It seems like this semester has really flown by, but at the same time when I look at all of the topics we have covered in this class, I feel like it was more than just a few. Watching people give their blog presentations last week reminded me of just how many topics we covered over the course of the semester. There were many topics that I had heard about, like the incident at Indian Wells, and some that I hadn’t, like the controversy of Jordan’s Hall of Fame speech or Renee Richard’s sex change and subsequent media attention.
I think that the topics covered in this class have given me a better understanding of how sport and gender play a role in the socialization of our society. Many great strides in women’s rights have been made and made public through the vehicle or agency of sport. The same goes for human rights as they apply to race as well. Everyone can picture two black men with raised fists standing on the podium receiving their medals at Hitler’s Olympics. Everyone has heard of Title IX, and, love it or hate it, Title IX has had a huge impact on the way men and women play sports.
I think that keeping this blog has enabled me to share my thoughts and opinions in a way that I may not have been comfortable doing in class. When writing a blog, I can step back and think about exactly what I want to say, there are no time limits on writing a blog. You can take five minutes and jot down some thoughts, or you can do a little research and discover what it is that you really think, and how you want to present those thoughts to the class.
As much as I learned from the class itself, I have also learned a lot from writing my blogs. Personally, I don’t like to rehash what was already said in class. I prefer to look up something that is related to what we read or discussed, but is still new and interesting for people to read. I enjoyed looking up articles and stories that expanded on things we discussed in class, and I was amazed at how easy it usually was to find resources related to those topics. I never realized how big some of these issues were and how far-reaching their implications, until I started blogging about them.
I think that I will probably use blogging in my future, even if it is just to keep my own thoughts straight or to ensure that I am keeping up with the latest news and trends in my field. As an event planner, knowing about upcoming trends is critical to my future career, and I will try to find interesting and helpful blogs to follow.
Overall, I definitely think that blogging has helped me to stay informed about current events in sports, and it has also helped me to better articulate myself through writing. I enjoyed blogging, and I would recommend blogging to future SM 425 students.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Homophobia in Uganda
In this class we have talked a lot about homosexuality and homophobia in sport. While it doesn’t directly relate to sport, I stumbled upon a video on CNN that discusses the controversy about a new law that is going to be voted on next year in Uganda. (You can watch the most recent video HERE.)
This law (which hasn’t been passed yet, but is receiving wide support from Ugandan religious and political organizations) would impose a possible lifetime jail sentence on anyone found guilty of “the offence of homosexuality,” “homosexual acts,” or “the intent to commit homosexual acts.” Even just the intent to commit homosexual acts can be punished by the Ugandan government by a life sentence. Even more extreme, serial, or repeat offenders will face the death penalty. Yes, the death penalty. If this law passes, homosexuals in Uganda will face death simply for having sex with the person of their choosing.
Governments and human rights groups from around the world have been expressing their concern about this potential law. The United States' own Hillary Clinton commented in the video “we view [the law] as a very serious potential threat to human rights.” Even a country that does not allow gay marriage in all of its states is expressing concern over this potential law.
While this law may not directly affect the United States or directly relate to sports and gender, it is a display of homophobia that cannot be ignored. I think it is incredible that laws like this can still be considered in this day in age. I think that it is ridiculous to sentence people to life in prison, or worse, sentence people to death, simply because they choose to stray away from the cultural norm. This video article brings up great discussion topics, and I am sure it will spark much debate around the world.
This law (which hasn’t been passed yet, but is receiving wide support from Ugandan religious and political organizations) would impose a possible lifetime jail sentence on anyone found guilty of “the offence of homosexuality,” “homosexual acts,” or “the intent to commit homosexual acts.” Even just the intent to commit homosexual acts can be punished by the Ugandan government by a life sentence. Even more extreme, serial, or repeat offenders will face the death penalty. Yes, the death penalty. If this law passes, homosexuals in Uganda will face death simply for having sex with the person of their choosing.
Governments and human rights groups from around the world have been expressing their concern about this potential law. The United States' own Hillary Clinton commented in the video “we view [the law] as a very serious potential threat to human rights.” Even a country that does not allow gay marriage in all of its states is expressing concern over this potential law.
While this law may not directly affect the United States or directly relate to sports and gender, it is a display of homophobia that cannot be ignored. I think it is incredible that laws like this can still be considered in this day in age. I think that it is ridiculous to sentence people to life in prison, or worse, sentence people to death, simply because they choose to stray away from the cultural norm. This video article brings up great discussion topics, and I am sure it will spark much debate around the world.
Magic Johnson and HIV/AIDS
In November of 1991, when basketball star Magic Johnson announced that he had contracted HIV, the virus that leads to AIDS, sports fans around the world were shocked. Up until this announcement, HIV/AIDS was considered to be a disease contracted by homosexual men, drug users and prostitutes. It was definitely not a disease that heterosexual men got, especially not renowned ladies men and athletes like Magic.
I think that in most situations like this, the public would have assumed that the man who contracted HIV/AIDS was a closet homosexual. However, Magic had been quite public about his romantic affairs with women. His images as an athlete and a ladies man gave credibility to his masculinity, and therefore saved him from being considered a homosexual male.
I think that Magic’s announcement has helped change at least two things about our society. Firstly, I think that Magic’s announcement helped change the way that the public views HIV/AIDS. Today people no longer consider HIV/AIDS to be a threat strictly to homosexual males, drug users, or prostitutes. It has also helped raise awareness about the virus, and that awareness has probably saved countless lives over the course of the last two decades.
Secondly I believe that Magic’s announcement has helped decrease the social acceptability of athletes sleeping around with lots of random partners. Whereas it used to be considered cool, manly, and socially acceptable to sleep with as many women as possible (Case in point: Wilt Chamberlain claiming to have had sex with more than 20,000 women), these days it is considered irresponsible for athletes to have that many partners. It is also considered a bad example to young people who consider athletes to be their role models. I think that Magic Johnson’s public announcement of having contracted HIV/AIDS directly influenced this change.
While I think it was reckless for Magic to sleep around and contract a potentially fatal disease, I think that his response to the situation was great. He didn’t have to go public with his private struggles, but he did. And I think that it has helped us, as a society, better understand HIV/AIDS and the consequences of sleeping with tons of different partners.
I think that in most situations like this, the public would have assumed that the man who contracted HIV/AIDS was a closet homosexual. However, Magic had been quite public about his romantic affairs with women. His images as an athlete and a ladies man gave credibility to his masculinity, and therefore saved him from being considered a homosexual male.
I think that Magic’s announcement has helped change at least two things about our society. Firstly, I think that Magic’s announcement helped change the way that the public views HIV/AIDS. Today people no longer consider HIV/AIDS to be a threat strictly to homosexual males, drug users, or prostitutes. It has also helped raise awareness about the virus, and that awareness has probably saved countless lives over the course of the last two decades.
Secondly I believe that Magic’s announcement has helped decrease the social acceptability of athletes sleeping around with lots of random partners. Whereas it used to be considered cool, manly, and socially acceptable to sleep with as many women as possible (Case in point: Wilt Chamberlain claiming to have had sex with more than 20,000 women), these days it is considered irresponsible for athletes to have that many partners. It is also considered a bad example to young people who consider athletes to be their role models. I think that Magic Johnson’s public announcement of having contracted HIV/AIDS directly influenced this change.
While I think it was reckless for Magic to sleep around and contract a potentially fatal disease, I think that his response to the situation was great. He didn’t have to go public with his private struggles, but he did. And I think that it has helped us, as a society, better understand HIV/AIDS and the consequences of sleeping with tons of different partners.
Richard and Renee
When we talked about Renee Richards in class, I was astonished to find out that a man, Richard Raskind, played tennis with the boys, had a sex change, and then played tennis with the girls as Renee Richards. At first I thought that this was entirely unfair to the women that Renee played against after the sex change, but as we discussed it further in class, I realized that it was not some plot to dominate women’s tennis or gain an unfair advantage in the sport. There are strict rules as to when a man who has had a sex change can play against girls, and this is after the hormone therapy has taken effect and helped the person truly become a woman in all physical aspects. I feel that this eliminates any unfair advantage that the previously male player may have over women players.
I found it interesting that Renee actually regretted playing tennis on a public stage, even though she did well. I can see her point though, because I would not want all of that media attention either, especially about an issue that is so personal and private. She said that she wished she had just returned to a medical practice, where there would have been significantly less public interest and media attention.
I was also intrigued by the fact that Renee stated in an interview that she would recommend against the sex change surgery, especially if the candidate was over 40 years old. Most of the stories I hear today promote being true to your “inner self” and make it seem like these types of life-changing personal decisions are easy ones, with no regrets and a beautiful happily-ever-after attached. I like that fact that she gave a real opinion and serious advice to people in her situation.
I think that what Renee did will make it less controversial, although not entirely socially acceptable, for athletes who want to have sex changes in the future. She is one of the people that have made new ground for transgender athletes, and no matter her regrets, she has changed sport and the way it looks at gender.
English on the LPGA Tour
In class we talked about how the LPGA is “encouraging” women on the LPGA tour to learn and exclusively speak English. Players who fail to pass an oral evaluation of their English skills will be suspended from the tour. According to an article that can be found HERE on ESPN.com, the rule was instated to break down communication barriers between players and sponsors, fans and teammates. The article states the following:
“’Why now? Athletes now have more responsibilities and we want to help their professional development,’ deputy commissioner Libba Galloway told The Associated Press. ‘There are more fans, more media and more sponsors. We want to help our athletes as best we can succeed off the golf course as well as on it.’”
This new rule, created in 2008, was put into effect immediately for new players on the tour. The LPGA held a mandatory meeting with the international golfers and explained to all 121 players from all 26 countries that they would be suspended if they failed their oral evaluation. The organizations claims that it does not intend to leave the players who cannot pass stranded, but they plan on providing help with the language problems by hiring tutors and specialists.
While I understand that language barriers can be difficult, I think that the LPGA is being more than a little bit disrespectful to international players on the tour. If US players in an international tour that played in another country were required to speak another language or face suspension, I believe that there would be a cry of outrage and foul play. So why is it fair for the LPGA to enforce a rule that jeopardizes the chance that an international player will be able to compete on the tour? I think that it is a good idea for all players to speak a common language, but I don’t think that it should be mandatory for all players to speak English or face suspension. It seems a bit harsh to me.
“’Why now? Athletes now have more responsibilities and we want to help their professional development,’ deputy commissioner Libba Galloway told The Associated Press. ‘There are more fans, more media and more sponsors. We want to help our athletes as best we can succeed off the golf course as well as on it.’”
This new rule, created in 2008, was put into effect immediately for new players on the tour. The LPGA held a mandatory meeting with the international golfers and explained to all 121 players from all 26 countries that they would be suspended if they failed their oral evaluation. The organizations claims that it does not intend to leave the players who cannot pass stranded, but they plan on providing help with the language problems by hiring tutors and specialists.
While I understand that language barriers can be difficult, I think that the LPGA is being more than a little bit disrespectful to international players on the tour. If US players in an international tour that played in another country were required to speak another language or face suspension, I believe that there would be a cry of outrage and foul play. So why is it fair for the LPGA to enforce a rule that jeopardizes the chance that an international player will be able to compete on the tour? I think that it is a good idea for all players to speak a common language, but I don’t think that it should be mandatory for all players to speak English or face suspension. It seems a bit harsh to me.
The Jordan Effect
While Michael Jordan may be best known for his amazing basketball career, he also changed the way the sports and advertising industries collaborate. Although Jordan wasn’t the first athlete to be a spokesperson for a company, he was the first athlete to turn himself into a complete marketing tool. He has successfully turned his name and his image into a brand, a brand that can sell just about anything, from cologne to shoes to underwear and t-shirts.
Using Jordan as a spokesperson has given companies like Nike tons of credibility, popularity, and especially sales that the company might not have had otherwise. I remember reading somewhere that Jordan’s shoes, “Air Jordans” have their own branch within the Nike company, an impressive feat for an athlete and a pair of shoes.
We discussed all of this in class, but while doing some extra research for this blog, I ran into a New York Times article published in 1994 (right around the time of Jordan’s foray into professional baseball) that puts his popularity into yet another light. In the 1994 season, like in previous seasons, the Birmingham Barons, a minor league baseball team, gave away approximately 46,000 tickets to a Sunday night baseball game. As usual, they distributed the tickets to local school kids, and given past experience planned on about 2,000 kids attending the game.
When Jordan was added to the Barons’ roster, expected attendance soared, and the Barons tried to recall the tickets to avoid having 46,000 kids attend a game in a stadium with a 10,000 person capacity. Needless to say, this decision did not go over well with the people who had received tickets, so the Barons decided to honor the tickets over a period of time, rather than at one single game.
This story just proves Jordan’s popularity among fans. Even in a sport where he did not excel, people wanted to see the legend play. His name sold several thousand tickets to minor league games, even though Jordan was an average baseball player at best. Although this example is slightly different from the ones we talked about in class, the idea is the same. Michael Jordan has become an amazing salesman as well as an incredible athlete.
Using Jordan as a spokesperson has given companies like Nike tons of credibility, popularity, and especially sales that the company might not have had otherwise. I remember reading somewhere that Jordan’s shoes, “Air Jordans” have their own branch within the Nike company, an impressive feat for an athlete and a pair of shoes.
We discussed all of this in class, but while doing some extra research for this blog, I ran into a New York Times article published in 1994 (right around the time of Jordan’s foray into professional baseball) that puts his popularity into yet another light. In the 1994 season, like in previous seasons, the Birmingham Barons, a minor league baseball team, gave away approximately 46,000 tickets to a Sunday night baseball game. As usual, they distributed the tickets to local school kids, and given past experience planned on about 2,000 kids attending the game.
When Jordan was added to the Barons’ roster, expected attendance soared, and the Barons tried to recall the tickets to avoid having 46,000 kids attend a game in a stadium with a 10,000 person capacity. Needless to say, this decision did not go over well with the people who had received tickets, so the Barons decided to honor the tickets over a period of time, rather than at one single game.
This story just proves Jordan’s popularity among fans. Even in a sport where he did not excel, people wanted to see the legend play. His name sold several thousand tickets to minor league games, even though Jordan was an average baseball player at best. Although this example is slightly different from the ones we talked about in class, the idea is the same. Michael Jordan has become an amazing salesman as well as an incredible athlete.
"Megarexia"
Until we read and talked about it in class, I had never heard of “megarexia.” It’s basically the opposite of anorexia, which is where people can’t get small enough to please themselves or satisfy what they think their image should be. One health and wellness website defines megarexia with the following:
“Megarexia is a problem caused predominantly in males, and is the opposite of anorexia. People suffering megarexia see themselves as too thin and too weak. They become obsessed with eating, exercising, and using supplements and steroids in an attempt to build their physique. They carry around a distorted image of themselves, as no matter how big they get, it is never big enough. Megarexia is common amongst men suffering low self esteem. They devote their spare time to excessive weight lifting, eating the right foods and using drugs.”
(The entire article can be found HERE.)
I had thought that women had the market on eating disorders, but I was wrong. In today’s society, there is a lot of pressure on young men to be as big as the movie stars, athletes, and bodybuilders that they see on TV. With role modes like Arnold Schwarzenegger, it’s no wonder that young men feel the need to take steroids and “buff up.” Just like the image of the “ideal” female body (slim and tight) is forced on young girls today, the “ideal” male body (very muscular and trim) is showcased everywhere in our daily lives.
While I think it’s great that society encourages young men to get in shape, I think that it is taken way too far. People place so much importance on outward appearances, and not only for health reasons. If boys continue to get the message that they are never big enough, fit enough, or strong enough, they will resort to using potentially harmful steroids to get big enough, fit enough, and strong enough. If we keep pressuring men to be bigger, where will it stop? When is big, big enough?
“Megarexia is a problem caused predominantly in males, and is the opposite of anorexia. People suffering megarexia see themselves as too thin and too weak. They become obsessed with eating, exercising, and using supplements and steroids in an attempt to build their physique. They carry around a distorted image of themselves, as no matter how big they get, it is never big enough. Megarexia is common amongst men suffering low self esteem. They devote their spare time to excessive weight lifting, eating the right foods and using drugs.”
(The entire article can be found HERE.)
I had thought that women had the market on eating disorders, but I was wrong. In today’s society, there is a lot of pressure on young men to be as big as the movie stars, athletes, and bodybuilders that they see on TV. With role modes like Arnold Schwarzenegger, it’s no wonder that young men feel the need to take steroids and “buff up.” Just like the image of the “ideal” female body (slim and tight) is forced on young girls today, the “ideal” male body (very muscular and trim) is showcased everywhere in our daily lives.
While I think it’s great that society encourages young men to get in shape, I think that it is taken way too far. People place so much importance on outward appearances, and not only for health reasons. If boys continue to get the message that they are never big enough, fit enough, or strong enough, they will resort to using potentially harmful steroids to get big enough, fit enough, and strong enough. If we keep pressuring men to be bigger, where will it stop? When is big, big enough?
Sinking Free Throws Blind, Literally!
In this class we have talked a lot about athletes who overcome physical disabilities to participate in sports. One great example of this is Matt Steven, a high school basketball player who also happens to be completely blind. His story was featured in an article on ESPN.com and written by columnist Rick Reilly. The article is titled “Matt Steven can't see the hoop. But he'll still take the last shot” and can be found in its entirety by clicking HERE.
According to the article, Matt was born with two permanently detached retinas, which makes it impossible for him to see anything. In spite of his disability, he still joined the basketball game, with no expectations to play in a game. According to the article, Matt just “likes to be on the team.” Even knowing it was unlikely that he would ever see playing time, he went to every practice, and worked on his free throws. That’s when his brother, who is also the team’s coach got an idea.
He put his brother in one game to shoot all of the free throws. Matt was led to the line by a teammate, and then his brother tapped on the edge of the basket with Matt’s cane. Remarkably, Matt made four out of eight free throws in that game, much to the team’s (and the crowd’s) delight. At the time the article was written, the team was planning on having Matt shoot free throws in the next few games.
This young man is a remarkable testament to what people can accomplish, when they don’t let challenges dampen their spirits or undermine their perseverance. I like this article and this kid’s story because it reminds me that if I persevere I can overcome anything too. I think that it is inspiring to know that a kid who is blind can sink free throws with better accuracy than some NBA players. Who knew?
According to the article, Matt was born with two permanently detached retinas, which makes it impossible for him to see anything. In spite of his disability, he still joined the basketball game, with no expectations to play in a game. According to the article, Matt just “likes to be on the team.” Even knowing it was unlikely that he would ever see playing time, he went to every practice, and worked on his free throws. That’s when his brother, who is also the team’s coach got an idea.
He put his brother in one game to shoot all of the free throws. Matt was led to the line by a teammate, and then his brother tapped on the edge of the basket with Matt’s cane. Remarkably, Matt made four out of eight free throws in that game, much to the team’s (and the crowd’s) delight. At the time the article was written, the team was planning on having Matt shoot free throws in the next few games.
This young man is a remarkable testament to what people can accomplish, when they don’t let challenges dampen their spirits or undermine their perseverance. I like this article and this kid’s story because it reminds me that if I persevere I can overcome anything too. I think that it is inspiring to know that a kid who is blind can sink free throws with better accuracy than some NBA players. Who knew?
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Girls Will Be Girls... But Compared To Boys
When doing research for the recent out of class assignment, I found an article from ESPN.com discussing Danielle Lawrie, a softball pitcher in the NCAA. She plays for the University of Washington and is the Most Outstanding Player in the Women's College World Series and the NCAA's Player of the Year for 2009. The ESPN article opens with a description of the 2009 first draft baseball pick, Stephen Strasburg. The author then proceeds to compare Lawrie to this first draft pitcher throughout the article. He then describes his experiences batting against male pitchers, and compares them to his experiences batting against Lawrie. This is a great example of how the media references the dominant men’s sports, even throughout articles about women’s sports.
I feel that this happens a lot in today’s media coverage of sports. Any time we hear about women’s sport, there is almost always a reference to an equivalent men’s sport thrown in. I think that this is due in part to the fact that more people will understand the significance of what is going on in women’s sport if they have something more well-known (i.e.- a similar event in a men’s sport) to relate it to. For example, an announcer might call a female basketball player the next female Michael Jordan. Even though this may help to explain why this happens, I think sports media writers, broadcasters, and announcers need to be more aware of this trend. Hopefully if the media can hype up women’s sporting events on their own merit, then people will get more excited about women’s sport.
I feel that this happens a lot in today’s media coverage of sports. Any time we hear about women’s sport, there is almost always a reference to an equivalent men’s sport thrown in. I think that this is due in part to the fact that more people will understand the significance of what is going on in women’s sport if they have something more well-known (i.e.- a similar event in a men’s sport) to relate it to. For example, an announcer might call a female basketball player the next female Michael Jordan. Even though this may help to explain why this happens, I think sports media writers, broadcasters, and announcers need to be more aware of this trend. Hopefully if the media can hype up women’s sporting events on their own merit, then people will get more excited about women’s sport.
The Girls at Gracie Gym
Several times in class we have discussed whether or not girls should be able to play, practice, and compete with boys in sport. Previously, I would have said that girls should probably stick to girls’ sports to avoid potential injury. However, I had an eye-opening experience recently that has forced me to reevaluate some of my opinions about girls in men’s sports.
My significant other Brian has practiced some form of martial arts for the past 15 years. When we started dating, I started observing his judo, jiu-jitsu, and muay thai (kickboxing) classes almost every evening at one of Relson Gracie's gyms. After I got used to the stench of the gym, I was astonished by how much athletic ability goes into these martial arts. The guys learn techniques, do drills and then “roll” or spar with each other in a non-stop class that lasts anywhere from an hour and a half to three hours.
That’s not the interesting part. A couple of weeks ago I was able to make it to one of Brian’s jiu-jitsu classes after work, and in addition to the 25 or so guys stretching, there were two girls warming up as well. Now I figured that once everyone paired up for drills and sparing sessions, the girls would naturally pair up with each other. However, due to height and weight differences, the instructor paired each of them with a guy about their size. As the drills started, it was easy to see that the guys were being a little more gentle with the girls than they were with the other guys. However, this came back to bite them when it came time to roll. The girls were more flexible than the guys and they used that to their advantage. While neither girl was able to submit their partner that day, they definitely held their own against the guys.
When I talked to Brian about it after the class, he said almost exactly what some people said in our SM class. He said that he was glad the girls were there, but for the guys it was a no win situation. If a guy won it was no big deal because he was only beating a girl. If a guy lost, however, there would be no end to the teasing and mocking of the guy who got “beat by a girl.” After all, that would be unforgivable, right?
My significant other Brian has practiced some form of martial arts for the past 15 years. When we started dating, I started observing his judo, jiu-jitsu, and muay thai (kickboxing) classes almost every evening at one of Relson Gracie's gyms. After I got used to the stench of the gym, I was astonished by how much athletic ability goes into these martial arts. The guys learn techniques, do drills and then “roll” or spar with each other in a non-stop class that lasts anywhere from an hour and a half to three hours.
That’s not the interesting part. A couple of weeks ago I was able to make it to one of Brian’s jiu-jitsu classes after work, and in addition to the 25 or so guys stretching, there were two girls warming up as well. Now I figured that once everyone paired up for drills and sparing sessions, the girls would naturally pair up with each other. However, due to height and weight differences, the instructor paired each of them with a guy about their size. As the drills started, it was easy to see that the guys were being a little more gentle with the girls than they were with the other guys. However, this came back to bite them when it came time to roll. The girls were more flexible than the guys and they used that to their advantage. While neither girl was able to submit their partner that day, they definitely held their own against the guys.
When I talked to Brian about it after the class, he said almost exactly what some people said in our SM class. He said that he was glad the girls were there, but for the guys it was a no win situation. If a guy won it was no big deal because he was only beating a girl. If a guy lost, however, there would be no end to the teasing and mocking of the guy who got “beat by a girl.” After all, that would be unforgivable, right?
Controversy at Indian Wells
In both of the SM classes I’ve taken we have talked about the incident involving Venus and Serena Williams at Indian Wells. In case you don’t know the story, you can read a quick recap here.
I think that what happened at Indian Wells was very unfortunate. The trainer should have notified the officials, and the officials should have notified the crowd as soon as they knew that Venus was not going to be able to play the match. I think that the fans at the next match Serena played were very upset that they had not gotten to see the sisters play against each other. The fans were probably also listening to rumors that the sisters and their father had rigged the match, in order to let Serena win, and therefore advance to the finals. Things got ugly when the crowd started jeering and booing both Venus and her dad as they watched from the stands, as well as Serena as she tried to play the match. Things got even uglier when some especially rowdy fans reportedly started using offensive language and saying inappropriate and racist things to Venus and her dad.
I think that the sisters definitely have every right to boycott matches held Indian Wells. I don’t think that this issue should be considered a racist one though. Just because a few stupid fans decided to cross the line, does not mean that Indians Wells should be held responsible, or that the entire crown was to blame. I do believe though, that something should have been done to control the entire crowd. All of the jeering and booing by the fans was influencing Serena’s tennis game, and definitely not for the better. I think that the officials at Indian Wells could have handled this whole situation a lot better by reporting Venus’s withdrawal earlier and making an effort to calm the disruptive crowd during Serena’s finals match.
I think that what happened at Indian Wells was very unfortunate. The trainer should have notified the officials, and the officials should have notified the crowd as soon as they knew that Venus was not going to be able to play the match. I think that the fans at the next match Serena played were very upset that they had not gotten to see the sisters play against each other. The fans were probably also listening to rumors that the sisters and their father had rigged the match, in order to let Serena win, and therefore advance to the finals. Things got ugly when the crowd started jeering and booing both Venus and her dad as they watched from the stands, as well as Serena as she tried to play the match. Things got even uglier when some especially rowdy fans reportedly started using offensive language and saying inappropriate and racist things to Venus and her dad.
I think that the sisters definitely have every right to boycott matches held Indian Wells. I don’t think that this issue should be considered a racist one though. Just because a few stupid fans decided to cross the line, does not mean that Indians Wells should be held responsible, or that the entire crown was to blame. I do believe though, that something should have been done to control the entire crowd. All of the jeering and booing by the fans was influencing Serena’s tennis game, and definitely not for the better. I think that the officials at Indian Wells could have handled this whole situation a lot better by reporting Venus’s withdrawal earlier and making an effort to calm the disruptive crowd during Serena’s finals match.
Jordan's Social Obligations
In class recently we discussed Michael Jordan and his changing roles throughout his career. Jordan has been a star athlete, a role model, and a huge product endorser. In each of these parts that he played, he changed the way people see that role. For example, Jordan was, and arguably still is, the biggest star that basketball has ever seen. He became one of the most popular black role models of his time. He changed the way athletes are marketed by becoming the face of several products and brands. I bet anyone reading this can name at least a couple of the products that MJ has endorsed over the years. Jordan also expanded his career by acting in commercials and movies, as well as venturing into baseball for a short while.
With all of the different roles Jordan has played, people see him as an icon in both sports and the media. With Jordan’s celebrity came the pressure to act politically. People expected Jordan to champion the cause of the underrepresented black community, since he was a famous black athlete in a position to be heard by the masses. Jordan stayed neutral though, which caused some outrage among people who thought he should use his fame to make a difference. For example, people were extremely disappointed and upset when Jordan did not publicly support a black political candidate in his home state.
I think that sports celebrities like Michael Jordan have the power to sway public opinion. However, I don’t think that they should have to be political icons as well. Maybe Jordan did not know enough about the candidates or the situations to support one side. And maybe he was focusing on winning basketball games, since that is what the fans really expect him to do. I know that from time to time when I see an athlete being interviewed about politics or social issues, I don’t find that they are a knowledgeable, credible source. So I think that while MJ could have used his celebrity to influence public opinion, he has no direct responsibility to do so. After all, like Jordan himself said, he just game to play the game.
With all of the different roles Jordan has played, people see him as an icon in both sports and the media. With Jordan’s celebrity came the pressure to act politically. People expected Jordan to champion the cause of the underrepresented black community, since he was a famous black athlete in a position to be heard by the masses. Jordan stayed neutral though, which caused some outrage among people who thought he should use his fame to make a difference. For example, people were extremely disappointed and upset when Jordan did not publicly support a black political candidate in his home state.
I think that sports celebrities like Michael Jordan have the power to sway public opinion. However, I don’t think that they should have to be political icons as well. Maybe Jordan did not know enough about the candidates or the situations to support one side. And maybe he was focusing on winning basketball games, since that is what the fans really expect him to do. I know that from time to time when I see an athlete being interviewed about politics or social issues, I don’t find that they are a knowledgeable, credible source. So I think that while MJ could have used his celebrity to influence public opinion, he has no direct responsibility to do so. After all, like Jordan himself said, he just game to play the game.
Monday, November 16, 2009
In-Class Discussion 11/12/09
In class on Thursday we looked at the following two questions regarding the readings:
1.) Study on "Gender and Audience Building"
-What might the findings be if this study was done today?
My group felt that if this study was done today, there might be a few differences. For example, women's sports used to have mostly female broadcasters. We don't feel that this is true in today's sports. People are just as likely to find a male announcing women's sports as a female. We also feel that women's basketball gets less media attention now than it has in the past. We think that this can be attributed to the fact that women's basketball has fewer big-name stars today than in recent hostory, and the fact that women's basketball tends to be more focused on team play and fundementals than superstars and showy, crowd-thrilling moves.
2.) Mesner article and "Ladies Day"
-How could audiences be constructed to reflect growth of girls and women in sport?
In order for audiences to reflect the growth of girls and women in sport, some changes need to be made. We came up with the following suggestions:
1.) Study on "Gender and Audience Building"
-What might the findings be if this study was done today?
My group felt that if this study was done today, there might be a few differences. For example, women's sports used to have mostly female broadcasters. We don't feel that this is true in today's sports. People are just as likely to find a male announcing women's sports as a female. We also feel that women's basketball gets less media attention now than it has in the past. We think that this can be attributed to the fact that women's basketball has fewer big-name stars today than in recent hostory, and the fact that women's basketball tends to be more focused on team play and fundementals than superstars and showy, crowd-thrilling moves.
2.) Mesner article and "Ladies Day"
-How could audiences be constructed to reflect growth of girls and women in sport?
In order for audiences to reflect the growth of girls and women in sport, some changes need to be made. We came up with the following suggestions:
- the media should provide easier access to more women's sports on a regular basis
- there should be more publicity for women's games, even in the regular season
- there should be more mention of women's sports in the sports section of newsbroadcasts
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Blue Eyes or Brown?
The other day in class we watched and talked about an experiment done by a 3rd grade teacher regarding prejudice, discrimination and racism. (The entire official PBS program can be found here.) The study was done to demonstrate how quickly discrimination can spread and how unfounded it can be.
Basically, the teacher split her class into two groups by eye color: blue eyes and brown eyes. On the first day of the experiment, she told the class that the students with blue eyes would have more privileges than those students with brown eyes, that the students with blue eyes were smarter than the students with brown eyes, and that the students with blue eyes were better people than the students with brown eyes.
The experiment took off very quickly, with blue-eyed students getting called on more often in class, brown-eyed students getting spoken down to by the teacher, and blue-eyed students getting more recess time than the brown-eyed students. By recess time a blue-eyed boy was taunting a brown-eyed boy by calling him “brown eyes.” I really like the point the teacher made at this time in the experiment. She asked the blue-eyed boy why he had called the other boy “brown eyes,” and the boy responded with “because he has brown eyes.” At this point, the teacher asked, “You didn't call him brown eyes yesterday, and he had brown eyes yesterday.” I think that this brings up two really good points.
1: Kids are really easily influenced by authority figures. ie: teachers and parents
2: People can always find a reason to discriminate against people who are different, even when the reason for the difference has no importance to the person’s character. And who decides what is important? What if we really were divided into social classes and status groups by eye color?
I think that this experiment was a really great demonstration of how meaningless differences can be used as reasons to discriminate against people who are different than we are. I also think that parents would be very upset if a teacher tried to do this experiment today. They would be afraid that their kids would develop an inferiority complex or something. I really think we can learn a lot from this experiment though, and we should be very careful what we believe and what we teach the kids we influence.
Basically, the teacher split her class into two groups by eye color: blue eyes and brown eyes. On the first day of the experiment, she told the class that the students with blue eyes would have more privileges than those students with brown eyes, that the students with blue eyes were smarter than the students with brown eyes, and that the students with blue eyes were better people than the students with brown eyes.
The experiment took off very quickly, with blue-eyed students getting called on more often in class, brown-eyed students getting spoken down to by the teacher, and blue-eyed students getting more recess time than the brown-eyed students. By recess time a blue-eyed boy was taunting a brown-eyed boy by calling him “brown eyes.” I really like the point the teacher made at this time in the experiment. She asked the blue-eyed boy why he had called the other boy “brown eyes,” and the boy responded with “because he has brown eyes.” At this point, the teacher asked, “You didn't call him brown eyes yesterday, and he had brown eyes yesterday.” I think that this brings up two really good points.
1: Kids are really easily influenced by authority figures. ie: teachers and parents
2: People can always find a reason to discriminate against people who are different, even when the reason for the difference has no importance to the person’s character. And who decides what is important? What if we really were divided into social classes and status groups by eye color?
I think that this experiment was a really great demonstration of how meaningless differences can be used as reasons to discriminate against people who are different than we are. I also think that parents would be very upset if a teacher tried to do this experiment today. They would be afraid that their kids would develop an inferiority complex or something. I really think we can learn a lot from this experiment though, and we should be very careful what we believe and what we teach the kids we influence.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Creating the Fiction of Gender
Our reading “Center Snap: Children Creating the Fiction of Gender” by Messner focused on gender, and how it is created. The author points out in the very beginning of the article that boys and girls are much more alike than different in their early years. So what causes us to be seen as different from each other as we grow older?
Children learn gender. When a baby is born, the nurse wraps it in either a blue or pink blanket, depending on the baby’s gender. (When I was born, the nurse thought my id bracelet said “Daniel” so I was actually wrapped in blue for all of my first pictures!) Parents take special care to dress their babies in clothes that clearly state the gender of their baby. Little girls wear “girly” colors and have bows in their hair in order to ensure that nobody mistakes her for a boy. All of this takes place because it would be easy to confuse a baby’s gender, since babies haven’t developed any clear gender indicators.
Messner uses youth soccer teams to further illustrate how gender is learned and performed. He cites an season-opening ceremony, where the soccer teams are sorted by age and gender. One of the little boys’ teams decides to be “the Sea Monsters,” while the girls’ team has named themselves “the Barbie Girls.” The boys, influenced by their parents, picked an aggressive team name, while the girls, also influenced by parents, chose a doll as their team name. The teams were also assigned team colors; the boys were assigned blue and green, the girls were assigned green and white, traditionally more feminine colors. Messner uses these examples to show that girls and boys are taught gender at a very young age, from everyone around them.
I think that Messner is right, and gender is definitely something that we learn as we grow up. There are some physical differences in genders, but most differences seem to be cultural to me. We are constantly being influenced by those around us to perform our "correct" gender, not to stray from what is considered normal and break social norms. I would even venture to guess that we all have been teaching and performing gender without even being aware of it.
Children learn gender. When a baby is born, the nurse wraps it in either a blue or pink blanket, depending on the baby’s gender. (When I was born, the nurse thought my id bracelet said “Daniel” so I was actually wrapped in blue for all of my first pictures!) Parents take special care to dress their babies in clothes that clearly state the gender of their baby. Little girls wear “girly” colors and have bows in their hair in order to ensure that nobody mistakes her for a boy. All of this takes place because it would be easy to confuse a baby’s gender, since babies haven’t developed any clear gender indicators.
Messner uses youth soccer teams to further illustrate how gender is learned and performed. He cites an season-opening ceremony, where the soccer teams are sorted by age and gender. One of the little boys’ teams decides to be “the Sea Monsters,” while the girls’ team has named themselves “the Barbie Girls.” The boys, influenced by their parents, picked an aggressive team name, while the girls, also influenced by parents, chose a doll as their team name. The teams were also assigned team colors; the boys were assigned blue and green, the girls were assigned green and white, traditionally more feminine colors. Messner uses these examples to show that girls and boys are taught gender at a very young age, from everyone around them.
I think that Messner is right, and gender is definitely something that we learn as we grow up. There are some physical differences in genders, but most differences seem to be cultural to me. We are constantly being influenced by those around us to perform our "correct" gender, not to stray from what is considered normal and break social norms. I would even venture to guess that we all have been teaching and performing gender without even being aware of it.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Who Was Bev Francis??
In class today, Dr. Spencer mentioned Bev Francis, a female bodybuilder. I had never heard of her, and I wanted to know more. She wasn’t hard to find online, since she was one of the first prominent female bodybuilders. Francis made her debut in 1983 at the Caesar’s World Cup, an event created specially for the film “Pumping Iron II: The Women.” The film focuses primarily on bodybuilders Bev Francis and Rachel McLish as they prepare for the competition. What I found very interesting was the fact that, while Francis was very skilled, she didn’t place very well, finishing 8th in that particular competition. Of her many competitions, Francis never finished in 1st place. However, she finished in 2nd place and 3rd place several times in the Ms. Olympia competition.Bev FrancisMany people have theories about why Francis was never awarded first place in these bodybuilding competitions, and I think that Guy Trebay explained it best in his article “The Body Politic: Weighing In on the Modern Amazon,” featured in the March 28, 2000 issue of the New York Times. Trebay writes:
“She was generally considered one of the most muscularly developed women anyone had ever seen, and—using the objective measures of body mass and definition—one of the best. But Bev Francis, whose career would extend over most of the next decade, never won a major bodybuilding contest, not that Ohio one, not ever. Even in the eyes of those accustomed to the weirder forms of hypertrophy, she was considered "unfeminine," daunting, freakish, ‘too much like a man.’ Her very presence threatened people with gender illegibility.”
Basically, Tebay is saying that people, both men and women, were intimidated by Bev Francis and uncomfortable with her non-conformance to typical gender roles. People felt that she was too “masculine,” even for a bodybuilder. Even though she was considered the best by many, she never won a competition due to the judges’ discomfort with her appearance. I feel that the typical standard of “femininity” was applied, even to female bodybuilders, and Francis did not meet this standard. In her time, female bodybuilders looked like Rachel McLish, lean and muscular, but still “feminine.” I feel that by breaking the rules and challenging how society defined femininity, Bev Francis provided future female bodybuilders with opportunities they may not have otherwise had.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Introduction
Hi! My name is Dani, and I am a senior in the Event Planning major here at BGSU. I am taking this class as one of my option electives, and it seems like it is going to be one of the more interesting options available. I really liked Dr. Spencer’s History and Philosophy of Sport class last spring, and I am hoping that this class will be enjoyable as well.
I hope this class will provide me with a good base of knowledge in the area of sports and gender. I think that this is an important topic to study, because sport is a common way that people relate to each other. There are many sports that break international boundaries, racial boundaries, language boundaries and some gender boundaries. For example, more and more baseball players are coming from places like Venezuela and the Dominican Republic. Men and women can compete in a lot of the same sports, but they don’t often compete directly, especially in contact sports like football, soccer, or rugby. I am excited to take a more in-depth look into these topics throughout the semester. I think that studying sport and gender is a great way to understand how people interact with each other, which can increase our overall understanding of humanity.
I have never really played organized sports, but I love to play volleyball and badminton recreationally, even though I am not very good at either. When I was in elementary school, I enrolled in a summer volleyball camp at the local high school. One evening, after the very first class, my little brother and I were playing with an old set of golf clubs in the backyard. We were just hitting golf balls around, seeing who could hit the farthest, or who could hit the gnarly pine tree with the most accuracy. We weren’t paying very close attention to the distance between us, and as my brother lined up a shot and took a giant swing, he smacked me in the eye with the club. I was rushed to the hospital, got several stitches, and was unable to return to volleyball camp for the rest of the summer. After that experience, I gave up all hope of ever becoming a professional athlete.
I hope this class will provide me with a good base of knowledge in the area of sports and gender. I think that this is an important topic to study, because sport is a common way that people relate to each other. There are many sports that break international boundaries, racial boundaries, language boundaries and some gender boundaries. For example, more and more baseball players are coming from places like Venezuela and the Dominican Republic. Men and women can compete in a lot of the same sports, but they don’t often compete directly, especially in contact sports like football, soccer, or rugby. I am excited to take a more in-depth look into these topics throughout the semester. I think that studying sport and gender is a great way to understand how people interact with each other, which can increase our overall understanding of humanity.
I have never really played organized sports, but I love to play volleyball and badminton recreationally, even though I am not very good at either. When I was in elementary school, I enrolled in a summer volleyball camp at the local high school. One evening, after the very first class, my little brother and I were playing with an old set of golf clubs in the backyard. We were just hitting golf balls around, seeing who could hit the farthest, or who could hit the gnarly pine tree with the most accuracy. We weren’t paying very close attention to the distance between us, and as my brother lined up a shot and took a giant swing, he smacked me in the eye with the club. I was rushed to the hospital, got several stitches, and was unable to return to volleyball camp for the rest of the summer. After that experience, I gave up all hope of ever becoming a professional athlete.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)