Hypocrite athletes living in the US and competing for other countries

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The messages to Chloe Kim are terrible!

I don't understand the backlash over the NYT article. Why it is offensive to say Asian Americans are over-represented in figure skating if that is indeed a factual statement? It is the same thing as if someone said Black Americans are overrepresented in the NFL or Male Americans are over-represented in technology companies or Elderly Americans are over-represented in the Presidency.

How should it be worded appropriately to say that a certain group holds proportion of the group that is more than what is seen in the general population?

"Over-represented" is not a neutral word. They should have found a better term.

Such as ?

Such as not focusing on race. Are blacks over-represented in basketball? In football? F*ck you racist hypocrites.

Yes? I literally used an example of how black athletes are over represented in the NFL in my original comment, did you read that?

But by the way I completely agree with you that there should be less focus on race and identity politics in general. However, I do not think it is constructive to criticize fact based statements as racism. There will always be both over representation and under representation in all elements of US society because 100% perfect representation of the populace is nearly impossible. Organizations like the NYT seem to be hyper focused on some theoretical idea of perfect representation in all elements of society which is very divisive in my opinion.

No need to curse at strangers on the internet, maybe try to calm down and find allies instead of jumping to conclusions.

I agree the cursing isn't helpful. But "overrepresented" is not a neutral term in the world of DEI, and Asian Americans are getting fed up with the bias against Asian American success and the double standards when it comes to race.

The media couldn't even celebrate properly when Michelle Wu became Boston's first person of color to become mayor. Like, this was one of the first articles: https://www.npr.org/2021/11/16/1055972179/boston-first-black-mayor. Asian Americans are the most underrepresented group when it comes to politics, so why is the NPR treating Wu's election as if it were some kind of tragedy?

Then you have what's going on in magnet schools and elite colleges across the US. Asian Americans are often described as "overrepresented" in these schools. That word keeps getting used over and over to justify discrimination against Asian Americans, so Asian Americans have gotten sensitive to the word.

As for the article, "overrepresented" carries the connotation that in an ideal world there would be fewer Asian Americans in ice skating. A publication like the New York Times should know better. I'm sure there's a better way of saying there are a lot of Asian Americans who like to ice skate now.

Yes, I understand it sounds frustrating when the accomplishments of Asian Americans do not get the same amount of celebration in the media as those in other minority groups and there is blatant anti-Asian discrimination going on in schools. But attacking semantics and facts as being "racist" is not a productive way to draw awareness to these real problems.

I happen to be part of a certain minority group that is often criticized and ridiculed for being over-represented in a particular job field. It is true, and it's not racist for people to point out this disparity. Some people want to change the entry criteria to accommodate more of the under-represented groups. While I strongly disagree their beliefs that the standards for this job field should change, it doesn't change the reality that they are in fact under-represented compared to overall population. To me the issue is that people infer value judgements (on being over/under represented) that imply that there is inherent fairness and value in striving for perfectly even representation of society when that is not the case.

I don't understand why you try to white wash the racial discrimination meaning of "over representation" here. "Over representation" means there are too many of them, it is sth abnormal, it takes away others' opportunity, it's not fair to other races, and so one should put a quote on these people. It's a label that was applied to Jews in the early 1930s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The messages to Chloe Kim are terrible!

I don't understand the backlash over the NYT article. Why it is offensive to say Asian Americans are over-represented in figure skating if that is indeed a factual statement? It is the same thing as if someone said Black Americans are overrepresented in the NFL or Male Americans are over-represented in technology companies or Elderly Americans are over-represented in the Presidency.

How should it be worded appropriately to say that a certain group holds proportion of the group that is more than what is seen in the general population?

"Over-represented" is not a neutral word. They should have found a better term.

Such as ?

Such as not focusing on race. Are blacks over-represented in basketball? In football? F*ck you racist hypocrites.

Yes? I literally used an example of how black athletes are over represented in the NFL in my original comment, did you read that?

But by the way I completely agree with you that there should be less focus on race and identity politics in general. However, I do not think it is constructive to criticize fact based statements as racism. There will always be both over representation and under representation in all elements of US society because 100% perfect representation of the populace is nearly impossible. Organizations like the NYT seem to be hyper focused on some theoretical idea of perfect representation in all elements of society which is very divisive in my opinion.

No need to curse at strangers on the internet, maybe try to calm down and find allies instead of jumping to conclusions.

I agree the cursing isn't helpful. But "overrepresented" is not a neutral term in the world of DEI, and Asian Americans are getting fed up with the bias against Asian American success and the double standards when it comes to race.

The media couldn't even celebrate properly when Michelle Wu became Boston's first person of color to become mayor. Like, this was one of the first articles: https://www.npr.org/2021/11/16/1055972179/boston-first-black-mayor. Asian Americans are the most underrepresented group when it comes to politics, so why is the NPR treating Wu's election as if it were some kind of tragedy?

Then you have what's going on in magnet schools and elite colleges across the US. Asian Americans are often described as "overrepresented" in these schools. That word keeps getting used over and over to justify discrimination against Asian Americans, so Asian Americans have gotten sensitive to the word.

As for the article, "overrepresented" carries the connotation that in an ideal world there would be fewer Asian Americans in ice skating. A publication like the New York Times should know better. I'm sure there's a better way of saying there are a lot of Asian Americans who like to ice skate now.

Yes, I understand it sounds frustrating when the accomplishments of Asian Americans do not get the same amount of celebration in the media as those in other minority groups and there is blatant anti-Asian discrimination going on in schools. But attacking semantics and facts as being "racist" is not a productive way to draw awareness to these real problems.

I happen to be part of a certain minority group that is often criticized and ridiculed for being over-represented in a particular job field. It is true, and it's not racist for people to point out this disparity. Some people want to change the entry criteria to accommodate more of the under-represented groups. While I strongly disagree their beliefs that the standards for this job field should change, it doesn't change the reality that they are in fact under-represented compared to overall population. To me the issue is that people infer value judgements (on being over/under represented) that imply that there is inherent fairness and value in striving for perfectly even representation of society when that is not the case.

I don't understand why you try to white wash the racial discrimination meaning of "over representation" here. "Over representation" means there are too many of them, it is sth abnormal, it takes away others' opportunity, it's not fair to other races, and so one should put a quote on these people. It's a label that was applied to Jews in the early 1930s.

Saying there is over represented of certain groups in certain activities is a factual statement. Do you disagree with this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The messages to Chloe Kim are terrible!

I don't understand the backlash over the NYT article. Why it is offensive to say Asian Americans are over-represented in figure skating if that is indeed a factual statement? It is the same thing as if someone said Black Americans are overrepresented in the NFL or Male Americans are over-represented in technology companies or Elderly Americans are over-represented in the Presidency.

How should it be worded appropriately to say that a certain group holds proportion of the group that is more than what is seen in the general population?

"Over-represented" is not a neutral word. They should have found a better term.

Such as ?

Such as not focusing on race. Are blacks over-represented in basketball? In football? F*ck you racist hypocrites.

Yes? I literally used an example of how black athletes are over represented in the NFL in my original comment, did you read that?

But by the way I completely agree with you that there should be less focus on race and identity politics in general. However, I do not think it is constructive to criticize fact based statements as racism. There will always be both over representation and under representation in all elements of US society because 100% perfect representation of the populace is nearly impossible. Organizations like the NYT seem to be hyper focused on some theoretical idea of perfect representation in all elements of society which is very divisive in my opinion.

No need to curse at strangers on the internet, maybe try to calm down and find allies instead of jumping to conclusions.

I agree the cursing isn't helpful. But "overrepresented" is not a neutral term in the world of DEI, and Asian Americans are getting fed up with the bias against Asian American success and the double standards when it comes to race.

The media couldn't even celebrate properly when Michelle Wu became Boston's first person of color to become mayor. Like, this was one of the first articles: https://www.npr.org/2021/11/16/1055972179/boston-first-black-mayor. Asian Americans are the most underrepresented group when it comes to politics, so why is the NPR treating Wu's election as if it were some kind of tragedy?

Then you have what's going on in magnet schools and elite colleges across the US. Asian Americans are often described as "overrepresented" in these schools. That word keeps getting used over and over to justify discrimination against Asian Americans, so Asian Americans have gotten sensitive to the word.

As for the article, "overrepresented" carries the connotation that in an ideal world there would be fewer Asian Americans in ice skating. A publication like the New York Times should know better. I'm sure there's a better way of saying there are a lot of Asian Americans who like to ice skate now.

Yes, I understand it sounds frustrating when the accomplishments of Asian Americans do not get the same amount of celebration in the media as those in other minority groups and there is blatant anti-Asian discrimination going on in schools. But attacking semantics and facts as being "racist" is not a productive way to draw awareness to these real problems.

I happen to be part of a certain minority group that is often criticized and ridiculed for being over-represented in a particular job field. It is true, and it's not racist for people to point out this disparity. Some people want to change the entry criteria to accommodate more of the under-represented groups. While I strongly disagree their beliefs that the standards for this job field should change, it doesn't change the reality that they are in fact under-represented compared to overall population. To me the issue is that people infer value judgements (on being over/under represented) that imply that there is inherent fairness and value in striving for perfectly even representation of society when that is not the case.

I don't understand why you try to white wash the racial discrimination meaning of "over representation" here. "Over representation" means there are too many of them, it is sth abnormal, it takes away others' opportunity, it's not fair to other races, and so one should put a quote on these people. It's a label that was applied to Jews in the early 1930s.

Well, hopefully you will agree that if over-representation is a racist term, them under-representation is as well. If indeed representation itself has become a racist dog whistle, I did ask for suggestions for other terms and no one had suggestions.

I am on your side here hun, and think people spend too much time focusing on identity issues and most of the policies in place today designed to promote equality are discriminatory against Asian Americans. But you choose to focus on tone policing, advocating to silence factual statements, and calling allies "F-ing racist" instead of seeking to discuss ways to make things better. Good luck with that approach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The messages to Chloe Kim are terrible!

I don't understand the backlash over the NYT article. Why it is offensive to say Asian Americans are over-represented in figure skating if that is indeed a factual statement? It is the same thing as if someone said Black Americans are overrepresented in the NFL or Male Americans are over-represented in technology companies or Elderly Americans are over-represented in the Presidency.

How should it be worded appropriately to say that a certain group holds proportion of the group that is more than what is seen in the general population?

"Over-represented" is not a neutral word. They should have found a better term.

Such as ?

Such as not focusing on race. Are blacks over-represented in basketball? In football? F*ck you racist hypocrites.

Yes? I literally used an example of how black athletes are over represented in the NFL in my original comment, did you read that?

But by the way I completely agree with you that there should be less focus on race and identity politics in general. However, I do not think it is constructive to criticize fact based statements as racism. There will always be both over representation and under representation in all elements of US society because 100% perfect representation of the populace is nearly impossible. Organizations like the NYT seem to be hyper focused on some theoretical idea of perfect representation in all elements of society which is very divisive in my opinion.

No need to curse at strangers on the internet, maybe try to calm down and find allies instead of jumping to conclusions.

I agree the cursing isn't helpful. But "overrepresented" is not a neutral term in the world of DEI, and Asian Americans are getting fed up with the bias against Asian American success and the double standards when it comes to race.

The media couldn't even celebrate properly when Michelle Wu became Boston's first person of color to become mayor. Like, this was one of the first articles: https://www.npr.org/2021/11/16/1055972179/boston-first-black-mayor. Asian Americans are the most underrepresented group when it comes to politics, so why is the NPR treating Wu's election as if it were some kind of tragedy?

Then you have what's going on in magnet schools and elite colleges across the US. Asian Americans are often described as "overrepresented" in these schools. That word keeps getting used over and over to justify discrimination against Asian Americans, so Asian Americans have gotten sensitive to the word.

As for the article, "overrepresented" carries the connotation that in an ideal world there would be fewer Asian Americans in ice skating. A publication like the New York Times should know better. I'm sure there's a better way of saying there are a lot of Asian Americans who like to ice skate now.

Yes, I understand it sounds frustrating when the accomplishments of Asian Americans do not get the same amount of celebration in the media as those in other minority groups and there is blatant anti-Asian discrimination going on in schools. But attacking semantics and facts as being "racist" is not a productive way to draw awareness to these real problems.

I happen to be part of a certain minority group that is often criticized and ridiculed for being over-represented in a particular job field. It is true, and it's not racist for people to point out this disparity. Some people want to change the entry criteria to accommodate more of the under-represented groups. While I strongly disagree their beliefs that the standards for this job field should change, it doesn't change the reality that they are in fact under-represented compared to overall population. To me the issue is that people infer value judgements (on being over/under represented) that imply that there is inherent fairness and value in striving for perfectly even representation of society when that is not the case.

I don't understand why you try to white wash the racial discrimination meaning of "over representation" here. "Over representation" means there are too many of them, it is sth abnormal, it takes away others' opportunity, it's not fair to other races, and so one should put a quote on these people. It's a label that was applied to Jews in the early 1930s.

Well, hopefully you will agree that if over-representation is a racist term, them under-representation is as well. If indeed representation itself has become a racist dog whistle, I did ask for suggestions for other terms and no one had suggestions.

I am on your side here hun, and think people spend too much time focusing on identity issues and most of the policies in place today designed to promote equality are discriminatory against Asian Americans. But you choose to focus on tone policing, advocating to silence factual statements, and calling allies "F-ing racist" instead of seeking to discuss ways to make things better. Good luck with that approach.

Under-represented has a totally different racial tone, it's the opposite of over-presented. I don't quite get it how you confused the two. Under-presented implies that the group in question is treated unfairly somehow. Over-presented has the exact opposite implications.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The messages to Chloe Kim are terrible!

I don't understand the backlash over the NYT article. Why it is offensive to say Asian Americans are over-represented in figure skating if that is indeed a factual statement? It is the same thing as if someone said Black Americans are overrepresented in the NFL or Male Americans are over-represented in technology companies or Elderly Americans are over-represented in the Presidency.

How should it be worded appropriately to say that a certain group holds proportion of the group that is more than what is seen in the general population?

"Over-represented" is not a neutral word. They should have found a better term.

Such as ?

Such as not focusing on race. Are blacks over-represented in basketball? In football? F*ck you racist hypocrites.

Yes? I literally used an example of how black athletes are over represented in the NFL in my original comment, did you read that?

But by the way I completely agree with you that there should be less focus on race and identity politics in general. However, I do not think it is constructive to criticize fact based statements as racism. There will always be both over representation and under representation in all elements of US society because 100% perfect representation of the populace is nearly impossible. Organizations like the NYT seem to be hyper focused on some theoretical idea of perfect representation in all elements of society which is very divisive in my opinion.

No need to curse at strangers on the internet, maybe try to calm down and find allies instead of jumping to conclusions.

I agree the cursing isn't helpful. But "overrepresented" is not a neutral term in the world of DEI, and Asian Americans are getting fed up with the bias against Asian American success and the double standards when it comes to race.

The media couldn't even celebrate properly when Michelle Wu became Boston's first person of color to become mayor. Like, this was one of the first articles: https://www.npr.org/2021/11/16/1055972179/boston-first-black-mayor. Asian Americans are the most underrepresented group when it comes to politics, so why is the NPR treating Wu's election as if it were some kind of tragedy?

Then you have what's going on in magnet schools and elite colleges across the US. Asian Americans are often described as "overrepresented" in these schools. That word keeps getting used over and over to justify discrimination against Asian Americans, so Asian Americans have gotten sensitive to the word.

As for the article, "overrepresented" carries the connotation that in an ideal world there would be fewer Asian Americans in ice skating. A publication like the New York Times should know better. I'm sure there's a better way of saying there are a lot of Asian Americans who like to ice skate now.

Yes, I understand it sounds frustrating when the accomplishments of Asian Americans do not get the same amount of celebration in the media as those in other minority groups and there is blatant anti-Asian discrimination going on in schools. But attacking semantics and facts as being "racist" is not a productive way to draw awareness to these real problems.

I happen to be part of a certain minority group that is often criticized and ridiculed for being over-represented in a particular job field. It is true, and it's not racist for people to point out this disparity. Some people want to change the entry criteria to accommodate more of the under-represented groups. While I strongly disagree their beliefs that the standards for this job field should change, it doesn't change the reality that they are in fact under-represented compared to overall population. To me the issue is that people infer value judgements (on being over/under represented) that imply that there is inherent fairness and value in striving for perfectly even representation of society when that is not the case.

I don't understand why you try to white wash the racial discrimination meaning of "over representation" here. "Over representation" means there are too many of them, it is sth abnormal, it takes away others' opportunity, it's not fair to other races, and so one should put a quote on these people. It's a label that was applied to Jews in the early 1930s.

Well, hopefully you will agree that if over-representation is a racist term, them under-representation is as well. If indeed representation itself has become a racist dog whistle, I did ask for suggestions for other terms and no one had suggestions.

I am on your side here hun, and think people spend too much time focusing on identity issues and most of the policies in place today designed to promote equality are discriminatory against Asian Americans. But you choose to focus on tone policing, advocating to silence factual statements, and calling allies "F-ing racist" instead of seeking to discuss ways to make things better. Good luck with that approach.

Under-represented has a totally different racial tone, it's the opposite of over-presented. I don't quite get it how you confused the two. Under-presented implies that the group in question is treated unfairly somehow. Over-presented has the exact opposite implications.

Is it okay to say AA are over represented in NFL and NBA? How about white are under represented in NBA and NFL?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The messages to Chloe Kim are terrible!

I don't understand the backlash over the NYT article. Why it is offensive to say Asian Americans are over-represented in figure skating if that is indeed a factual statement? It is the same thing as if someone said Black Americans are overrepresented in the NFL or Male Americans are over-represented in technology companies or Elderly Americans are over-represented in the Presidency.

How should it be worded appropriately to say that a certain group holds proportion of the group that is more than what is seen in the general population?

"Over-represented" is not a neutral word. They should have found a better term.

Such as ?

Such as not focusing on race. Are blacks over-represented in basketball? In football? F*ck you racist hypocrites.

Yes? I literally used an example of how black athletes are over represented in the NFL in my original comment, did you read that?

But by the way I completely agree with you that there should be less focus on race and identity politics in general. However, I do not think it is constructive to criticize fact based statements as racism. There will always be both over representation and under representation in all elements of US society because 100% perfect representation of the populace is nearly impossible. Organizations like the NYT seem to be hyper focused on some theoretical idea of perfect representation in all elements of society which is very divisive in my opinion.

No need to curse at strangers on the internet, maybe try to calm down and find allies instead of jumping to conclusions.

I agree the cursing isn't helpful. But "overrepresented" is not a neutral term in the world of DEI, and Asian Americans are getting fed up with the bias against Asian American success and the double standards when it comes to race.

The media couldn't even celebrate properly when Michelle Wu became Boston's first person of color to become mayor. Like, this was one of the first articles: https://www.npr.org/2021/11/16/1055972179/boston-first-black-mayor. Asian Americans are the most underrepresented group when it comes to politics, so why is the NPR treating Wu's election as if it were some kind of tragedy?

Then you have what's going on in magnet schools and elite colleges across the US. Asian Americans are often described as "overrepresented" in these schools. That word keeps getting used over and over to justify discrimination against Asian Americans, so Asian Americans have gotten sensitive to the word.

As for the article, "overrepresented" carries the connotation that in an ideal world there would be fewer Asian Americans in ice skating. A publication like the New York Times should know better. I'm sure there's a better way of saying there are a lot of Asian Americans who like to ice skate now.

Yes, I understand it sounds frustrating when the accomplishments of Asian Americans do not get the same amount of celebration in the media as those in other minority groups and there is blatant anti-Asian discrimination going on in schools. But attacking semantics and facts as being "racist" is not a productive way to draw awareness to these real problems.

I happen to be part of a certain minority group that is often criticized and ridiculed for being over-represented in a particular job field. It is true, and it's not racist for people to point out this disparity. Some people want to change the entry criteria to accommodate more of the under-represented groups. While I strongly disagree their beliefs that the standards for this job field should change, it doesn't change the reality that they are in fact under-represented compared to overall population. To me the issue is that people infer value judgements (on being over/under represented) that imply that there is inherent fairness and value in striving for perfectly even representation of society when that is not the case.

I don't understand why you try to white wash the racial discrimination meaning of "over representation" here. "Over representation" means there are too many of them, it is sth abnormal, it takes away others' opportunity, it's not fair to other races, and so one should put a quote on these people. It's a label that was applied to Jews in the early 1930s.

Well, hopefully you will agree that if over-representation is a racist term, them under-representation is as well. If indeed representation itself has become a racist dog whistle, I did ask for suggestions for other terms and no one had suggestions.

I am on your side here hun, and think people spend too much time focusing on identity issues and most of the policies in place today designed to promote equality are discriminatory against Asian Americans. But you choose to focus on tone policing, advocating to silence factual statements, and calling allies "F-ing racist" instead of seeking to discuss ways to make things better. Good luck with that approach.

Under-represented has a totally different racial tone, it's the opposite of over-presented. I don't quite get it how you confused the two. Under-presented implies that the group in question is treated unfairly somehow. Over-presented has the exact opposite implications.

It is a mathematical truth that if there exists a group that is underrepresented, then there must exist at least one group that is overrepresented. Groups can be over/under-represented for many reasons, and over/under representation does not necessarily imply that the group had an unfair dis/advantage.

Your posts keep talking about "tone" and value judgements, and I am talking about factual statements. I think that we need to agree to disagree hun. It seems like this topic is really upsetting you and you keep making accusatory attacks instead of replying to the content of my posts. Take a break and have a good night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else here think the real problem is the IOC? People should compete for the country where they live. If an athlete moves to China or any other country I have no issue with them competing for that country. If an athlete moves to the USA of course they should be allowed to compete for the USA.

The issue is when they don’t actually move and become a part of that country. If Gu moves and lives in China then cool, her choice compete there. The USA has had plenty of athletes move here and compete. It’s the sham of it, she visits China and has never lived there. This is a IOC issue, people should compete where they live.

Hey sweetheart, Eileen Gu spends more than 50% of her time in China since 2019! She has residences both in US and in China. Do you have problem with that?

Your English is not as good as you think it is, you are trying so hard to be colloquial but just can't get it quite right and it is telling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else here think the real problem is the IOC? People should compete for the country where they live. If an athlete moves to China or any other country I have no issue with them competing for that country. If an athlete moves to the USA of course they should be allowed to compete for the USA.

The issue is when they don’t actually move and become a part of that country. If Gu moves and lives in China then cool, her choice compete there. The USA has had plenty of athletes move here and compete. It’s the sham of it, she visits China and has never lived there. This is a IOC issue, people should compete where they live.

Hey sweetheart, Eileen Gu spends more than 50% of her time in China since 2019! She has residences both in US and in China. Do you have problem with that?

Your English is not as good as you think it is, you are trying so hard to be colloquial but just can't get it quite right and it is telling.

+1

[Anonymous]

Maybe Gu cannot afford to use the training facility in the US. She took a gap year to train in China full time. Does anyone know the cost if the training facilities in the US? The training facility in China is on dry land and is accessible all season. Athletes land in a pool during practice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe Gu cannot afford to use the training facility in the US. She took a gap year to train in China full time. Does anyone know the cost if the training facilities in the US? The training facility in China is on dry land and is accessible all season. Athletes land in a pool during practice.

Since she attended a high school where tuition was 50k a year and she made 42 million in endorsements last year, I don’t think the cost of the training facilities was the issue.

https://au.sports.yahoo.com/sports/winter-olympics-2022-42-million-truth-eileen-gu-furore-232629894.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe Gu cannot afford to use the training facility in the US. She took a gap year to train in China full time. Does anyone know the cost if the training facilities in the US? The training facility in China is on dry land and is accessible all season. Athletes land in a pool during practice.

Since she attended a high school where tuition was 50k a year and she made 42 million in endorsements last year, I don’t think the cost of the training facilities was the issue.

https://au.sports.yahoo.com/sports/winter-olympics-2022-42-million-truth-eileen-gu-furore-232629894.html

Soviet athletes defected to the USA. Elite African athletes come to the USA to take advantage of the facilities and win the US medals. Athletes will go where they have the greatest opportunity to succeed. Gu wanted endorsements and she got them. In the USA, she would have been one of many…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe Gu cannot afford to use the training facility in the US. She took a gap year to train in China full time. Does anyone know the cost if the training facilities in the US? The training facility in China is on dry land and is accessible all season. Athletes land in a pool during practice.

Since she attended a high school where tuition was 50k a year and she made 42 million in endorsements last year, I don’t think the cost of the training facilities was the issue.

https://au.sports.yahoo.com/sports/winter-olympics-2022-42-million-truth-eileen-gu-furore-232629894.html

Do you suggest she started to train for the sports after she received the endorsement?

[Anonymous]

Eileen Gu, two Gold and one Silver Medals. What a talented athlete.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
How about Americans who get college paid for and then go to work in other countries and for other countries? Are they hypocrites?

Way to compare apples to oranges. Other countries have specific scholarship programs intended for anyone, including people who are not citizens. They also have scholarship programs intended for their own citizens. It'd be like a German citizen in Germany enjoying all of the scholarship programs for German citizens only, yet going out an competing for Russia.

Gu enjoys everything about the US, yet enriches herself competing for China. The hypocrisy is truly astounding. It's funny how progressives will defend her when she competes for the country systematically wiping out Uyghurs while the same progressives will chastise China over the issue. You can't have it both ways.

Wtf are you talking about? No one I know who is a progressive is “defending” Gu. Frankly, I find her participation on behalf of China and her plastic surgery to be really gross.

She's had plastic surgery at her age?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
How about Americans who get college paid for and then go to work in other countries and for other countries? Are they hypocrites?

Way to compare apples to oranges. Other countries have specific scholarship programs intended for anyone, including people who are not citizens. They also have scholarship programs intended for their own citizens. It'd be like a German citizen in Germany enjoying all of the scholarship programs for German citizens only, yet going out an competing for Russia.

Gu enjoys everything about the US, yet enriches herself competing for China. The hypocrisy is truly astounding. It's funny how progressives will defend her when she competes for the country systematically wiping out Uyghurs while the same progressives will chastise China over the issue. You can't have it both ways.

Wtf are you talking about? No one I know who is a progressive is “defending” Gu. Frankly, I find her participation on behalf of China and her plastic surgery to be really gross.

She's had plastic surgery at her age?

Hope that would make you happy about yourself.