You Can't Call a Pretty Girl Pretty; What Kind of Country Are We Becoming?

Here's a cogent point for you. The fact that some, small (and as far as we actually know, imaginary) segment of the population was offended by the commentators comments doesn't warrant a apology from anyone unless someone was harmed. Even if we stipulate that your above argument is true (which I don't...and I am a successful, professional woman...not a man who participates in 'de-valueing' women for their looks), all Mr. Mussberger did was state his opinion and compliment a beautiful woman. He in no way took anything away from any other person on the planet. No harm, no foul. Additionally, as the mother of a very successful and beautiful daughter, I encourage both her looks and her intellect, because in the real world we know that

it helps to have both. You can be as idealistic as you want, but looking good never hurts anyone.

It's not that looking good hurts anyone, or that Brent took anything away from anyone else. I'm glad that you and your daughter are pretty. I'm sure that has made both your lives better than it otherwise would have been.

The comment, especially as followed by Kirk, idealized her beauty and implicitly attributed some of her success to it, as in, "you girls can also be the sexual object of the star QB if you're pretty enough." I don't oppose celebrating attractiveness in the proper venue--heck, this girl is a model so she obviously doesn't mind being objectified, but its the message being sent to the national audience that those who were offended had a problem with.

That you didn't mind the comment doesn't mean that the group that

was offended is imaginary, too small, or too unimportant to care about. Musberger has a responsibility to maintain a family friendly atmosphere during the broadcast of those games, and many feel he fell short of that aspiration on that circumstance. Regardless of whether its his opinion, it has no place on a national television sports broadcast if it offends that many people.

I honestly found it to be pretty innocuous, but I'm not into marginalizing people's opinions. If there is a vocal enough group, they'll get something, which in this case was an apology. At least they didn't call for his head like Don Imus. Brent makes a lot of money for ESPN, so I doubt they would fire him unless the outcry was HUGE. He's pretty safe.

I don't really think "you, too, could hang on the arm of a QB," is the message we still want to send to the little girls watching.

Secondly, while those comments were made about a specific person, they were directed at a national audience, so people have every right to disagree with them and to challenge their import. I personally find them pretty innocuous. But that doesn't take away from or undermine the argument of those who were truly offended.

Finally, I'm happy for Mark Davis that he doesn't believe that anyone was actually offended, but I just don't care. That's a loser of an argument for someone who simply failed to make his case.

I think you are being selective in your argument. "First, our society devalues intellect, character, and basically every other value with positive connotation when it comes to women."

Come on, just women? Look at sitcoms (I actually don't watch any, but am familiar with some). The typical scenario is the stupid, pathetic husband matched with a smart, savvy woman. This would be the case with "World According to Jim" to "Everybody Loves Raymond" to dozens other. But really, wt, I think you should lighten up a bit.

No response, wt? I made a cogent point refuting a major point of your argument, and you just sailed past me to tobogun? Well, I don't expect anything at this point, it being a dead column by now. But by your own definition, you lost this particular argument. It doesn't fit your narrative, so it doesn't exist.