Author
|
Topic: Aggression in Sports
|
DavisMavis
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7508
|
posted 11 February 2005 10:17 AM
As a pro-feminist man, I've long been quite disturbed by the trends of blatant violence, aggression, and chauvinism in male sports. Formally, my opinion on this has originated from my view that masculinity itself is the main problem when it comes to sexism and male dominance, and it manifests itself in sport. Masculinity needs to be confronted and eliminated, and feminine qualities like sensitivity, as well as masculine qualities like strength must not be assigned to a specific gender. These should be human qualities. In competetive male sports, opponents call each other 'sissies' and 'girls' in order to invalidate their masculinity, and somehow that is supposed to make them less formidable. Male sports seem to glorify in this uber-masculinity, and these same attitudes lead to gender discrimination and inequality. In watching the recent Super Bowl game, I couldn't help but notice how the aggressive and uber-masculine military display was beng linked with competitive sports, particularly contact sports. I guess my problem arises when I think about myself as an athlete. I've been a life-long soccer player, and have had my share of rough games. I don't think anyone can deny that violence and aggression in sports needs to be toned down for the sake of safety and also for eliminating masculinity. In a discussion with a female friend of mine (who is also an avid soccer player), she is of the opinion that aggression is simply part of sport. She recounts that in female sports, there are the same attitudes of aggressiveness, where if you don't go out and hurt "them", they are going to hurt you. One should do whatever it takes to win, whether one is female or male. My concerns lie in if one can distinguish between aggressive male attitudes in sport and aggressive female attitudes. Should violence and aggressiveness be universally condemned in sports? I believe that it is more of a male problem, but when I think about it, cannot females be just as aggressive and violent on the field of play as males? Cannot women want to "kill" their opponents as much as men do? What steps should be taken to teach young people the value of sport but lose the macho attitude? I believe professional sports is setting a dismal example for young people, but can you take violence and aggressiveness out of sport and still call it sport?
From: the occupied territory of nova scotia | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202
|
posted 11 February 2005 10:29 AM
I think (although I'm quite tentative here) that there does not have to be any automatic denouncement of violence in sport. Some sports are aggressive, and as long as it's controlled, I don't have much of a problem with that.I agree with you, DavisMavis, in taking issue with the discourse of some sport teams: calling other players "sissies" or "girly men" etc. I've also noticed a parallel discourse on some women's teams where they call the opposite team members "whores" or "sluts" and use other language about sexuality. Sometimes this also includes heterosexist language. From my own experiences, I was a (not very good) rower during my undergrad years, but our crew didn't have these problems. Some people said it was because rowing isn't a contact sport but I think it had as much to do with the style of coaching and the culture of the sport. When we had a change of coaches to a more "tough guy" type of coach, several members of the crew starting adopting his language, and I thought that was detrimental to the team. I quit, although that decision was mostly based around wanting to concentrate on my studies and also spend more time with my chum. Long story short, I think the aggression and patriarchal attitudes aren't necessarily linked. There is a problem with patriarchal culture in sport but I don't see this as being tied up with aggression or aggressive types of sport, just within the organizational culture of the team and/or league.
From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
DavisMavis
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7508
|
posted 11 February 2005 01:15 PM
quote: Originally posted by aRoused:
I don't want to be perceived as baiting you, but would you also argue that femininity needs to be confronted and eliminated?
Well, femininity never really caused anyone any problems, besides maybe being called a 'fag' or something. But I advocate dismantling gender classifications altogether, if that's what you mean. Good qualities, be they feminine or masculine, should be human qualities, there's no need to assign characteristics to being male or female. The emphasis on masculinity has to do with the harm it has caused gender relations, harm that I don't think femininity has ever caused. Masculinity MUST be eliminated, for I perceive it as harmful. Femininity I don't perceive as harmful, but that being said, I'm against assigning traits to genders.
From: the occupied territory of nova scotia | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
DavisMavis
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7508
|
posted 11 February 2005 01:19 PM
quote: Originally posted by dokidoki: I think (although I'm quite tentative here) that there does not have to be any automatic denouncement of violence in sport. Some sports are aggressive, and as long as it's controlled, I don't have much of a problem with that.I agree with you, DavisMavis, in taking issue with the discourse of some sport teams: calling other players "sissies" or "girly men" etc. I've also noticed a parallel discourse on some women's teams where they call the opposite team members "whores" or "sluts" and use other language about sexuality. Sometimes this also includes heterosexist language. From my own experiences, I was a (not very good) rower during my undergrad years, but our crew didn't have these problems. Some people said it was because rowing isn't a contact sport but I think it had as much to do with the style of coaching and the culture of the sport. When we had a change of coaches to a more "tough guy" type of coach, several members of the crew starting adopting his language, and I thought that was detrimental to the team. I quit, although that decision was mostly based around wanting to concentrate on my studies and also spend more time with my chum. Long story short, I think the aggression and patriarchal attitudes aren't necessarily linked. There is a problem with patriarchal culture in sport but I don't see this as being tied up with aggression or aggressive types of sport, just within the organizational culture of the team and/or league.
Yes, you're right doki, it seems that what I'm really trying to condemn is the culture built up around the sport, be it football, hockey, or whatever. I think that playing hard and being aggressive are disconnected from patriarchy, it's just when that aggressiveness is equated with being manly and superior that I get uncomfortable. I played volleyball for several years, and the attitudes were very much the same as in soccer, even though volleyball isn't a "contact" sport. So you're analysis holds in that the real problem is the culture and coaching styles employed that might promote sexist and harmful attitudes.
From: the occupied territory of nova scotia | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341
|
posted 11 February 2005 01:53 PM
I'm calling FOUL ! ! quote: Masculinity needs to be confronted and eliminated,
Davis, I think you have a problem. First, you get a well desrved chewing out from your female schoolmates for presuming to preach to them on "how to be good feminists", you sign on to this board to whine about that, find little sympathy, and now come into the feminist forum demanding that masculinity must be eliminated. Well, like it or not, Davis, I'm keeping mine. This may come as a shock to you, but in the several decades that it has possesed me, I've not committed any homicides, beaten any women or children, nor tormented any animals. It has, on a few occassions, assisted me in defending myself, and in one, to intervene on behalf of a womon who being beaten by a drunken lout on the street. Please, keep your self-loathing to yourself, or find a good shrink to share it with.
From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
DavisMavis
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7508
|
posted 11 February 2005 05:06 PM
quote: Originally posted by James: I'm calling FOUL ! ! Davis, I think you have a problem. First, you get a well desrved chewing out from your female schoolmates for presuming to preach to them on "how to be good feminists", you sign on to this board to whine about that, find little sympathy, and now come into the feminist forum demanding that masculinity must be eliminated. Well, like it or not, Davis, I'm keeping mine. This may come as a shock to you, but in the several decades that it has possesed me, I've not committed any homicides, beaten any women or children, nor tormented any animals. It has, on a few occassions, assisted me in defending myself, and in one, to intervene on behalf of a womon who being beaten by a drunken lout on the street. Please, keep your self-loathing to yourself, or find a good shrink to share it with.
First, I find it strange that it was your "masculinity" that helped you to defend yourself. Are you sure that this was not your strength, or sense of obligation to help others, not some gender specific traits that females do not possess? If females are strong and have a sense of obligation, why do those things have to be masculine? I'm not saying that all those you wish to label "masculine" are inherently criminal or violent, but that it is the attitudes and traits associated with masculinity that have lead to things like violent crimes and sexual abuse. You are implying a line of thought that is repeatedly used by so-called "men's rights" groups and other misogynist organizations that wish to characterize feminists as "just a bunch of man-haters". I feel sorry that you have to cling so vehemently to a set of masculine traits and values when it seems like so many others are exchanging them for human ones. Second, I did not receive a chewing out by any of my classmates, it was one student from a different institution who misinterpreted what I wrote. In case you didn't notice, most of the feedback on that thread was positive, with constructive criticism on how I might modify my language so as to not come across the wrong way. I thought I received a great deal of sympathy and encouragement from the board, with the exception of yourself. Posting here has nothing to do with my self-loathing. I wish to discuss feminist issues from a pro-feminist perspective, and that's exactly what I'm doing. I don't think attempting to get a better understanding of where people stand on feminism requires a shrink. [ 11 February 2005: Message edited by: DavisMavis ] [ 11 February 2005: Message edited by: DavisMavis ]
From: the occupied territory of nova scotia | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
DavisMavis
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7508
|
posted 11 February 2005 05:53 PM
I know this is like the fourth post of mine in a row, but I guess I need to clarify some things about my stance on masculinity. There has been a long campaign to "reform" masculinity by feminist groups and others (the "real men don't rape" campaigns), but in my experience, it hasn't really worked. Boys still call each other 'fag' and 'girl' as insults, as if the target of the insult is unable to live up to what it means to be a man, to be masculine. Men still rape women. I don't think that pointing out patterns of male dominance that emerge out of the socialization of masculinity is saying that every man is a violent aggressor or rapist. I'm glad that I've had the privilege of growing up in an environment that taught me that I did not have to strive to "be a man", whether that's in reference to sex, where pleasure means the taking of a woman, or on the playing field, where playing tough and hard means becoming increasingly violent. But I've still had to deal with what it is to "be a real man" in locker room conversations and on the street. It is the attempt to assign behavioral traits to biological differences, and it just doesn't jive with me. If we want to reform masculinity, that means we are attempting to separate the genders, find things that men are and women aren't. Why not skip all these steps and just get rid of what is causing the problems in the first place? I say that so long as there is masculinity, there are going to be the problems stemming from it. I'm not talking about the physical state of being male, or the physical state of being female, for that matter. I'm talking about men's behavior, which is indistinguishable from masculinity.So, the logical question is what can we do about it? Well, for one, we can stop glorifying violence in sports. The military display at the Super Bowl was put on partially to show that such violence is heroic. Let's make peace and non-violence heroic, and stop senselessly beating the crap out of each other when we play sports. Men are not all rapists, but we need to own up for our behavior as a gender. Claiming that "well, I've never raped someone" or "I've used my masculinity for the forces of good!" is inadequate. In order to solve the problems of sexual harrassment and assault, male dominance, and patriarchy, we must strive for collective stratagies and solutions. I've always felt uneasy about masculinity, even before I started learning about feminism. How many men out there have ever wondered if they didn't have what it takes to be a "real man"? I bet a lot of you have, myself included. Masculinity is fake. It is an unattainable goal. It's scary to let go of these gender traits, I know. It's hard to step outside the box and proclaim oneself as not "masculine" or "feminine". But it is vital to dismantling the systems of injustice and inequality.
From: the occupied territory of nova scotia | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341
|
posted 11 February 2005 06:32 PM
quote: Originally posted by DavisMavis:
You are implying a line of thought that is repeatedly used by so-called "men's rights" groups and other misogynist organizations that wish to characterize feminists as "just a bunch of man-haters". I feel sorry that you have to cling so vehemently to a set of masculine traits and values when it seems like so many others are exchanging them for human ones.
You self identify as "a pro-feminist man". I would question your appropriation of the noun, let alone the adjective. quote: Man: Especially: An adult male person; a grown-up male person, as distinguished from a woman or a child.
quote: Adult: Having arrived at maturity, or to full size and strength; matured; as, an adult person or plant; an adult ape; an adult age.
quote: Maturity: The state or quality of being mature; ripeness; full development; as, the maturity of corn or of grass; maturity of judgment; the maturity of a plan.
The definition is not met by your profile, by your postings here nor elsewhere on the web. As for "pro-feminist" ... that quality is demonstrated through actions, rather than sophomoric self-obsessed web natterings. Perhaps you may lecture me about feminism, and about my own equivalence to "men's rights" groups and other misogynists" (as you so chatitably put it) after you - have risked your own career to hire and promote women in the very male-centered '70s era heavy construction industry, have been the home based primary child care-giver to enable your spouse to better pursue her career, to the detriment of your own second career, have, in the course of the above, raised two adult offspring, being a demonstrably pro-feminist son, and a daughter who is confident (because her father insisted was so from the time she could talk) that she has as many choices, abilities, perogatives and opportunities in life as does any man. I could go on, but in writing this, something has occurred to me. Had I eliminated (as you advocate) a "set of decidedly masculine traits" in the manner of a certain notorios Welsh football fan, those two wonderful young folk who I describe above wouldn't exist, would they ? [ 11 February 2005: Message edited by: James ]
From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
DavisMavis
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7508
|
posted 11 February 2005 07:32 PM
quote: Originally posted by James: The definition is not met by your profile, by your postings here nor elsewhere on the web. As for "pro-feminist" ... that quality is demonstrated through actions, rather than sophomoric self-obsessed web natterings. Perhaps you may lecture me about feminism, and about my own equivalence to "men's rights" groups and other misogynists" (as you so chatitably put it) after you - have risked your own career to hire and promote women in the very male-centered '70s era heavy construction industry, have been the home based primary child care-giver to enable your spouse to better pursue her career, to the detriment of your own second career, have, in the course of the above, raised two adult offspring, being a demonstrably pro-feminist son, and a daughter who is confident (because her father insisted was so from the time she could talk) that she has as many choices, abilities, perogatives and opportunities in life as does any man. I could go on, but in writing this, something has occurred to me. Had I eliminated (as you advocate) a "set of decidedly masculine traits" in the manner of a certain notorios Welsh football fan, those two wonderful young folk who I describe above wouldn't exist, would they ? [ 11 February 2005: Message edited by: James ]
I guess I'm not man enough to be pro-feminist.
From: the occupied territory of nova scotia | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|