Rob Grabowski-USA TODAY Sports
I’ve been sitting here trying to figure out how to approach the whole mess surrounding Duncan Keith’s comments to The Team 1040’s Karen Thomson last night. The best way I know is to sort out everything in writing.
In case you haven’t heard already, Keith was being interviewed in the locker room, as he has been in the past, after the Chicago Blackhawks’ loss to the Vancouver Canucks. Thomson asked him about Daniel Sedin’s breakaway goal. She thought Keith’s actions (an alleged penalty committed on Sedin) might have warranted a penalty, and she wanted to know his take on it:
Thomson: “It looked like maybe there was a penalty that went undetected. You seemed a bit frustrated.”
Keith: “Oh, no. I don’t think there was anything. I think he scored a nice goal. The ref was right there. That’s what the ref saw. We should get you as a ref maybe, eh?”
Thomson: “Yeah, maybe.”
Keith: The first female … ”
Thomson: “I can’t skate, though.”
Keith: “The first female referee. You can’t play probably either, right? But you’re thinking the game like you know it? Okay, see ya.”
For the record, the referee did see it, and the penalty was delayed. The only reason it wasn’t called was because Sedin scored the goal, negating the call.
There are a lot of excuses floating around in defense of his comments. The game was bad and he was upset. The question she asked was pretty snarky. He’s a crankypants with reporters regardless of their gender. Perhaps all of those are true, but those are weak reasons to shove this aside.
I’ve also heard “Hey, I’m a girl, and I’m not offended! Shut up and get over it!” First of all, I’m very much not a girl, I am a woman, and I was offended. Secondly, do not tell me how to feel about this. In fact, don’t ever police other people’s feelings about anything at any time.
Then there’s the excuse that he didn’t really mean what he said. Unless you’re a mind reader or have a Vulcan mind meld with him, you don’t know for certain what Keith was thinking. It doesn’t matter what he did or didn’t mean, it came out of his mouth the way it did.
There are two things to his comments that are really bothersome. The first is that by emphasizing that Thomson can’t skate and therefore never played hockey, she’s not qualified to comment on what did or didn’t happen. Look, I can’t skate either, but that doesn’t mean I can’t be a hockey fan and comment on games. If playing the game was a requirement for hockey writing, whether it’s freelance or a regular column in the big newspapers, there wouldn’t be a lot of hockey writers out there.
The second and biggest thing that’s wrong with what Keith said boils down to one word: female. Using that word denoted that she’s unqualified to know anything about hockey simply because she’s a woman. In that moment, when that word was uttered, he forgot that there’s a women’s hockey team that just went completely undefeated for their season and won an NCAA championship. He forgot that his native country boasts Olympic champions in both men’s and women’s ice hockey. He forgot that 20 years ago, a woman took to the net for the Tampa Bay Lightning in an exhibition game.
To the female hockey fans who aren’t offended, I ask “Why not?” We encounter this so much as fans, whether it’s being made to recite statistics and past rosters to prove ourselves to male fans or being branded with the horrid “puck bunny” label. Whether he meant it or not, Keith’s comments are hurtful, and they become another example of sexism in male-dominated sports.
Duncan Keith will be sorry that he said what he did, and Thomson has gotten over it (as she later tweeted), but it brings to light a very real and very ugly facet of society. Unfortunately, it won’t be going away any time soon.
