Quote:
Originally Posted by Yamer
Well, she did reference her commentary from the day, including her Tweet. She explained that she is coming from an emotionally charged place, and exclusively from a group that has, traditionally, been shuffled out-of-sight in the NHL and hockey culture. Thankfully, that has recently changed and is gaining momentum.
What's different is that she spoke from a woman's perspective operating within the industry, and what she's saying - if I'm hearing properly - is that even with how much has gone on, what has come to light, and what the NHL has had to reckon in the past few years we are seeing the same damn rhetoric.
I'm not sure people want to change everything overnight, it's just disappointing that at yet another crossroads we are still entertaining the same 3 Ds I mentioned earlier.
Being emotional and demanding change is perfectly reasonable from a person with her platform and in her position. Frankly, I wouldn't trust it genuine if a little emotion and demand weren't part of it. With letting the perpetrators off light and declaring issues like the Aliu/Peters situation as closed (when it wasn't) I think people are justified in viewing Bettman and the NHL as insincere.
|
But she’s only looking at it from the angle of emotional appeal. Where are facts to back anything she’s saying? Has she even proposed anything to consider? She doesn’t realize there are so many things to consider here that Bettman and co have to play the cards close to their chest for legal reasons into the future. This speaks to credibility. She knew she was being given the spotlight to speak and she did it alright I guess but there are no facts. Just words and emotion. Like Corsi said, perhaps she should have a debate with Bettman or a bigwig and challenge them while on the show. Come with facts and not emotionally charged sweet nothings.