Big Ten Feminist In Bill Cosby Sweater Offended By Brent Musburger

Published on: January 09, 2013 | Written by: Clay Travis

One of the stupid things about made-up "controversies" is that there are inevitably stupid people offended by these made-up controversies.

Yesterday afternoon ESPN apologized to the .0001% of Americans who were dumb enough to be offended by Musburger's commentary: “We always try to capture interesting story lines and the relationship between an Auburn grad who is Miss Alabama and the current Alabama quarterback certainly met that test,” ESPN spokesman Josh Krulewitz said. “However, we apologize that the commentary in this instance went too far and Brent understands that.”

Why did ESPN apologize?

Because of stupid articles like this in the New York Times.

And because ESPN is a corporate entity and corporate entities have the backbone of worms. Which is to say, none. 

What ESPN should have said is this:

"Dear losers who were offended by Brent Musburger's comments, go f--- yourselves.

Sincerely, 

ESPN" 

Instead thanks to ESPN's apology, Musburger's comments about AJ McCarron's girlfriend, Katherine Webb, have become a made-up controversy. Musburger had the absolute gall to call Webb beautiful during Monday night's BCS title broadcast. That's undoubtedly true. She is beautiful. It isn't a particular values judgment that Musburger is making there, nor is it some old-man generational move, it's a stating of objective reality. Like calling the sun "hot," Eddie Lacy "fast," gravity "forceful," or Mant'i Te'o "overrated."

These are just facts.

 

But, of course, not everyone is comfortable with a beautiful woman being called beautiful.

Meet Michigan State journalism professor Sue Carter, who the New York Times tracked down to buttress its weak, overinflated, and completely worthless article about the Musburger "controversy."

Quoth Sue Carter: “It’s extraordinarily inappropriate to focus on an individual’s looks. In this instance, the appearance of the quarterback’s girlfriend had no bearing on the outcome of the game. It’s a major personal violation, and it’s so retrograde that it’s embarrassing."

This quote is so incredibly stupid even other feminist journalism professor's who pose for their official faculty photographs in Bill Cosby sweaters and turtlenecks should be offended.

Good points, Sue.

It's clearly a "major personal violation," to be called beautiful.

Even if, you know, Katherine Webb herself actually considers it to be a compliment.

And, even if, you know, Webb has actually participated in pageants that subjectively judge her based on, among other things, her beauty.

When you win Miss Alabama you are, objectively speaking, beautiful.

It's like calling the spelling bee champion a great speller. It's just true, she's Miss Alabama!

Was your turtleneck cutting off the blood flow to your brain, Sue? Are we really to the point where compliments are "major personal violations"? Really, that's the stupid feminist standard now? (Note: I actually like feminists with a brain. Those that focus on legitimate issues that matter such as education for women in third world countries where standards of living and treatment are actually "so retrograde that it's embarrassing." Not being allowed to decide how many children you have, drive a car, or vote that's so retrograde it's embarrassing. Being called beautiful, yeah, not so much).  

How can anyone in modern society even say that "it's extraordinarily inappropriate to focus on an individual's looks" as our buddy Sue did?

Welp, there goes procreation, television, magazines, books, and movies.

We might as well just all go attend poetry slams with Sue while wearing bags over our heads. And maybe we should also carry those Scream-voice altering synthesizers because I personally find it "extraordinarily inappropriate to focus on an individual's voice."

What's more, this isn't even the sum total of Sue's stupid quote. 

She also said, "the appearance of the quarterback's girlfriend had no bearing on the outcome of the game." Yep, that's Sue's standard for what should be shown on television during a game.   

Since fans in the stands have "no bearing on the outcome of the game," we should probably shield them from the camera lens as well, right? Showing a happy fan when his team scores is just frivolous! No more camera shots of parents either, right? I mean, those parents have "no bearing on the outcome of the game," at all. Why do we care how they react when their sons or daughters win or lose? That's totally irrelevant. And those cheerleaders in short skirts on the sideline who happen to often be beautiful?

Offensive!

Strike them from the broadcast!

Welcome to Sue Carter's football world, just the field, nothing but the field, within the camera's lens.

Sue, put simply, you and everyone like you sucks.

And so does Deadspin, for pandering to the premise of a stupid article.

The same website that brought a criminally obtained Erin Andrews peephole video to the masses, is now offended that Musburger called a fully clothed woman in a football stadium beautiful.

Quoth a stupid person at Deadspin: “For Brent Musburger to find this woman attractive is normal. For him to assert that every man should, and that every boy should try to be a football hero to get such a gorgeous woman, is where it is really not a good thing for me.”

But, of course, linking to criminal videos of naked sideline reporters is "really a good thing." The hypocrisy is just mind-boggling. 

Musburger made a joke about kids picking up footballs in Alabama to also get hot girlfriends.

The quarterback getting the hot girl has been a cliche of American society as long as football has existed.

You know why it's a cliche?

Because the quarterback does, in fact, get the hot girlfriend. Just like the rock star, and the hedge fund manager, and the best-selling author. (Salman Rushdie marrying Padma Lakshmi is the greatest outkick of all time).

You know why? Because women find talent and success incredibly attractive.

Go figure.

But you know what, society benefits. Men work harder at their respective crafts to get more desirable mates. The same is true for women. You know what we call this? Biology. Pursuit of attractive mates is why we don't still live in caves and throw feces at one another for fun. 

Finally, let's not leave ESPN out of the criticism loop here. The network found McCarron's mom and girlfriend in the stands and had pre-planned graphics for them when they were put on camera. Plus, they went back to them again and again as they realized the social media reaction that Webb was receiving. This is a bit like a quarterback who leads his receiver over the middle, sees the receiver get decked trying to make the catch, and then blames the receiver for the hit that occurs.

It's not like Musburger mans the production booth. He didn't choose to focus on that shot, ESPN did. He just reacted to what ESPN put in front of him.

Would ESPN have put McCarron's girlfriend on television if she wasn't beautiful? Of course not. So what do you want Musburger to say when ESPN chooses to put a gorgeous woman on the screen? Pretend she isn't gorgeous? Plain and simple, despite what the Sue Carter's of the world would have you believe, Musburger did absolutely nothing wrong.

Zero.

ESPN should have never apologized for him.

Now can we all just go buy Bill Cosby sweaters and turtlenecks and be friends?

Because regardless of our sex and personal attractiveness, we can all go bond over at least one common and shared belief -- the Big Ten is really awful at football.