Don't mean to start a men vs women thing, but...

[OneTrickPony]

Talk about gender discrimination! Why is it that women get to have multiple peaks, but it's quite difficult for men to achieve?

Darn Wonkster...I studiously avoid saying Twin Peaks and you have to go blow it!

 

[RadyLady]

"USA stuffs Turkey" would have been better.

THIS post I want to like a million times!!!!

Sent from my SGH-T959V using Tapatalk

 

[OneTrickPony]

THIS post I want to like a million times!!!!

Sent from my SGH-T959V using Tapatalk

Beat you to it, RadyLady!

 

[vtcwbuff]

.
Don't mean to piss off HuskyNan, but ... () how come women are such lousy sports fans?

In general, women are a small percentage of the live crowd. I'm talking across all sports. My current working hypothesis is that sports don't mean as much to women as it does to men (a substitute for war). And I don't think the situation is likely to change significantly in the future.

Can I double like this. I have been saying that for years. If women spent 10% of their cosmetic budgets ( est 7-8 billion a year) supporting women athletes there wouldn't be the such a disparity.

 

[ursusminor]

Can I double like this. I have been saying that for years. If women spent 10% of their cosmetic budgets ( est 7-8 billion a year) supporting women athletes there wouldn't be the such a disparity.

Well, if women weren't judged so much on the way they looked, and pressured into imitating photoshopped supermodels, by an essentially patriarchal society, they wouldn't spend so much on cosmetics. They'd probably also have more time for going to sports events and spend less time at home taking care of things so that the men can go out.

I also find broad, sweeping generalizations about women fans to be veering dangerously close to rude and condescending. I'm the one who remembers to turn on the hockey game in our place, even though it's my husband who actually grew up a hockey fan. I go to volleyball and basketball games on the Maryland campus simply to be able to watch a game, even though I have no interest in which team wins or loses. The idea that sports mean less to me than the men in my family, with the possible exception of my uncle who pays to get NESN in Philly so he can watch the Red Sox lose, is utterly laughable.

 

[Waquoit]

The idea that sports mean less to me than the men in my family, with the possible exception of my uncle who pays to get NESN in Philly so he can watch the Red Sox lose, is utterly laughable.

No doubt many women are sports fans. I knew my mother was a fan of the old NY Football Giants and my dad was a Johnny Unitas fans. However, I just last year found out that that they almost broke up over the 1958 NFL Championship. If my mother wasn't such a good sport I wouldn't be here on this board!

The fact is, however that men overall are bigger sports fans and I've read they support women's sports in bigger numbers than women do. Figure skating is the only sport that has more female than male fans. Men are doing their part to support women's sports.

 

[Wonkster]

Well, if women weren't judged so much on the way they looked, and pressured into imitating photoshopped supermodels, by an essentially patriarchal society, they wouldn't spend so much on cosmetics. They'd probably also have more time for going to sports events and spend less time at home taking care of things so that the men can go out...

So you're saying women weren't competitive with each other over men before supermodels and Photoshop first appeared in world history?

My ex was a great sports fan - it was one of the many things that were distinctive about her. I often wondered why more girls weren't clever enough to see that possibility and fake interest in sports; they'd have twice as many male pursuers. I should add that girls in Ohio seem to have learned this lesson. On a trip to the Buckeye State last year I observed slews of girls watching football on TV and vigorously participating in football discussions with guys. I was amazed.

 

[vtcwbuff]

Well, if women weren't judged so much on the way they looked, and pressured into imitating photoshopped supermodels, by an essentially patriarchal society, they wouldn't spend so much on cosmetics. They'd probably also have more time for going to sports events and spend less time at home taking care of things so that the men can go out.

I also find broad, sweeping generalizations about women fans to be veering dangerously close to rude and condescending. I'm the one who remembers to turn on the hockey game in our place, even though it's my husband who actually grew up a hockey fan. I go to volleyball and basketball games on the Maryland campus simply to be able to watch a game, even though I have no interest in which team wins or loses. The idea that sports mean less to me than the men in my family, with the possible exception of my uncle who pays to get NESN in Philly so he can watch the Red Sox lose, is utterly laughable.

Your "dangerously close to rude and condescending" comes across as defensive. Do you really think that women spend money on cosmetics because they are driven to do so "by a patriarchal" society ? Women are pressured by other women. In general women don't dress for men they dress because they know they are being judged by other women.

My comment about the lack of women supporting women's athletics was a generality and not directed at anyone. If you support women's sports well bully for you, but you are in a minority. The main reason why women's sports struggle in the marketplace is because most women have little if any interest in sports.

 

[vtcwbuff]

...since I've already started down that path with the Opals thread, why, I'll just keep going.

I was on the USABasketball.com site this morning and was struck by these two headlines:

USA Men's Fast Start Paves Way To 86-80 Win Against Argentina
USA Women Pluck Win From Upset-Minded Turkey

Which team was it that won by 19?

Well, ya' did!

 

[ursusminor]

Your "dangerously close to rude and condescending" comes across as defensive. Do you really think that women spend money on cosmetics because they are driven to do so "by a patriarchal" society ? Women are pressured by other women. In general women don't dress for men they dress because they know they are being judged by other women.

You're right, I am defensive. Women are pressured by society, and indeed mostly other women, to conform to a standard of appearance that is based on what a male would find attractive - because this is still a patriarchal society. I don't think implicitly criticizing cosmetic spending contributes anything to the discussion of sports fans; shall I look up how much money the (mostly male) consumer market spends on adult entertainment, and suggest their money is better spent elsewhere?

Women have less interest in sports at least partly because, even still, there are parts of this country where girls are criticized for being "unladylike" at best for picking up a ball.

 

[ursusminor]

So you're saying women weren't competitive with each other over men before supermodels and Photoshop first appeared in world history?

No, I was commenting that the modern cosmetics industry is largely driven by that type of marketing. Before that they were competitive with each other because convincing a man to marry them and not some other girl was literally the only reliable way to secure a decent living.

 

[UConnChapette]

.
Don't mean to piss off HuskyNan, but ... () how come women are such lousy sports fans?

In general, women are a small percentage of the live crowd. I'm talking across all sports. My current working hypothesis is that sports don't mean as much to women as it does to men (a substitute for war). And I don't think the situation is likely to change significantly in the future.

I love the fact that I don't fit into generalities. In my house, I am the sports fan. I watch 100% more ESPN than my husband or two sons. The males in my family don't give a hoot about most sports - except my Yellow Jacket who has been known to go all in as a Georgia Tech football fan.

BTW - he also spends a lot more on hair and makeup than I do:

 

[VAUConnFan]

Can I double like this. I have been saying that for years. If women spent 10% of their cosmetic budgets ( est 7-8 billion a year) supporting women athletes there wouldn't be the such a disparity.

Whether it was intended or not, this thread has become a men vs women thing. One cannot help but appreciate the boldness of comments that might easily find a married man relegated to the couch.

 

[VAUConnFan]

No, I was commenting that the modern cosmetics industry is largely driven by that type of marketing. Before that they were competitive with each other because convincing a man to marry them and not some other girl was literally the only reliable way to secure a decent living.

For what it's worth, I feel that far too many razors are being sold to women these days.

 

[ursusminor]

vtcwbuff: You touched upon, very broadly, a subject that I do get vocal and defensive about. In the future, I will try to be less defensive and more ... eloquent as to why it bothers me. Can't make any promises.

I want to expand on what I mentioned in my last reply, which is actually tangentially related to both your cosmetics comment and the actual thread topic as a whole. For various reasons, girls and women participation in sports is not generally as high as men. I believe that people used to think (and I don't have a source to cite handy) that women couldn't physically run long distance - certainly not, say, a marathon - because it would damage their uterus.

One article I've found suggests that roughly equal numbers of girls and boys play organized sports in elementary school, but as kids become teens, there are more boys playing than girls. Some studies suggest that this is because playing sports is not seen as "feminine" and girls feel pressure to quit playing in order to fit in. Joan Benoit Samuelson, who won the world's first gold medal for women's marathon at the 1984 Olympics, has commented that when she was a kid, "girls just didn't run in public". A study in Britain showed that young girls are less active than young boys. One private school in Arizona chose to forfeit a state baseball championship rather than play a team that had a girl player (she played baseball because her school has no softball team). I can cite where I found most of this information if people are interested.

This is a long-winded way of saying that perhaps the shortage of female fans is related to the lack of female athletic opportunities in the past. I am certainly such a fan of sports because I played, and I'm the biggest fan of the specific sports that I most enjoyed playing. As gender equality in youth athletics has and continues to improve, perhaps we will also see more women sitting in the stands, cheering athletes on and talking happily of their glory days on the court and field in high school.

 

[Wonkster]

Anyone who has spent an entire lunchtime with HuskyBill is no milquetoast!

Probably certifies the party in question as a masochist!

 

[blackbird]

...since I've already started down that path with the Opals thread, why, I'll just keep going.

I was on the USABasketball.com site this morning and was struck by these two headlines:

USA Men's Fast Start Paves Way To 86-80 Win Against Argentina
USA Women Pluck Win From Upset-Minded Turkey

Which team was it that won by 19?

to be fair to the men, Argentina actually is supposed to have a shot at beating them.

 

[JS]

The fact is, however that men overall are bigger sports fans and I've read they support women's sports in bigger numbers than women do.

FWIW, the last time we took a census it showed 60-65 percent of posters on this board were men.

 

[Wonkster]

... perhaps the shortage of female fans is related to the lack of female athletic opportunities in the past. I am certainly such a fan of sports because I played, and I'm the biggest fan of the specific sports that I most enjoyed playing. As gender equality in youth athletics has and continues to improve, perhaps we will also see more women sitting in the stands, cheering athletes on and talking happily of their glory days on the court and field in high school.

I think that's entirely likely. My sportsfan ex played field hockey in high school. This notion has been used before in the following fashion:

"Why does my husband watch so much football?"
"What would you rather he do?"
"Take me to the ballet."
"Why do you like to watch ballet?"
"I took ballet lessons almost all the way through grammar school. I love to watch talented dancers who perform so exquisitely well."
"Do you think your husband might like to watch football players who play at a level far beyond what he was able to reach?"

My oldest daughter had a natural talent for running. When I could no longer catch her in a chase around the house after some piece of mischief, I suggested that she consider trying out for her high school track team. After several such suggestion/reminders, I asked her why she had not applied. Her answer? "I don't want to get all sweaty." However, when her friends made the same suggestion, she soon tried out for the team. She wound up first team All Suffolk County in cross country, and in college made women's crew. I told her I was really proud of her.

 

[ThisJustIn]

I can't imagine why on earth women (who actually will out number men, viewing the Olympics) aren't better fans of women's sports.

It couldn't have anything to do with history - what with, for example, women's competitive high school basketball being wiped out in the mid-30's. I mean, if THAT doesn't tell women to watch women's sports, I don't know what does?

It couldn't have anything to do with what's on TV - what with, for example, the majority of sports broadcast being of the male type. I mean, why wasn't every woman a UConn fan BEFORE Rebecca Lobo got on TV?

It couldn't have anything to do with coverage -- I mean, if you look hard enough you'll find a blog or two that covers women's athletics. Sure, ESPN won't send Mechelle Voepel to cover the US team, but really, won't you be just as satisfied with AP Doug? He's pretty good. And working hard will keep him out of trouble.

It couldn't have anything to do with missing role models. I mean, women have had forty years of Title IX, fer cryin' out loud. Granted, most universities and high schools aren't in compliance, but honestly, how long does it take to catch up to 100+ years of men's athletics?

It couldn't have anything to do with free time. I mean, really, I understand that in most (hetero) couples both work full time jobs and the woman is still does the greater part of the childcare and housekeeping, but really, if the WANTED to be sports fans they'd find the time.

 

[HuskyJohn]

Queen makes some important points and the light sarcasm is justified. If we look at historical trends and changes involving prejudice within our culture and others, it often takes a very long time for any kind of real movement of the kind we hope for. Racial and sexual orientation are but two examples. In these cases as well as access to organized sports, laws have needed changing for speed up the process and promote social justice.

I mentioned in an earlier post that money is key in the fact that commentators make note of male star athletes three times as much as female stars. There is no reason why this can’t change over time and I hope it will. Sports are not just fun to watch and participate in; they should become more important for the population as a whole for obvious health reasons as well. That is clearly true for men and women.

 

[Icebear]

I can't imagine why on earth women (who actually will out number men, viewing the Olympics) aren't better fans of women's sports.

It couldn't have anything to do with history - what with, for example, women's competitive high school basketball being wiped out in the mid-30's. I mean, if THAT doesn't tell women to watch women's sports, I don't know what does?

It couldn't have anything to do with what's on TV - what with, for example, the majority of sports broadcast being of the male type. I mean, why wasn't every woman a UConn fan BEFORE Rebecca Lobo got on TV?

It couldn't have anything to do with coverage -- I mean, if you look hard enough you'll find a blog or two that covers women's athletics. Sure, ESPN won't send Mechelle Voepel to cover the US team, but really, won't you be just as satisfied with AP Doug? He's pretty good. And working hard will keep him out of trouble.

It couldn't have anything to do with missing role models. I mean, women have had forty years of Title IX, fer cryin' out loud. Granted, most universities and high schools aren't in compliance, but honestly, how long does it take to catch up to 100+ years of men's athletics?

It couldn't have anything to do with free time. I mean, really, I understand that in most (hetero) couples both work full time jobs and the woman is still does the greater part of the childcare and housekeeping, but really, if the WANTED to be sports fans they'd find the time.

There goes the sarcasm meter again, blown to smithereens. Good thing that I was able to swing a volume discount given the nature and propensities of our posters

 

[HuskyNan]

FWIW, the last time we took a census it showed 60-65 percent of posters on this board were men.

And the average age 60+. Hence many of the outmoded attitudes.

 

[alexrgct]

FWIW, the last time we took a census it showed 60-65 percent of posters on this board were men.

I was going to make this exact point without knowing the stats. Even on this forum, which is a women's sports forum, there is more male participation that female. And if men make up the sports audience to a large degree (something that is changing, but only incrementally), a reality of that is that men generally prefer watching men play sports. So do a lot of women for that matter.

Saying that we still have a fundamentally patriarchal social structure is something of an overstatement...or at least if its still true, it won't be a generation from now. There are more women entering med school than men, more younger women getting their careers off the ground than men, more girls succeeding in primary and second classrooms than boys, and heck, more women representing the US in the Olympics. Meanwhile, men face increasing pressure to focus on their appearance. However, I get the point about cosmetics. If I were going to make a point about something women spend too much money on, it would be shoes. Which men really don't care about, btw.

 

[HuskyNan]

I was going to make this exact point without knowing the stats. Even on this forum, which is a women's sports forum, there is more male participation that female. And if men make up the sports audience to a large degree (something that is changing, but only incrementally), a reality of that is that men generally prefer watching men play sports. So do a lot of women for that matter.

That poll is about 10 years old and from 3 boards ago. We don't know the exact number now.

What women want from TV viewing is different than what men want, generally speaking. The reason that the announcers on ESPN ramble on about a player's grandmother or her favorite class in college is because the casual female viewer likes it. Women aren't into the big dunks and extreme physicality of men's basketball, for example, they like relating to the young women on the teams, seeing them as daughters or granddaughters and forming emotional attachments to them. It's what women do, we try to relate to other women on a personal basis. That's why networks show those biographical snippits during the Olympics - we'll root for the Russian girl that lost her mom when she was a baby over the American girl because we care about her.

That men don't get this, or worse look down on our need to relate to other people as individuals, is a big problem for networks and newspapers. They understand we don't necessarily want "hard" news all the time but they risk alienating male fans and women who prefer information without frills. ESPN actually doesn't get enough credit for at least trying to bridge the divide (good article on ESPN & its attempt to attract women)

As for the board, well, it has become a more hospitable place in recent years (I hope) but there was a loooong stretch of time where the Boneyard wasn't an easy place for women to reside. The period when men's & women's fans shared the board was the worst. Fishy still teases with his references to "chicks's hoops", a holdover from the condescending attitudes of the men's team fans. As the board evolved, the attitudes improved gradually but posters could still be subjected to name calling or sneering comments from people that saw themselves as "real" sports fans. It was even worse if someone was a newbie to basketball - the more knowledgeable fans would laugh them off the board. Women didn't see any need to reside in a hostile atmosphere where they couldn't connect with other people.

Add to that the constant flame wars that would pop up with the LV fans, as well as fans of other programs, from time to time, and women just didn't want to be here. It was likewise on other sites. That's why I decided to be a tyrant for a while and really put my foot down, creating the Boneyard rules demanding civility and hesitating less to boot out the arrogant, condescending, sarcastic bozos that made the Boneyard a hostile place. It's helped, but you can't change a culture overnight. As the article linked above notes, it's a complicated issue.

 

[Bestiarius]

"USA stuffs Turkey" would have been better.

Or, "Women gobble up another victory."

 

[alexrgct]

That poll is about 10 years old and from 3 boards ago. We don't know the exact number now.

What women want from TV viewing is different than what men want, generally speaking. The reason that the announcers on ESPN ramble on about a player's grandmother or her favorite class in college is because the casual female viewer likes it. Women aren't into the big dunks and extreme physicality of men's basketball, for example, they like relating to the young women on the teams, seeing them as daughters or granddaughters and forming emotional attachments to them. It's what women do, we try to relate to other women on a personal basis. That's why networks show those biographical snippits during the Olympics - we'll root for the Russian girl that lost her mom when she was a baby over the American girl because we care about her.

That men don't get this, or worse look down on our need to relate to other people as individuals, is a big problem for networks and newspapers. They understand we don't want "hard" news but they risk alienating male fans and women who prefer information without frills. ESPN actually doesn't get enough credit for at least trying to bridge the divide (good article on ESPN & its attempt to attract women)

As for the board, well, it has become a more hospitable place in recent years (I hope) but there was a loooong stretch of time where the Boneyard wasn't an easy place for women to reside. The period when men's & women's fans shared the board was the worst. Fishy still teases with his references to "chicks's hoops", a holdover from the condescending attitudes of the men's team fans. As the board evolved, the attitudes improved gradually but posters could still be subjected to name calling or sneering comments from people that saw themselves as "real" sports fans. It was even worse if someone was a newbie to basketball - the more knowledgeable fans would laugh them off the board. Women didn't see any need to reside in a hostile atmosphere where they couldn't connect with other people.

Add to that the constant flame wars that would pop up with the LV fans, as well as fans of other programs, from time to time, and women just didn't want to be here. It was likewise on other sites. That's why I decided to be a tyrant for a while and really put my foot down, creating the Boneyard rules demanding civility and hesitating less to boot out the arrogant, condescending, sarcastic bozos that made the Boneyard a hostile place. It's helped, but you can't change a culture overnight. As the article linked above notes, it's a complicated issue.

I think women who like sports aren't, as a general rule, as into basketball as football, baseball, tennis, and Gymanstics/ice skating at the Olympics (which, btw, is the one sporting event that really caters to female viewers).

In addition to the human interest vs. competitive (and quantitative/analytical) question, there's the fact that a lot of women who consume sports do so in a more social and casual fashion. For instance, if you go south of the Mason-Dixon, there are a TON of women who like college football, but very few who would post on a CFB message board. Message boards are just very conducive to competition, analysis, and quantitative stuff.

Personally, I don't mind the human interest stuff, but during the Olympics, it gets ridiculous. Everyone has a dead grandmother or a sick uncle who is inspiring them to compete.

 

[ursusminor]

And the average age 60+. Hence many of the outmoded attitudes.

Not even so much outmoded as, in some cases, unaware. (This is why I can't keep my mouth shut but should be less defensive.) Life is a gendered experience; even going to the bathroom is different. When it comes to more subtle social/cultural constructs, it can be very difficult for a man to fully understand exactly what is motivating stereotypical women-only behavior. Heck, it can be difficult for women to pinpoint what is driving them to behave that way. That's not anybody's fault, it's just the way it is.
I don't think the cosmetics comment was meant to be more than a gentle tease, or perhaps an exasperated expression of perceived waste, which is a reasonable interpretation from the perspective of a (middle-aged?) man. I am a 24-year old female who has worried before that forgetting my make-up (I pretty much never wear any) might have hurt my chances in a job interview. For some women in some industries, that's as important as remembering your pants, but I can't expect everyone on this board to know that.

 

[Waquoit]

If we look at historical trends and changes involving prejudice within our culture and others, it often takes a very long time for any kind of real movement of the kind we hope for. Racial and sexual orientation are but two examples.

But you know once things reach critical mass, change comes pretty quickly. Now it seems like forever, but it wasn't too long ago that people could smoke in a office setting. Can you imagine that today? The gay marriage train is out of the station and it ain't coming back. I was thinking about this today while reading about Sally Ride, a true hero. Did anyone else here know she was gay and was in a relationship for over 25 years. Does it really matter now? Back then it did.

 

[alexrgct]

I'd say that the order of speed of change has been:

1. Gay rights (pretty incredible since Stonewall if you think about where we were and where we are)

2. Gender (where we are compared to the 1950s is pretty dramatically different.

3. Race (institutionalized racism was eliminated in pretty dramatic fashion from 1947-1965, but economic enfranchisement has been extremely slow to happen...and 9/11 didn't help for Arabs and other Muslims).

The advantage, if you want to call it that, that gay people had was a smaller group with, again relatively speaking, a more homogenous set of discrimination and health issues that needed/need to be addressed. Race is way more complicated, and, from a gender perspective, half the population is not going to have anything remotely resembling a homogenous set of issues and priorities. You won't even get consensus that there was ever a problem with patriarchy, traditional gender roles, etc., or that there is now.