NFR: Women's Sport

[OxfordWhite]

Just wondering if I could have some thoughts on the following:

I am all for sexual equality but I feel this has been misconstrued as a concept. Women's sport is (generally) of a worse quality than mens. This is to say that a man and woman of a similar worldwide standard in two sports within their sexes play each other, the man normally wins (I.E. Murray vs. Sharapova). I don't object to increased coverage of women's sport if it is of the same standard of mens/as entertaining, but I feel that it is patronising to try and equate the two. Women can earn more money than men being supermodels, TV presenters (often) as well as in many other occupations. I feel these days as if I am almost forced to notice womens sport when the interest in it just isn't there when compared to mens sport. I don't think this is sexist in any way just an appreciation of the fact that while men and women should be "equal", they are also different.

I can expand but I think you guys can see what I am getting at!

[BarryP]

This is simple. Turn the channel if  you don't like it and to each their own.

[Logicalman]

I can expand but I think you guys can see what I am getting at!

I guess you mean that we should not watch any football unless its the top league, or its World Cup, because the other leagues/Cup competitions are not of the same standard?

Personally, I believe sport is about competition, and when I see Man Utd vs Oxford Utd, I don't consider that as competitive as Oxford Utd vs Southend, for example, simply because of the inequalities of the teams, and so I would rather watch the latter.

I guess it's all about personal choice -- now where is that remote?

[Airfix]

By God, it's still 1976!

I bet you think that the girlies should all stay at home and concentrate on knitting and kittens.

[OxfordWhite]

This is simple. Turn the channel if  you don't like it and to each their own.

I am talking more about the equal prize money at Wimbledon, calls to have equality in coverage of the Ashes and football tournaments and the frequent outrage that people don't care enough about women's sport.

[OxfordWhite]

By God, it's still 1976!

I bet you think that the girlies should all stay at home and concentrate on knitting and kittens.

Not in anyway, I support equality of all as I clearly stated. Don't be so narrow minded. My point is that I feel that it is patronising, sexism would be not wanting to watch it BECAUSE women play, I am saying that I don't want to as it is of a lower quality.

[OxfordWhite]

I am saying that I do not think that ANY sport should be pushed above where it would naturally lie (Womens football, for example, probably does not get enough viewing to justify it being on BBC 1,2 or ITV 1,2 ( I will try and find stats). If it gets this viewing then I would love to see it on TV.

[The Equalizer]

Women can earn more money than men being supermodels, TV presenters (often) as well as in many other occupations.

You mean occupations where their bodies and looks are more accepted than any other attributes? I wouldn't like to put this argument before the Women's Lib!

I can understand what you say though, the simple fact is the difference in biology. If women want to have complete equality in sports, then let's see them put a load of players into a professional rugby or football team. The women would be dropped very quickly due to the simple fact that men can physically be bigger, stronger and faster. If they were then dropped because they were too slow, weak or small, the feminists would say it's sexism.

No love, it's biology.

[Logicalman]

By God, it's still 1976!

I bet you think that the girlies should all stay at home and concentrate on knitting and kittens.

Not in anyway, I support equality of all as I clearly stated. Don't be so narrow minded. My point is that I feel that it is patronising, sexism would be not wanting to watch it BECAUSE women play, I am saying that I don't want to as it is of a lower quality.

I fully understand where you're coming from, but as my original post stated, if its the quality that counts most, and in competition sports the quality is the competition, then why should great competition by two equally-matched womens teams be any less than watching a one-sided male competition, or should we never watch anything less than the best of anything?

[Logicalman]

Women can earn more money than men being supermodels, TV presenters (often) as well as in many other occupations.

You mean occupations where their bodies and looks are more accepted than any other attributes? I wouldn't like to put this argument before the Women's Lib!

I can understand what you say though, the simple fact is the difference in biology. If women want to have complete equality in sports, then let's see them put a load of players into a professional rugby or football team. The women would be dropped very quickly due to the simple fact that men can physically be bigger, stronger and faster. If they were then dropped because they were too slow, weak or small, the feminists would say it's sexism.

No love, it's biology.

.. and you are perfectly correct, though I didn't see anywhere in the original posts about mixing it up in that way (could be interesting though, where would the high-tackle line be set for a rugby match - without complaints the male team were just out to cop a feel?)

[The Equalizer]

Women can earn more money than men being supermodels, TV presenters (often) as well as in many other occupations.

You mean occupations where their bodies and looks are more accepted than any other attributes? I wouldn't like to put this argument before the Women's Lib!

I can understand what you say though, the simple fact is the difference in biology. If women want to have complete equality in sports, then let's see them put a load of players into a professional rugby or football team. The women would be dropped very quickly due to the simple fact that men can physically be bigger, stronger and faster. If they were then dropped because they were too slow, weak or small, the feminists would say it's sexism.

No love, it's biology.

.. and you are perfectly correct, though I didn't see anywhere in the original posts about mixing it up in that way (could be interesting though, where would the high-tackle line be set for a rugby match - without complaints the male team were just out to cop a feel?)

Ah, I may have misconstrued the original post too.

In that case, I don't see anything wrong with exposure to women's sport at all. I love watched women's golf, tennis and beach volleyball. I think all of it should be shown as long as there's an audience for it. The fact is though that women's events don't get the attendances or the viewing figures, because largely the quality isn't good enough (tennis and golf being the exceptions). It is all about quality though. If pub football or pub snooker was being played, then I doubt very much that many people would watch it.

[RidgeRider]

Interesting topic. I say to each his own. I really don't see anyone or any network attempting to equate men's and women's sport. I have found women's sports can be of equal entertainment and if I know I am watching the highest quality in women's sport, even if I know men are better (which rarely even comes into my thinking), then it can be very entertaining.

In the sport I engage in, our best women can keep up with most of the men and many times are even faster. The difference is not that great. The biggest difference is on the shear numbers. There are more men racing than women, but the women I often train with are nearly as good as the best men and certainly just as tough or tougher than most men (mentally and physically).

I see nothing wrong with equal prize money if equal entertainment is being provided....and personally that doesn't have to be of equal quality.

Many women watch women's sports, and some men do as well, so it all depends on with which lense you are viewing.

[hesedmedia]

Is it possible that women have been rather forced into competing at sports that were originally designed by and for men, such that, as has been mentioned, the physique required to excel at playing, say, rugby is going to more often than not, pair with the male gender?

There may be a psychological aspect to this as well. Many of the sports at which men fare better are of the sort that require an immediate, direct conflict of wills, whereas sports like cycling, gymnastics, golf, motor sports, sheer athletic competitions such as crossfit games, really don't -- they're more about individual excellence, and it's far more entertaining to me to watch women's gymnastics or the women's crossfit events than it is to watch the men compete in those sports. If men are competing at something, I want to see them in direct conflict, where success for one means defeat for the other in an immediate sense, and I want to see this because it's an analogue for conflict in my own life.

Maybe that's way off, just a thought I had while reading the thread.

[Lighthouse]

I actually don't understand what the point being made is. All I do know is that I would find tennis very dull if I only watched men playing. Womens sport is um different because they are women. Watching womens football is enjoyable  because there is more emphasis on parts of the game that are ignored by men. Yes the keepers are not of a great standard but then that is part of the sport. Womens tennis is less reliant on serve. Although watching Williams play is boring because it is all power.

In other words womens sport is different not inferior. I don't just want to watch the very best men play sport. I want to watch the very best women play sport.

Now should women tennis players be given the same prize money for playing less tennis then the men? That is an interesting debate.

[The Equalizer]

Is it possible that women have been rather forced into competing at sports that were originally designed by and for men, such that, as has been mentioned, the physique required to excel at playing, say, rugby is going to more often than not, pair with the male gender?

There may be a psychological aspect to this as well. Many of the sports at which men fare better are of the sort that require an immediate, direct conflict of wills, whereas sports like cycling, gymnastics, golf, motor sports, sheer athletic competitions such as crossfit games, really don't -- they're more about individual excellence, and it's far more entertaining to me to watch women's gymnastics or the women's crossfit events than it is to watch the men compete in those sports. If men are competing at something, I want to see them in direct conflict, where success for one means defeat for the other in an immediate sense, and I want to see this because it's an analogue for conflict in my own life.

Maybe that's way off, just a thought I had while reading the thread.

One point about motorsport is that currently, there are few if any women competing professionally. I understand that a young lady is going to be starting in the Formula One soon, so I'm quite excited to see what happens there. Although, that's one sport where it is difficult to judge on ability as currently it's all about the tyres.

Queue comments from my Dad regarding women drivers...

[BarryP]

This is simple. Turn the channel if  you don't like it and to each their own.

I am talking more about the equal prize money at Wimbledon, calls to have equality in coverage of the Ashes and football tournaments and the frequent outrage that people don't care enough about women's sport.

As I said to each their own. I am more likely to watch women's tennis than I am men's because there is far too little of the serve and volley for my taste. Because I like that better should the women be paid more?

While were changing things could we ban these composite rackets and bring back wooden ones instead. There is something worth having a rant over.

[Berserker]

I'm equally good at some things as men, other things i am better at, and somethings they are better than me at

[thebumponleroyshead]

Well, I moved to Sweden three months ago, the Womens Euros here were massive news and got large tv audiences newspaper front page coverage and crowds with sensible family friendly ticketing. One of the English players commented accordingly about how big womens football was here; big league games get 3,000 crowds akin to Conference level but in a country of 9 mill that is impressive.
The Swedes view Damfotboll (Womens football) as a separate entity to the mens game ie. Goalies not as big, less long balls, more focus on intricate technical ability.
Its a question of equality in society - a large proportion if not majority of politicians, lawyers, business people are women in Sweden.  Refreshingly one of the least sexist places on earth without a doubt.
However I am biased as I am a coach for girls in northern Stockholm. (they play in black and white I may add - Sollentuna FK)
Either way sport for both genders is a great thing and gives life meaning. :54:

[Jimpav]

It depends on the sport - tennis, athletics, swimming, gymnastics, equestrian, cycling etc all draw a decent sized audience and have produced iconic and inspirational stars.

I wouldn't choose to watch a lot of women's cricket, football or rugby but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be given coverage. Like it or not its only going to become more prominent. In turn I can see more young women getting into sport and their being less stigma around it.

[Logicalman]

Is it possible that women have been rather forced into competing at sports that were originally designed by and for men, such that, as has been mentioned, the physique required to excel at playing, say, rugby is going to more often than not, pair with the male gender?

There may be a psychological aspect to this as well. Many of the sports at which men fare better are of the sort that require an immediate, direct conflict of wills, whereas sports like cycling, gymnastics, golf, motor sports, sheer athletic competitions such as crossfit games, really don't -- they're more about individual excellence, and it's far more entertaining to me to watch women's gymnastics or the women's crossfit events than it is to watch the men compete in those sports. If men are competing at something, I want to see them in direct conflict, where success for one means defeat for the other in an immediate sense, and I want to see this because it's an analogue for conflict in my own life.

Maybe that's way off, just a thought I had while reading the thread.

Good point, though I have thought of one sport (and it is) that seems to make one wonder why the fairer sex are not as 'good' as their male counterparts, and that being Darts.

Yep I know Maureen Flowers could wipe the floor with the majority of darts players (she would do so with me I would testify), as would Trina Gulliver (though being sexist the way I am I might actually enjoy that), but there are/were very few others that could stay on pace with the top 20 Mens players, even these days, I would offer.