A. Montaño slams Nike for its pregnancy ad, says they are gaslighting people into believing they leaders in women's empowerment

First world problems personified. There are childbslaves working all day in terrible conditions for this company and she has the audacity to complain that she's somehow a victim of the company that's voluntarily funded her whole career. Give me a break, baby.

I love her take. Just because there are bigger problems or she signed a contract with them doesn't mean her criticisms aren't valid. I worked at major college without healthcare for less than 15k a year for like 6 years. People "volunteer" to do stuff all the time because they really want to do something and it's better than not having it, but that doesn't make it right.

I remember talking to a woman about this whole pregnancy no-contract thing when it was happening in 2019. My friend was REALLY upset by it. And what pissed her off is that Nike had just released that Serena Williams ad. I actually assume it's that ad that caused people like Montano to speak up in the first place.

Nike was doing the same thing then that it's doing now - acting like it's really pro-pregnant women.

There's nothing wrong with the ad now except for the fact that many view it as "too soon."

Here is the Serena ad from 2019.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Mc06cIrvXE

So...another reason not to support them.

My only issue with Montano's post is the use of "our women"... otherwise, her heart is in the right place, but she could also take the perspective that she inspired NIKE to act and support pregnant women. She could see it as a compliment and sign of respect.

Yeah it's just frustrating because it's a little too late & the average person might think that Nike is great for doing this on their own, because they care, etc.

Good on Montano for speaking out and spurring this change. It would have been nice if this had been Nike's attitude when she ran for them.

Nike: Catches flack for not supporting pregnant athletes.

Nike: Switches stances, promotes pregnant female athletes

Public: NOT COOL, CANCEL THEM!

i think in part the difficulty is that a compliment doesn't pay the bills -

It's amazing how many rich and famous victims we have in this country. All you have to do is claim racial, or gender, or sexual orientation, or whatever systematic injustice and you are immediately a hero to the woke mob.

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

It's amazing how many rich and famous victims we have in this country. All you have to do is claim racial, or gender, or sexual orientation, or whatever systematic injustice and you are immediately a hero to the woke mob.

Thats the braindead hateful bigot reaction here. Spouting off about people you hate when nobody brought them up. Do you just wake up pissed off at gay people and "the libs"?

Her disgust is about the hypocritical practice of a company scoring brownie points w pregnant women when they have an historical precedent of not renewing the contracts of women when they get pregnant. Sociopath companies doing horrible crap to people because they can, then putting on a smiley face for the public.

You should see the utter bemusement in the UK right now at the US / Oprah’s acceptance of Harry and Meghan’s interview claims - some of which are probably incorrect. It’s insane how powerful the emotionalist mob have become. I suspect that eventually we’ll see an over correction the other way.

How many of those women return to their former level? Serious question.

Nike have always low-balled their athletes following injury, or even simply because they can - here’s an excerpt of a Greg Rutherford interview from 2013 when he was Olympic champ:

“ They offered me a contract but the clauses were such that, by the end of this year, I would end up earning probably less than I would have done on my old junior contract, I would be completely tied to it and unable to do nothing else, as they would own all my image rights ” he said.

“To sign a contract for a lower amount with horrible clauses, why would you do that? You’re in a scenario where you have to say, 'I’m not prepared to accept that’.

Rutherford added: “It’s very frustrating because I’ve been with them a long time. They cut back my retainer at the end of 2011 because I got injured at the worlds, so I was a bit frustrated by that.

“Then I’m thinking, with the years I’ve been with them, surely winning that gold medal would put me in good stead to be offered a great contract. All you want is to be shown some respect and for people to say, 'You’ve done well and we will reward you for that’.”

Why doesn't Montaño build a company herself and run it the way that she thinks Nike should be? Because it's easier to be a taker, whiner, complainer. Go build something yourself, Alysia. Then you can pay all the pregnant women you want. Your move.

toozy wrote:

You should see the utter bemusement in the UK right now at the US / Oprah’s acceptance of Harry and Meghan’s interview claims - some of which are probably incorrect. It’s insane how powerful the emotionalist mob have become. I suspect that eventually we’ll see an over correction the other way.

I think the majority of American's are actually on the side of the royal family. It's hard to side with a B-list actress who marries a guy best known for the Nazi outfit incident then complains his family is racist while living on a $14 million dollar estate that is paid for with the inheritance from his family. It's just the people defending Meghan and Harry are much more loud and passionate than the people on the other side. Plus the MSM media is totally invested in any narrative that supports the cause which is how you get Don Lemon saying we don't even need to look at the evidence it is clear that we must accept everything Meghan said at her word.

Or attempt to address Nike’s treatment of sponsored athletes in general, rather than use singular examples of arguably ethically dubious practices which are simply reflective of their general business model.

The greater hypocrisy is indicative of the state of western corporate PR in 2021 (famously at google who’s employees hamstrung their attempts in the Chinese market).

your move wrote:

Why doesn't Montaño build a company herself and run it the way that she thinks Nike should be? Because it's easier to be a taker, whiner, complainer. Go build something yourself, Alysia. Then you can pay all the pregnant women you want. Your move.

She did build a company herself and is running it the way she thinks it should be.

The company is already supporting three athletes and mothers: Dawn Harper Nelson, Sara Vaughn, and Olicia Williams.

Respect.

donkeydoug wrote:

Nike: Catches flack for not supporting pregnant athletes.

Nike: Switches stances, promotes pregnant female athletes

Public: NOT COOL, CANCEL THEM!

Just because they promote pregnant female athletes doesn't mean that they are supporting female athletes.

Nike were taking money back or cancelling contracts for female athletes that don't race. Guys say "well, they are not working so why are they getting paid". It is easy to say when guys can't have kids. Guys don't have to decide between participating in the sport as starting a family. Than women rushing back to race before they are ready and getting penalized for poor performances,

Muebele wrote:

donkeydoug wrote:

Nike: Catches flack for not supporting pregnant athletes.

Nike: Switches stances, promotes pregnant female athletes

Public: NOT COOL, CANCEL THEM!

Just because they promote pregnant female athletes doesn't mean that they are supporting female athletes.

Nike were taking money back or cancelling contracts for female athletes that don't race. Guys say "well, they are not working so why are they getting paid". It is easy to say when guys can't have kids. Guys don't have to decide between participating in the sport as starting a family. Than women rushing back to race before they are ready and getting penalized for poor performances,

This is such a nonsense arguement.

People make choices based on how they want to live and finances are impacted by it. Shalene Flannigan did not have kids throughout her career. Should athletes who chose to have kids and experienced no drop in performance be entitled to the same compensation as Shalane who consistently performed high with no break? Not unless they can are still producing money for their employer. BTW some athletes like Stephanie Bruce have parlayed motherhood into increase earnings so let's not pretend this only cuts one way. You make life choices and your employer is not required to compensate you beyond your contractual terms. You work in a profession where being in peak physical is key. No one has forced you to have kids, if you chose to do so and it hurts your value to your employer they can do as they please.

Another legitimate truth is that Montano is done as an athlete. She has not performed at a high in years. Her last active season was 2017 in which she ran 2:21 which is not even a decent D1 time. She is 34 which is well past an 800m prime. She is a has-been athlete and this whole scandal she is drumming up is purely about trying to keep herself in the public space and financially benefit her because she no longer has the ability to make money based on performance. The sad truth is probably far more Americans know who she is now because of this nonsense than when she was actually a top-level athlete competing for medals on the world's stage.

I also recall that ridiculous stunt she pulled at the USATF Championships where she ran while very pregnant. If you are not prepared to race then do not take someone's spot on the line. It was all about her. Why care about the young lady she left off the start list when you can get a loud applause for running slow?