OT: First Calls for Companies to Cut Ties with Peyton Manning
Link: http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/peyton-manning-womens-group-wants-sp…
Caveats: No, this does not make him guilty of anything. No, I do not support (or reject) this particular feminist/woman's rights organizations. No, I am not trying to get a bunch of people to argue about some reporter who has no credibility, statutes of limitations, race, etc.
What I do think will be interesting to watch is what happens from here. Laugh at these kinds of "demands" from activist groups if you want, but they are often effective. Ultimately, these businesses will do what they think is best for their bottom lines. So who is more powerful - Peyton and the NFL, or his/their critics???
February 17th, 2016 at 3:28 PM ^
precisely.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:16 PM ^
thou doth protest too much.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:18 PM ^
So, more caveats to try to direct the conversation in a non-hostile direction, or fewer? :-)
February 17th, 2016 at 2:20 PM ^
You gotta slap that crap out there and own it! The conversation will go where it goes. It always does.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:24 PM ^
You gotta toe that line. You don't want people to think you care about social issues TOO much. Saying you're a feminist? Bad move. You're done. Saying you hate women? Boom. Also done. You have to convince people that you don't care about women's rights, but also that you're not actively against them.
This get's way more complicated when more than one type of activism is involved.
February 17th, 2016 at 3:28 PM ^
/s
Fuck you.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 17th, 2016 at 3:45 PM ^
I thought for sure that I didn't need the "/s" because of how ridiculous my statement was, but I can totally see why you thought I was serious.
February 17th, 2016 at 4:14 PM ^
"bad move" really gives it away
February 17th, 2016 at 2:30 PM ^
Methinks "methinks" is one word.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:31 PM ^
Shakespeare.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:20 PM ^
February 17th, 2016 at 2:29 PM ^
February 17th, 2016 at 2:36 PM ^
February 17th, 2016 at 8:35 PM ^
February 17th, 2016 at 3:57 PM ^
Is it because the pizza is shit?
Edit: Had this tab open way too long in the background. Late to the party.
February 17th, 2016 at 4:36 PM ^
+1 anyway champ!
February 17th, 2016 at 2:22 PM ^
Everyone is so negative. I see this as an opportunity for him to become the face of Lipton Tea or Moonpies, depending on whose version of the story you believe!
February 17th, 2016 at 3:16 PM ^
February 17th, 2016 at 3:36 PM ^
With that said this comment made me:
Go Blue
February 17th, 2016 at 4:26 PM ^
Mount...
February 17th, 2016 at 2:22 PM ^
February 18th, 2016 at 9:41 AM ^
Not sure if this was intended, but I read that to the tune of the Nationwide jingle.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:23 PM ^
you are obviously trying the old "no politics but let me slip in all my political views" crap. DESTROY THIS POST.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:26 PM ^
"Politics?" Really? Which party is he backing here? It looks more like wry observation of sports and media to me.
Maybe "Metamedia" would be a better term.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:30 PM ^
Thank you so much for your positive feedback [JCV16]. While I cannot respond to all of my fans personally, please know that your kind words mean a lot!
~mofo
February 17th, 2016 at 3:12 PM ^
Seriously. Has your handle always been mofo? I could have sworn it was fomo this entire effing time. Dead serious.
February 17th, 2016 at 3:48 PM ^
He has 2 accounts. Fomo and Mofo.
Edit: Add Ofom to that list. I didn't know you could change around your account name.
February 17th, 2016 at 4:01 PM ^
More like F(w)o(lverine)mo and M(dev)o(tee)fo amirite?
Am I doing this right?
February 17th, 2016 at 4:57 PM ^
'Twas.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:32 PM ^
This may not be politics politics, but when a headline begins "Women's group wants..." there are few message boards on the internet who can handle following the spirit of the "no politics" rule.
February 18th, 2016 at 1:38 AM ^
women
February 17th, 2016 at 2:30 PM ^
February 17th, 2016 at 6:26 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 17th, 2016 at 8:33 PM ^
Flash-frying the mushroom? (I just made that up. What do you think?)
February 17th, 2016 at 2:31 PM ^
Do you know what "politics" means? It doesn't seem so.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:35 PM ^
especially on a sports blog. Just because there are political views that can be attached to an issue doesn't mean: [1] that it was his intention to start a discuss of the values of said views; [2] that he is attempting to state his own polital view; or [3] that the topic cannot be discussed without embarking upon a political debate.
Peyton Manning is a popular figure and, especially in light of the Manning v. Brady rivalry, its an interesting topic that's worth discussing. Furthermore it can easily be discussed without venturing into devisive political discussions.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:30 PM ^
dude you got too much time on your hands
are you going to turn MGoBlog into a yahoo feed?
February 17th, 2016 at 2:34 PM ^
February 17th, 2016 at 2:47 PM ^
Did Puffington Host not have this up yet?
February 17th, 2016 at 4:47 PM ^
Leftist feminists don't watch sports
/s
February 17th, 2016 at 2:41 PM ^
February 17th, 2016 at 3:37 PM ^
February 18th, 2016 at 1:40 AM ^
if he does, i'll have to find another source for all the people who have passed. oh wait, yahoo does those too. never mind
February 17th, 2016 at 2:37 PM ^
Women
February 17th, 2016 at 2:42 PM ^
are awesome.
February 17th, 2016 at 2:52 PM ^
Just like men. And some aren't.
Just like men.*
*It's looking, of course, like Peyton may be in the "aren't" camp - at least based on this week's revelations.
February 17th, 2016 at 7:47 PM ^