EasternOHBillsFan Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 The original question was directed at a specific poster, not yourself. It might help you to read the original post and the response. But I have one for you...what should I do with my pink shirts? I don't know because I am not you, and you are not me. I would never wear pink, as most men would never wear pink, hence why the NFL and clothiers don't make much mens clothing in pink. So you propose to raise awareness on a cause by creating a color scheme that blends in so well people wouldn't even notice it. Got it. Brilliant insight. I take it you work in advertising. Got it. So no where in history has a man ever worn pink? And if a man dares to wear pink he must be gay, right? Come on, be honest. That's what's behind this. You feel that if you root for a man wearing pink someone might think you're gay. Right? I would notice light purple towels mixed with NFL gear even with the Vikings or the Ravens... radioactive pink hurts my eyes. YOU make that assumption.... read my response to Beerball. You are really pushing this 'hidden agenda' with pink hard, and to me it is lunacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 It hurts my eyes. But as I said in the other thread on this (mods: why hasn't this one been closed with the usual disclaimer?), pouring lemon juice on a paper cut hurts, too. I prefer to avoid either, but I don't go out of my way to B word about either one. And as for the Kormen foundation...I have an inherent distrust of any charity that so aggressively markets themselves, and an inherent cynicism that refuses to believe that "inspiring" forty mile walks will somehow cure breast cancer. See, this is the kind of stance that makes sense. I have no problem that. I don't know because I am not you, and you are not me. I would never wear pink, as most men would never wear pink, hence why the NFL and clothiers don't make much mens clothing in pink. I would notice light purple towels mixed with NFL gear even with the Vikings or the Ravens... radioactive pink hurts my eyes. YOU make that assumption.... read my response to Beerball. You are really pushing this 'hidden agenda' with pink hard, and to me it is lunacy. See your underlined section. Show me numbers on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 See, this is the kind of stance that makes sense. I have no problem that. Really? That made sense to you? It didn't even make all that much sense to me. By the way...I'm also cynical enough to note that, despite being for "the cure," a very small sum of their outlay goes towards "a cure". Most of it funds pallative and supportive care, with comparatively little (operative word being "comparatively") going towards curative or preventive research). Of course, "Susan G Komen Race For The Treatment And Hospice Care" isn't nearly as inspiring as "Susan G Komen Race For The Cure". And they are the single largest private provider of breast cancer-related research grants in the world (though I suspect that's due in no small part to the Borg-like assimilation of any and all other charities they could ever compete with). So I won't deny that they do quite a bit of good...but whatever else you might say about them, they always seem to me first and foremost a marketing campaign (but a truly ****-hot one at that. They could give Apple lessons in branding.) And aggressively marketed charities scare me - they make me wonder where their priorities are, exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SF Bills Fan Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 I am sure there was a spike in donations today. The fact that it is being dicussed here shows that the goal was accomplished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfreak Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) What about testicular cancer? Everyone could hang a set of Truck Nuts from their facemasks. Seriously, I don't have a problem with it, I am pretty sure that you can bid on alot of the pink game used stuff and the money goes to the treatment/study for a cure. I have had several family members die of cancer, none breast cancer, but it is a good cause, so what does it hurt? It is to raise money, and I am pretty sure it is also a PR Stunt, since the bright pink is so noticeable and everyone knows what it stands for. The only part that makes me laugh, is they can wear this pink all over the place because it sends a postiive message about the NFL, but if Peyton Manning wants to wear high top spikes for one game to honor Johnny Unitas or Jake Plummer wants to honor Pat Tillman, then they can't do it without being fined. Edited October 3, 2011 by billsfreak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantankerous Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 It looks ridiculous and is way over the top. There are plenty of other ways of getting the message across than having the players wear hot pink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just in Atlanta Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Where, is the "There is not enough pink. They can work it into the Jerseys and Helmets" option. I was thinking of adding the option of Dying Niagara Falls pink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metzelaars_lives Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) When your stated reason for disagreeing with it is because "guys yelling at each other in pink doesn't work", then absolutely. It's a silly, ignorant and short sided view of the larger issue. Breast cancer, along with prostate and colon cancers, are diseases that can be stopped with early detection. Early detection requires people not only being aware of the issue, but being comfortable enough talking about those very private issues in sensitive areas of our bodies, to go to their doctors and get check ups. The entire point of the campaign is to stand out. NOT blend in. The NFL has embraced this as is their right. The color scheme has NO impact on how the game is played. It doesn't make the men less tough, slower or weaker. It doesn't have any impact on the game itself at all EXCEPT for promoting discussions like this one. Which, again, is the entire point of the campaign. But let's stop that because the 1970s Raiders wouldn't wear pink. There's no such thing as progress in your world, eh? Maybe we should keep all the sports exactly how they started off. Why stop with uniforms? Why not go back to the days of segregation? I mean the 1935 Yankees never played with a black player. They would have thought it absurd. And to second your thoughts, this would have no impact on the way the game is played so as far as I'm concerned, it's a no-brainer. You're making a ridiculous argument that has absolutely no bearing on the sport itself. Instead, you've taken something that is positive and want to eliminate it because it makes YOU uncomfortable to root for dudes in pink. That's a YOU problem. Ya know, you're right. I've had some time to look at myself in the mirror and do some soul searching. I agree with you whole-heartedly. In fact, I'd like to take it a step further. 50 years from now, we will laugh at the fact that gay people could not get married without a hassle in 2011. This is a MAJOR issue confronting us today. So I hereby propose that in November, for all four games, teams wear rainbow colors and a patch of two men (like the men's room sign for men) holding hands. I mean, we need to increase awareness for issues, right? What better way than an NFL uniform? Who's with me? And yeah, I totally agree with you that this would in no way affect the way the game is played. You'd have to be a real jerk to object to this idea. What do you have an issue with this, tgreg99? Or are you too manly? Would you rock a Barnett rainbow jersey? Of course you would. Edited October 3, 2011 by metzelaars_lives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) Where's the "I don't mind it" option without the judgement that it's overkill? Edited October 3, 2011 by BlueFire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 I don't know because I am not you, and you are not me. I would never wear pink, as most men would never wear pink, hence why the NFL and clothiers don't make much mens clothing in pink. But, do you think less of me for wearing pink? I have a swarthy Mediterranean complexion and I look really good in pink. I hate to think that people look down on me for wearing a certain color. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 "The pink hurts my eyes and football players aren't manly enough." Somebody better call the wahmbulance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 "The pink hurts my eyes and football players aren't manly enough." Somebody better call the wahmbulance. It does hurt my eyes. But like I said...I don't make a whole Broadway production out of it. And you have to admit, the "feminine color" complaint was classic. "They picked a feminine color to support breast cancer!" Well...they were considering desert camo, but it turns out the US Army has that trademarked... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
judman Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 After reading all this, I need to grab me some Pepto Bismol!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 Ya know, you're right. I've had some time to look at myself in the mirror and do some soul searching. I agree with you whole-heartedly. In fact, I'd like to take it a step further. 50 years from now, we will laugh at the fact that gay people could not get married without a hassle in 2011. This is a MAJOR issue confronting us today. So I hereby propose that in November, for all four games, teams wear rainbow colors and a patch of two men (like the men's room sign for men) holding hands. I mean, we need to increase awareness for issues, right? What better way than an NFL uniform? Who's with me? And yeah, I totally agree with you that this would in no way affect the way the game is played. You'd have to be a real jerk to object to this idea. What do you have an issue with this, tgreg99? Or are you too manly? Would you rock a Barnett rainbow jersey? Of course you would. You can twist it any way you'd like. But you were the one who said "Grown men yelling and cursing while wearing pink simply does not work" -- not me. You're the one who's so offended by the NFL deciding to rock pink in their uni's to support a great cause was in some way ruining the experience for you. And you haven't been able to give a reason for it other than pink is a woman's color. If it has no impact on the game then why are you against it? I don't play in the NFL, nor do I work for an NFL club. So whether or not they wear pink has no impact on my NFL experience. It doesn't change the game. It doesn't do anything but engender conversations about breast cancer awareness and raise money for the cause. A cause that impacts millions of people in the world. Don't the pros far outweigh the cons here? But to answer your (ridiculously hilarious) question, if the NFL decided to make equal rights their cause rather than breast cancer, and I was in the NFL, I absolutely would rock the rainbow jerseys. Why wouldn't I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atlbillsfan1975 Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 The NFL is the biggest and best pro sports league in the US for a reason, marketing. I might be a total cynic here but they realize the biggest area of growth for them is in woman viewers. Think about it. How many times does the 'woman throwing the man jersey in her boyfriends face' come on? And yes i agree that breast cancer is a great cause, so not offended by it or care really that the guys wear pink. I think it is genius for the NFL to take it up as much as they have. Win/Win really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nervous Guy Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 It hurts my eyes. But as I said in the other thread on this (mods: why hasn't this one been closed with the usual disclaimer?), pouring lemon juice on a paper cut hurts, too. I prefer to avoid either, but I don't go out of my way to B word about either one. And as for the Kormen foundation...I have an inherent distrust of any charity that so aggressively markets themselves, and an inherent cynicism that refuses to believe that "inspiring" forty mile walks will somehow cure breast cancer. Little known fact...Harvey, the CEO of the "Kormen Foundation", died of breast cancer...yes men can get it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted October 3, 2011 Share Posted October 3, 2011 (edited) In Western culture, the practice of assigning pink to an individual gender began in the 1920s[12] or earlier.[13] An article in the trade publication Earnshaw's Infants' Department in June 1918 said: "The generally accepted rule is pink for the boys, and blue for the girls. The reason is that pink, being a more decided and stronger color, is more suitable for the boy, while blue, which is more delicate and dainty, is prettier for the girl."[14] From then until the 1940s, pink was considered appropriate for boys because being related to red it was the more masculine and decided color, while blue was considered appropriate for girls because it was the more delicate and dainty color, or related to the Virgin Mary.[15][16][17] Since the 1940s, the societal norm was inverted; pink became considered appropriate for girls and blue appropriate for boys, a practice that has continued into the 21st century. It should be noted that the "but pink is a WOMAN'S color" argument is bunkum. The whole thing is based on some inane (and plastic) social construct. In fact, it used to be that pink was considered a masculine color not 70 years ago. Some 70 years from now, it will probably change again just because people are weird like that. Edited October 3, 2011 by SageAgainstTheMachine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 It should be noted that the "but pink is a WOMAN'S color" argument is bunkum. The whole thing is based on some inane (and plastic) social construct. In fact, it used to be that pink was considered a masculine color not 70 years ago. Some 70 years from now, it will probably change again just because people are weird like that. Pink is a feminine. Blue is masculine. That's why the Dolphins hide behind the fiction of "orange" and "teal". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrappy Posted October 4, 2011 Author Share Posted October 4, 2011 I started a similiar thread about this month of pink, it's overkill & actually makes me want to avoid this cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I started a similiar thread about this month of pink, it's overkill & actually makes me want to avoid this cause. You are an amazing attention whore. Get therapy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts