| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
 Posted: 09/13/17 1:49 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| Silky Johnson wrote: |
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
... On the other hand, the vast majority of men's basketball fans don't watch women's basketball mainly for the same reason they don't watch para-Olympic basketball: they simply don't like, are bored by, and have no interest in watching the product. It's not bias against women or paraplegics as people. |
The trouble that I have with this passage is: how do you unravel the systemic and institutionalized sexism that we have all been indoctrinated with, both consciously and subconsciously for decades, nigh unto centuries, from whatever we believe to simply be a reasonably-formed opinion, regarding sports/entertainment? Like, maybe it sounds reasonable to say, "I'm not sexist/I'm not biased against women's basketball! I just don't think that it's entertaining."But how do you take a statement like that at face value, in a manner which dilutes or removes all of the context that led up to that opinion being formed? |
Very well said.
There was a conversation I was having in another thread (the expansion thread) that kind of dealt with this. Another poster noted that women just aren't as "athletic" as men, thus people who watch the WNBA are already willing to watch an inferior product.
But if we think about the term "athletic" and how it translates into basketball, it shines a light on the systemic sexism that is ingrained in how we perceive things. Think about how we define "athletic". Its very nature is of skills/traits that are more prevalent in males. It is about speed, strength, vertical jumping, etc. While these things can help in basketball, ultimately it is a game about putting the ball into a hoop. The fact that we find "athletic" ways of doing that more appealing/fun/exciting than the other ways says something about our culturally ingrained values.
Why is it we find isolation basketball where a star "posterizes" a hapless defender with a dunk more exiting than a beautifully crafted offensive set that moves the ball to force the defense out of position and then finishes with a butter smooth jump shot that hits nothing but net?
Enjoyment is subjective, and we are built from the ground up by the culture that surrounds us. And that culture is years and years in the making. There are things that are so rooted in our cultural ideology that they have become simple "truths" to us. The fact that it is only in the last few years that women have even been in the conversation as serious athletes means that it would be insane to downplay the role of historical, if not contemporary, sexism in shaping barriers for the league to have to overcome. We have simply defined "good sports" in the male image, and have done it for so long that it seems a simple truth to many that women's sports just aren't "good" or exciting.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11149
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/13/17 3:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Anyone who's spent much time thinking about philosophy, metaphysics, historical inertia, etc., has realized that there's a major gap between theory, especially normative theory ("people ought to do X"), and day-to-day reality.
Marx can chart world history through the lens of economics and dialectical materialism, but his theories translated poorly to the world people actually live in -- which leads to the inevitable question/compromise involving whether to get ahead of the crowd and hope people follow, or work with the situation as it is, regardless of its shortcomings.
So proponents of women's sports, or paralympic sports, can seek to redefine what "athleticism" means, or ask/demand that other people change their viewpoints to match what "should" be the norms, or push ahead regardless of how many follow. Or they can work within the system/culture they find themselves in, and try to slowly push the envelope in the "right" direction.
The WNBA, as a business, must operate differently than high schools, say, which are mandated by law to have girls' sports. The WNBA, and to a lesser extent, collegiate programs, have obligations that require compromise with the existing culture, so getting too far ahead of the curve (in redefining athleticism or "good basketball") will be self-defeating.
As fans and supporters of women in athletics, we can of course say everyone "ought" to admire the women's game as much as the men's, and "ought" to feel and act in certain ways. (Just as we "ought" to make fundamental changes in our lives and economic systems to combat climate change ...)
But these kinds of normative "demands" are almost never met. Change comes in many different ways, and has many different triggers, but seldom does a philosophical/intellectual call to "raise" our standards to a presumably more enlightened level make much of a difference.
It's good to make the statements, and it's good to raise the issues, and it's very, very good to make more and more people aware of the underlying oppression of women that permeates this planet, but there's a gap, if not a chasm, between those actions and actions that effectively create the change that most here want to see.
Here, of course, the writer is supposed to lay out those effective actions in no uncertain terms, but I don't have any to offer. From my limited perspective, it seems that the slow, incremental movement in the more "advanced" countries towards less oppression of women is probably the most effective path, but maybe not. Still, I think that abstract calls such as the one to "redefine athleticism" are not going to move us very far down the road. I think a better plan is to work within the existing cultural definitions as best we can ... but of course, I could be wrong.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/13/17 3:47 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
Anyone who's spent much time thinking about philosophy, metaphysics, historical inertia, etc., has realized that there's a major gap between theory, especially normative theory ("people ought to do X"), and day-to-day reality.
Marx can chart world history through the lens of economics and dialectical materialism, but his theories translated poorly to the world people actually live in -- which leads to the inevitable question/compromise involving whether to get ahead of the crowd and hope people follow, or work with the situation as it is, regardless of its shortcomings.
So proponents of women's sports, or paralympic sports, can seek to redefine what "athleticism" means, or ask/demand that other people change their viewpoints to match what "should" be the norms, or push ahead regardless of how many follow. Or they can work within the system/culture they find themselves in, and try to slowly push the envelope in the "right" direction.
The WNBA, as a business, must operate differently than high schools, say, which are mandated by law to have girls' sports. The WNBA, and to a lesser extent, collegiate programs, have obligations that require compromise with the existing culture, so getting too far ahead of the curve (in redefining athleticism or "good basketball") will be self-defeating.
As fans and supporters of women in athletics, we can of course say everyone "ought" to admire the women's game as much as the men's, and "ought" to feel and act in certain ways. (Just as we "ought" to make fundamental changes in our lives and economic systems to combat climate change ...)
But these kinds of normative "demands" are almost never met. Change comes in many different ways, and has many different triggers, but seldom does a philosophical/intellectual call to "raise" our standards to a presumably more enlightened level make much of a difference.
It's good to make the statements, and it's good to raise the issues, and it's very, very good to make more and more people aware of the underlying oppression of women that permeates this planet, but there's a gap, if not a chasm, between those actions and actions that effectively create the change that most here want to see.
Here, of course, the writer is supposed to lay out those effective actions in no uncertain terms, but I don't have any to offer. From my limited perspective, it seems that the slow, incremental movement in the more "advanced" countries towards less oppression of women is probably the most effective path, but maybe not. Still, I think that abstract calls such as the one to "redefine athleticism" are not going to move us very far down the road. I think a better plan is to work within the existing cultural definitions as best we can ... but of course, I could be wrong. |
I would actually agree. We call these cultural "truths" for a reason. The WNBA cannot rest on the idea that cultural sexism is a barrier and use it as an excuse to fail. It needs to be able to exist within that paradigm until it is no longer the case. Just as the NBA needed to survive within the realities of racism until it was able to overcome it financially and culturally.
But what it should do is temper the expectations of fans. We need to understand the realities that the league is facing and know that mere survival in the short term is actually a win. We need to know that every year that the WNBA exists, that there is a new generation of potential fans that will have been raised in a world where "women athletes" are not a novel or niche idea. The more it is normalized, the more the subjective tastes of the populace will shift, and the more people will be able to appreciate all the women's game as to offer, and see it for the good, exciting product it is.
Now that isn't to say the league should get a pass on everything, as they still have a responsibility to work their butts off to grow the game and to ensure the best product possible gets to the fans.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
Bob Lamm
Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/13/17 4:32 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I believe that profound cultural/social/political change happens due to both outsiders and insiders. To take an obvious example, how did Jim Crow segregation die? Partly through the work of radical activists from the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and Dr. King's Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC). And partly through the work of Lyndon Johnson, some terrific members of Congress from both political parties, and even some awful politicians who voted the right way. It's not an either-or.
In terms of fighting sexism or any comparable poison, I believe we need the strongest possible voices from the outside making the strongest, uncompromising statements. And we need good people on the inside cutting the best possible deals to advance step-by-step.
_________________
Remember Roe v. Wade. Work for and support legal abortion all over the world and full reproductive rights for everyone.
|
|
Jet Jaguar
Joined: 11 Feb 2014
Posts: 1111
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/13/17 4:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Totally irrelevant comparison. Back when the NBA was not as popular, the sport in general had not taken hold. After the Bird/Magic rivalry and a bit later the Jordan phenomenon the sport took off. Now it's one of the most popular sports in the world. And yet the WNBA is still niche.
_________________
Oderint dum metuant - Let them hate, so long as they fear
|
|
Jet Jaguar
Joined: 11 Feb 2014
Posts: 1111
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/13/17 4:59 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Silky Johnson wrote: |
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
... On the other hand, the vast majority of men's basketball fans don't watch women's basketball mainly for the same reason they don't watch para-Olympic basketball: they simply don't like, are bored by, and have no interest in watching the product. It's not bias against women or paraplegics as people. |
The trouble that I have with this passage is: how do you unravel the systemic and institutionalized sexism that we have all been indoctrinated with, both consciously and subconsciously for decades, nigh unto centuries, from whatever we believe to simply be a reasonably-formed opinion, regarding sports/entertainment? Like, maybe it sounds reasonable to say, "I'm not sexist/I'm not biased against women's basketball! I just don't think that it's entertaining."But how do you take a statement like that at face value, in a manner which dilutes or removes all of the context that led up to that opinion being formed? |
No matter how it's formed, that's how they feel. You can't make people like it. To me it's not just athleticism that's an issue, but style of play. NBA, in general, has a more exciting style of play. I think a lot of girls are taught "this is how you do this", "this is how you do that", which is great fundamentally, but they don't get the creativity aspect of the game like the guys do who play a lot of pickup and one-on-one when they are growing up.
_________________
Oderint dum metuant - Let them hate, so long as they fear
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/13/17 7:08 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I see quite a bit of "creativity" in the women's game. Just as much as in the men's. Heck, I would argue there is perhaps more since you can't rely on iso basketball as much as they do in the men's.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8227
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/13/17 10:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I alluded to this earlier, but let me emphasize the point more. There literally was no TV when the NBA began in 1946. I began watching NBA games in the early 50's, but that's only because our upstairs tenant had a TV and one of the non-network TV stations in NYC used to broadcast the Knicks games.
But most of the country probably had little TV access to NBA games for the first 10 or 15 years of the NBA's existence. Even in 1967, I bet the number of TV's in American homes was a small fraction of the number of TV's in homes today, to say nothing of the number of TV's + computer streams + smart phone streams today.
Thus, even if the NBA and WNBA arena attendance figures are relatively even for their first 21 years, the WNBA is way, way, way behind when you adjust and normalize for the huge electronic exposure advantage the WNBA has had for its first 21 years.
Silky, I believe there is only a very tenuous connection between what you describe as centuries of sexism and attendance at WNBA games.
First, I'd not go back just centuries, but millions of years to the beginning of the various hominid species. Universally, there have always been role differences between hominid males and females. I don't call this "sexism", but anyone is free to use terms however they want.
Males naturally and universally evolved to be the hunters, the warriors and the explorers. To fulfill these necessary survival of the species roles, they naturally evolved -- versus females -- superior speed, strength, jumping ability, running ability, reflexes, musculature, stamina, and killer instinct.
Athletic games are contests of speed, strength, reflexes, running, jumping and stamina -- games that evolved as sport, and as training venues, for the serious stuff of hunting, warring and exploring. The men who were the best at these "athletic" skills became the "athletes" that the "athletic fans" most wanted to see.
Athletic fans from the beginning and still today mostly want to see the most athletic athletes, not mediocre or inferior athletes, in contests that are athletic in nature. As a matter of evolutionary biology, that doesn't include many women. So most fans of athletics have no interest in watching unathletic people in such games.
You can call that historic or cultural "sexism". I don't. Sexism is a legal, cultural or social block that prevents women from having equal access to something that males have. Women do have equal access to sports opportunities, as the very existence of the WNBA proves.
But none of this means that athletic fans -- whether those fans be men or women -- will want to watch the the biologically inferior athletic skills of teams of women when they can fill their limited available spare time by watching those higher-skilled athletes known as men.
This is no different from music fans wanting more to see a concert by a great singer rather than a concert by a mediocre singer. It's no different from a ballet fan from wanting more to see a performance by a prima ballerina than by a klutz. It's no different from an theater fan wanting more to see a performance of Hamlet by Lawrence Olivier than by me. (This actually happened in 1962.)
None of these fan preferences, in my opinion, is any sort of culturally opprobrious "ism".
Let me try one more hypothetical example. Suppose a basketball league was formed for players less than six feet tall. This league might have some terrific athletes in it, but I bet it would be poorly attended and have nowhere near the success of the NBA. I wouldn't call this an example of a new cultural evil called "heightism". Would anyone?
Oh, heck, one more: Imagine a basketball league composed solely of players over 50 years of age. Virtually no one would pay to watch this league, including rabid basketball fans themselves over 50 years old. That apathy would not be "ageism". It's simply a disinclination to spend limited leisure time watching an "athletic" contest that contains inferior "athletes".
Sorry if I'm the bearer of shocking new news: WNBA players are substantially inferior athletes to NBA players. And their games are often considered to be boring and called "unwatchable", even on the most ardent WBB internet sites in the world. Sexism? Not in my dictionary.
I'm more inclined to acknowledge what is inaccurately called "homophobia" than sexism or racism regarding WNBA attendance. But I'm ranted out at the moment. |
|
Luuuc
#NATC
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21929
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/13/17 11:06 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Let's completely ignore that basketball is a sport of skill, smarts and teamwork in addition to athleticism.
Average athleticism hasn't stopped Steph Curry from being one of the most successful, most popular, and most paid players in the world. James Ennis is twice the athlete Curry is, but I bet he doesn't sell more tickets, jerseys & shoes.
_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
|
|
josephkramer44
Joined: 23 Aug 2016
Posts: 136
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/13/17 11:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| You certainly touch on a lot of truths. I also feel the WNBA is poorly run as a business too. Some very uncharismatic spokesmen and poor marketing with other built inefficiencies. Niche products can be successful, but only if they are lean and properly marketed.
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8227
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/13/17 11:56 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Luuuc wrote: |
Let's completely ignore that basketball is a sport of skill, smarts and teamwork in addition to athleticism.
Average athleticism hasn't stopped Steph Curry from being one of the most successful, most popular, and most paid players in the world. James Ennis is twice the athlete Curry is, but I bet he doesn't sell more tickets, jerseys & shoes. |
I'm not sure what your point is, Luuc, if you're responding to me, but my point solely relates to the specific thread topic: the number of fans of the WNBA vs. the NBA. My last treatise was a simple attempt to explain the vast overall preference for the men's version, and why that preference is not primarily due to "sexism", as I understand that as a legal and cultural term.
In my posts prior to that, directed at Bob Lamm's comments, I argued forcefully that there many male fans of women's sports and woman athletes. I'd put the number of such fans in the tens of millions just in the USA. I listed many of the women's individual and team sports that attract male sports fans.
However, if we're talking about the much narrower issue of why a lot more male basketball fans -- and probably female basketball fans, too -- would rather tune in an NBA game instead of a WNBA game, it's because the level of athleticism is so different that they are almost different sports. The men's version is and always will be much more popular for that reason.
Myself, I tuned out the NBA about 17 years ago for a variety of reasons, after 48 years of watching it, because I preferred to watch women's basketball, especially the teamwork demonstrated by UConn, notwithstanding the obvious lesser athleticism of the female game. However, I don't consider myself a "misanthrope" for doing so, nor do I kid myself that my personal preference for WBB over MBB is anything but a small minority preference. And I actually like the WNBA the least of all the WBB levels. |
|
Aladyyn
Joined: 23 Jul 2017
Posts: 1560
Location: Czech Republic
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/14/17 3:55 am ::: |
Reply |
|
WNBA season takes place mostly in the NBA off-season. "People would rather watch the more athletic NBA" always sounds silly to me, the leagues are not competing! You literally can't "tune into an NBA game instead" even right now, during the playoffs.
Instead it should be "most basketball fans would rather NOT watch basketball than watch the WNBA" which is probably even sillier but true. Makes you wonder how much most people actually like basketball.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11149
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/14/17 9:49 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Luuuc wrote: |
Let's completely ignore that basketball is a sport of skill, smarts and teamwork in addition to athleticism.
Average athleticism hasn't stopped Steph Curry from being one of the most successful, most popular, and most paid players in the world. James Ennis is twice the athlete Curry is, but I bet he doesn't sell more tickets, jerseys & shoes. |
Stephen Curry is far from an average athlete. His hand speed is off the charts, and his coordination is in the 99th percentile. He played in a professional golf tournament and didn't embarrass himself against players who do nothing but play golf.
And I would also argue that shooting is an athletic trait -- no matter how hard some people work on it, they cannot approach the "pure" shooters who have the genetic gift of being able to control objects in flight.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11149
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/14/17 9:53 am ::: |
Reply |
|
And to piggyback on Glenn's comments about hominids, etc. ...
Almost every human culture with disposable income has had organized sports at one level or another -- and I don't know of a single one that focused on women's sports rather than men's. (If there's a counterexample, I would love to hear about it.)
So if all these cultures, from all over the world, with varied economic and social models, had the same athletic focus, it would seem to me it's hard to argue that what's happening to the WNBA is a cultural bias -- it seems more like a homo sapiens bias.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/14/17 11:17 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
And to piggyback on Glenn's comments about hominids, etc. ...
Almost every human culture with disposable income has had organized sports at one level or another -- and I don't know of a single one that focused on women's sports rather than men's. (If there's a counterexample, I would love to hear about it.)
So if all these cultures, from all over the world, with varied economic and social models, had the same athletic focus, it would seem to me it's hard to argue that what's happening to the WNBA is a cultural bias -- it seems more like a homo sapiens bias. |
When was the last historical society that wasn't sexist toward women? Or didn't have clearly defined gender roles that precluded women from being an "athlete"? Sport has been built around male participation and defined by male traits since the birth of the concept (basically since the dawn of civilization). That is one hell of a barrier to overcome, and should highlight exactly why it is stupid to use male sports as a model of whether or not the league is successful, and why the very fact of its existence in a sustainable fashion should be considered an amazing success in and of itself.
It's also why I hate the term "niche sport". It is only "niche" if youbhave the expectations of male sports. The league is the most popular and sustainable team based women's professional sports league of all time. It is helping to redefine the role of women in sports. That's not "niche".
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
Silky Johnson
Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 3318
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/14/17 11:18 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| ... So if all these cultures, from all over the world, with varied economic and social models, had the same athletic focus, it would seem to me it's hard to argue that what's happening to the WNBA is a cultural bias -- it seems more like a homo sapiens bias. |
... And I would make the argument that it's a "homo sapiens bias" that is informed by a cultural bias. Like, how do you get to the point as a society (or even across multiple societies) where you decide that the aspects of a sport which emphasize being bigger, faster and stronger are more entertaining than the parts which emphasize technique? What has to go into the development of your perception of the differences between men and women, and the value that you place on those differences, for you to come to the conclusion that bigger, faster and stronger is just more fun? If you're arguing that we're genetically disposed to that, I'm going to beg to differ.
_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
|
|
josephkramer44
Joined: 23 Aug 2016
Posts: 136
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/14/17 11:54 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
And to piggyback on Glenn's comments about hominids, etc. ...
Almost every human culture with disposable income has had organized sports at one level or another -- and I don't know of a single one that focused on women's sports rather than men's. (If there's a counterexample, I would love to hear about it.)
So if all these cultures, from all over the world, with varied economic and social models, had the same athletic focus, it would seem to me it's hard to argue that what's happening to the WNBA is a cultural bias -- it seems more like a homo sapiens bias. |
When was the last historical society that wasn't sexist toward women? Or didn't have clearly defined gender roles that precluded women from being an "athlete"? Sport has been built around male participation and defined by male traits since the birth of the concept (basically since the dawn of civilization). That is one hell of a barrier to overcome, and should highlight exactly why it is stupid to use male sports as a model of whether or not the league is successful, and why the very fact of its existence in a sustainable fashion should be considered an amazing success in and of itself.
It's also why I hate the term "niche sport". It is only "niche" if youbhave the expectations of male sports. The league is the most popular and sustainable team based women's professional sports league of all time. It is helping to redefine the role of women in sports. That's not "niche". |
It is only sustained by the goodwill of the NBA. So far it has proven itself to be completely unprofitable as a whole. How many other professional sports leagues have gone 21 seasons and are still reliant upon an "Angel Investor" willing to sustain losses? It is still a league crying out for relevance and respect from the US public. I'm sorry but in regards to a sporting product it most certainly is niche. Some people prefer to look at it as a cause, which is fine but certainly does the league no favors in the long run.
In regards to the US being a sexist society against women you will be hard pressed to find a place where women have more opportunities than here. Come hang out with me in the Sahelian belt of Afrique or the PRC and see how badly women fare there. I'm not saying the US is a perfect place (our nation is a constant work in progress) but talk about people taking things for granted and not appreciating how good things are here.
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/15/17 12:18 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| josephkramer44 wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
And to piggyback on Glenn's comments about hominids, etc. ...
Almost every human culture with disposable income has had organized sports at one level or another -- and I don't know of a single one that focused on women's sports rather than men's. (If there's a counterexample, I would love to hear about it.)
So if all these cultures, from all over the world, with varied economic and social models, had the same athletic focus, it would seem to me it's hard to argue that what's happening to the WNBA is a cultural bias -- it seems more like a homo sapiens bias. |
When was the last historical society that wasn't sexist toward women? Or didn't have clearly defined gender roles that precluded women from being an "athlete"? Sport has been built around male participation and defined by male traits since the birth of the concept (basically since the dawn of civilization). That is one hell of a barrier to overcome, and should highlight exactly why it is stupid to use male sports as a model of whether or not the league is successful, and why the very fact of its existence in a sustainable fashion should be considered an amazing success in and of itself.
It's also why I hate the term "niche sport". It is only "niche" if youbhave the expectations of male sports. The league is the most popular and sustainable team based women's professional sports league of all time. It is helping to redefine the role of women in sports. That's not "niche". |
It is only sustained by the goodwill of the NBA. So far it has proven itself to be completely unprofitable as a whole. How many other professional sports leagues have gone 21 seasons and are still reliant upon an "Angel Investor" willing to sustain losses? It is still a league crying out for relevance and respect from the US public. I'm sorry but in regards to a sporting product it most certainly is niche. Some people prefer to look at it as a cause, which is fine but certainly does the league no favors in the long run.
In regards to the US being a sexist society against women you will be hard pressed to find a place where women have more opportunities than here. Come hang out with me in the Sahelian belt of Afrique or the PRC and see how badly women fare there. I'm not saying the US is a perfect place (our nation is a constant work in progress) but talk about people taking things for granted and not appreciating how good things are here. |
You have just committed what is known as the "Fallacy of Relative Privation". Just because something could be worse doesn't have bearing on an argument. The simple truth of the matter is that we still have a ways to go here in America, even if it isn't as bad as in other places around the world.
That it is worse elsewhere has nothing to do with the way we have culturally ingrained gender roles. The years upon years of this ideology (and as I noted before, some of these roles go back to the dawn of civilization and have only recently changed) have shaped our understanding of subjective qualities like what is "entertaining". That simply means we need to give our culture time to shift its perceptions and alter its "truths".
Whether or not another businesses has invested in the WNBA or not is irrelevant to its sustainability, unless there is signs that the business is looking to devest. And the NBA is not doing that. They are looking at it as a long term investment and since most teams are making either a small profit or are just about breaking even, it is not a hard investment to maintain. If 50 years down the road they can grow the WNBA to be another major sport it would have been more than worth the investment.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
tfan
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 9627
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/15/17 7:38 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| The WNBA could thrive with just female fans. I know they are given a pass with "women don't watch sports", but maybe that is something to change culturally if it's important to have successful women's sports leagues.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11149
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/15/17 7:48 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
| The WNBA could thrive with just female fans. I know they are given a pass with "women don't watch sports", but maybe that is something to change culturally if it's important to have successful women's sports leagues. |
As I've mentioned, very few girls' high school basketball players are sports fans, in the sense they watch games on TV. And of the 30 girls signed up to play basketball at Miramonte this year, including seven or more with dreams of playing in college, one, at most, watched a second of the WNBA playoffs.
As Yogi Berra once said, if they don't want to come, you can't stop them.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
josephkramer44
Joined: 23 Aug 2016
Posts: 136
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/15/17 6:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| josephkramer44 wrote: |
| justintyme wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
And to piggyback on Glenn's comments about hominids, etc. ...
Almost every human culture with disposable income has had organized sports at one level or another -- and I don't know of a single one that focused on women's sports rather than men's. (If there's a counterexample, I would love to hear about it.)
So if all these cultures, from all over the world, with varied economic and social models, had the same athletic focus, it would seem to me it's hard to argue that what's happening to the WNBA is a cultural bias -- it seems more like a homo sapiens bias. |
When was the last historical society that wasn't sexist toward women? Or didn't have clearly defined gender roles that precluded women from being an "athlete"? Sport has been built around male participation and defined by male traits since the birth of the concept (basically since the dawn of civilization). That is one hell of a barrier to overcome, and should highlight exactly why it is stupid to use male sports as a model of whether or not the league is successful, and why the very fact of its existence in a sustainable fashion should be considered an amazing success in and of itself.
It's also why I hate the term "niche sport". It is only "niche" if youbhave the expectations of male sports. The league is the most popular and sustainable team based women's professional sports league of all time. It is helping to redefine the role of women in sports. That's not "niche". |
It is only sustained by the goodwill of the NBA. So far it has proven itself to be completely unprofitable as a whole. How many other professional sports leagues have gone 21 seasons and are still reliant upon an "Angel Investor" willing to sustain losses? It is still a league crying out for relevance and respect from the US public. I'm sorry but in regards to a sporting product it most certainly is niche. Some people prefer to look at it as a cause, which is fine but certainly does the league no favors in the long run.
In regards to the US being a sexist society against women you will be hard pressed to find a place where women have more opportunities than here. Come hang out with me in the Sahelian belt of Afrique or the PRC and see how badly women fare there. I'm not saying the US is a perfect place (our nation is a constant work in progress) but talk about people taking things for granted and not appreciating how good things are here. |
You have just committed what is known as the "Fallacy of Relative Privation". Just because something could be worse doesn't have bearing on an argument. The simple truth of the matter is that we still have a ways to go here in America, even if it isn't as bad as in other places around the world.
That it is worse elsewhere has nothing to do with the way we have culturally ingrained gender roles. The years upon years of this ideology (and as I noted before, some of these roles go back to the dawn of civilization and have only recently changed) have shaped our understanding of subjective qualities like what is "entertaining". That simply means we need to give our culture time to shift its perceptions and alter its "truths".
Whether or not another businesses has invested in the WNBA or not is irrelevant to its sustainability, unless there is signs that the business is looking to devest. And the NBA is not doing that. They are looking at it as a long term investment and since most teams are making either a small profit or are just about breaking even, it is not a hard investment to maintain. If 50 years down the road they can grow the WNBA to be another major sport it would have been more than worth the investment. |
So what is so terrible here in the US and what can we do to correct it? Apart from passing legislation. I hear all the complaints from numerous people about everything and the only solutions I hear are more laws and legislation. Heaven forbid the product is changed and marketing is improved. I have said this to numerous Americans and will say it again. "You almost certainly have no idea of what real oppression is." I have seen things done in parts of this world that would bring tears to even the most hardened person and they are done on an everyday basis in these places. Not just in the 3rd world either. I once watched half of a city come out to brutally beat and cripple its gay population with the blessings of the elected officials and police (who just stood by and laughed) while women and children cheered the perpetrators on. Thank god we don't have to worry about such things here in the US.
The financial shortcomings of the league are also insanely relevant. As an independent owner where is my incentive to start a team? Even the most noble causes get old. I strongly doubt that the teams are in general making a profit, even with a bloated TV deal whose numbers are not based in reality (the 2nd in charge of the NBA went with the WNBA head to negotiate the deal in private). Not that they are releasing data anytime soon. The real danger (and we have said this before in other topics on this board) is if ESPN2 goes dark the League will lose its platform and it will be hard pressed to find another. I don't see Fox Sports stepping in to pay money to cover the games.
It would be different if the league was making some steady progress but it isn't. Attendance is stagnant at best and tv ratings are down significantly from the last few years. And numerous people have divested from the WNBA. The Lakers cut the Sparks loose among others and Reinsdorf in Chicago actually refused Stern's requests to start a team back in the late 90's because he didn't think it would be profitable.
The reason the NBA stays invested is not because they are hoping for a profit but because the PR cost of shutting down the league would be too great. For example the NHL was asked to help fund a women's professional hockey league with paid players here in the US. The declined without hesitation in large part because they knew if they started to fund and support this league it would be very hard to divest.
The players and the coaches in the WNBA have absolutely nothing to be ashamed of. It is easy to tell that they are putting out 100 percent effort in an attempt not only to be victorious but to bring pleasure to their fans. The amount of interaction between the players and their fans should be mimicked by all professional sports leagues. I am one of those people that think the world is a lot more fun with a lot of different people liking a different variety of things. That's why I want to see all professional sports leagues prosper (except maybe Nascar which I just can't seem to get into (lol)). I also think it is important for athletically minded girls to have as many positive role models to look up as possible (although the WNBA has its issues just like any other league). But as of right now unless things change quickly the WNBA will continue to languish. If you disagree (which I obviously respect) please point out some positive developments that you think point to a brighter future for the league?
|
|
NYL_WNBA_FAN
Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 14097
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/15/17 7:00 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Some people don't like the WNBA because it's too slow for them and there's practically no dunking. We've seen plenty of examples of sexist comments (go back to the kitchen, etc.) on social media to indicate there's an extra layer of vitriol in some circles.
To me, it's very telling that the Libs get about 9,000 fans per game where on a given Tuesday or Thursday night at Baruch College I could go to watch a men's streetball summer league game and there could be 3,000 people there or more. I've gone a few times and the quality is ok but it's nothing like the caliber of any high level of pro basketball in terms of structure or effort.
For me it's whatever. I've given up trying to convince people to like it. I've given up trying to sell dudes on the qualities of something that they simply won't have interest in. I'm thankful that Adam Silver values the league, I'm thankful that it continues to exist and I hope it lasts for a long time. From a business standpoint I wonder if the WNBA has some ancillary benefits in terms of drumming up fan interest in the NBA and its merchandise among groups who might not otherwise be interested. If so, great. If not, again, whatever. I like it. I hope it lasts. I've given up on concerning myself with who else likes it or how popular it is.
And that's it.
_________________
The poster formerly known as LibWNBAFan.
|
|
Silky Johnson
Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 3318
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/15/17 7:26 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| NYL_WNBA_FAN wrote: |
| To me, it's very telling that the Libs get about 9,000 fans per game where on a given Tuesday or Thursday night at Baruch College I could go to watch a men's streetball summer league game and there could be 3,000 people there or more... |
In fairness, there's, like, ten million people in New York City... There's enough to go around. If we wanted to suppose that the percentage of people that are WNBA fans in NYC is more or less constant nationwide, well... that leads to the attendance in cities like Atlanta being, more or less, right where it mathematically should be? Seems like an argument for playing in smaller venues.
The real surprise is the attendance in markets like Minnesota: I guess we'll have to see how it holds up, after the dynasty's over.
_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
|
|
justintyme
Joined: 08 Jul 2012
Posts: 8407
Location: Northfield, MN
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/15/17 7:49 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| josephkramer44 wrote: |
| I have said this to numerous Americans and will say it again. "You almost certainly have no idea of what real oppression is." I have seen things done in parts of this world that would bring tears to even the most hardened person and they are done on an everyday basis in these places. Not just in the 3rd world either. I once watched half of a city come out to brutally beat and cripple its gay population with the blessings of the elected officials and police (who just stood by and laughed) while women and children cheered the perpetrators on. Thank god we don't have to worry about such things here in the US. |
Again, this is called relative privation. Just because there are worse problems elsewhere doesn't mean that people cannot be concerned about the problems that affect them.
It would be like telling me that I should be happy with my 1972 Chevy Nova because many people have no car at all.
Now this doesn't mean we need to "fix" certain things, more that we just need to be cognizant of its existence (which a lot of the time is actually what can fix it as it brings it out into our conscious minds instead of letting ourselves be unconsciously interpellated by our cultural status quo).
Specific to the case of the WNBA is us being aware that our definitions of atheltics and thus our subjective tastes as to what makes them "exciting" is millenia in the making. We need to understand that this is not going to change overnight, but rather over decades and decades. And the way to "fix" this? To be a presence in the world and normalize a new definition, and then as the new generations come and the old ones pass the barriers will drop. In other words, survive in any way possible.
| Quote: |
| The financial shortcomings of the league are also insanely relevant. As an independent owner where is my incentive to start a team? Even the most noble causes get old. I strongly doubt that the teams are in general making a profit, even with a bloated TV deal whose numbers are not based in reality (the 2nd in charge of the NBA went with the WNBA head to negotiate the deal in private). Not that they are releasing data anytime soon. The real danger (and we have said this before in other topics on this board) is if ESPN2 goes dark the League will lose its platform and it will be hard pressed to find another. I don't see Fox Sports stepping in to pay money to cover the games. |
There were teams turning a profit before the ESPN deal. But this ties into my earlier point: the league should leverage every opportunity they get. Increasing its presence through social media is smart. They should use the deep pockets and power of the NBA to bully networks into TV deals. They should continue to focus on getting media coverage beyond what the ratings/clicks/numbers say selling the idea that it is The Right Thing to Do. That profits are not everything and social change does not come easily and those with a platform have a responsibility to do everything they can to make it happen. That is why the NBA got invloved and why they continue to do so. It is an investment in humanity as much as a it is a business investment. And Adam Silver gets it (as do people like Magic Johnson and Glen Taylor).
Now none of this means that the league shouldn't continue to strive to make themselves as sound as possible, nor should they give up on putting out the best product possible. But again, survival is paramount. Survival is a win. Every year that passes the league becomes less of a joke amongst sports fans, and at some point that normalization is going to see it shift into the mainstream. And the more media outlets they can get on board the quicker it will happen. I have seen the effect of this here in Minnesota. The Lynx are often mentioned in the same breath as the other sports teams and the effect on the populace has been significant. I am much more likely to hear positive comments about the team than hear an old "WNBA, hur hur hur" joke.
_________________
↑↑↓↓←→←→BA
|
|
Bob Lamm
Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 5065
Location: New York City
Back to top |
| Posted: 09/15/17 8:12 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| justintyme wrote: |
| josephkramer44 wrote: |
| I have said this to numerous Americans and will say it again. "You almost certainly have no idea of what real oppression is." I have seen things done in parts of this world that would bring tears to even the most hardened person and they are done on an everyday basis in these places. Not just in the 3rd world either. I once watched half of a city come out to brutally beat and cripple its gay population with the blessings of the elected officials and police (who just stood by and laughed) while women and children cheered the perpetrators on. Thank god we don't have to worry about such things here in the US. |
Again, this is called relative privation. Just because there are worse problems elsewhere doesn't mean that people cannot be concerned about the problems that affect them.
It would be like telling me that I should be happy with my 1972 Chevy Nova because many people have no car at all. |
Thank you, justintyme, for continuing to explain about relative privation. (Though I'll bet you'll never persuade Joseph Kramer.) I live in Manhattan. Even in most allegedly LGBT-friendly neighborhoods of Manhattan, there are homophobic and transphobic hate crimes, including murders. Those
killed in these hate crimes no longer have the opportunity to ponder whether their deaths rise to Mr. Kramer's lofty standard of "real oppression." They're dead.
Any concept of relative oppression, relative pain, etc., is profoundly destructive. It inevitably trivializes the horrors person A or country A experiences because person B or country B may have it even worse.
_________________
Remember Roe v. Wade. Work for and support legal abortion all over the world and full reproductive rights for everyone.
|
|
|
|
