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.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)