Angels fire Mickey Callaway, placed on MLB Ineligible List through 2022

[bruin5]

1 minute ago, Jinzu said:

There are plenty of instances of misconduct by men in all professions. All of those should be punished.

A man trying to give her his number because he found her attractive is not one of them.

Would you defend a man’s claim of feeling like a victim and that “it was somehow his fault” because a woman gave him her number on his first day of work?

You are totally lost on this.  The telephone number story just was her setting the context.  That on her first day in a clubhouse a player hit on her and made her feel uncomfortable.  Maybe because, and reasonably so, she though that an appearance of dating a player would be bad for her career of being a journalist.   

And, it’s not something that would result in the players release.  Rather, it was an opportunity for the coach to have a conversation with that player to tell him it was not appropriate and set boundaries - a coaching moment. 

[AngelsLakersFan]

Just now, calscuf said:

I empathize with poor Mickey. He's going to lose his career over a few missteps. 

We should stop and ask ourselves whether or not the punishment fits the crime. 

[Jay]

2 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

Don't assume that baseball lockerrooms are pick-up joints.

By the same token it shouldn't be assumed that baseball locker rooms are full of choir boys.

[jsnpritchett]

1 minute ago, Jay said:

By the same token it shouldn't be assumed that baseball locker rooms are full of choir boys.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? 

[jsnpritchett]

1 minute ago, ScottT said:

It probably works sometimes.  That story she shared seems incredibly mundane. 

To you.  Clearly not to her.  That's part of the issue with situations like this, or the Porter/Callaway situations: it doesn't really matter that much what the intentions were or that they thought it was harmless/"a joke"/etc.  Assuming that people that you're interacting with professionally are open to personal relationships/interactions is a recipe for disaster.

[mtangelsfan]

I don’t see where she or any other party benefits from her coming out with her story.  There doesn’t seem to be much doubt it happened.  
 

He should be fired.  

[34red4]

10 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

Again, I'm not focusing too much on that specific example in the thread.  That said, she's using that as the example of how she was "introduced" to the clubhouse setting.  I think her point in using that as an example is simply that on the very first day she was doing something "professional" (I count internships as professional), someone tried to turn it into a personal situation without any indication from her that that was acceptable at the time.  Regardless of gender, if you're going into a situation expecting to work and interact with people on a professional basis and some random person who you've never interacted with sends you their number, yeah, I could imagine that a lot of people would find that to be awkward.

The TL:DR version: Don't assume that baseball lockerrooms are pick-up joints.

I respect your point of view. In my opinion, the player did not do anything wrong. It was not stated he disrespected her in any way.

FYI. 22% of US married couples met at work.

[jsnpritchett]

2 minutes ago, Jinzu said:

I respect your point of view. In my opinion, the player did not do anything wrong. It was not stated he disrespected her in any way.

FYI. 22% of US married couples met at work.

So a small minority.  Got it. 

And, yeah, sure, I know couples who've met at work, too.  I don't think any of them met by one of them passing a note through another co-worker asking for their number without ever speaking to them--on their first day, no less.

I think we're losing sight of the bigger picture/problem, though, by continuing to focus on one specific example, so I'll bow out of discussing the number request further, if that's ok.

[ten ocho recon scout]

3 hours ago, Taylor said:

Who is the pitchfork and torches crew?

Most of us in the "we got cobb" thread

[Angel Oracle]

1 hour ago, Second Base said:

Agreed. I actually hope this can be resolved without him being fired, but am not anticipating that happening. MLB took the correct first step in creating the anonymous reporting service. 

I actually don't think reporters should even be allowed in the clubhouse in the first place, male or female. Maybe narrow three interactions to simply post game press conferences and hopefully get rid of this inside scoop culture that had elevated guys like Jon Heyman. 

Exactly, only allow the reporters  at the post-game press conferences, and just extend their length.    Don’t create any doubts.

Edited February 3, 2021 by Angel Oracle

[Taylor]

42 minutes ago, AngelsLakersFan said:

We as a society seem to have lost the ability to empathize with others. 

"It doesn't offend me, so it shouldn't bother anyone" is what most people seem to think.

[Taylor]

38 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? 

It was the same argument used when the video was released about [redacted] grabbing [redacted] by their [redacted], and a bunch of dudes defended it as "locker room talk."

[jsnpritchett]

2 minutes ago, Taylor said:

"It doesn't offend me, so it shouldn't bother anyone" is what most people seem to think.

This is probably the best, most succinct comment in the entire thread.

[34red4]

13 minutes ago, jsnpritchett said:

So a small minority.  Got it. 

And, yeah, sure, I know couples who've met at work, too.  I don't think any of them met by one of them passing a note through another co-worker asking for their number without ever speaking to them--on their first day, no less.

I think we're losing sight of the bigger picture/problem, though, by continuing to focus on one specific example, so I'll bow out of discussing the number request further, if that's ok.

Of course.

So I do want to ask you, because I do value your opinion, do you think there is any possibility that the Callaway interactions were consensual?

[Taylor]

3 minutes ago, Angel Oracle said:

Exactly, only allow the reporters  at the post-game press conferences, and just extend their length.    Don’t create any doubts.

Or the ogres in the clubhouse can act like decent human beings instead of dogs in heat.

[Taylor]

Just now, jsnpritchett said:

This is probably the best, most succinct comment in the entire thread.

[Taylor]

1 minute ago, Jinzu said:

Of course.

So I do want to ask you, because I do value your opinion, do you think there is any possibility that the Callaway interactions were consensual?

The women are saying it wasn't consensual, which is the very definition of "not consensual." It's an easy concept to understand.

[Taylor]

Just now, ScottT said:

I disagree with that assessment.

You're right. It's probably more like 45% of the population, and 70% of the people in this thread. So saying "most people" was an exagerration.

[jsnpritchett]

7 minutes ago, Jinzu said:

Of course.

So I do want to ask you, because I do value your opinion, do you think there is any possibility that the Callaway interactions were consensual?

I don't know, because I haven't read all of them--but even if something was initially consensual, if it ever becomes NON-consensual, then the original consent (stated or not) is moot.  And, again, in situations like this where there's a power imbalance, there's a school of thought that says that there really can't be true "consent."  It's a tough road, for sure.  I think the overall lesson is that there is almost never any upside to behavior like this--and the potential downsides are catastrophic.

Edited February 3, 2021 by jsnpritchett

[eligrba]

2 minutes ago, Jinzu said:

Of course.

So I do want to ask you, because I do value your opinion, do you think there is any possibility that the Callaway interactions were consensual?

Probably not. But you didn’t ask for my opinion.

[T.G.]

6 minutes ago, Taylor said:

It was the same argument used when the video was released about [redacted] grabbing [redacted] by their [redacted], and a bunch of dudes defended it as "locker room talk."

 

On 2/1/2021 at 7:39 AM, Taylor said:

Can we please go one thread without someone bringing up the previous president? Sheesh, it's time to move on.

[Taylor]

I plead the 5th.

[Stradling]

2 hours ago, Second Base said:

See now I disagree, respectfully. The investigation isn't complete yet, but what do we know he's guilty of at this point? Cheating on his wife, that's about it. 

Immoral as that is, it isn't grounds for termination. There's still a scenario where the Angels, the women reporting this, and Callaway can all come out in a positive manner. 

First of all, the women held onto this information for years and never reported it to their bosses or anyone, but then jump in as soon as someone wants to report it. Is similar to the #metoo movement, which was both good and bad, good in that it brought awareness to an issue, bad in which there are documented cases where it was abused and used as a smear campaign against someone the left didn't like.

Whatever the case is here, if the women coming forward offer the necessary proof and can explain why they never reported it, clearly there's an existent problem in the way Mickey is doing things. And that must change. 

There may or might not be grounds for termination, but there's certainly reason for Mickey to attend counseling and be taught that the old way of doing things, isn't appropriate anymore, because culture has shifted, regardless of the meaning behind those actions on his part. He must change.

If that's the case, Callaway undergoes counseling, the Angels follow an investigation and keep their pitching coach and MLB creates an anonymous reporting service which helps create another avenue for women to report cases of sexual harassment without fear of blow back from any direction. 

Sexual harassment is an extremely big deal right now, and society in general had taken steps to solving that problem. These women need to know that at any point, they could've gone to their bosses, they could've gone to the teams, they could've taken it to social media, they could've done anything. The only thing they shouldn't do is simply tolerate it and not come forward until years after the fact, in the mean time Mickey kept doing what he was doing.

 

 

They don’t have to offer an explanation of why they waited to come forward they just have to show he did it and it was unwarranted. 

[34red4]

1 minute ago, Taylor said:

The women are saying it wasn't consensual, which is the very definition of "not consensual." It's an easy concept to understand.

I disagree. In my opinion, IF they went along with his “flirting” because they were receiving the benefit of getting inside information from him at the time, it can be seen as consensual. Regretting of past actions would not change that.

[Taylor]

Just now, Jinzu said:

I disagree. In my opinion, IF they went along with his “flirting” because they were receiving the benefit of getting inside information from him at the time, it can be seen as consensual. Regretting of past actions would not change that.

You seem to know a lot about this topic. As a woman in sports journalism, have you ever experienced harassment and excessive unwanted attention?