Sports and the patriarchy

[vivacian]

I’ve got a bit of an idea that I can’t quite articulate. I’m hoping that someone can help me or point me in the direction of where this has been thought about before.

My idea is that sports have generally evolved if they favour typically male traits. So we can hold a belief that men are just better at sports than women because men are just generally stronger and faster. However, that is based in a context where strength and sprinting, say, are what is valued. But we can’t think outside of this box to imagine a history and world context where other traits are valued.

Perhaps if the world were more equitable then flexibility and balance (or pregnancy and breastfeeding) would be as equally prized.

Whilst I can ind of see where you are going with this it doesn't really work. We can't and definitely shouldn't make something breastfeeding or pregnancy competitive.

The traits that are 'seen' as female and positive are generally things that can't be competitive (cooperation etc).

Even the competitions that are not based on strength are often based on single mindedness another trait that is probably seen less in xx people than xy people.

Going way back in history xy plus testosterone was the hunter, providing food for the family/clan. Many sports seemed to have evolved to fulfill that roll for the xy people once hunting for food was no longer essential.

On the other hand a woman has just been the first xx to win a darts championship so who knows where that will lead.

I have some vague ideas about this too. First women are good at sports - why do they need to be compared to men at all even when doing the same thing.

Second there are lots of things that womens bodies are better suited to which arent about pregnancy and birth. It sounds daft but fiddly stuff for a start. So you get the whole crafts area. I know women that competitively quilt for instance. But its a bit mocked propbably because it a woman thing and even worse older women.

If I've understood you OP I think what you're saying is sports are set by a male standard, by male capabilities and therefore women are not able to compete on a level playing field. Yep. Women have had to create their own space in sport, from Kathrine Switzerland to Fallon Sherlock, women have had to fight tooth and bloody nail to compete or at the very least elbow their way in since they were not invited.

Then we have Jasmine Paris who not only won an ultra marathon but breastfed throughout. So inspirational.

Personally I think women are better at competitive sport in general as our egos are less likely to be damaged by a loss and we are spurred on to work and train as hard as we can do to prove others wrong.

It's another area of systematic and everyday misogyny. Even with some things shifting it's not really moving that far that fast.

Bull-leaping was one of the earliest sports, and there is some evidence that some bull-leapers were women. Flexibility and balance would certainly be necessary traits.

I'm agree that there is something to what you suggest - men were interested in wrestling, running, and football (or tsu-chu as it was known in ancient China), so those sports became popular. However, horse racing - where women can compete on a reasonably equal level - has also been popular since ancient times, and gymnastics, and archery ...

I think it's more likely that men had more time to sit around on their arses, and men like watching male sports - that's why those sports developed.

Personally I think women are better at competitive sport in general

How are you measuring this?

But its a bit mocked propbably because it a woman thing and even worse older women.

Although traditional country skills like quilting, or making jams etc, seem to be coming back into style, and they really can be terribly competitive.

OP, sports were originally something of a male thing. Games perhaps less so. But I would not say that means they are somehow patriarchal or bad, nor is it wrong that women like to do sports and want to compete in them.

The expression of maleness or femaleness in the physical world is not in itself negative or something to be suppressed. I think that idea is part of what got us into the current mess in the first place.

Sport traditionally functioned to keep men fit for war if needed (strong, fit, skills like aiming etc) and also as an outlet for aggression.

Women have been kept out of the public sphere and public competition would have damaged the reputation of women for much of history.

Google sociology of sport

*How are you measuring this?
*
Based on how men and women lose, at individual sports and in team sports, it's my view.

I think women have a better attitude.

I agree with this. In fact I wrote a philosophy essay at university about this which was received with bewilderment because of course it’s obvious that picking up heavy bits of metal or jumping over a very high bar by boinging off a long pole are valued human endeavours whereas the things female bodies are designed to do better (dexterity, nimbleness, flexibility) are irrelevant or merely circus acts. And that’s before you mention the power to create life.

I laugh at the idea of superior male bodies. It’s such blatant womb envy. Can’t create life so have to go and make up games involving throwing balls at each other then give each other prizes about ball throwing.

Disagree with a pp that single mindedness is not a useful female trait. How else do women get through pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding without some abnegation of the self. It seems to me you’d only do that - go through that much pain and awfulness and risk - if you were focussed on a particular outcome and able and willing to put aside other priorities for the duration.

Oh yeah, women definitely have a better attitude - that's true of almost everything.

Top sportswomen sometimes have attitudes as 'bad' as men, though. I think hating to lose is part of what makes someone a winner Serena Williams, for example, or Nichole Cooke.
Me? I generally don't care much if I loose to someone else, as long as I think I did well by my standards - probably why I don't win much :)

"if I loose to someone else"

I can only apologise.

Well, sports are generally governed by a requirement for speed, power, and athleticism, which male physiques are generally better suited to.

As posters above have commented, women seem to have better flexibility etc which is why gymnastics seems to favour them. I think a lot of it is also to do with the target market. For instance, I hear quite a lot of people complain about the lack of interest on the women's world cup (football), but how many women really follow the premier league compared to men.

Thank you all! Your comments have helped.

I am not particularly interested in watching or following sport. I wonder how much this is socially conditioned, but then, while I am very interested in things like cooking and sewing, I am uninterested in any kind of competition in them. So maybe I simply don't value competition, as opposed to the activity itself.

Certainly co-operativeness is seen as a more feminine trait than competitiveness. But, again, how much of that is socially conditioned? There are plenty of highly competitive women. Perhaps, had my experiences of organised sport in my childhood and youth been less humiliating, I would feel differently.

Dh, who loves playing, watching and following sports, says that he really enjoys watching the women's competitions, particularly in football and tennis, as the games are far more strategic and nuanced.

Just a footnote to this in Khione's comment earlier: "Going way back in history xy plus testosterone was the hunter, providing food for the family/clan."

Not really. Data on current-day hunter-gatherers shows women provide about 70% of the calories. That's because men tend to specialize on bigger animals, for instance spearfishing for lunkers while standing on the river bank, while women use nets or fish toxins to catch barrels-full of smaller fish.

Evolutionarily, men aren't providers any more than women. But since their reproductive contribution is tiny, they're expendable according to Mother Nature. So they do the dangerous defense jobs, whether it's wild animals or hostile tribes. Extra strength and speed means a specific man is likelier to survive those encounters and last longer (and so father more kids). That's where the selective pressure comes from, not providing food.

As for women's sports, as other commenters have said: if women do it, who cares, if men do it, it's a big deal (to men, of course, who seem to be the only ones who count (to men)). As people slowly extract their heads from their asses, you see a gradual increase in interest in women's sports.

if men do it, it's a big deal (to men, of course, who seem to be the only ones who count (to men)). As people slowly extract their heads from their asses, you see a gradual increase in interest in women's sports.

People generally seem more invested in sports undertaken by their own gender. I don't know if it's because they can better relate or whether it's group psychology.

But if more women watched and supported female sports, then they would undoubtedly be more popular.

To tend to agree that that to some extent there is more of an interest from women in women's sport, and vice versa.

And women do seem to be less interested overall I suppose that would be frustrating to a women very invested in sport, or wanting to make a career of it, but I can't say that motivates me to want to go spend my money on seasons tickets to a woman's team of some kind.

I think it’s a myth that women are not competitive. It’s just that people are only competitive around things they are interested in. I am hopeless at sport and therefore don’t try to beat anyone or even myself but I secretly rate my swimming. And I am a pretty good cook - my friends are too and there is definitely a friendly competitiveness about who does the best roast potatoes (me). Meanwhile my uber competitive (male) colleague is obsessed with his triathlon times but he’s not trying to compete with me on who makes the best cakes for the office because he knows he doesn’t have a chance. He’s not invested in it therefore he’s not competitive. It’s not a core male trait is my point. People are competitive around things they value or things that show their own skills.

Look at WI baking competitions and the growth in tv competitions for baking and sewing. Those people really want to win.

Breastfeeding teaches grit and patience or reveals the extent of your grit and patience.

Says the woman feeding an 18 mo old through teething and a sleep regression.

Fml.

It’s just that people are only competitive around things they are interested in.

Not necessarily. I love my various thread and yarn based activities, but do not, for example, watch Sewing Bee. In fact, I have worked my way through several needle-craft groups locally, until I found one which is not at all competitive. Quite the opposite: there is constant knowledge-sharing, teaching each other skills, enjoying each other's work. I have absolutely no interest in proving myself to or against anyone. I enjoy these activities and the company of like-minded women.

How else do women get through pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding

Well, we kinda had to whether we liked it or not.

OP I can enjoy sports even though women will not be among the fastest nor strongest humans. It’s okay you know.

To be the fastest woman is no small achievement! Sports should be for everyone, which is why we have the paraolympics and special olympics

Interesting thread OP.

I’ve spent many years being involved with a traditionally male sport.

Without a doubt the least supportive was other women post-18. Pre-18 I was at an all girls’ school with a hugely supportive and “you can do anything and we’ll facilitate it for you” attitude.

I can enjoy sports even though women will not be among the fastest nor strongest humans. It’s okay you know

I feel the same. It doesn’t bother me that I’ll never play against men. I’m more interested in being the best player I can be.

One interesting thing that I didn't know is that the natural hormonal process of pregnancy is incredibly strength building and if you exercise during and / or afterwards, not worrying about weight loss but focussing on strength, you can become very fit. It's why some women with cfs become better post pregnancy; this was certainly my experience.

I was very careful due to hypermobility and couldn't run, had also had a cs, but did do some Pilates and strength building stuff (MUTU was good, didn't do full course tho) plus I walked a lot with my baby in a sling. He was also a heavy baby. I've retained so much more muscle and am fitter as a result. I started occasionally running at 14 months and got into it very easily which surprised me.

I didn't know any of this after my first, nor the fact I was hypermobile, and that coupled with hypothyroidism and undiagnosed asthma is how I ended up in a cfs like state. I lost a ridiculous amount of weight through stress, and strength, which only properly returned during pregnancy. I also noticed it during the few short pregnancies I had between my first and my second.

Evolution built us to be super mamas post partum!

The assumption is that among human hunter-gatherers, men were the hunters, bringing home high-value protein intermittently, and women, with children-in-arms, were the gatherers providing a regular supply of carbohydrate.

Re sports, the only team sport designed specifically for women is netball, a variant of basketball that was intended to be rather statuesque and elegant in long skirts and fifty petticoats. Its evolution into a game of speed and movement was gradual, and the product of competition.