Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York City, New York
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Retouching History: Is the Coverage of Gina Carano Misleading?
Well, there are either going to be lovers or haters on this one, I think. Tried to make it as diplomatic as possible, but it's hard to say anything about Gina without getting people pissed off.
Click here for the rest.
Originally Posted by IronMan @ MMAOpinion
It should be made clear from the offset that Gina Carano’s role in women’s MMA is not debatable. She is the face of the female incarnation of the sport. She is beautiful, charismatic and an incredible fighter. It is not possible to debate any of those points, as far as I’m concerned, and so it is not even worth wasting time with them.
What is debatable, though, is whether (as some elements would like readers to believe) Gina Carano is a self-made queen of the sport who conquered all of the challenges the world presented. The press image, and perhaps the popularly accepted image, (and it’s unclear whether the chicken or the egg came first on that one) is that Carano is a thai fighter who came out of obscurity through hard work, exciting wars and a desire to champion female MMA, leading the lesser known branch of the sport into mainstream consciousness.
What is debatable, and what needs to be debated, is whether or not the perception of Gina as a self-made figurehead is realistic. Certainly, the characteristics that have made her a fixture in the sport make it clear that there is no one better to lead women’s MMA, but whether she was brought into the lead with the aid of those looking to further the cause should be scrutinized a little more carefully.
Also, this one is long, but hopefully worth the 1400-ish words.
Sig by Toxic
Barnett - Toquinho -Werdum - "Nurmie"
Z. Gurgel - Morango - Rocha - Tiequan