Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="champs99and04, post: 2750972, member: 488"] I've never bought the idea that people watch the UConn women's team because of how good they are. That's a completely arbitrary justification that doesn't hold up to further scrutiny. Quality is subjective and can be manipulated quite easily to fit any narrative you want. If ESPN televised boys high school games or D-3 men's action, would you watch? Probably not, because even if they were equivalent to the UConn women in terms of dominance, they still wouldn't wear the UConn jersey. The sentimental appeal wouldn't exist and people wouldn't care. Similarly, if the UConn field hockey team embarked on a similar streak, they wouldn't garner near the attention that the women's basketball team gets. The reason I point these things out is to show how gender intersects with a host of other variables on the topic of college sports. That might seem obvious (thank you Einstein for telling us UConn fans would rather watch UConn than Trinity High), but it masks a central truth that the rest of the dialogue then pivots from: people feel obligated to watch the women's team because they've been deprived of every excuse not to. The crutch that exists for, say, Wisconsin football fans does not for UConn basketball fans because patriarchy is not built into the sport itself in the same way. They can say "I don't like basketball that much" just like the Duke fan can say "I don't like high school basketball" or the NBA fan can refuse to watch anything that's not the best. People find a way to circumvent the decisive variable - gender - when it comes to explaining their preferences in entertainment. Except, rationalization is never necessary as a consumer, and so, yes, I do get annoyed when people in the media trip over themselves to acknowledge Geno's success because it feels so shamelessly manufactured, even after every pixel of novelty has dissolved. "Can you imagine not losing a conference home game since 1943, Seth?" "Seth, you there?" Please don't accuse me of generalizing, because I'm well aware that there are plenty of people legitimately invested in women's basketball. All the power to them, and if they're passionate about growing the sport, they should continue to promote the players and coaches with the same vigor that ESPN grants LeBron. Ultimately, the reason does not matter. If you're rooting for the program because you love the school, or want to encourage your daughter to play, or just can't find anything else on TV, every contribution means a lot and supports a great cause. Let's just stop insulting everyone's intelligence. People tend to care about things that other people care about. Certainly, there is something to be said for pioneering change and stepping out on an island every now and again, but don't allow the lazy social angle to obscure the nature of people (ironically, the popularity of men's sports are sustained by a bandwagon effect that is largely associated with femininity and group think). Some give and take is required. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach