FanDuel - WFBC

May 25, 2006

"The King" Thinks women should not be in Racing: Richard Petty said that women should not be in NASCAR.

posted by houston2006 to auto racing at 11:23 PM - 114 comments

What a dinosaur...

posted by everett at 11:32 PM on May 25

It's part of the generation he came from and the world was different when he and Lee raced. Of course women should be allowed to compete in NASCAR today, but you'll never catch me saying that King Richard is wrong. He's right from his point of view and upbringing. That's good enough for me.

posted by commander cody at 11:36 PM on May 25

Man you really hit the nail on the head there commander cody, generational differences are great excuses for ignorance. Petty is right just like plantation owners before 1863 were right. Discrimination is different for every generation right?

posted by everett at 11:42 PM on May 25

Discrimination is different for every generation right? Exactly.

posted by commander cody at 12:18 AM on May 26

so wait... did you read the rest of my comment? are you really saying that the... oh nevermind.

posted by everett at 12:25 AM on May 26

I'll say it. "King" Richard is wrong. I just don't understand how any man, regardless of the generation to which he was born, can claim that there is any domain out of reach, or out of bounds, for women. What is it that a man can do behind the wheel of a car that a woman can't? [I hear that! ... but it wasn't funny] Why are some guys still so afraid of a woman competing in the same field?

posted by Spitztengle at 12:37 AM on May 26

No. I read your whole comment. My father told jokes that I never would, but that doesn't mean I agree with him, just that I understand the generation he came from. Discrimination is an evolving concept and changes with each generation as we learn more and become more enlightened. Richard Petty is not as much wrong as he is right for how he was raised.

posted by commander cody at 12:40 AM on May 26

justifying ignorance is moronic... You can't justify fascism based on the treaty of versailles or slavery based on early confederate laws and customs any more or less than this. discrimination is discrimination. Petty is proving himself to be a dinosaur.

posted by everett at 12:52 AM on May 26

Everett, I respecfully disagree and withdraw.

posted by commander cody at 12:54 AM on May 26

Typical redneck NASCAR BS. I mean Robbie Gordon last year refused to race at Indy because of Danica Patrick having an "unfair advantage" for being so light. Well get on a fucking treadmill then... Or better yet, fuck off back to the Baja. I've followed F1 for 20 years. In that time one woman has made it there. I think her name was Gianni Amati, or close enough to that. She drove a few races for Brabham before being canned and replaced with an unknown driver named Damon Hill. Danica is the best hope right now for a driver in a top flight racing league. Sarah Fisher seems to have fizzled sadly. Erin Crocker has not been doing great in trucks from what I've seen. Petty and his ilk need to do what dinosaurs do best, and become extinct.

posted by Drood at 01:20 AM on May 26

Me and uncledaddy was discerssin it ovah a jug'o moonshine and we figgered they got them bazoombas we lahk so much.

posted by GoBirds at 04:06 AM on May 26

I think women can be in racing! As long as the IRL or NASCAR, don't pimp them off anymore than they do the men. But Danica is the darling whore for the IRL, but hasn't won anything.

posted by scotsman at 05:16 AM on May 26

I think women can be in racing too! And gosh, there they are! ("Darling whore?" scotsman, she's 10th on the grid for the Indy 500 this weekend. She's not some giggling idiot trackbunny.)

posted by chicobangs at 05:48 AM on May 26

I agree with this guy. She led 19 laps last year. How many other drivers in this year's grid led a lap at Indy? (I think i read 10 somewhere, but not 100% on that). I can see the frustration, casual fans who wouldn't pay attention now might pay attention to her. But a lot of women gravitiate towards Nascar drivers b/c the think they're cute. What's the difference?

posted by SummersEve at 06:23 AM on May 26

"So you were an artist! Big deal! Elvis was an artist. But that didn't stop him from joining the service in time of war. And that's why he's The King, and you're a schmuck." -Serendipity

posted by MrFrisby at 06:24 AM on May 26

Richard Petty is not as much wrong as he is right for how he was raised. I understand, commander cody, and I sort of agree...except then was then and now it's now, and he's living now. Sure, he was raised in a different time, but so was everybody else, including a lot of guys older than him who understand that the world has moved on and that their nostalgia has a place on the porch with their like-minded contemporaries, but that's about the only place it makes any sense.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 07:14 AM on May 26

He's just bitter because a woman beat him out for North Carolina Secretary of State.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 07:45 AM on May 26

Look, I don't think that just because Petty thinks that "women don't belong racing" means that he is an immoral asshole - but he is wrong and is coming off as being dinosaur brained. I also don't think that we can just pass this off as a generational thing. There is right and wrong, and Petty is wrong. (See - I can see the issue in black and white just like he can.)

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 08:19 AM on May 26

I agree with the masses who have mentioned that this is a generation thing. I'm not sure what the exact percentage is but I've heard it was close to 40% of the Nascar fans are women. Not only would they have someone to watch and cheer for but imagine the money spent on merchandise. Take Danica Patrick for example. She has sold millions and millions of dollars worth of merchandise and the IRL benefits from that. Danica said on ESPN that no one from Nascar has made her an offer to drive a car. Not even a test run. I for one, would like to see how she'd do.

posted by dbt302 at 08:28 AM on May 26

I don't believe age/generation can be considered an excuse for holding ignorant views. The guy lived through the civil rights movement and women's lib. He should understand by now the importance of not deciding what someone is capable of based on how they look.

posted by bperk at 09:05 AM on May 26

Why the hell is this such a big deal 99% of all men in NASCAR don't think women should be in. Petty was the only one with enough balls to say it. Shawna Robinson gave it a try and nearly crashed out of every race taken others with her. Enough said.

posted by bamike at 09:19 AM on May 26

99% of all men in NASCAR don't think women should be in. Yeah, well, once upon a time I'm sure that 99% of men in universities didn't think that women should be allowed to get a university education. IOW, the opinion of the majority of those in the bastion counts for something, but it doesn't settle the issue all by itself.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 09:27 AM on May 26

Petty wasn't raised pre-sufferage gang. He was raised in the damn 60s and 70s. No excuse. It's backwards, mysoginist thinking. My god, it is 2006, right? We are STILL talking about shit like this?

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 09:31 AM on May 26

Yeah, well, once upon a time I'm sure that 99% of men in universities didn't think that women should be allowed to get a university education. Women in universities weren't driving at 200 mph and putting other peoples lifes in jeopardy.

posted by bamike at 09:49 AM on May 26

Yup. Keep em barefoot and pregnant. Is that dualing banjos I hear in the distance?

posted by Tinman at 09:51 AM on May 26

99% of all men in NASCAR don't think women should be in. You have a source for that statistic, pal? Because every active driver, on the Indy series and NASCAR, I've seen interviewed on Sportscenter or the Speed Network is saying exactly the opposite. If someone can do it, be they male, female, hermaphrodite, alien or protozoan, bring them on. Every. Single. One. Richard Petty would do good for his legacy by staying out of the politics of the sport and just being the Grand Old Man of racing. That's what kings do these days. (Well, that and dying on the toilet.)

posted by chicobangs at 10:04 AM on May 26

You have a source for that statistic, pal? Because every active driver, on the Indy series and NASCAR, I've seen interviewed on Sportscenter or the Speed Network is saying exactly the opposite. No I don't have a source it's just a gut feeling, and if you think that what people say in front of a camera is all true I got a bridge I'de like to sell you.

posted by bamike at 10:21 AM on May 26

He's right from his point of view and upbringing. Do you feel the wame way about people who were brought up in a racist household? Therefore you agree with them being racist? Would that be good enought for you?

posted by joromu at 10:22 AM on May 26

As for winning. How many male drivers have gone on race after race and year after year without a win? I think too many of these bozos have been going through too many hours of left turns only and their brains are plastered to the right side of their heads.

posted by joromu at 10:27 AM on May 26

If comander cody is completely wrong, and everett is completely right, then we should not take into account the changes in the world from generation to generation. Therefore our founding fathers (Washington and his slaves, Jefferson and his slave servents etc) should be treated in our history books as early nazis, or at the very least, evil bigots. Frankly, the history books from my 50's schooling didn't treat them as such. How about todays schoolbooks?

posted by drevl at 10:34 AM on May 26

I don't think there is any conflict at all in teaching history for real. Should some of the founding fathers be judged for being slaveholders? Why not? Slavery was always morally dubious. And owning slaves is directly in conflict with the positions they were taking in the Declaration of Independence. It's important to keep it in context of the time, the land, and economy, but that doesn't mean that we should tell children that slavery was right back then even though we think it is wrong now.

posted by bperk at 10:51 AM on May 26

As a side note, I believe that most of the founding fathers were anti-slavery.

posted by bperk at 10:55 AM on May 26

Again, I have to say, you're giving more slack than is needed. Petty is epousing a view that isn't backed by a generational gap. It's 2006 and the man is in his 50s. He doesn't get the slack that the damn founding fathers get (the abolishment of slavery was almost 100 years after the framing of the constitution - THAT'S a generational gap). My god, people - show a shred of perspective here. His is a discriminatory opinion. Dress it up all you want.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:57 AM on May 26

Men or Women...Doesnt matter as long as they can push the beer and pork rinds! Duhhh...go fast....turn left.

posted by HammerStorm at 10:59 AM on May 26

bamike Shawna Robinson gave it a try and nearly crashed out of every race taken others with her. As one of many who thinks the only thing exciting about NASCAR is the crashes, maybe the team owners of NASCAR should be recruiting from the womens ranks much more! More seriously, if it was such a social issue, then some successful women should do more to give women an opportunity to race, in much the same way as Tiger Woods and others have seen to it that more inner city children have a chance to play golf. And, ironically, many of you who seem to think that there are racial problems w/quotas in regard to hiring in front office and coaching jobs of other sports, neglect to address the same issue that is overwhelmingly prevalent in NASCAR circles. (pun intended)

posted by mjkredliner at 11:08 AM on May 26

Women in universities weren't driving at 200 mph and putting other peoples lifes in jeopardy. Just for the record, men haven't been doing that great of a job at driving 200mph either. When is the last time you saw a crash-free race? I'm not sure that a properly trained and qualified female driver is any more likely to put "peoples' lives in jeopardy" than a properly trained and qualified male driver.

posted by grum@work at 11:12 AM on May 26

Just out of curiosity, and not entirely (I think) off-topic: How many of the drivers on the grid this weekend, male or female, have ever led a lap of the Indy 500? Where would one find a statistic like that? I know they keep track of it, but my Google-fu is failing me.

posted by chicobangs at 11:16 AM on May 26

I have met Richard Petty a few times and I can atest to the fact that he is a very nice man. That said, lets look at this for what it is. This is the opinion of a 60+ man who drove a car for a living and by his own admission did not do to well in school. He was raised by a redneck in the company of rednecks, and please don't for a moment think the word redneck and asshole are the same thing

posted by CB900 at 11:18 AM on May 26

More seriously, if it was such a social issue, then some successful women should do more to give women an opportunity to race, in much the same way as Tiger Woods and others have seen to it that more inner city children have a chance to play golf. And, ironically, many of you who seem to think that there are racial problems w/quotas in regard to hiring in front office and coaching jobs of other sports, neglect to address the same issue that is overwhelmingly prevalent in NASCAR circles. (pun intended) Why should a woman have to be the one given women an opportunity? Every man is not like Petty. Further, I hope you see the folly with the comparison that you are making. There is a huge difference between a sport lacking diversity because there is a lack of diverse interest and a sport that has tons of diverse interest, including players and assistant coaches, yet the diversity doesn't rise up the ranks.

posted by bperk at 11:21 AM on May 26

Diversity includes women but not people of color? The reason I said that "successful women" should do more to provide opportunity for women to race is the same reason that Tiger did what he did. Because he saw a need, and took the initiative to fix a problem that he knew would not be fixed by others. Racing takes money. Lots of it, even on a "just a hobby" scale. If it is such a huge issue that more women are not represented in professional motor contests, (I refuse to call it a sport) then maybe women should do something about it. Apparently, women with the ways and means to correct said problem, do not see it as a big deal.

posted by mjkredliner at 11:39 AM on May 26

Nj, I couldn't agree with you more... I also think that the slaves in Antebellum America could have really had a big effect on the late 18th and 19th century slaves if they had just done "more to provide opportunity for themselves" Also, Dont even get me started on those lazy apathetic WW2 Jews...

posted by everett at 11:48 AM on May 26

Who has called it a huge problem that more women are not represented in professional motor contests? I only think that a woman like Danica who works her way through the ranks should be given a chance -- without hearing a ton of crap about how women shouldn't be allowed to race.

posted by bperk at 11:49 AM on May 26

She is breaking new ground, bperk, and I think she is doing quite well myself. Richard Petty's opinion was only that. An opinion. I doubt very seriously his remarks will have any impact on her fortunes. everett, comparing this to slavery, or the holacust, is absurd.

posted by mjkredliner at 11:57 AM on May 26

Diversity includes women but not people of color? May I be the first to compliment you on the anatomical realism of your man of straw. The reason I said that "successful women" should do more to provide opportunity for women to race is the same reason that Tiger did what he did. Because he saw a need, and took the initiative to fix a problem that he knew would not be fixed by others. Racing takes money. Lots of it, even on a "just a hobby" scale. ...and men have a lot more of what makes racing go round than women do. IOW, in case you weren't paying attention, there are many fewer women who are "successful" on that scale.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:59 AM on May 26

mj: No it's not absurd. Youre saying that to dissolve discrimination people need to make space for themselves, and that is absurd. I've said it beffore, and I'll say it again discrimination is discrimination is discrimination. Why the fuck would you defend discrimination. My grandfather is a very good man, and I respect him very much, but when he goes into his backwards 1950 caveman dialogue, I tell him to stop, because he lives now, and any other thought he might have had throughout his life because of his environment are not in any way justified by that environment. For discrimination to stop EVERYONE needs to stand up against it, not just the people being discriminated against.

posted by everett at 12:03 PM on May 26

everett, comparing this to slavery, or the holacust, is absurd. He didn't compare women not racing in NASCAR to the holocaust or slavery. He compared attitudes towards them, and made the point that both contain arguments in favor of a second-class status. Please quit moving the goalposts, okay?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 12:11 PM on May 26

Just out of curiosity, and not entirely (I think) off-topic: How many of the drivers on the grid this weekend, male or female, have ever led a lap of the Indy 500? A column in yesterday's USA Today said 11 counting Patrick.

posted by SummersEve at 12:16 PM on May 26

Petty wasn't raised pre-sufferage gang. He was raised in the damn 60s and 70s. No excuse. It's backwards, mysoginist thinking. My god, it is 2006, right? We are STILL talking about shit like this? Actually Weedy he was raised in the 40's and 50's (and in a more backwards/redneck culture at that). He'll be 70 next year, so while it may not be an excuse it is a reason to understand why he thinks as he does. Besides it's just his opinion and his opinion doesn't hurt anyone. I don't agree with him and never said that I did, but I do understand why he feels like he does.

posted by commander cody at 12:25 PM on May 26

everett, great work in this thread ... i couldn't agree with you more! cheers!

posted by Spitztengle at 12:26 PM on May 26

He's right from his point of view and upbringing. Do you feel the wame way about people who were brought up in a racist household? Therefore you agree with them being racist? Would that be good enought for you? I would agree with them being racist, but I would understand why they were. There's a lot of difference between agreeing with one persons opinions and understanding how they got them. Understanding is not the same thing as defending.

posted by commander cody at 12:50 PM on May 26

I have no problem with Petty's opinion. Judging by what's happened up until now, he's absolutely correct about women not being able to consistantly be competitive in a field of pros.

posted by im050483 at 12:51 PM on May 26

I would agree with them being racist, Actually that was supposed to read "wouldn't". Haven't had enough coffee this morning...yet.

posted by commander cody at 12:55 PM on May 26

Petty is entitled to his opinions even if they do expose him for being the red necked neanderthal that he is. Hey who really is expecting great intellectual revelations from somebody that got famous in a sport where you drive cars with beer logos around in a circle as fast as you can. It just requires skill and a lot of nerve, but intellect is not that necessary. The only reason women are not more prevelant in auto racing is that not very many women are interested in being race car drivers. Certainly there is nothing about driving fast that makes men more suitable for it other than a higher degree or frequency of interest. Sorry if that makes the King feel less like a man. It isn't fighting or football.

posted by Atheist at 12:56 PM on May 26

There's a lot of difference between agreeing with one persons opinions and understanding how they got them. And, there is a difference between understanding how he got his opinions and having no idea how he could hold on to them given the current reality of our society. The fact that he has not in the last 30 years re-assessed his views on the place of women is not a reflection of his generation, but of his close-mindedness.

posted by bperk at 01:20 PM on May 26

everett. I fuckin' did NOT defend discrimination. If you would like to point out where I have, I would be much obliged. I did not say that people need to make space for themselves. I merely suggested that if women feel they are being reduced to "second-class status", then perhaps they could do a little more about it themselves, as a gender, since it is obviously not a front burner issue amongst the small group of men that are NASCAR team owners. I am not a NASCAR fan, but I think that if anyone is surprised by Richard Petty's remarks, then they are not very well versed in the roots of the sport, or Mr. Petty's character. Tiger Woods, through his various foundations, has supplied many an underpriveleged kid that normally would not have had a chance to play golf, with the opportunity to do so. Because, he realized that white, corporate America would not. So, lbb and bperk, why don't you start up some kind of charitable organization that would provide such an opportunity for girls and women to get involved in racing, instead of sitting here and cajoling people, if you feel that strongly about it?

posted by mjkredliner at 01:38 PM on May 26

Have any of you actually even been to a NASCAR race? There are more women in Nascar than people would imagine. Most wear daisy dukes and bikini tops, which is finewith me. They don't seem to have a problem with it. And leading a few laps does not equal a win or a championship, or for that matter repeat championships.

posted by volfire at 01:45 PM on May 26

Let's look at other professional sports. Golf has two separate leagues -- one for men and one for women -- but women are being given the opportunity to try to qualify for men's tournaments (and have done so). Tennis has men playing men and women playing women in the same tournaments, but I don't believe there are tournaments for men against women (insert Martina Narvratilova quips here). Hockey? Men's and women's teams -- that's how it's done in the Olympics. Same with soccer, basketball, etc. However, consider that there are some high school wrestling teams with girls wrestling boys. The face of sports is changing and Petty is coming from a pre-Title IX mentality. Regardless, the guy has a right to his opinion, no matter what you think of it. I've never been in a race going 200 miles per hour, so maybe he knows something that I don't know about what it takes. Does a women have what it takes to compete in a predominantly male sport? If she does, more power to her -- drop the starting flag and let's see what happens!

posted by gdvbranz at 01:53 PM on May 26

So, lbb and bperk, why don't you start up some kind of charitable organization that would provide such an opportunity for girls and women to get involved in racing, instead of sitting here and cajoling people, if you feel that strongly about it? This was a pretty civil discussion, but thanks for ruining it by being an asshole.

posted by bperk at 01:56 PM on May 26

I thought it was a perfectly reasonable suggestion, bperk. Polite, well intentioned...where did I go wrong?

posted by mjkredliner at 02:02 PM on May 26

Look, one of the greatest un-written rules of our culture is that when you're a man and you get older you're allowed to say all kinds of silly-assed crap (i.e. In my day we had to walk 50 miles to school in the blazing sun and neck deep in snow during a hail storm!) and get away with it because it was written off as just the silly grumbles of a bitter old man. I know it's one of the few reasons I've been looking forward to getting old. In July I'm going to turn 50 and I'll be damned if I'm going to let anyone get away with changing this rule just when I'm becoming eligible to start using it! Give 'em hell Richard! And in MY day we DID walk 50 miles to school in the blazing sun in neck deep snow during hail storms! So there you whippersnappers!

posted by commander cody at 02:19 PM on May 26

I thought it was a perfectly reasonable suggestion, bperk. Polite, well intentioned...where did I go wrong? I'm not sure about what bperk thinks, but I strongly suspect you went wrong in your assertion that the discriminated-against are not doing enough to remedy said discrimination. If you have actual facts to support that, plus an objective standard for what "enough" would look like, I'd love to hear it. Or maybe not, because I'm sure you can play semantic games and move the goalposts so that "enough" never comes. By some reasoning, women didn't do "enough" to pass the 19th Amendment -- hell, not a single one voted for it!

posted by lil_brown_bat at 02:42 PM on May 26

hell, not a single one voted for it! Bangorang Peter!

posted by everett at 03:01 PM on May 26

I thought it was a perfectly reasonable suggestion, bperk. Polite, well intentioned...where did I go wrong? You don't see anything wrong with presuming to know us well enough to suggest how we should direct our energies? Or implying that you know what is important to us and that we are slacking in our duty to do something about it (but, you, Mr. Wise MJK, can steer us down the right path)? Or implying that this is somehow a more meaningful topic to us than to any of the other people who commented on this thread? Do you know what the word condescending means?

posted by bperk at 03:09 PM on May 26

What about public opinion in general? If womens leagues were a viable commodity, don't you think that there would be more of them? Oh, I know, the good ole boy's of the network won;t permit it. If it could make money bet damn sure they would! People are'nt going to take theirs boys, or families to see women play sports. Ladies nite out? Lets go see girls box! Women don't even patronize female sports teams.

posted by volfire at 03:37 PM on May 26

And owning slaves is directly in conflict with the positions they were taking in the Declaration of Independence. I assume you mean the Constitution, as declaring our independence from England had nothing to do with our new system of laws, just that we wouldn't obey their laws (ie: civil disobedience). Not only was slavery NOT in conflict with the Constitution, but the Constitution went so far as to make a slave two thirds of a person (as respect to the census count).

posted by drevl at 03:44 PM on May 26

I assume you mean the Constitution, as declaring our independence from England had nothing to do with our new system of laws, just that we wouldn't obey their laws (ie: civil disobedience). An excerpt from the Declaration of Independence for you, drevl: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by the Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."

posted by bperk at 03:59 PM on May 26

that all men are created equal, Since women couldn't vote and slaves were basically considered two thirds of a person, interperate "all MEN" as meaning all white men (who also happen to be property owners). Even white men with no property couldn't vote. Is that truely your verson of "equality"?

posted by drevl at 04:05 PM on May 26

Ninja, I gotta say... I think that comment was entirely tongue-in-cheek, and not even close to the most offensive concept promoted in this thread. No? lightman, to say that racing isn't a sport because anyone can drive a car would be like saying track isn't a sport because anyone can run; maybe not the best argument.

posted by everett at 04:07 PM on May 26

you're probably right, everett. i think i lost my sense of humor during my 2-12 shooting performance this morning. oy.

posted by ninjavshippo at 04:34 PM on May 26

I am going to guess most of the people here know very little about racing. No one starts out at the top of this sport and you come from a racing family no one just gives you a ride and sponsership. With very few exceptions if you want to start driving race cars you have to pay for it yourself, and its not cheap!!!. To run in the very lowest levels of racing will cost 15 to 20 grand for a whole season, and thats if ya don't break anything. For every 1 driver who makes a living at racing there are 5,000 who work a full time job and spend most of there time and money joust to be able to race one nite a week. The only way to get to the top of this sport is to earn your way.

posted by CB900 at 05:24 PM on May 26

I ment to say No one starts at the top of this sport unless thay come from a racing family

posted by CB900 at 05:29 PM on May 26

Richard Petty not accepting women into racing is not a new stance for him. Back in 1976 when Janet Guthrie began her 4 year NASCAR career, Richard was not at all happy about it and treated her very coldly, to the point that when the call of "Ladies and Gentlemen start your engines!" came, Richard was quoted as saying "Shes no lady, If she was a lady she would be at home. There is a big differance between being a lady and being a woman." So that should give everyone a clue as to what "The King" thinks about woman sitting behind the wheel of a racecar. Even though woman have been in NASCAR since before Richard even raced. There was Ethel Flock Mobley (A daughter of the infamous Flock racing family) and there was Louise Smith who raced between 1946-1956 and because of her 36 wins in the NASCAR modified series was the 1st woman elected into the International Motorsports Hall of Fame in 1999. (YES, she did also race in the regular NASCAR series back then in a Hudson Hornet.) My point in all this is that NASCAR is bigger than even "The King" and seeing as how they have mandated equality in racing Richard may has well get used to seeing a woman behind the wheel. And by the way Mr. Lightman... You'd never last 20 minutes in a NASCAR race, if the "G"'s while cornering, or the 160 degree furnace that a car turns into didn't get to you, the "SHIT" that you would end up with in your pants would force you into the pits! So you better just stick to your bowling and baseball, They are MUCH safer sports!! :)

posted by ImissDAVEYnAlan at 05:31 PM on May 26

Maybe Petty's still smarting about his '96 loss for Secretary of State in NC. But seriously, this "not a sport"/"tougher than you could handle" game can stop. How many times has this been ran into the ground with zero minds being changed?

posted by igottheblues at 05:53 PM on May 26

I don't see a problem with women in racing. I have seen some women that are every bit as good as the guys on a local level. However, the women that I have seen racing in the ranks of Nascar have been good for a pit stop. Half of the time they take each other out. I'm sure that one day there will be a woman driver that sets the track on fire. Unfortunately, that time is not right now.

posted by latemodelrocket at 06:16 PM on May 26

lightman: yeah, it has gone to shit And what would you know about it, fenugi? By the way, NvsH, your train is in the fine Amtrak tradition of being about a day and a half late. Get with the program if you're gonna announce the wreck.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 06:54 PM on May 26

"anyone can drive a car, but show me how many people can hit a fastball." While driving.

posted by mr_crash_davis at 07:27 PM on May 26

Petty is a dinosaur. That doesn't make him evil, just WAY out of touch with the times. As far as whether he's correct or not, I'd have to say no. Some of you have pointed out that women haven't had much luck being competitive, but CB900 is right. It's because most racing teams in open wheel and NASCAR are VERY hard to break into. If you're not a member of one of the ruling families, you'd better have plenty of your own money or an amazing amount of talent and luck. Most of the women who've been given an opportunity have been involved with a lower tier team that didn't have competitive pit crews, testing facilities, etc. The NHRA has been more friendly to letting women in. Shirley Muldowney got a chance in dragsters in the late 70's and started tearing up the tracks. There've been women sprinkled through their ranks ever since, but over the last few years it's exploded. If you doubt that women can run with the big dogs, take a look at the current NHRA points standings.

posted by ctal1999 at 08:58 PM on May 26

Well, it appears I struck a nerve, or three. First, I would like to say that many more inflammatory things have been said here than what I have said, and, secondly, the personal attacks on myself are quite funny. lbb, you accuse me of "moving the goalposts". I re-iterated what I thought was a reasonable analogy about the Tiger Woods foundation providing opportunities for children, and women of means doing the same for girls, and women, 3 different times. My position is unwavering. In no way did I attempt to quantify what "enough" was, to do so would be largely impossible. But if you are insulted by my suggestion that you be part of the solution, then, I suggest, you are part of what you see as a problem. To compare the attitude of Hitler, and of slave owners, (founding fathers included) and the consequences of those attitudes, to Richard Petty's attitude is, I repeat, absurd. As unfair as women have had it in this country, and the world in general, it does not compare to the injustices served upon the slaves of this country or the jews under the persecution of the third reich, male OR female. Better to work for 3/4 pay than to work as slaves, or be executed for your religous beliefs. And, that is fallacy, as well. By my own observations, if a woman does the same job as a man, she gets equal pay. If she chooses to work as a carpenter, or a roughneck, instead of a clerk, then she is payed the same as men in that field. Was this always the case? Of course not. Is this to suggest that discrimination does not exist? No, but it goes to show that, if a woman is willing to endure the same physical hardships that many "typically male" occupations require, then she is payed accordingly. I don't see that the checks Danica is cashing are less than the men are receiving for same finishes, either. By the way, a yahoo search for "definition of fenugi" only resulted in my being directed to posts by you calling other people the same name in other discussion groups. I found that odd..... bperk there is a huge difference between a sport lacking diversity because there is a lack of diverse interest and a sport that has tons of diverse interest blah, blah, blah everett discrimination is discrimination is discrimination Do you think motor sports have a fair and proportionate number of blacks representing them? Do you think that of the millions of toy race cars sold every year, that not one is purchased by a black child who might be a pretty fair driver if given the chance? Of course the same could be said of little girls. The point that I am making is that neither I, nor the people who read this publication and others, do not think so. Racing, unfortunately, as has been pointed out, is a sport (or, contest, if you will) that requires lots of money and inroads to facilities, car builders, etc. etc. etc. My suggestion for the rectification of the discrimination against females in this field (certainly not the end all to beat all, but a suggestion, nonetheless) was met with disdain. I will not offer one for the discrimination for blacks since I feel it would meet a similar fate. Instead, I will quote Richard Petty, from the link, speaking of Janet Guthrie: "She said, "I'm here, I'm going to do it" and she was able to get it done. You have to admire her for that."

posted by mjkredliner at 12:27 AM on May 27

If Richard Petty wants to start weeding out people who don't belong in NASCAR, he should start with his son Kyle. He hasn't won a race in 11 years or even been in the top 5 since 1997.

posted by rcade at 07:28 AM on May 27

lbb, you accuse me of "moving the goalposts". I re-iterated what I thought was a reasonable analogy about the Tiger Woods foundation providing opportunities for children, and women of means doing the same for girls, and women, 3 different times. My position is unwavering. It sure is, even in the face of counter-arguments; you ignored it when I pointed out that men in general, and certainly Tiger Woods, have a lot more means than women in general. How many billionaire women can you name? In no way did I attempt to quantify what "enough" was, to do so would be largely impossible. I stand corrected; you didn't move the goalposts, you simply refused to say what they were. You said that women should "do more" without saying what that would look like. It gives you an easy out to ignore whatever women have done for ourselves, and to dismiss any future efforts as "not enough". But if you are insulted by my suggestion that you be part of the solution, then, I suggest, you are part of what you see as a problem. Is that so, son? And how about if I'm insulted because I already am part of the solution? What have you done in your life to advance women's opportunities in sports? Your whole "be part of the solution" sounds to me like a classic copout, a way to justify your failure to walk your talk. To compare the attitude of Hitler, and of slave owners, (founding fathers included) and the consequences of those attitudes, to Richard Petty's attitude is, I repeat, absurd. You really do have a reading comprehension problem, don't you? Read this, carefully: He didn't compare women not racing in NASCAR to the holocaust or slavery. He compared attitudes towards them, and made the point that both contain arguments in favor of a second-class status. Now...whose attitudes am I talking about there? Hint: it's not Hitler's or the founding fathers'. Better to work for 3/4 pay than to work as slaves, or be executed for your religous beliefs. And, that is fallacy, as well. By my own observations, if a woman does the same job as a man, she gets equal pay. If she chooses to work as a carpenter, or a roughneck, instead of a clerk, then she is payed the same as men in that field. Go educate yourself; do a websearch on "pink-collar job". By the way, a yahoo search for "definition of fenugi" only resulted in my being directed to posts by you calling other people the same name in other discussion groups. I found that odd..... I don't; that's what you get for using Yahoo for a search tool. Since this term evidently originated well before your time...fenugi. Fuckin' New Guy.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 07:56 AM on May 27

By some reasoning, women didn't do "enough" to pass the 19th Amendment -- hell, not a single one voted for it! Funniest comment of the day. I'm glad you're back, LBB.

posted by rcade at 08:54 AM on May 27

I don't; that's what you get for using Yahoo for a search tool. Since this term evidently originated well before your time...fenugi. Fuckin' New Guy. posted by lil_brown_bat at 7:56 AM CDT on May 27 I've seen you use the term "fenugi" several times and never knew what it meant. Now that I do, I'm amazed at the usage. Here's a post about attitudes, and you infer that a person doesn't know what he's talking about - BECAUSE HE'S A NEW MEMBER TO THIS SITE! Give me a break. Also, please, please, please stop with the moving goal-post analogy. The only thing I know about moving goal-posts was moving them from the front of the end-zone to the back of the end-zone for safety reasons.

posted by drevl at 09:16 AM on May 27

lbb: Admittedly, I have done little to advance womens opportunity in sport. I offer my services as a little league umpire (girls play now, too!) and as an official for soccer matches (boys and girls), and have been part of drives to recycle used golf equipment to be used by children of both gender. I do not percieve the lack of women in motor sports as discriminatory, I see it rather as a lack of opportunity and interest. You educate yourself: read of the sacrifices, financial and otherwise, that Kasey Kahne and others have gone through to get where they are on the Nascar circuit. Granted, many of the race car drivers on the various pro circuits were born and bred in racing families, but there are others who found a way to pursue and achieve their goal. If women can not band together on what they percieve as discrimination, then I feel that they will wait a long time before the doors that they feel are closed to them are opened. As for women having less means than men in general, this is true, but there are still a significant number of women in this country who are wealthy, and they became wealthy by overcoming the same barriers set before them as every other woman. I apologize for coming across as saying that you were not a part of the solution, I had no basis for that, and from your comments, here and previously, I can tell that you are sincere (and well educated) in your beliefs.

posted by mjkredliner at 09:53 AM on May 27

mjk: I think that you have said it the best. I guess what it really comes down to, however, is the fact that one man doesn't think that women belong in Nascar. Personally, If you think that you have what it takes to drive those cars, then Gods speed to you, I can tell you from racing the local dirt tracks, It is much harder than it looks. The physical requirements to drive the car is out of most womens physical realm. Now don't take that as being discimatory, I'm just stating a fact. There are some women that can drive the wheels off a race. I have witnessed it. For the most part it is just a male dominated sport. I think that women will trickle into the sport eventually and have some success. I don't however, think that there will ever be an overwhelming female presence in Nascar.

posted by latemodelrocket at 11:34 AM on May 27

After having read this whole thread, I personally have concluded that Petty is an asshole and mjkredliner makes a pretty compelling, consistent arguement.

posted by vito90 at 02:14 PM on May 27

I've seen you use the term "fenugi" several times and never knew what it meant. Now that I do, I'm amazed at the usage. Here's a post about attitudes, and you infer that a person doesn't know what he's talking about - BECAUSE HE'S A NEW MEMBER TO THIS SITE! Give me a break drevl, read for context, okay? The individual in question, who was commenting about how SpoFi had gone to hell in a bucket, has been a member for less than a month. Still all mad at me?

posted by lil_brown_bat at 05:56 PM on May 27

I do not percieve the lack of women in motor sports as discriminatory, I see it rather as a lack of opportunity and interest. But hang on, this is about Petty saying, "They don't belong." He's not interested in the least in why women aren't well represented in motor sports; he just wants 'em all out. If women can not band together on what they percieve as discrimination, then I feel that they will wait a long time before the doors that they feel are closed to them are opened. So, before you were suggesting the solution was some sugar mamas; now it's to create a mass movement? I dunno, sounds to me like we're talking about three or four different problems by now. I'm not sure who turned this into a parity argument; it sure wasn't me. I apologize for coming across as saying that you were not a part of the solution, I had no basis for that, and from your comments, here and previously, I can tell that you are sincere (and well educated) in your beliefs. Thanks, mjk -- I appreciate that.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 06:02 PM on May 27

Do you think motor sports have a fair and proportionate number of blacks representing them? What exactly are you trying to prove here???? I think that the big issue here is not the lack of women in NASCAR, but rather Petty's attitudes towards them. If Richard Petty expressed similar sentiments about black people as he did about women, no one in their right mind would defend him. I'm not saying that NASCAR needs to go out and recruit women, or black people for that matter. I'm simply saying that when a woman does get the sponsorship and the skill to make it into the ranks that Richard Petty needs to shut his damn mouth and drive his damn car.

posted by everett at 08:11 PM on May 27

NASCAR has in its history one of the ugliest examples of discrimination in an American sport. On Dec. 1, 1963, in Jacksonville, Wendell O. Scott became the first (and still only) black driver to win a race. He didn't get to celebrate the win. Racing officials claimed a "scoring error" and named another driver the winner, telling him hours later that he finished first.

In the early sixties there was often speculation about what exactly would happen if Wendell did win a race. How would officials handle that situation? Would the beauty queen give him the traditional winner's kiss as they used back then? Those questions were answered on the night of December 1, 1963 when Scott won his first, and only, Grand National race in Jacksonville, Florida. Scott came off of turn four on the final lap leading the race but he never saw the checkered flag. The flag instead was waved over Buck Baker's car who was in second at the end of the race. Baker was feted in victory lane, got the race trophy and the kiss from the pretty girl. Many hours later, Scott was informed by officials that they had discovered a scoring error and he was, in fact, the actual winner of the race. Scott received his winner's trophy approximately one month later, without fanfare, at a race in Savannah, Georgia. But it wasn't the original beautiful trophy that Baker had received that night in Florida. Scott's trophy was some cheap looking wood glued together without an engraved brass plate proclaiming his Grand National win.
Read the whole link to get a reminder of the ugly world people are rationalizing as a generational difference. It's too bad that Petty, who reportedly helped out the underfunded, underequipped Scott on occasion, doesn't see the entry of women into NASCAR as a chance to do the right thing at the right time.

posted by rcade at 08:45 PM on May 27

Petty is a product of his time, of his age and of his upbringing. As such, like all of us, he has a right to his opinion, esp since it has no effect on if someone, male, female, black, white or green gets to race or not. I don't agree with his opinion, but I support his right to express it no matter how I personally feel about it.

posted by commander cody at 09:35 PM on May 27

Way to fight for the under dog there commander! I bet there are all sorts of racist discriminatory organizations around the world who would love your support.

posted by everett at 10:47 PM on May 27

I don't support any racists organizations (or non-racist ones for that matter), but I am a card carrying member of the ACLU and I do support everyones right to express their opinions, no matter what those opinions are. It's one of the most basic rights of our country and always the one most in danger of being stopped. Everyone has a right to think and a right to speak what they think, no matter their opinions. I follow the saying that I might not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.

posted by commander cody at 12:08 AM on May 28

/golf clap Amen, commander.

posted by mjkredliner at 12:34 AM on May 28

I don't think any one is saying Richard Petty doesn't have a right to be a prick, simply that he is a prick... a dinosaur prick.

posted by everett at 12:35 AM on May 28

I don't think any one is saying Richard Petty doesn't have a right to be a prick, simply that he is a prick... a dinosaur prick. Why? Because you disagree with him? My father was only 2 years older then Petty. If he was still alive he'd be 71 in a few weeks. He was a classic redneck truck driver. Boots. Jeans. Beer belly. Country music. Even a western hat with feathers and sunglasses just like Petty. He and I disagreed on several things like school prayer, inter-racial dating, abortion, etc, but we still loved and respected each other because we agreed to disagree. We each respected the fact that the other had a right to feel like they did, to have their own opinions and we understood it, even if we didn't always agree. Of all of the things he taught me, that was the most important. Even though I disagreed with him on some things I still knew that he was an honest, hard working man that loved his family. I knew he wasn't perfect. He had flaws just as we all do. I knew that the sum of the person he was was a lot more important then my feelings about the things we disagreed about. I disagree with Petty's opinion about women in racing, but the fact that I don't care for his opinion about it doesn't make him a prick, just someone I disagree with on one issue. That's hardly enough of a reason to condemn a man's whole life over or make me respect his accomplishments any less.

posted by commander cody at 01:12 AM on May 28

Silliness...

posted by everett at 03:24 AM on May 28

I agree with you Cody Silliness...All this over one coment that in itself is a bit silly (out dated and seemingly predudical). Silliness Indeed

posted by Folkways at 09:52 AM on May 28

Just for the record, these are the first two bullets of the ACLU mission statement. Does it say that second part on the back of your card there cody? Your First Amendment rights-freedom of speech, association and assembly. Freedom of the press, and freedom of religion supported by the strict separation of church and state. Your right to equal protection under the law - equal treatment regardless of race, sex, religion or national origin.

posted by everett at 10:34 AM on May 28

Certainly the ACLU stands for equal treatment under the law. But as your own post indicates, it's first mission is the ultimate protection of the Bill of Rights and the first right mentioned in the Bill of Rights is the freedom of speech. Freedom of speech comes from the freedom to think and to express your thoughts. Without this basic freedom none of the others are possibile. Therefore, in example, even though I hate everything organizations such as say the KKK or Nazis stands for, I respect their right to peacefully express their point of view. As I said before I disagree with Petty's opinion, but I respect and defend his right to express it, mostly because it's just that, an opinion. It carries no weight other then that. If Petty were in a position to stop women from racing then that would be another matter. That would be a discrimatory action, not opinion and he should be stopped. But that's clearly not the case here. He just said that he didn't think women should race, not that he was going to attempt to stop them.

posted by commander cody at 10:50 AM on May 28

drevl, read for context, okay? The individual in question, who was commenting about how SpoFi had gone to hell in a bucket, has been a member for less than a month. Still all mad at me? posted by lil_brown_bat at 5:56 PM CDT on May 27 lbb, if that's the case then you have a point. However, you seem to be directing this comment to someone named "lightman" and I can't seem to find any comments in this post by anyone named "lightman". Am I missing something?

posted by drevl at 10:52 AM on May 28

I don't think really think you're missing anything drevl. There was a comment from someone called "lightman", but it's gone now. Perhaps Gary zapped it? It really wasn't a part of the disscussion as much as just a nasty statement that I can't recall right off hand. That's probably what's causing the confusion.

posted by commander cody at 10:57 AM on May 28

He just said that he didn't think women should race, not that he was going to attempt to stop them. Words have consequences, Cody. He's making it harder for women to be accepted in auto racing as they've been accepted as combat pilots, shuttle pilots, and many other more physically arduous jobs in the world. When people speak up in favor of prejudice, they embolden others to do the same.

posted by rcade at 12:18 PM on May 28

I don't think really think you're missing anything drevl. There was a comment from someone called "lightman", but it's gone now. Perhaps Gary zapped it? It really wasn't a part of the disscussion as much as just a nasty statement that I can't recall right off hand. That's probably what's causing the confusion. Aaaaaah, dawn breaks on Marble Head. Thanks for catching this, CC. Yes, I was indeed responding to lightman, and I guess that comment is gone now; in fact, there are several other responses to comments from lightman in this thread, and I guess all those comments are gone now too.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 12:38 PM on May 28

Commander Cody, I don't think our POVs are necessarily that far off. Where we may disagree is on whether one's upbringing should play a major role in how others receive one's comments. I am willing to accept that Petty was raised to have a barefoot-and-pregnant opinion towards women;however, as I said previously, then was then and now it's now. He has a right to hold to that opinion and to express it, and I have a right to regard him as ignorant and foolish because of it -- many others, raised in the same times, have managed to move on and to grasp the reality that this is no longer how society looks at women. Furthermore, I'm getting the sense that a lot of folks, perhaps yourself included, feel that Petty's comments should be treated with quite a bit of indulgence because of this "product of upbringing" thing. You can feel free to indulge him as you choose, but I don't feel the same compulsion and I don't see why I should. This whole barrage of "you have to understand where he comes from" is really both pointless and insulting. I do understand just fine. I also understand the distinction between an explanation and an excuse. So if you ever meet Richard Petty and he expresses these views to you, you feel free to slap him on the back and say, "Attaway, Pops!" And I'll feel free to tell him to grow up and get over his messed-up childhood already.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 12:46 PM on May 28

Actually, it is more than Petty's words that might be keeping women racers down. He does have a little affiliation with the sport as a team executive. If some woman wanted a legal issue, she could always apply for a driver position with Petty Enterprises, then let the legal feathers fly. I'd love to see Danica approach Petty Racing about forming a new team, or about taking Kyle's car. After all, it's not like he's using it for anything.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 02:59 PM on May 28

Hand, You have an evil mind...and that's a good thing! I love the idea. I'm not sure she'd be willing to slow down that much though!

posted by ctal1999 at 03:35 PM on May 28

TBH: I'm not that educated on the hiring laws in the sport, but don't the teams get a lot of freedom about who they hire? I can't envision a situation where discrimination could be proved without many cases of tangibly less qualified men being hired over women.

posted by everett at 03:40 PM on May 28

One of the ironies of the situation is that Patrick may be saving her sport. The interest she sparked last year (and today's one-for-the-ages race) are bringing casual fans back to Indy.

posted by rcade at 03:46 PM on May 28

Not at all llb. If I were to meet him and he expressed that opinion about women not belonging in NASCAR I would, respectfully, disagree with him. That said I wouldn't write off his whole life or start thinking of him as an asshole or, as everett has said, a dinosaur prick. I don't agree with Petty, but I can agree to disagree with him without hating him or losing respect for the things he has accomplished in his life and career. His opinion is a charcter flaw and a relatively minor one at that.

posted by commander cody at 03:48 PM on May 28

Opps...lbb.

posted by commander cody at 03:55 PM on May 28

Words have consequences, Cody. He's making it harder for women to be accepted in auto racing as they've been accepted as combat pilots, shuttle pilots, and many other more physically arduous jobs in the world. I don't necessarily agree rcade. Gen Chuck Yeager is acknowledged as one of the greatest pilots ever and he didn't like the idea of women pilots in the Air Force, but there they are. I just don't think Petty's opinion carries that much weight. Of course that's just my opinion and I could be wrong. ;-)

posted by commander cody at 04:22 PM on May 28

Also, please, please, please stop with the moving goal-post analogy. The only thing I know about moving goal-posts was moving them from the front of the end-zone to the back of the end-zone for safety reasons. Wrong football sport. It's a soccer reference. And enough of an old saw there's a Billy Bragg song named after it.

posted by yerfatma at 05:46 PM on May 28

everett, I'm sure you're right, but if there's a chance for a lawyer to get involved, somebody'll get sued. Plus, Kyle Petty is already tangibly less qualified than at least a few women out there. I'd be willing to bet that there are women racing at some local levels who could consistently finish 40th.

posted by The_Black_Hand at 09:41 PM on May 28

true that

posted by everett at 10:09 PM on May 28

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.