LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: THE OTHER SIDE OF HOGAN'S COMPLAINT

To the editor and Ms. Hogan:

I only want to make three points regarding Ms. Hogan's letter which was read on Rush Limbaugh's Wednesday radio show.

1) What you refer to as an "inaccurate metaphor" can be more specifically described as a "motivational technique." A coach, who I'm sure understands the way his players think far better than you do, chose to get his team's attention by saying they were playing like a bunch of girls. His "ploy," if you will, worked.

So what's your complaint?

Your complaint is basically that he was demeaning girls.

Did you ask him if he meant to demean girls? Did you ask the story writer if his purpose for quoting the coach was to demean girls?

I'm sure you did not. Had you asked, you would have found a reason not to write your letter.

2) Stick to your knitting.

Ah yes, I'm sure you have just read another "inaccurate metaphor" into the above statement. "Stick to your knitting" is an often-used phrase by coaches which means do what you do best and don't get away from it.

Whatever you do for a living, Ms. Hogan, I'm sure you do it reasonably well. Fortunately, the results of your daily work aren't printed in the newspaper for everyone to read and criticize. The sportswriter and coach, on the other hand, both have the results of their work put on display for everyone to see.

What I find most alarming about your letter to the editor is that you did not talk to either of the sources first. Like I'm doing to you now, you took a cheap shot. How does it feel, Ms. Hogan?

You assumed that your connotations -- the meanings derived from the words you read -- were correct. You didn't bother to ask the writer if his purpose for using the quote was to make girls feel bad because a) you really didn't want to know; or b) you aren't confident enough in yourself to face the people you accused.

You attempted to publicly humiliate people for what you felt was a wrongdoing. Never mind, what the writer and the coach really meant. You made a stand. Hooray.

So, you argue: The writer didn't consider that he was being unkind to girls when he wrote his article.

True, he probably didn't. He has deadlines and commitments and I'm sure he is naive enough to have never thought someone would read such a negative slant on what he felt would be such a positive story.

As a young man, I would be more embarrassed if my mother had taken your public stand than to be called a girl by my coach.

3) You're not the only one who feels the way you do. There are 1,000 people in my town who would agree with everything you said. There is strength in numbers.

But it's an ugly strength. I's a strength built on building walls between people: Men vs. Women, Blacks vs. Whites, Protestants vs. Catholics; Us vs. Our Neighbors ... You vs. the Coach and the Sportswriter.

You distinctly drew the line between yourself and them. You are building a wall.

Instead of building walls, why don't we try to build character.

Character comes from facing adversity. The reason our children play team sports is to learn how to face adversity. They learn how to compete. They learn things they'll need to know to get through everyday life.

What are your actions teaching our kids? More than anything -- and if nothing else you must agree with this -- your actions are a direct reflection of you. Are you proud of what you did?

When we feel negative about something written in the paper, we have a right to stand up and say something about it. You probably believe you used that right. I believe you abused it.

Let's not make everything an issue of sex, race, creed or political stance. Believe it or not, there are some of us out there who aren't trying to insinuate bad things about girls.

Look for the humor in it. It's only an athletic contest. It wasn't serious enough to be real life until you got involved.

Richard G. Sanders

Harrison, Ark.