#I compete gymnastics in a league that allows co-ed competition in both the ''men's'' and ''women's'' disciplines and I have a lot of fun

[say-duhnelle]

I'm not sure that naming gymnastics as the antithesis to sports with "ghettoized leagues for the frail and delicate" where traits more common in cis men give you an inherent advantage is quite the W you think it is, mate

crazy that in the 1970s they were like, "fine, women can play sports. but because they're innately less athletic than men, only in a special ghettoized League For The Frail And Delicate where they get paid less 😊". And not only is that still the system in 2023, but viciously lashing out at the smallest challenges to that system gets framed as Feminist Praxis

[eichy815]

America’s Wide World of Bad Sports

This past week, blowhard tennis champion John McEnroe stirred up yet another controversy during an NPR interview.  When pressed by Lulu Garcia-Navarro, McEnroe gave younger tennis phenom Serena Williams a backhanded compliment by saying that, although Williams is a talented athlete, she would only rank 700th in the world if she was playing against male tennis stars.

In response, Williams asserted that McEnroe should stop pulling random numbers out of the air when talking about gender in sports.  She asked him to kindly leave her name out of all future references when he chooses to compare men and women in sports.  McEnroe shot back, opining that perhaps professional tennis matches should be made coed so the debate over gender – when it comes to speed, agility, and upper body strength – could be settled once and for all.

McEnroe clearly savors the limelight, as someone who pugnaciously wears his bombastic heart on his sleeve; he was, after all, doing a book tour when he publicly invoked Serena Williams as part of the conversation.  But his attitude during the interview reflects the obvious gender disparity in sports with which American culture has grappled for as long as this country has existed.  For this reason, it’s worth exploring ways in which such a divide can be closed.

First, let me say – as someone who is totally uncoordinated and has absolutely no athletic skill of my own – how much I admire athletes of both sexes for their talent, commitment, and discipline.  I also say this as someone who has zero interest in watching professional sports...or even recreational athletics.  I don’t watch sports on TV, and I generally don’t watch it in person.

I preface my commentary in this manner because a lot of sports fans would sneer at me, “You don’t even* like* sports, Eichy!  Who the hell are you to tell athletes what they should be doing differently...or dictating what sports fans should be watching or interested in?”

That’s not what I’m trying to do.  But for as long as anyone can remember, male sports have enjoyed systemic and cultural advantages over female sports.  Women’s leagues haven’t been given fair access or equal exposure...nor have they been treated with the social reverence of their andocentric counterparts.  As CNN’s Kelly Wallace reports, virtually every variable related to athletics – salaries, coverage, access, recruitment, and perception – sees male athletes being given far more advantages and opportunities compared to female athletes.

The Economist published a July 2014 article that summarizes this problem concisely:

If there were more sponsorship and media coverage, some say, then women’s sports would be more popular.  Media outlets and sponsors retort that if women’s sports attracted more interest in the first place then they would invest more time and money in it.  All sides agree on what it takes to make a sport successful: a balance of consumer, media and commercial appeal.

Chris Bodenner of The Atlantic did a comparative assessment that considers varying opinions and perspectives on the role of gender in contemporary athletics.  Although he doesn’t take a clear stand one way or the other as to what the approach should be going forward, his overview of differences amongst sports emphases is thoughtful and worth reading.

Some of Bodenner’s findings include the common realities we're all aware of: female athletes are paid less, become the recipients of less cultural reverence, and attain less media exposure.  Yet, that exposure, not surprisingly, is directly related to popularity.  While a knee-jerk perception of many is that male athletes possess superior speed, strength, and skill – many respondents view the male/female split of athletic virtues as being more equal.  In some cases, women are viewed as more skilled than their male counterparts – with gymnastics, figure skating, skiing, soccer, volleyball, and swimming being prime examples.

Even in a male-dominated sport like boxing, not all superstars fall into the “heavyweight” category.  Certain male-centric sports such as MMA and track-and-field don't have as high payouts for their professional athletes as others – golf, tennis, or football.  And many spectators take a laissez faire attitude that if a sport has to rely on charity to increase its own popularity, it bears the blame for not holding its own; after all, it’s not like people are paying for season tickets to go watch ultimate frisbee or lawn bowling.

As far as closing the gap when it comes to this disparity, there are several potential solutions that we can and should explore.  But as we delve into those options, there needs to be a distinction between which type of venue is hosting these athletics.  Public schools and universities are funded by taxpayers...whereas private corporations aren’t.  So it only follows that public vs. private standards should be applied insofar as their treatment.

For example, the NBA, MLB leagues, and the NFL are more akin to a private corporation than a public entity.  They live or die based on how much capital they can generate, be it through celebrity star power or traditional ticket sales.  While society itself wouldn’t cease to exist if any of them shut down operation, a free and prosperous society also holds that it’s one’s right to sample, audition for, or enjoy these venues if you’re accepted into their ranks (whether it’s as a customer or an employee).

A parallel point to this would be my personal belief that private entities should be able to deny service or membership to others at their discretion.  I outline my philosophy on this in my November 2015 op-ed, “Faking the Cake.”  In the same way that private businesses shouldn’t be compelled by the federal government to cater events or customize their product against their will, sports corporations shouldn’t be forced to desegregate or expand their player rosters in the name of “evening things up.”

So what about team sports found in middle schools, high schools, and colleges?  After all, these periods of one’s life are when athletes’ skills or biases are initially cultivated.  For those of us who desire a gender-inclusive society (especially when a portion of students are transgender), why shouldn’t gender neutrality – or at least, gender parity – be enforced?

Even feminists would acknowledge the common differences in weight, height, and physique between women and men.  This was at the heart of the long-running debate over whether women should be allowed to serve in military combat positions (for the record, I think female soldiers should have the exact same opportunities as male soldiers as long as they meet the exact same physical and performance requirements).

Others try to bring science into the equation to support their positions.  In a Time piece, Jeffrey Kluger discusses lek – an aviary phenomenon where male birds engage in direct combat to weed out competition in terms of pursuing females.  The female birds, in turn, observe those interactions...presumably to assess the desirability of potential male mates.

Kluger is simply pointing out how there may be an evolutionary component present amid our socialization.  The males of certain animal species are more entrenched in physical interpersonal competition with one another (even if the females of that same species compete with each other to find a companion).  Humans translate this rudimentary concept to aspects of life such as warfare and social status.  So, as many people would contend, the reality that it spills over into the realm of sports could be at least partially rooted in nature.

However, I still maintain that accepting this phenomenon on its face is reductionist and heterosexist.  It’s exclusive of transgender athletes, and it makes the presumption that every element of a creature’s life is driven by the desire to either procreate or reach sexual climax.  Furthermore, it ignores the reality that we, as humans, have the capacity to place a high value on sportsmanship and civility – yes, even amid the adrenaline-bursting rush of competition.

With that in mind, we should also continue to make the distinction between contact sports and performance sports.  There will be different physical characteristics that need to be taken into account when comparing football to archery...or basketball to swimming...or baseball to gymnastics.

Obviously, in the macroscopic sense of these issues (and comparisons made therein), there are pointed differences between national security (e.g. women in the military) versus casual recreation (e.g. women in professional athletics).  But in each of these realms, there are still differences between men’s and women’s bodies.  That’s also why – within single-sex competitive sports – there are sometimes individual weight classes, such as in boxing and wrestling.  On top of this is the controversy over which athletic leagues transgender athletes should be eligible to participate in – as the Gavin Grimm media storm has shown us.

Given how a major role of sports – even in public sector – is to generate commercial profit, whatever solution gets employed should balance the realities of capitalism with the ideals of gender equality.  Probably the most efficient way for us to reach that point, sociologically, would be to increase the availability of gender-neutral sports.  Usually, these would be non-contact sports: volleyball, tennis, golf, swimming, gymnastics, etc.  These leagues would compete against other such leagues, all with gender-neutral coed lineups.  The leagues, by design, would compete against other gender-inclusive leagues.  And, their existence wouldn’t preclude the continuation of male-only or female-only leagues within each sporting area.

A cultural change wouldn’t occur instantly.  Coed athletics would need to gain a foothold at elementary school age so there could be an increasing appetite for it with successive generations.  But we’ll never get there if we don’t make a conscious effort to begin offering kids these opportunities from a very early age.

Stephanie Fabry, who played Division 1 athletics in the UW system, breaks down the lack of praise received by female athletes; she emphasizes how awareness of this disparity is the first step in solving the problem.

From there, as discussed by The Atlantic’s Alia Wong, we need to look at the legal realities.  Title IX funding guarantees equal resources for males and females to participate in school activities.  However, as Wong notes, as many as 28% of public high schools in the United States are in violation of Title IX due to the disproportionate numbers of available spots on teams when comparing female and male sports leagues.  There has also never been federal funding denied to a school due to noncompliance; further enabling this grim lack of oversight is the murkiness of any standards available for defining how it can be “proven” that a school is violating Title IX.

The factors Wong examines show how there’s a parallel between sexism and racism in sports.  Both educational resources and extracurricular athletic resources alike are allocated to predominantly-white schools at a much higher rate than they are to those schools with large populations of students of color.

Let me reiterate, one more time: this wouldn’t be a mandate that all sports fully integrate their teams based on sex 100% of the time.  On the contrary:  even gender-neutral sports, such as swimming and gymnastics, still have sex-segregated competitions due to physiological differences between males and females.  These circumstances are typically related to the kinesiological nature of each sport itself.

Whenever there is a public funding involved – a taxpayer-supported public school district or a state university system – there must be at least the opportunity for female students and male students alike to have leagues inclusive of them in each athletic area.  So, for instance, if a public college has a men’s rugby team...there must also be a women’s rugby team.  If there’s a women’s volleyball team...there should also be a men’s volleyball team.

And what happens when not enough players of the corresponding sex try out?  That may need to be addressed on a school-by-school basis.  One option could be having exhibition sports conferences.  This would be relevant, hypothetically, if there weren’t enough sex-specific teams in a regional conference to warrant a significant breadth meets or tournaments.  Allowing athletes in gender-disadvantaged leagues to put their talents on display could help move along a cultural shift.

Of course, the matter will need to be addressed of how to be inclusive within sports in which females have traditionally had little interest in participating.  This was at the heart of last year’s Fox television drama Pitch (where Kylie Bunbury played the first woman to compete in an all-male MLB league).

What happens if, hypothetically, only one female student at a college wants to try out for the school’s football team – and she happens to possess athletic skill and a physique that’s on par with a majority of that college team’s best male football players?

Under Title IX, if a female student can display the same skill level as the best male players in a predominantly male-dominated sport, they should be allowed to play.  Locker room facilities would still remain segregated by sex.

Another noticeable factor is the enormous pay inequity amongst coaches based on their sex – although budget gurus will tell us that it’s based on the profitability of individual teams.  Training camps, apparel companies, and appearance fees also pad these male coaches’ pocketbooks.

Draft eligibility requirements are stricter for women’s leagues than they are for men’s leagues (with the WNBA being the prime example).  Now, the WNBA would say (rightfully so) that this policy has been enacted with the intention of benefiting the female players’ post-athletic futures by requiring academic enrichment (as a contingency for the privilege to play).  If publicly-funded schools were required to have academic standards of an equal threshold for male athlete drafts, might that result in a more well-rounded and worldly population of student athletes?

In addition to the wage gap, there are other variables that need to be taken into consideration if we’re going to employ effective strategies to reach gender parity in sports.  Playing conditions are often different within certain gender-neutral sports categories (e.g. the increase of injuries to female FIFA athletes when forced to compete on artificial turf).  Female athletes are dissuaded from furthering potential athletic careers due to the expectation of needing to assume a “nurturer” or “caregiver” role in life.  And there’s sexual objectification – highlighting the sex appeal of even the most successful female athletes, whereas superstar male athletes are given opportunities by media outlets to be more prolific in their public profiles.

We can’t force people to watch (or buy tickets to) specific athletic competitions against their will.  And we have limited control over how the mainstream media chooses to portray male and female athletes so differently.  But we *do* have control over how we socialize children from a young age to place value on a wider variety of athletic categories...and providing opportunities for those kids to play in those venues from an early age.

The bottom line is: we need to begin building these options at the K-12 level (and gradually incorporating them into university culture) in order for them to permeate the monopolization of male-oriented college and professional leagues.

Achieving equality is never easy.  In that spirit, allow me to harken back to my very first edition of “Eichy Says” from a little under four years ago – males and females each experience unique challenges and social prejudices in life.  When looking at ways to encourage Americans’ attitudes on sports to evolve, we must tailor the solutions to cultivate interest levels before adulthood...while customizing standards and guidelines to the kinesiology involved with every individual athletic genre.