I sometimes watch, but don’t listen, to soccer matches from across the pond.  The other day I made the mistake of unmuting the T.V.  To my surprise, the soccer analyst had somewhat decipherable diction for a change.  However, he was worse overall….

In a game between Nottingham Forest and West Ham United, he pondered whom would be named “Man of the Match,” then suddenly apologized.  He then corrected his apparent political incorrectness by admitting his misspeak and emphasizing that it should be “Player of the Match.”

I know this is only soccer in mediocre Britain, but what the hell is going on in the culture at large? An announcer has been so beaten down by the PC police that he’s obliged to publicly admonish himself for using what has been common parlance for generations.

This was a men’s soccer game.  The “players” were all men.  It is common sense to refer to the best on the day as “man” of the match.  Women play, too, but theirs is really a different version of soccer, so to conflate the two by referring to androgynous “players” is absurd.

Besides, why wouldn’t a female player want to celebrate womanhood?  Why wouldn’t she wish to be named “Woman of the Match” if deserved?  Of course she’s a “player,” but there’s an opportunity to be more specific, and to respect women.  They may not be as fast and strong, but they play with great heart and soul.  Sometimes they even exhibit some toxic femininity.

Now then, if this has something to do with “trans” whatever, well I simply can’t fathom it.  But if a “trans” player wants to be a woman, wouldn’t “it” also want to be named “Woman of the Match”?  Otherwise, why go through all that weird stuff?

Men’s soccer and women’s soccer have different attributes.  The players showcase different skills and abilities.  There is not enough commonality to enforce some kind of unnatural equalization.  If anything, it dilutes the award for both men and women to now refer to the best performers on the day as player of the match.  Over here we celebrate the most valuable player, but we have more common sense.  Over there, many decades of tradition celebrate the “man” of the match.   It has been the subject of innumerous awards, sports shows, and interviews.  It also rolls off one’s tongue more naturally.

Ex-Prime Minister David Cameron once cautioned against the divineness wrought by multiculturalism, stating that Britain needs to apply “muscular liberalism.”  He was half right — we can do without the liberalism bit (by modern “liberal” standards, that is).  All I know is that we’ve now a bunch of effete wussies in the soccer booth who’ve succumbed to feeble liberalism.  Heck, men’s soccer can even use a dose of toxic masculinity — by definition, not available to all “players” — to inject more excitement.

Britain may be mediocre-ish for many reasons now, including that its culture has been coarsened by unappreciative foreigners and the societal tyranny of DEI.  But the soccer analysts, if you can believe it, are less than mediocre.  Thankfully, I can find my mute button without looking, because those woke wankers don’t add value, and captions indicate which players are being substituted.

Image: Free image, Pixabay license.