are you kidding me? I am 1000% against any "unprovoked" violence against women. I'm sorry but if some woman is standing there hitting me, slapping me, basically assaulting me I'm going to defend myself. Yes, me defending myself is probably considered "violence against women" just so I'm clear..as to why I added that. Now this "unofficial spokewoman" for violence against women has email both Stoops and Joe C in light of the Mixom tape release. She wants them to fly her out to Oklahoma so she can set up a policy about this. I'm sorry I just see someone trying to take advantage of a horrible thing that happened to her...no doubt but this is crap. So now, both Stoops and OU will look like asses if they say no, we've got it handled. Good grief...
You're cherry picking the story. Mixon went into the deli to pick a fight - he wasn't some random guy going in for a sandwich. So if you follow a group including a female into a restaurant to pick a fight and it works - the female responds - you are justified to "defend" yourself? I don't even think this is a violence against women issue in this case. Had Mixon provoked one of the guys in the group and then smashed his face it would have been just as bad, although I'm sure it wouldn't have been treated as such.
never said Mixon did a right thing. It's the bigger picture. You didn't comprehend my post. Maybe I didn't write it clear enough. Stoops and OU took care of the situation, but because the video is released this lady, self appointed protector of women against violence, now feels she has the right to have OU "pay" her (flight, hotel, food, expenses) to come and help set up a policy. The fact she sent a copy of the email to the paper, so that now OU is in a lose/lose situation, is bs. I'm not cherry picking anything...she is. She has now "blackmailed" to a degree OU to entertain her desires. Not sure how you think I thought Mixon was justified at all...I was talking about an individual's right to defend themselves, whether they are male or female.
I was just responding to your first sentence in the post - that Mixon was defending himself - he wasn't. It was typical bully behavior; a person with a large physical advantage egging someone into a fight. Then they can claim self defense if they are successful and pummel their target. I totally support someone defending themselves in a genuine self defense situation. The more recent parking lot incident that got Mixon suspended for the ISU game was of concern because it was the same behavior. He got riled up due to the ticket which is understandable. But then he left and came back because he couldn't leave well enough alone - just like at Pickleman's. Then he made it worse by using his car as a tool of intimidation. It smacks of an anger management problem and using violence as an outlet.
Yes, I agree.. didn't know he came back on the ticket, I thought he just tore it up when he got it, but yea...that's not good either. I don't know his up-bringing at all, but teaching in a middle school urban area and quite frankly anywhere, these young kids are all about "getting even" for the smallest of things. Def a change in how behavior is going.
From everything I've read... Joe is very well-liked, and respected by the team. He is actively involved in counseling. He was given another chance. He's going to have some hiccups (tearing up a ticket... is a FAR cry from striking another human being). Listening to him speak, putting together the other things we know... I think kicking him to the curb, is the worst thing you can do. Especially in this culture. Sure, there is the male/female dynamic. But, he was a KID, he's still a kid and OU, Bob Stoops... might just turn that part of his life around. I'm a Christian above everything else. So, I'm going to give him another chance. I'm going to root for him. I'm going to pray, he's chosen and will stick to, the straight and narrow. He is supremely talented, and it would be such a waste, to throw away, for something that happened a couple years ago... and something he appears to truly grasp the gravity of it.
yup..I agree. The original post was about this lady basically (in my humble opinion) blackmailing the university to fly her out and be a part of the policy process. I trust Bob, Joe and the school to take care of the situation.
I think Bob handled the Brenda thing very well. Telling her to mind her own business would have been the exact wrong thing to do. But welcoming her input while maintaining full control of the program was spot on. I'm not a Christian and I thought giving Joe a second chance was the right thing to do. So we have Christians and non-Christians agreeing - isn't that everyone?
