This must go beyond creating entitlements and enforcing parity, as Title IX does. We must dismantle the grandfathered-in systemic advantages that male athletes and male-dominated sports infrastructures continue to enjoy. We must cultivate tastes for other sports, the ones that women excel in and even dominate. And we must broaden our definition of what athletic prowess looks like....
That reminds me of the letter I wrote to the NYT in 1989 (published here):Men’s bodies are different from women’s; men are generally bigger, faster and stronger. And currently, the sports that make the most money and see the largest audiences in the United States are suited to a male body’s physical strengths: football tackles, basketball dunks. Sports built for women’s bodies would be different. Compared with men, women have superior flexibility and resilience. Women excel at enduring....
By the way, the NYT gives us no comments section for that Lindsay Crouse piece. If it did, surely someone would puzzle over the failure to consider transgender athletes. Crouse forefronts the reality that "Men’s bodies are different from women’s." In sports, bodies matter, not inward feelings. Or is that just another matter of taste — cultivated and amenable to reculturation?
UPDATE: The NYT has now added a comments section. Here's one that addresses transgenderism:
I don't know how the average citizen can possibly care about women having equal opportunities anymore when we're constantly being told that there are no fundamental differences between men and women, and that people can be any gender they want to be. You can't have it both ways. Either one gender has been marginalized in certain areas and we need to lift them up and provide more equal opportunities, or gender is an entirely personal, individual, "felt" identity, and arguments about gender groups as a whole are meaningless.
पोस्ट्स
८१ टिप्पण्या:
There is an unfair focus on sports people want to watch and participate in. We must (MUST!) shift our priorities to sports people don’t care much about.
“You’ll take what we give you and like it.”
I expect Crouse has already said all she cares to say about men playing women’s sports.
Organic reality: Women watch and pay for sports during the Olympics and not much more. They like the alternative sports that were invented over the last several decades just for women...rhythmic gymnastics, synchronized swimming, ice dancing, and whatnot. How many more do we need? The Olympics has tear-jerker human interest stories for female viewers. Only. There's been a huge ideological push for more women in soccer and basketball, but where are masses of paying fans?
In contrast, men all around the world spend a fortune every week attending baseball, basketball, soccer, football, hockey, golf, auto racing, horse racing, dog racing, cock fighting, and bull fighting events and more. Men populate a zillion sports bars every day. Men spend a fortune on sports gambling too.
Men care more about athletic competition than women do. How many times must we rediscover this? How many times must we rediscover that men prefer things and competitive teams, while women prefer people and supportive clubs?
Why can't we let natural, organic processes be natural, sustainable, and organic but not self-conscious, forced, and ideological? (Other than putting the professional complainers out of a job, and losing their lawsuit paydays.)
Throwing glass objects is woman-specific.
"We must cultivate tastes for other sports, the ones that women excel in and even dominate."
No, we must make them more interesting to the sports audience. Spectator sports are entertainment, so lose the feminist whining and field a more entertaining product.
One of the more popular sports in the US right now is Ninja Warrior, particularly the American version. It is broadcast on prime time with replays getting attention on other channels. Women compete on the same course as men. Men dominate and I can see the course is better designed for taller frames. But they also have young adults now competing on the same course and they do exceptionally well regardless of frame or sex. The most interesting part of the competition is the premise. It is about overcoming obstacles.
Too much emphasis is placed on the elite competition and entertainment value income of Athletics.
That's just the tip of the iceberg and in the grand scheme of Life on planet Earth is the most meaningless aspect of sport.
What's really important is to get more kids to participate in athletics: male, female whatever. It's like we are purposefully growing a future generation of couch potatoes and the most important part of the debate about sports is what those couch potatoes should watch.
The great tragedy of the decline of the American educational system has been the reduction and/or elimination of sports and arts in childhood academics.
Let's start by bringing back recess and lunch time dodgeball.
The question is what is causing us to like what we like. If men in huge numbers watch certain team sports played by men, why is that happening? Is it just what happens through the force of nature? No, it's culture, or we wouldn't have baseball while elsewhere they have cricket. There's some cultural element, and it's interesting to try to understand it and at least possible to shape it.
Crouse works on the theory that the fixation on men's teams sports has to do with the culture's need for military power:
"Part of the problem is the way we think about sports is a vestige of our fixation on nationalism and military strength — spheres that men also have dominated. Traditional American public school physical education, with the pull-ups and push-ups of the Presidential Fitness Test, began amid Cold War fears that we were not producing enough combat-ready American men. The sports events we stage today continue to pantomime militarism and war — complete with societally enforced adherence to prescribed behavior during the national anthem. Our sports showcase our strength, and Americans generally see strength as a male trait."
It used to be very common to interpret the interest in football as homoerotic: "An academic paper from 1978 by Cal-Berkeley anthropologist Alan Dundes called "Into the End Zone for a Touchdown: A Psychoanalytic Consideration of American Football." I can sum it up with this opening line from a 1978 Time magazine article, "Football as Erotic Ritual": "Are the guys on the gridiron really gay?""
I'm skeptical of Crouse's (and my own) idea of reshaping the culture of sports spectatorship, but it's certainly worth noticing that it is, to some extent, culture and not merely nature.
At that link, a quote from "The David Kopay Story": "The whole language of football is involved in sexual allusions. We were told to go out and "fuck those guys"; to take that ball and stick it up their asses"or "down their throats."The coaches would yell,"knock their dicks off," or more often than that,"knock their jocks off." They'd say,"Go out there and give it all you've got,a hundred and ten percent, shoot your wad. You controlled their line and "knocked" 'em into submission. Over the years I've seen many a coach get emotionally aroused while he was diagramming a particular play into an imaginary hole on the blackboard. His face red, his voice rising, he would show the ball carrier how he wanted him to" stick it in the hole."
"We must dismantle the grandfathered-in systemic advantages that male athletes and male-dominated sports infrastructures continue to enjoy."
Use of the word "systemic" tells you they got nothing to say. Just like "systemic racism," which means we can't explain why one racial group on average does so poorly in various social measures, so we reach for the "systemic" bromide, and, please, don't ask any questions about that! It's systemic!
Also, the word "dismantle." Another lefty-tell word.
Are these people aware of how empty this language sounds?
We must find a better way of persuasion than continuously repeating the words “we must “.
I feel like I am constantly being yelled at by a segment of society and am beginning to really resent it.
I'd like to see a critical reexamination of sports spectatorship as a waste of time. Too many people sitting around watching other people move around. It's so obviously better to find an activity you enjoy. It's analogous to watching porn instead of engaging in your own sexual activity.
Ann, your 1989 letter should have gotten more attention. Iditarod!
And you are so right (= I agree with you) that watching sports is an incomprehensible waste of time. How is a random bunch of men hired by a team in my city "my" team whose victories or I should celebrate?
Ann Althouse said...The question is what is causing us to like what we like. If men in huge numbers watch certain team sports played by men, why is that happening? Is it just what happens through the force of nature? No, it's culture, or we wouldn't have baseball while elsewhere they have cricket.
True, the specific sports people watch is a cultural thing. But they arose organically within each culture--the popular sports are popular because people like them. Crouse is talking about forcing marginal sports into the limelight, about forcing people to watch what they're not interested in watching. That's not going to work.
Remember ABC's Wide World of Sports? ("The thrill of victory...and the agony of defeat")--there used to be a much larger variety of sports programming. The sports Crouse wants on TV already had their chance at broadcast television. They're gone now because not enough people were interested.
Ann Althouse said...I'd like to see a critical reexamination of sports spectatorship as a waste of time.
I'm willing to bet, similar to the zoo thread of a few days ago where the point was made that seeing exotic animals in cages in your community makes you more likely to support preservation efforts in the wild, that people who watch a lot of sports are more likely to participate in sports than are people who don't watch.
We must cultivate tastes for other sports, the ones that women excel in and even dominate
And WHAT would These sports BE?
Remember (Ms Althouse),
the purpose of PROFESSIONAL sports is GETTING PAID TO PLAY (it's kinda the definition).
And, in order to get PAID.. People Have TO WATCH
Might i make a modest proposal. One that will make EVERYONE happy (at least gilbar)
Professional Pole Dancing
it's athletic (check)
women excel at it and even dominate it (check)
people will PAY to watch (check)
I'd like to see a critical reexamination of reading the WaPo, the NYT and the New Yorker as a waste of time. Too many people sitting around reading about other people's thoughts. So obviously better to get out and have your own. It's analogous to reading porn novels instead of engaging in your own sexual activity.
You got issues, Prof.
I've spent several summers as a counselor at girls' summer camps. There was a huge push at one time to play "New Games" with the kids. The games were designed to promote cooperation and had no winners and losers. When some of the counselors tried to play the games with boys in the mix, they complained the boys weren't interested unless there was competition. The reality is the girls weren't all that enthusiastic about the games, either. They were just more compliant. During their free time at camp I never once saw them organize a "pick up New Game". The problem isn't forcing an interest in sports on women whether to watch or to play. It's just accepting that men and women have some interests that have some overlap, and some that don't. In science and engineering, for example,
Lets set aside the Times' obvious flop-sweat efforts to reel in wokeness and talk about the real issue: get men pretending to be women out of women's sports.
Come to think of it, reeling in wokeness could be a sport enjoyed by all sexes, including journalists.
"I'd like to see a critical reexamination of sports spectatorship as a waste of time. Too many people sitting around watching other people move around."
I'd like to see fewer Karens telling other people what they should do. BTW, it's entertainment, not spectatorship. Sort of like reading the comments on blogs - mostly a waste of time, but often entertaining.
“ It's analogous to watching porn instead of engaging in your own sexual activity.”
Baseball games average well over two hours.
"A New Deal for Women's Sports" when people are losing interest the Olympics, the NFL, and sports in general? That seems like especially poor timing. People won't be watching phony baloney newly invented women's sports if the electricity goes out. Get your priorities in order. If the order of the day is making do, and learning to live with less, activists and agitators will have to accept that the resources aren't available for their pet projects.
@Althouse wrote: "I'm skeptical of Crouse's (and my own) idea of reshaping the culture of sports spectatorship, but it's certainly worth noticing that it is, to some extent, culture and not merely nature."
Sports is the closest part of culture tied to our animal facts of life and biological nature. Survival of the fittest. Hunting. Combat. Teams of hunters with spears and slings have chased impala and deer for dinner...for a million years. Humans are "hunter-gatherers" after all. Men hunted and women gathered. Men evolved to specialize in heavy construction (e.g., building shelters; later farming) and getting meat (i.e., hunting). Women evolved to be caregivers for small children as human babies take forever to mature versus other species, plus gatherers of grain, nuts, berries, and fruit, and also weavers of clothes. Women still DOMINATE assembly line and fine-detail jobs to this day, be it in clothing/textiles or electronics. Men continue to dominate truck manufacture, truck driving, and getting dirty digging ditches. They also dominate sports interest world wide.
Sports are mainly an artifact of the need for hunting meat. Humans are predatory apes and require a heavy protein intake for the "big brains" needed with upright walking, spear throwing, and strategic hunting coordination. It's no accident that humans teamed up with carnivorous wild wolves and tamed them as dogs to expand the hunting pack. "Man's best friend" gave him an edge in hunting/root sports. Humans, dogs, and dolphins: meat eating pack hunters and natural born killers. Eyes on the front of the face = predator. Eyes on the side of the head = wide field of vision and ability to escape from predators.
Men use metaphors of sex and violence and domination because sports are the culturally-permitted way to release the primal drive to hunt and kill. Boxers and martial artists are allowed to punch, kick, and smash their opponents directly. Many, many, many men enjoy this (e.g., Joe Rogan). Women...not so much...nor is there any data that they prefer getting dirty digging ditches or getting greasy underneath a tractor.
The above was reasoned by many evolutionary biologists 100 years ago. If you have supporting data for the primacy of culture over nature and a better comprehensive explanation of the range of facts, please present it. Now, those same evolutionary theorists laid the groundwork for eugenics movements and the mass murder wars of the 20th century...as would be expected from us as a predatory, killer species. Keep the worst under control through sports, but don't expect male nature or female nature to change in less than another 1,000,000 years. Evolution determines outcomes.
Culture is always filtered through biological roots. Always.
It used to be very common to interpret the interest in football as homoerotic
Homosexualized intellectuals have a propensity for the absurd, like pointing out as evidence the position of "tight end". I guess it justifies their own internalized shame by projecting onto others.
A cigar may be a phallus, if you are so inclined to think that way, but as Sigmund Freud pointed out, often it is just a good smoke.
Fans have often played a sport themselves. That is part of the cultural attraction. My sister has done ballet all of her life. She went to a show recently where the male lead was an elite, professional dancer and she was blown away by how good he was. She said she felt sorry for the female lead. I may have enjoyed his performance but would have no idea know how spectacular it was.
Similarly, watching a bunch sprint in cycling is incredibly exciting for me because I know how hard it is to navigate a bunch sprint even though I've only done it in social group rides.
Before I worry about the sport spectator; I rather worry those who watch fictional dramas. I always find it interesting that those who pay a good deal of attention on news seem to have a hatred of sport spectators, as if news spectating is better and healthier. How much better of a person was made that followed carefully the news coverage of the Mueller Investigation, the 2 impeachments of Trump, and the Jan 6th hearings? Are they really better than someone who watches girl’s gymnastics? Don’t tell me the former learned about good law enforcement and judicial proceedings unless you intend to make a joke.
I've spent several summers as a counselor at girls' summer camps. There was a huge push at one time to play "New Games" with the kids. The games were designed to promote cooperation and had no winners and losers. When some of the counselors tried to play the games with boys in the mix, they complained the boys weren't interested unless there was competition, and we needed to convince the boys the games were fun. The reality is the girls weren't all that enthusiastic about the games, either. They were just more compliant. During their free time at camp I never once saw them organize a "pick up New Game". It's just time to stop the fantasy that men and women are the same, and we can force them into proving it. We are complimentary. As long as a household has two TVs, both partners don't have to watch the same thing. Equal opportunity time wasting, but not wasted in the same way. Same result. Megan Rapinoe can't make a fortune at soccer, but Joanna Gaines can decorating houses and making banana muffins
“What's really important is to get more kids to participate in athletics: male, female whatever. It's like we are purposefully growing a future generation of couch potatoes and the most important part of the debate about sports is what those couch potatoes should watch.”
“The great tragedy of the decline of the American educational system has been the reduction and/or elimination of sports and arts in childhood academics. “
Amazingly, I agree 100% with Howard here.
My daughter went to a private prep school 3-12, and from 6-12, there were mandatory athletics. One of the things that our tuition money paid for was having enough teams so that most everyone could play whatever they wanted. A klutz like me, she still managed to play varsity her senior year (and letter) in Field Hockey. There and in (JV) soccer, there was a lot of running around. She had wanted to play basketball, but her step father got ahold of her and retaught her to run correctly too late, so would just tromp down the court. Great effort, but not that great of a result. In any case, all of the kids, boys, and esp girls, came out of HS with An active lifestyle. Now at 30, she hikes and skis most weekends, and runs several times during the week. Maybe because of this, or visa versa, she ended up married to a guy who is also very physically fit - instead of running during the week, he plays hockey 2-3 nights a week.
In contrast to this, we had a grandson graduate from public HS in May. His older brother had graduated two years earlier. Both have long term girlfriends, both of whom have weight problems (at 18 and 20). We were at graduation, and I was surprised to find that the norm, not the lean and fit of the girls at my daughter’s HS graduation a decade earlier.
For me, and I think for her, playing sports through HS was far more important than women playing professionally, or competing in the Olympics. 99.99% of girls will never make it to that level, and they seem to realize that better than the boys do. It’s the experiences of competing, and the habit of lifetime activity, that they learned in MS and HS that was important.
As for arts, her HS had mandatory fine arts too that included music, art, and dance. Everyone had to pick at least one per trimester. Her stepfather is an artist, but that never drew her interest. So, she did music instead. She learned flute, then piano. Neither was that compelling to her. Much happier in choir. Actually took voice lessons for several years. In college, she continued that, but found she preferred church singing. One of her college ministers was Black, and had a (mostly White) gospel choir. Daughter loved it. Now, a decade later, still sings in her church choir, when they are in town, and not hiking or skiing on Sunday, and goes to practice on Thursdays. Again, a lifetime pursuit, started as a teenager.
“Let's start by bringing back recess and lunch time dodgeball.”
That really was more of a boys’ thing. We (males) needed it a lot more than the girls did, to burn off the excess energy we had, so that we could sit in class somewhat silently and learn. Now the LS teachers, mostly female, just get their more troublesome and energetic boy students drugged with Ritalin, so they will act like girls, and sit quietly in class, now that recesses have mostly been eliminated.
I've spent several summers as a counselor at girls' summer camps. There was a huge push at one time to play "New Games" with the kids. The games were designed to promote cooperation and had no winners and losers. When some of the counselors tried to play the games with boys in the mix, they complained the boys weren't interested unless there was competition, and we needed to convince the boys the games were fun. The reality is the girls weren't all that enthusiastic about the games, either. They were just more compliant. During their free time at camp I never once saw them organize a "pick up New Game".
It's just time to stop the fantasy that men and women are the same, and we can force them into proving it. We are complimentary. As long as a household has two TVs, both partners don't have to watch the same thing. Equal opportunity time wasting, but not required to be wasted in the same way. Megan Rapinoe can't make a fortune at soccer, but Joanna Gaines can decorating houses and making banana muffins.
Football is a domestication of violence. As are jokes.
"We must dismantle the grandfathered-in systemic advantages that male athletes and male-dominated sports infrastructures continue to enjoy."
Yes, we do have systemic advantages in male dominated sports. The males are the pack hunters, and their sports reflect this. What sports reflect females’ natural roles throughout history? Competitive Basket Weaving? Child rearing? Shopping?
I do a lot of yoga and walking so I can sit and watch a lot of soccer and baseball.
Fandom is often passed from father to child. I miss watching Yankees games with my late father, but I always feel connected to his presence while watching them now. For me, this is not a waste of time.
Boys start playing sports at an early age. I remember playing baseball in the street when I was no more than 7 years old. We moved when I was 8 to a new home across the street from a park. My buddies and I played baseball and football there every single day of the year come rain or shine. Its just what we did. Our sisters never played sports at all.
It's analogous to watching porn instead of engaging in your own sexual activity.
I'm able to multi-task.
There are tens of thousands of women who love watching mens sports too. I am one of them. Others have said it’s entertaining, not just spectating, which is very true. If you love watching a local team, you are part of a community that takes pride in its achievements. It’s a very positive way to connect with your friends and neighbors. It’s also an emotional roller coaster ride, which if frankly hard for me at times. I can’t even watch if there’s a lot on the line! It’s thrilling and great and so very frustrating. And it helps you forget all the other stuff going on in your life for a few hours.
Women's sports can provide these thrills as well, of course, but the whole “aren’t women awesome just for being women out on a court or field” vibe has to be reduced or eliminated. For me, the draw of mens sports is not because of the male sex, it’s because of the athletes achievements. The focus should be on the athletic achievements in whatever sport or arena, whether male or female.
I'd like to see a critical reexamination of sports spectatorship as a waste of time.
The spectator experiences physical and emotional thrill from the rush. Addiction is near by.
Seems at least somewhat more threatening than a simple waste of time.
I've only been able to find a few limited articles on the subject, but for the sake of this discussion let's assume the following to be true: women's beach volleyball has consistently higher ratings than the men's version, though the men are bigger, faster, and stronger. If we could only find out the reasons, maybe we could apply them to other sports?
Sports built for women’s bodies would be different.
Beach Volleyball plays to women's strengths.
Women excel at enduring....
That's great since we already have endurance sports, the most popular of which is the marathon.
Remind me again how the top women's times compare with the top men's times.
We must cultivate tastes
In other words, you need to get your mind right.
You will be made to care, made to like women's field hockey more than anything.
@Stephen: "women's beach volleyball has consistently higher ratings than the men's version,
A large component is that men like to watch semi-clothed women move, bounce, and jiggle. Video games have long created female avatars, because some guys like watching females more than males. Some young men have no women in their lives, and their relationships with game characters can get really creepy in Japan and Korea.
https://gaming4.cash/best-boobs-in-video-games
https://www.engadget.com/2007-12-12-breast-video-game-boobs-to-haunt-our-mammories.html
https://www.dailydot.com/irl/video-game-girlfriend-loveplus-japan/
https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24614830
It's a techno riff on instinctive sexual conquest of a different sort...is it better or worse than prostitution? I have no idea!
"There are tens of thousands of women who love watching mens sports too."
I don't know why anyone would expect heterosexual women to prefer watching women's sports. Not only are the male athletes better than the women, they are more attractive to us!
And currently, the sports that make the most money and see the largest audiences in the United States
I believe this statement has these people's priorities in the correct order, though not in magnitude. As Ann's letter would suggest, if these feminists truly had their way female athletes would be collecting contracts as lucrative as the men while nobody watched them participate in their sports...
certain team sports played by men
There are no rules prohibiting women from playing major league baseball or in the NFL, NHL, NBA or PGA. Women have played in PGA events and in auto racing. They are free to try out and play for any professional baseball, football, hockey or basketball team.
The only team sports with sex limitations are those for women.
"We must..." "We must..." Translation: You troglodytes need to start doing what I'm yelling at you about.
“Football is a domestication of violence.”
I figure that I can talk about my daughter a bit now, because she is now married - to a college football player. He played O-Line, and by his senior year was flirting with 300 lbs. He thinned down that spring to a much healthier 240, and maybe 10 lbs lighter now, a decade later. Still a really big guy, solid as a rock. He also played rugby and ice hockey, but football is better funded at the college level and fields much larger teams. These are all sports requiring a lot of hitting of players on other teams. I figure that he is better suited to protect her than I am now. All that violence. Now he just plays hockey, lifts (a lot of) weights, and runs, skis and hikes with said daughter.
Oh, and he watches a lot of football. Not surprisingly, he watches the opposing lines much more critically than most. And he can often see plays breaking one way or another faster than most for that reason. He is a lifetime Patriots fan (growing up in that region), but was warming to the Denver Donkeys. Classmate of my daughter had the inside track for taking over management of the Denver team - but the family apparently just sold them to the Waltons, of Walmart fame. So, maybe less enthusiasm for the Donks, now that they have Arkansas ownership. He still has his Patsies.
There must be 190 channels for sports on TV. For example, SEC Network, 100 ESPNs, Big 10, local sports. There is a Corn Hole league - WITH Sponsors. (Beer would be the obvious choice, along with brats) To say that there are no opportunities to broadcast Women's sports is insane.
Watching women's sports is the issue. In the non-artistic sports, like basketball or soccer, the game is slower with less action and physicality. People do watch Women's Tennis, swimming (Olympic) and Golf - perhaps individual efforts are better suited, than team based women's sports for the spectators. But remember, most spectators are men, women don't watch sports as much as men to.
There are no shortage of fans for Gymnastics and Figure Skating. In those endeavors, I would say the women are more popular than the men, with both sexes watching.
It is not a straight forward issue - we cannot change what we like.
You need a tag for "White people problems."
"We must cultivate tastes for other sports, the ones that women excel in and even dominate."
At pro, collegiate and junior level, there's a big push to promote women ice hockey. But a big problem is in the women's game there's no checking or other body contact thereby rendering women's hockey as unwatchable. It's boring, but that doesn't stop the marketers from trying to convince us it's a great sport.
Sure, other cultures have other sports-- cricket, rugby, etc. But....they still prefer the very best of the competitors.
I am a woman who looooves watching football and some (college) men's basketball. I participate in yoga and knitting. I've been to a lot of swim meets in my life time, and watch it during the Olympics but not otherwise. I don't want to watch yoga on tv. I do watch knitting shows on YouTube.
A few years ago (pre-pandemic) I got a mailer encouraging me to go to a WNBA game. "You will never see people who work together more!" it said "It's a beautiful display of team cooperation!". I don't know if that's the best argument they have for women's basketball, or if they think that's what appeals to women. But it certainly is interesting sports marketing.
We must dismantle...
We must cultivate...
Translation: "Your folkways must conform to my preferences." The use of "we" in such cases is a narcissistic variant of the "royal we" posing as someone who speaks for The People.
If you truly respect the Will of the People, you leave them alone in their pursuit of happiness unless that pursuit infringes substantively on others.
Mud and oil wrestling might draw an audience.
Sports in their most fundamental and purest sense are about athletic achievement without considering any other factors. Who can run the fastest? How can jump the highest? Who an ski down the mountain the fastest? Who can throw a ball the best such that it is hard to hit with a bat? And that's the entertainment value. We want to see the best of human achievement. Furthermore, we want to see those who are seemingly at a disadvantage succeed through clever strategy and/or dogged determination. There's your drama. There's your attraction.
Sex is irrelevant to these questions, not to mention age, race, wealth, height, weight, religion, place of origin, hair color, attractiveness, and any other factor you wish to consider. If sports were just sports without any of the limitations society puts on them, men would compete with women, school children would compete with the elderly, the tall with the short. I suppose the most impressive X in a particular category is an interesting concept as a novelty, but that's not the point.
In the large majority of sports, with a few exceptions, at the highest level of competition men always beat women. The differences in achievement are such that men who decline to compete because they have no chance of success would beat the best women. This is not to say that every man would beat every woman - most certainly not true - but if you are searching for the greatest achievement, the underlying motivation of sports, the winner is always going to be a man.
So the idea that the system is setup to the advantage of men is failing to understand the concept entirely. It is an argument of ignorance, an argument that desires a conclusion and then reasons back from it. Sports are primarily about men because men are better at sports. Attempting to make it something else is artificial, something the author completely fails to understand.
Though perhaps the author is a huge fan of long distance swimming.
What's really important is to get more kids to participate in athletics: male, female whatever. It's like we are purposefully growing a future generation of couch potatoes and the most important part of the debate about sports is what those couch potatoes should watch.
Bingo.
As for watching being a waste of time. . . .well, why would you watch a Hollywood movie about X instead of just doing X? Why would you watch a cooking show instead of just cooking? Why go to a concert instead of making music yourself?
In terms of sports, we like seeing other people do something well; in the vast majority of cases, doing it far better than we can ever hope to. Even if we never even try it ourselves (e.g., football). There's something beautiful about watching one person throw a ball 60 yards so accurately that it drops into the hands of a guy who's just entered the end zone at full tilt.
I suppose one could extend that to watching Pr0n as well, though I shan't dwell on the specifics. . . .
Over on another forum, I've been part of a long-standing and often heated debate about trans-inclusionism in sports. Over the past few years, one of the things I've learned is that there are precious few sports where women actually have an advantage over men. The claim that women excel at tests of endurance is a canard. Even in such tests, men dominate. Even in chess. You'd think chess, being purely intellectual, would render moot the physical disparity between men and women. But for some reason, men still dominate the top levels of the game.
Nobody wants to pay money to see things that they could do, or that their 14-year-old son could do better.
After the NBA, NBA Development League (G League), College D1, D2, D3, Boys' traveling teams, and high school, the WNBA is next in terms of talent.
Does anyone really want to see the 8th best version of basketball?
'The question is what is causing us to like what we like.'
I think it's perfectly natural to want to see the best expression of human physical achievement.
I want to see a Broadway musical to be amazed at how well people can sing and dance...to see something that I couldn't imagine myself doing in a million years.
I can see myself stumbling around and croaking out a song in community theater...
"Too many people sitting around watching other people move around. It's so obviously better to find an activity you enjoy."
Now do opera or theater.
Do not assume these same folks don't already engage in an activity they enjoy.
Do not assume that folks who devote 3 hours (or even 6 hours) on Sunday watching football are sedentary the rest of the week.
'In any case, all of the kids, boys, and esp girls, came out of HS with An active lifestyle.'
Exactly this.
Make those things fun so that they will carry over into life after school.
Sports in school should promote activity and teamwork.
Team sports teach kids (even good athletes) that everything isn't just about them.
Unless you're Kobe Bryant:
On stage, Shaquille O’Neal remembered a time when Bryant wouldn’t pass the ball. He went to speak to him, and said “Kobe, there’s no ‘I’ in team.”
Kobe replied, “I know. But there’s an ‘M-E’ in that motherfucker.”
The transgender spectrum is narrow but colorful and exclusionary, and while politically congruent ("="), is not equal, at all.
That said, males and females are equal and complementary from conception to death.
If the NFL is popular because it parallels war & offers gay erotica, whither the USFL?
As a highly competitive and enthusiastic lifetime JV level athlete, and the parent of some highly competitive and enthusiastic JV level athletes, I can assure you that nobody except the parents wants to watch the scrubs.
Hence the futility of the effort to promote women's sports (with notable exceptions--skating, gymnastics, beach volleyball)
It also appears to me that someone in marketing for the LPGA has figured out that if the attractive women wear attractive outfits, they atract more viewers. What a concept!
@stutefish: You'd think chess, being purely intellectual, would render moot the physical disparity between men and women. But for some reason, men still dominate the top levels of the game.
One explanation is that male test scores are more broadly distributed than those of women. Women tend to be clustered about the middle, while some men are extremely capable or extremely stupid.
https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/chart-of-the-day-scottish-iq-test-scores-by-gender-reveal-the-greater-variability-of-male-intelligence/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26158978/
The only team sports with sex limitations are those for women.
You do get why that is, don't you, Mark? Or am I misunderstanding and what you're trying to say is that "men's sports" should similarly take action to forbid women's participation?
If there are three separate gender categories for bathrooms at Target now and three separate gender categories for US passports now, that's ample precedent for three separate separate categories for human sporting competitions now, wouldn't ya think?
If people didn't like what they like then things would be different. I mean, yeah, tautologies are tautologies.
Simone Biles is a phenomenal athlete--almost literally incredible. How would she do on the rings, though? What harm does having separate spheres of competition cause, again?
"We must cultivate tastes for other sports, the ones that women excel in and even dominate. "
It's good to enjoy sports where women dominate, but not men?
That sounds... sexist.
What's really important is to get more kids to participate in athletics: male, female whatever. It's like we are purposefully growing a future generation of couch potatoes and the most important part of the debate about sports is what those couch potatoes should watch.
I also agree with Howard 100%. I grew up playing football and basketball, not varsity quality but lots of action. I also played golf from age 9 and was captain of my high school team. One nice thing about golf is you can play most of your life. I finally had to quit about 7 years ago. Another sport I got involved with as an adult was sailing. That also is in the past. My grandkids are athletes and keep very active. The transgender thing became a bit of a concern as my youngest is a swimmer and her future might be affected. She may even change sports. She is tall and might go for volleyball. I wonder if females, when they are young, will decide to avoid certain sports because of the tranny thing ?
I look at elite sports like modern dance coupled with performance art. However much of sport (NASCAR, NFL, etc) has become a form of pornography for flabby men to feel the psychological effects of high testosterone temporarily while they consume mass quantities of food and drink laying on the couch scratching their diaper rash.
The solution isn't reprioritizing the popular sports, it's to emphasize and require participation in sports starting at very early ages and going on throughout the life cycle.
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
I'd like to see a critical reexamination of sports spectatorship as a waste of time. Too many people sitting around watching other people move around. It's so obviously better to find an activity you enjoy. It's analogous to watching porn instead of engaging in your own sexual activity.
'...while some men are extremely capable or extremely stupid.'
This had been my observation...
I was once at a small Iowa county fair which featured female jell-o wrestling.
I will leave it to your imagination as to what that looked like.
People paid money to watch. There was a male referee so things didn't get too out of hand. But as I recall it was the referee who got the worst of it, as all the girls ended up ganging up on him.
people are finally noticing the ridiculous doublespeak of "what is a woman/support women"
Go ahead, structure whatever sport you'd like to work for women. If it finds an audience, great. If not, yell and scream loud enough about inequality and no doubt some politician will fund it with other people's money.
I'm skeptical of Crouse's (and my own) idea of reshaping the culture of sports spectatorship, but it's certainly worth noticing that it is, to some extent, culture and not merely nature.
Culture is not supernatural.
However much of sport (NASCAR, NFL, etc) has become a form of pornography for flabby men to feel the psychological effects of high testosterone temporarily while they consume mass quantities of food and drink laying on the couch scratching their diaper rash.
Howard could not handle people (normals) agreeing with him. Therefore he had to let his projection out. NASCAR has started to get WOKE so Howard will probably be OK with them soon. The NFL fans are mostly black these days so I will not comment on their body type.
It also appears to me that someone in marketing for the LPGA has figured out that if the attractive women wear attractive outfits, they attract more viewers.
There is a disproportionate number of Asians playing in LPGA events.
That does not mean that the sport is unfair to non-Asians.
The only team sports with sex limitations are those for women.
You do get why that is, don't you, Mark? Or am I misunderstanding and what you're trying to say is that "men's sports" should similarly take action to forbid women's participation?
What is it about you people? I have always said what I mean and meant what I said.
Must I really mansplain here? If I meant what you are saying I would have said it. Instead, I was responding to AA's statement about supposed men's sports. In fact, there are no men's sports, there are no men's teams at the professional level. Maybe tennis, but you'd have to show us the actual rule.
What was my point. THAT WAS MY POINT. There are no men's sports. There is no unjust discrimination. Women are NOT being treated unfairly. If they want to play in MLB, NHL, NFL, NBA or PGA, by all means, go for it. Want to drive in the Indy 500 or at Daytona? Go for it. Plenty of women have. Want to ride in the Kentucky Derby? Ride baby ride.
And if the women want to have "a league of their own"? Sure go for that too. But don't whine that professional sports discriminate against women.
Womens Naked Beach Volleyball has potential.
My dog and I have taken probably 5,000 walks in municipal parks. Aside from tennis, I have never seen a pickup game among girls. Basketball, soccer, lacrosse, volleyball - you name it. There will be girls playing in organized leagues, girls taking lessons, a couple girls together practicing drills, two or maybe four girls playing in a bigger coed game. But, aside from tennis, never two to 22 girls paired off into teams, just competing for fun.
We must cultivate tastes for other sports, the ones that women excel in and even dominate. And we must broaden our definition of what athletic prowess looks like....Men’s bodies are different from women’s; men are generally bigger, faster and stronger.
I have the perfect tag line for the ad campaign: ”Women! They’re small, weak, and slow!” Feminists will love it.
I read her Wikipedia entry and didn't see any reason to think she knows anything about sports. She actually seems pretty far removed from American culture.
"Crouse is a Buddhist and a direct student of Sumati Marut. In 2005, she organized an annual Buddhist educational program, originally held at the Windhover Center for the Performing Arts in Rockport, Massachusetts,[20] and then in 2010 moved to The Governor's Academy in Byfield, Massachusetts.[21] "[Buddhism] is not an exclusive club. It has something to offer everyone at all levels," says Crouse. "Buddhism is dynamic and has captured the interests of Americans. Even our quantum physics validate[s] ideas the Buddha taught 2,500 years ago."
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा