I read this article and i read the previous one - so I'm here to re-iterate what I said before. When we use hyperbolic language like 'bodyslam', we are culpable for feeding the outrage machine. Both men involved in this little tete-a-tete have described it as a non-event, it was a non-event apart from the fact that Kelce was dating Taylor Swift and half the universe with an interest in an ostensibly bland singer suddenly came to watch a sporting event without much familiarity of the subculture.

By way of a reversal, if Kelce attends a Taylor Swift concert and half the Super Bowl fans decide to follow him there to watch, would it be acceptable for them to draw inferences about 'unacceptable female hysteria' and their silly emotional brains? And of not, why not... those swifties do seem to be screaming a lot. Perhaps that happens to be the subculture of that time and place and perhaps that's entirely fine - and they aren't a synecdoche for a wider social malaise.

That aside, I think you made a good point - and that was the difference between how male and female athletes are treated - I just think you drew the incorrect conclusion. The correct conclusion (in my opinion) was to call society out when it holds up a double standard based on an athlete's genitals. I think it has far less to do with the internalised violence of men and everything to do with firing up the fairly extensive home-crowd of readers.

Mine have come to expect me to come out and disagree and debate- so here I am. Now we can intelligently debate these two points of view if you want?