Author
|
Topic: New Male Ritual: Mobs harassing women at sports events
|
martin dufresne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11463
|
posted 02 December 2007 08:52 AM
NYT: At Jets Game, A Halftime Ritual of Harassment NYT, Nov. 20 - "At halftime of the Jets' home game against the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday, several hundred men lined one of Giants Stadium's two pedestrian ramps at Gate D. Three deep in some areas, they whistled and jumped up and down. Then they began an obscenity-laced chant, demanding that the few women in the gathering expose their breasts. When one woman appeared to be on the verge of obliging, the hooting and hollering intensified. But then she walked away, and plastic beer bottles and spit went flying. Boos swept through the crowd of unsatisfied men. (...)" I am well aware of the long-standing testosterone frenzy atmosphere at major spectator sports events, but a specific focus on harassing female co-spectators, spitting and throwing refuse at those who don't comply in exposing themselves, literally assaulting them collectively, is beyond mere male bonding around 'sports' and alcohol. It seems that the "Girls Gone Wild" ethos*** is gradually legitimating gang rape, be it at a symbolic level. Room for concern IMO. An op-ed comment from Michael Kimmel: Stop the anti-female chants at Jets games "I remember my first Jets game, in 1968. A grateful patient had given my father tickets for the game vs. the Cincinnati Bengals at Shea Stadium. The crowd was animated and boisterous, and I was thrilled to be part of that Super Bowl season. Today I wouldn't even consider taking my son to a Jets game. (...) ***For those of us who are in a position to circulate or promote ground-breaking education material about the so-called 'raunch' culture, I highly recommend Dines, Whisnant and Jensen's "Who Wants To Be a Porn Star?" very disturbing PowerPoint presentation, available for $5 on DVD from [email protected] [ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: martin dufresne ]
From: "Words Matter" (Mackinnon) | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560
|
posted 02 December 2007 09:00 AM
Also, I love how they can't stop men from harassing women because of "free speech" but they go after women who give in to the pressure from hundreds of men to expose themselves: quote: Denisse Rivera, a 23-year-old from the Bronx, was on a first date Sunday. When she arrived at the crowd at Gate D, several men pointed at her, signaling men at all levels to chant in her direction. After a brief moment of hesitation, she flashed them. Then she took a bow. “I don’t care,” Rivera said when told that video clips of previous incidents, taken on cellphones, ended up online. “I love my body and I like what I have, so let everybody share it.” Two security guards soon approached Rivera. The guards warned her about indecent exposure laws, she said, and let her go.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indiana Jones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14792
|
posted 05 December 2007 09:09 AM
I think a number of factors collided here.I've actually written cultural anthropology paper on the social dynamics of sports fans and the rituals involved in attending and watching a game. First, one of the attractions of going to a live sporting event is a sense of it being an interactive, rather than passive, experience. It's more rock concert than symphony or movie. At a symphony or movie, you are a spectator, expected to sit quietly and watch what is being presented to you. Attending a game or a rock concert, however, involves more spontanaiety as well as a sense that the attendee is a participant, rather than a mere observer. You are expected to cheer, to yell encouragement, insults, boos, etc. Some take it to the point of actually running onto the field, in extreme cases. Generally, there can be a sense among many that buying a ticket entitles you to be a jackass. There's also a sense of the stadium or arena as a specifially "male place" and one of the few remaining vestiges of that. For a lot of men, it's a chance to get away from their wife or girlfriend and engage in male bonding. There is definitely a sense that women in the stadium are not on their level as they are consided less knowledgeable about the game and not "real fans." Therefore, they do not have equal status as participants in the ritual and are reduced to side entertainment. Third, when you combine excessive alcohol and adrenaline to an already volatile situation, you tend to get bad behaviour. Interestingly, this sort of behaviour is far more common during more "agressive" sports such as football and more rare in slower games like baseball. Finally, I think cultural and sociologial shifts in perceptions of young women have created expectations taht this sort of behaviour is acceptable. The Girls Gone Wild mentality creates the idea in the minds of some that all women are like those in the videos and and even if they do not act that way, they "secretly" are really jsut the same and just need to be "brought out of their shells" either through alcohol or male encouragement.
From: Toronto / Brooklyn / Jerusalem | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
bigcitygal
Volunteer Moderator
Babbler # 8938
|
posted 05 December 2007 11:02 AM
Indiana Jones, welcome to babble, and I like your analysis. However, part of what you said, and this: quote: Originally posted by martin dufresne: Does this suggest that women should stay off men's private property if they don't want to be verbally or physically assaulted?
has got me a bit riled up, not necessarily at you and martin. Here goes.Since when are sports stadiums "men's private property"? When Skydome or whatever the fuck it's called now, and the Air Canada Centre were being built, I found myself saying the following, sounding distressingly like a right wing fuckwad, and not caring that I did: "Why the fuck are my tax dollars going to fund this privately-owned palace for mostly male sporting events when there is public housing to be built?" Okay, maybe just the first part sounds like a right-wing fuckwad. "Why the hell should I pay for something, through my taxes, that's going to make profit for a privately owned company?!? Never mind something that holds no interest for me as a form of entertainment!" I of course don't feel at all the same when talk turns to, let's say, the public education system, which shouldn't have to compete with entertainment for government money, yet it does. I have no children, and I will not ever have children, but I completely support my taxes going to the public education system. Don't get me started about roads and highways, though.
From: It's difficult to work in a group when you're omnipotent - Q | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Indiana Jones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14792
|
posted 05 December 2007 11:30 AM
Oh, BCG, I wish you hadn't gotten me started on sports stadiums. Public funding of stadiums is just about the biggest corporate welfare boondoggle that exists. The argument is that they create jobs and economic stimulus for the surrounding area, which is simply nonsense. First, the jobs they create are mostly minum wage part-time jobs. Baseball has more home games than any other sport and there are only 81 of them. So you've created jobs for people that only last for maybe 4 hours a night and for 81 days a year. The idea that it attracts people to the area where they will then spend money on taxis, bars, restaurants, etc. is also sheer nonsense. It doesn't stimulate spending, it only shifts it. One's leisure time is finite and if I go to a Jays game, that means I'm not going to a movie or a concert or somewhere else. I'm spending the same amount on entertainment, I'm just spending it in one place instead of another. The only instance in which is actually creates any degree of economic growth are in really blighted, abandoned areas that otherwise wouldn't attract any visitors at night. Apparently, Detroit may be the only city that will actually get any sort of return on their investment. Though, obviously, that money could have been better spent. For a city like Toronto with a vibrant downtown that is always crowded with people, subsidizing sports stadiums makes no sense whatoever.
From: Toronto / Brooklyn / Jerusalem | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312
|
posted 05 December 2007 02:07 PM
What is it with male sports and attacks on women - even by women involved in male sports? quote: The wives of the hockey players for the Ottawa Senators have formed a charitable group called "The Better Halves" and are soliciting donations that will go to a local pregnancy center. One-third of the money they raise will support the First Place Pregnancy Centre, which helps women in the area who are considering an abortion.The Sens Foundation, the team's registered charity arm is matching every dollar the wives raise during the campaign, which involves selling Christmas trees.
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Indiana Jones
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14792
|
posted 05 December 2007 02:47 PM
You're right, kropotkin.Baseball and CFL football are certainly able to attract ordinary people to their games, but the Leafs are completely out of reach for the ordinary middle class parent who wants to take their kid. I remember the last time I was at a Leafs game (several years ago). My friend's dad had platinum seats that belonged to his company and gave them to us. We felt very under-dressed in jeans and sweaters. Most people were in suits. They spent much of the game on their blackberries and they were selling sushi and martinis instead of beer and hot dogs. It struck me as rather surreal.
From: Toronto / Brooklyn / Jerusalem | Registered: Dec 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bacchus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4722
|
posted 05 December 2007 09:43 PM
quote: Since when are sports stadiums "men's private property"? When Skydome or whatever the fuck it's called now, and the Air Canada Centre were being built, I found myself saying the following, sounding distressingly like a right wing fuckwad, and not caring that I did:"Why the fuck are my tax dollars going to fund this privately-owned palace for mostly male sporting events when there is public housing to be built?" Okay, maybe just the first part sounds like a right-wing fuckwad.
Not wanting to disagree but isnt the skydome where the aboriginal event (not sure of the exact title) is held every year? As well as other charity, music, cultural events? And the ACC does concerts as well as hockey/basketball. When its sports male bastion it is (very frustrating to Mrs Bacchus who is a NFL expert and College Basketball statisician) but not ALWAYS. ETA here it is [ 05 December 2007: Message edited by: Bacchus ]
From: n/a | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|