I think the book might say sociopathy) and narcissistic personality disorder.

 

[Robert21]

Re: Re:

The suffragette movement failed entirely, not least because it resorted to what today would be called a terrorist campaign - bombings, including one in Westminster Abbey, arson, slashing paintings in the National Gallery, trying to kill Asquith by throwing an axe at him and so on. Then, as now, the government was loath to give any concessions to those resorting to such terrorist tactics.

The only figure fighting to have the vote extended to all women (and men) was Sylvia Pankhurst, who was thrown out of the WSPU by her mother for her 'socialist' attitudes and opposition to the WSPU's terrorist activities.

A misleadingly simplified potted synopsis (and a bit irrelevant to the thread).

If it's simply that sexism and accusations thereof is a complicated matter, existing in both genders, with various social threads and unconscious bias and such and such and so forth, I'd hazard a guess that not many people would disagree.

It wasn't me who brought up the topic of the history of women's suffrage. However, that someone should think fit to do so in relation to the Sutton / BC case does illustrate what I have been saying - that much of the heat generated about what Sutton did or did not do has a lot more to do, in some people's minds anyhow, with the position of women in society generally, the result being that people like Sutton, Tim Hunt and so on end up having to 'pay' not so much for what they actually did but for all those wider injustices that are perceived to exist.

As to the history of Suffragette movement, this is hardly the pace to give a detailed account, so I can hardly be criticised for simplifying the story! (The real 'misleading simplification' is the popular view that 100 years ago most men had voting rights, and that ordinary women today have the suffragettes to thank for the fact that they have the vote.) As to the points you highlighted, it is true the the British government did not grant a single concession to the suffragette movement whilst it was active, due largely to their terrorist methods. (And surely no one today would argue that such terrorism is justified if society doesn't happen to be run the way you would like.) I do agree that it would have been more accurate to say that Sylvia Pankhurst was the only major figure, or only member of the Pankhurst family to be dedicated to fighting for the vote for ordinary women (and men).

As to your final point. Yes that is pretty much what I am saying, and think the reality is that many people would disagree with it! Certainly many of those attacking Tim Hunt had no time for such subtleties, and suggesting that even the Sutton case is not entirely black and white has seen some on here resorting to the usual cliched accusations of misogyny, 'wanting to see women back at the kitchen sink' and personal abuse.

 

[Robert21]

Re: Re:

Hopefully at the very least all of this has raised some awareness though. Maybe signs of this with the British swimmers now speaking out about the same behaviours.

What has happened with BC and Sutton is not restricted either to the UK, or males in position of power.

Boston University women’s basketball coach Kelly Greenberg is the latest to face accusations, after four players left the team this year and said they had been emotionally abused, in one case to the point that it triggered suicidal thoughts. The university is investigating the allegations against Greenberg, which are not a first: similar complaints were filed seven years ago.

Oakland University, meanwhile, says its former women’s basketball coach, Beckie Francis, obsessed over her players’ weight and forced her Christian views upon them. The university documented the “mental and emotional abuse” in a court filing responding to a lawsuit by Francis, who was fired in June.

And Rutgers University took heat last year for bringing on an athletics director who was accused of verbally abusing her volleyball players as a University of Tennessee coach. Julie Hermann had called players “whores, alcoholics and learning disabled,” they said, casting doubt on the person Rutgers picked to help restore credibility to an athletics program marred by former men’s basketball coach Mike Rice’s physical and mental abuse of players.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/03/13/are-reports-bullying-female-coaches-increasing-or-just-more-concerning

I'm not saying that the above excuses anything that BC and/ or Sutton might have done, but it does seem that BC and Sutton have been vilified to a much greater degree than any of the above were, in part because many are highly suspicious of how BC have got their results, and because Sutton is a seemingly 'old-fashioned', hard-headed male who fails to see that sexist language is unacceptable, living in a world where failing to be sufficiently 'PC' at all times is enough to see one's career destroyed.

 

[Random Direction]

Nonsense, and you know it. Tangential arguments designed to reduce the implied wrongs of Sutton. Treat each case on its merits.

 

[Robert21]

Re:

Nonsense, and you know it. Tangential arguments designed to reduce the implied wrongs of Sutton. Treat each case on its merits.

Not at all, and I am not trying to somehow excuse Sutton. What bothers me here is the unthinking, lynch mob mentality that always seems to surface in such cases. Of course you can believe otherwise if you wish. As I said, many people prefer to live in a simplistic, 'black and white' world.

 

[TourOfSardinia]

More lynch mob fuel for you Robert:

Email throws fresh light on British Cycling’s burying of bullying
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/24/email-throws-fresh-light-british-cycling-burying-bullying

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

The suffragette movement failed entirely, not least because it resorted to what today would be called a terrorist campaign - bombings, including one in Westminster Abbey, arson, slashing paintings in the National Gallery, trying to kill Asquith by throwing an axe at him and so on. Then, as now, the government was loath to give any concessions to those resorting to such terrorist tactics.

The only figure fighting to have the vote extended to all women (and men) was Sylvia Pankhurst, who was thrown out of the WSPU by her mother for her 'socialist' attitudes and opposition to the WSPU's terrorist activities.

A misleadingly simplified potted synopsis (and a bit irrelevant to the thread).

If it's simply that sexism and accusations thereof is a complicated matter, existing in both genders, with various social threads and unconscious bias and such and such and so forth, I'd hazard a guess that not many people would disagree.

It wasn't me who brought up the topic of the history of women's suffrage. However, that someone should think fit to do so in relation to the Sutton / BC case does illustrate what I have been saying - that much of the heat generated about what Sutton did or did not do has a lot more to do, in some people's minds anyhow, with the position of women in society generally, the result being that people like Sutton, Tim Hunt and so on end up having to 'pay' not so much for what they actually did but for all those wider injustices that are perceived to exist.

As to the history of Suffragette movement, this is hardly the pace to give a detailed account, so I can hardly be criticised for simplifying the story! (The real 'misleading simplification' is the popular view that 100 years ago most men had voting rights, and that ordinary women today have the suffragettes to thank for the fact that they have the vote.) As to the points you highlighted, it is true the the British government did not grant a single concession to the suffragette movement whilst it was active, due largely to their terrorist methods. (And surely no one today would argue that such terrorism is justified if society doesn't happen to be run the way you would like.) I do agree that it would have been more accurate to say that Sylvia Pankhurst was the only major figure, or only member of the Pankhurst family to be dedicated to fighting for the vote for ordinary women (and men).

As to your final point. Yes that is pretty much what I am saying, and think the reality is that many people would disagree with it! Certainly many of those attacking Tim Hunt had no time for such subtleties, and suggesting that even the Sutton case is not entirely black and white has seen some on here resorting to the usual cliched accusations of misogyny, 'wanting to see women back at the kitchen sink' and personal abuse.

Utter BS. Hunt acted like a sexist idiot in a very public way. There's consequences for that, no matter how nice of a guy he is normally. If the pope used the "N-word" while making a lame joke in front of a delegation from Africa, you could expect some fallout, no matter where he falls on the racist spectrum.

As for Sutton, his repeated behaviour over long periods demonstrates that he's harmful to the women around him. Call it whatever you want. At a minimum he needs to be removed to prevent further harm.

John Swanson

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

The suffragette movement failed entirely, not least because it resorted to what today would be called a terrorist campaign - bombings, including one in Westminster Abbey, arson, slashing paintings in the National Gallery, trying to kill Asquith by throwing an axe at him and so on. Then, as now, the government was loath to give any concessions to those resorting to such terrorist tactics.

The only figure fighting to have the vote extended to all women (and men) was Sylvia Pankhurst, who was thrown out of the WSPU by her mother for her 'socialist' attitudes and opposition to the WSPU's terrorist activities.

A misleadingly simplified potted synopsis (and a bit irrelevant to the thread).

If it's simply that sexism and accusations thereof is a complicated matter, existing in both genders, with various social threads and unconscious bias and such and such and so forth, I'd hazard a guess that not many people would disagree.

It wasn't me who brought up the topic of the history of women's suffrage. However, that someone should think fit to do so in relation to the Sutton / BC case does illustrate what I have been saying - that much of the heat generated about what Sutton did or did not do has a lot more to do, in some people's minds anyhow, with the position of women in society generally, the result being that people like Sutton, Tim Hunt and so on end up having to 'pay' not so much for what they actually did but for all those wider injustices that are perceived to exist.

As to the history of Suffragette movement, this is hardly the pace to give a detailed account, so I can hardly be criticised for simplifying the story! (The real 'misleading simplification' is the popular view that 100 years ago most men had voting rights, and that ordinary women today have the suffragettes to thank for the fact that they have the vote.) As to the points you highlighted, it is true the the British government did not grant a single concession to the suffragette movement whilst it was active, due largely to their terrorist methods. (And surely no one today would argue that such terrorism is justified if society doesn't happen to be run the way you would like.) I do agree that it would have been more accurate to say that Sylvia Pankhurst was the only major figure, or only member of the Pankhurst family to be dedicated to fighting for the vote for ordinary women (and men).

As to your final point. Yes that is pretty much what I am saying, and think the reality is that many people would disagree with it! Certainly many of those attacking Tim Hunt had no time for such subtleties, and suggesting that even the Sutton case is not entirely black and white has seen some on here resorting to the usual cliched accusations of misogyny, 'wanting to see women back at the kitchen sink' and personal abuse.

Utter BS. Hunt acted like a sexist idiot in a very public way. There's consequences for that, no matter how nice of a guy he is normally. If the pope used the "N-word" while making a lame joke in front of a delegation from Africa, you could expect some fallout, no matter where he falls on the racist spectrum.

As for Sutton, his repeated behaviour over long periods demonstrates that he's harmful to the women around him. Call it whatever you want. At a minimum he needs to be removed to prevent further harm.

John Swanson

Very much true and it appeared the sexist attitudes at the top rub off on the riders as well with insensitive comments by Wiggins and Kennaugh towards women.

 

[Dan2016]

Re: Re:

<snipped>

I'm not saying that the above excuses anything that BC and/ or Sutton might have done, but it does seem that BC and Sutton have been vilified to a much greater degree than any of the above were, in part because many are highly suspicious of how BC have got their results, and because Sutton is a seemingly 'old-fashioned', hard-headed male who fails to see that sexist language is unacceptable, living in a world where failing to be sufficiently 'PC' at all times is enough to see one's career destroyed.

(To your other post, I'll leave well alone the suffrage movement other than to say you are continuing to misleadingly simplify. A summary can be done quite comfortably without misleading).

Bolded above, language is telling. I might as well have bolded that whole section. You're not indicating that you agree at all with my proposed answer to the question ''what are you trying to say?''. And what's with all the Tim Hunt stuff, totally unrelated and bizarre. Are you Tim Hunt?

Anyway, I think you have a blind spot on this one. The bias in your postings comes through strongly, as does your attempts to confirm that bias with tangents, false comparisons, leaps of logic etc. Questioning perceptions is fine, everything should be open to question, but it needs objectivity - which includes recognition of personal bias - open mindedness and flexibility of thought. Instead, you seem to have predetermined your conclusions, and disagreeing with you only seems to reinforce your idea that everyone is brainwashed by militant feminist PC agendas. It's circular, self-confirming reasoning, like apologetics applied to sexism.

To just fully acknowledge Sutton's behaviour for what it is, without all the if's and but's and wriggling, shouldn't be difficult, yet you seem incapable of doing so.

 

[MmeDesgrange]

Wonder what happened about the kit being resold out of Sutton's flat? The man has form for that sort of thing - ask Welsh Cycling

 

[budegan]

Re:

Wonder what happened about the kit being resold out of Sutton's flat? The man has form for that sort of thing - ask Welsh Cycling

Go on! Tell!

 

[Robert21]

Re: Re:

Hunt acted like a sexist idiot in a very public way. There's consequences for that, no matter how nice of a guy he is normally.

Point is, the consequences for Hunt were wholly disproportionate, agenda driven and gendered. For proof of this just look at the relative lack of consequences when women have behaved in far more appalling ways. For example Assistant Chief Constable Rebekah Sutcliffe got away with a warning after her disgraceful behaviour. Similarly, Bahar Mustafa, Goldsmith Univerity's 'diversity officer' kept her job despite telling white men to stay away from the events she organised, adding hashtags to her work-related posts such as "kill all white men" and "misandry" and referring to Caucasian people as 'white trash'.

I am not saying that Sutton is innocent, but we should continue to keep in mind the illiberal, 'politically correct' environment in which his actions are judged.

 

[Robert21]

Re: Re:

you are continuing to misleadingly simplify.

An ironic statement, given that you appear to be determined to ignore the subtleties of everything I have been trying to say. That said, most of what you say just comes across as being nothing more than an ad hominem attack.

Anyhow, I must say that I have enjoyed the debate, even if I feel that I should really be offering up a prayer to Saint Jude.

 

[Darryl Webster]

Sutton, sexist or bully?
He,s both.
Having been in the same team as him in 88 I can recall him very clearly expressing the view that cycle racing " was no place for sheilas " and yes he did speak like that.
As my mrs was a former National Champion and Shane a notoriously aggressive fella I just ignored the idiot.
He really is a bloody Neanderthal .

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Re: Re:

Hunt acted like a sexist idiot in a very public way. There's consequences for that, no matter how nice of a guy he is normally.

Point is, the consequences for Hunt were wholly disproportionate, agenda driven and gendered. For proof of this just look at the relative lack of consequences when women have behaved in far more appalling ways. For example Assistant Chief Constable Rebekah Sutcliffe got away with a warning after her disgraceful behaviour. Similarly, Bahar Mustafa, Goldsmith Univerity's 'diversity officer' kept her job despite telling white men to stay away from the events she organised, adding hashtags to her work-related posts such as "kill all white men" and "misandry" and referring to Caucasian people as 'white trash'.

I am not saying that Sutton is innocent, but we should continue to keep in mind the illiberal, 'politically correct' environment in which his actions are judged.

Oh no! There's offensive idiots everywhere! How dare a woman get away with it once in a while. Outrage!

Sunshine, the bottom line is that nobody should have to put up with someone's offensive behaviour. And when the offensive idiot is in a position of authority, the offensive behaviour is straight up abuse because the victim doesn't have the power to stand up for themselves.

Now let's think for a minute. In your case you can just pretend and enjoy a minute's silence. Until very recent times, who is it that has held the VAST majority of these positions of power? Why yes. It's been men. Which makes women the ones who have disproportionately been the victims.

After some not too few centuries, we're not even a generation into creating a system of gender equality here in the "west". Some Asian and African societies figured it out forever ago, but I digress. There's every sensible right for good thinking people to be sensitive to *actual* gender inequality such as what happened at BC, especially because for some women it's *still* a part of their daily existence.

And if you reply, I'd like you to list the number of women that hold a position of direct authority over you. Then try to think of even one time they used that power to abuse you. Then ask any of the women in your life the same question, but in reverse. I bet there will be hours of anecdotes for you to ponder.

John Swanson

 

[Dan2016]

Re: Re:

you are continuing to misleadingly simplify.

An ironic statement, given that you appear to be determined to ignore the subtleties of everything I have been trying to say, misrepresenting my arguments and distorting them into a grossly simplified caricature or straw man.

Anyhow, I must say that I have enjoyed the debate, even if I feel that I should really be offering up a prayer to Saint Jude.

Saint Lucy can help you too

Distorting arguments isn't my style. I don't think you've presented a subtle, coherent argument, and I attempted to point out your own words to you. But a lot gets lost in translation on forums, that's a given.

Questioning and challenging is good, but I don't agree with your method and think your apparent conclusion are unjustified. Tim Hunt, agreed, overreaction. Potential in society for overreaction and censoring of expression with labels like sexist being too easily used, agreed. Censoring free expression and thought is a problem and it's a pertinent discussion being had by many, scholars and universities included. Militant, over-reactive feminism exists (in a minority), but feminism is an extremely diverse philosophy and women are extremely diverse in their views. I've not seen your argument reflect this and men simplifying women is in itself a very entrenched sexist attitude, unconsciously held by far too many still.

It appears that you've fixated on what happened to Tim Hunt and concluded ''feminist hegemony'', and used cases of women not being sacked for bullying and misandry as supporting evidence. Needless to say, that's not a serious argument. If that's a distortion then please correct it. I'm not trying to win an argument.

Regarding Sutton, it would appear he is de facto sexist. It appears he has solely bullied women. If he bullied men too then he's an 'equal opportunities bully'. Whatever the case, it seems clear he's a bully and deserved to be sent packing. Will you only fully believe this if some male riders come out and say it?

 

[Darryl Webster]

I know for a fact Sutton has bullied men to...we are not likely to see any of his victims disclose it for much the same reason we rarely see men report domestic abuse .

 

[Irondan]

Re: Re:

you are continuing to misleadingly simplify.

An ironic statement, given that you appear to be determined to ignore the subtleties of everything I have been trying to say, misrepresenting my arguments and distorting them into a grossly simplified caricature or straw man.

Anyhow, I must say that I have enjoyed the debate, even if I feel that I should really be offering up a prayer to Saint Jude.

<snipped for brevity>

Regarding Sutton, it would appear he is de facto sexist. It appears he has solely bullied women. If he bullied men too then he's an 'equal opportunities bully'. Whatever the case, it seems clear he's a bully and deserved to be sent packing. Will you only fully believe this if some male riders come out and say it?

Well, here's a male rider that has come out and said it.... Do you believe it now?

I know for a fact Sutton has bullied men to...we are not likely to see any of his victims disclose it for much the same reason we rarely see men report domestic abuse .

 

[Dan2016]

Re:

I know for a fact Sutton has bullied men to...we are not likely to see any of his victims disclose it for much the same reason we rarely see men report domestic abuse .

Really interesting contribution, as is your other one above. Didn't know you posted here. (I don't know you personally by the way, I just live in the UK and your racing days are very well known). Would be good if men spoke out more but as you say they rarely do.
So, further confirmation Sutton is a Neanderthal, going back many years. Should've been booted out a long time ago, or more to the point never been put in a managerial position.

 

[thehog]

Re: Re:

I know for a fact Sutton has bullied men to...we are not likely to see any of his victims disclose it for much the same reason we rarely see men report domestic abuse .

Really interesting contribution, as is your other one above. Didn't know you posted here. (I don't know you personally by the way, I just live in the UK and your racing days are very well known). Would be good if men spoke out more but as you say they rarely do.
So, further confirmation Sutton is a Neanderthal, going back many years. Should've been booted out a long time ago, or more to the point never been put in a managerial position.

Leaving Sutton in charge and Brailsford with a £78m budget was tantamount to dictatorship, put it up there with Saddam Hussian and Idi Amin. They were very successful dictortors just like the "medialist" winning ways of Brailsford.

 

[Benotti69]

Re: Re:

I know for a fact Sutton has bullied men to...we are not likely to see any of his victims disclose it for much the same reason we rarely see men report domestic abuse .

Really interesting contribution, as is your other one above. Didn't know you posted here. (I don't know you personally by the way, I just live in the UK and your racing days are very well known). Would be good if men spoke out more but as you say they rarely do.
So, further confirmation Sutton is a Neanderthal, going back many years. Should've been booted out a long time ago, or more to the point never been put in a managerial position.

Leaving Sutton in charge and Brailsford with a £78m budget was tantamount to dictatorship, put it up there with Saddam Hussian and Idi Amin. They were very successful dictortors just like the "medialist" winning ways of Brailsford.

Seems Sutton was acting as the muscle for Brailsford. How sad is that!!!

 

[MmeDesgrange]

You do know, just because some women haven't experienced sexism in an organisation, doesn't mean systematic sexism doesn't exist?

 

[Benotti69]

Lizzie Deignan nee Armistead backs Varnish.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/31/lizzie-armitstead-becomes-latest-rider-to-accuse-british-cycling-of-sexism?CMP=share_btn_tw

 

[BYOP88]

Re:

Lizzie Deignan nee Armistead backes Varnish.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/mar/31/lizzie-armitstead-becomes-latest-rider-to-accuse-british-cycling-of-sexism?CMP=share_btn_tw

Just a bitter woman who couldn't make it in cycling...........oh wait!!!

 

[yaco]

Sport and in this case cycling is a microcosm of society where bullying is rampant in all institutions of life - Society has a poor history in willingly acknowledging bullying and acting on bullying - I chuckle when people rail about taxpayer's money spent on cycling - Reckon there is more extensive cases of bullying involving taxpayers dollars.