Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Gonzaga!
PRESS RELEASE
For more information please contact your local Officer of Politically Correct Thought
###
As a result of the recent "Brokeback Mountain" scandal at Gonzaga (Google it dummy - ed) several other cheers and taunts directed from one group to another (or individual athletes) at sporting matches have been deemed insensitive and are henceforth banned. As sampling of the banned cheers include:
"That's alright. That's OK. You're going to work for us someday" has been deemed offense to liberal arts students whose choice in major renders them unemployable in today's business climate. This includes Philosophy, the Fine Arts (visual, performance and music) and, of course English. A rider to this law also recognizes that the chant is offensive when directed by Ivy League students to State School students as it emphasizes the economic disparity between the two groups.
"It's all your fault!" when directed at goalies (hockey, soccer and lacrosse), place kickers, and relief pitches has been deemed offensive as it hurts the feelings of the individual player. We recognize that a goal scored against a team or a team loss is due to the communal "failure" to prevent such a loss and should not be ascribed to one particular player. We do, however, recognize that in individual events (eg. long distance running) any individual failing to come in first place CAN be heckled because it is indeed their fault for not winning.
"Hold that Tiger!" when shouted at a sporting event in which Princeton is one of the teams indicates a desire to violate the personal space of an individual. Banned.
"Kill the ref!" for obvious reasons. Deep psychological damage akin to Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome has been observed in Referees subjected to this hateful taunt. Banned.
"We want a pitcher, not a belly-itcher" has been found to be disruptive to baseball pitchers at all levels of play (from local elementary school leagues to the Majors). Not only is it disruptive to the pitcher in question, it is unabashedly offensive to individuals suffering from bedbugs, fleas, poison oak, ivy or sumac, and psoriasis. Banned.
Furthermore, all cheerleaders henceforth shall be covered head to toe in burkas. Lustful male fans, and the occasional lesbian fan, when directing their gaze at bare midriffs, heaving chests and toned arms and legs are viewing the cheerleaders as objects and not individuals. This is sexist and continues the misogynistic, male-dominated, paternalistic society that is clearly the source of suffering and misery here and abroad.
Finally, there is consideration to ban all sporting events. For there to be a winner, there must be a loser. And nobody wants to be a loser. We are all sensitive, caring, feeling people NOT losers. This type of thinking devalues us all and is unacceptable. A ruling on this issue is expected in six to nine months.
For more information please contact your local Officer of Politically Correct Thought
###
As a result of the recent "Brokeback Mountain" scandal at Gonzaga (Google it dummy - ed) several other cheers and taunts directed from one group to another (or individual athletes) at sporting matches have been deemed insensitive and are henceforth banned. As sampling of the banned cheers include:
"That's alright. That's OK. You're going to work for us someday" has been deemed offense to liberal arts students whose choice in major renders them unemployable in today's business climate. This includes Philosophy, the Fine Arts (visual, performance and music) and, of course English. A rider to this law also recognizes that the chant is offensive when directed by Ivy League students to State School students as it emphasizes the economic disparity between the two groups.
"It's all your fault!" when directed at goalies (hockey, soccer and lacrosse), place kickers, and relief pitches has been deemed offensive as it hurts the feelings of the individual player. We recognize that a goal scored against a team or a team loss is due to the communal "failure" to prevent such a loss and should not be ascribed to one particular player. We do, however, recognize that in individual events (eg. long distance running) any individual failing to come in first place CAN be heckled because it is indeed their fault for not winning.
"Hold that Tiger!" when shouted at a sporting event in which Princeton is one of the teams indicates a desire to violate the personal space of an individual. Banned.
"Kill the ref!" for obvious reasons. Deep psychological damage akin to Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome has been observed in Referees subjected to this hateful taunt. Banned.
"We want a pitcher, not a belly-itcher" has been found to be disruptive to baseball pitchers at all levels of play (from local elementary school leagues to the Majors). Not only is it disruptive to the pitcher in question, it is unabashedly offensive to individuals suffering from bedbugs, fleas, poison oak, ivy or sumac, and psoriasis. Banned.
Furthermore, all cheerleaders henceforth shall be covered head to toe in burkas. Lustful male fans, and the occasional lesbian fan, when directing their gaze at bare midriffs, heaving chests and toned arms and legs are viewing the cheerleaders as objects and not individuals. This is sexist and continues the misogynistic, male-dominated, paternalistic society that is clearly the source of suffering and misery here and abroad.
Finally, there is consideration to ban all sporting events. For there to be a winner, there must be a loser. And nobody wants to be a loser. We are all sensitive, caring, feeling people NOT losers. This type of thinking devalues us all and is unacceptable. A ruling on this issue is expected in six to nine months.
posted by Anonymous, 1:51 PM
3 Buffaloes were bitter enough to post comments:
I read in MAXIM there is a move afoot to ban "Sieve!" as a goalie taunt, because upon further reflection it was determined that sieves are, in fact, commonly used in kitchens across the world as a barrier that prevents one type of material (vegetables, meat, etc.) from winding up in an undesirable area (the sink, a hot pan, etc.). MAXIM suggested "perforated condom!" as a more mechanically appropriate (and sexually charged) taunt, but a readers' poll rejected that in favor of "big hole!" Whatever you think about the issue, I think we can agree MAXIM readers are pretty astute.
See? My satire was so subtle that even the poster who wrote the original satire at which my homage was directed didn't get it. As everyone knows, I read that in Esquire, not MAXIM.
Yes, Im good. AND sutble.