I needed your personal opinion. The women have won their 3rd olympic gold, do you think football or soccer sexism still exists in America or is it better than other countries?
I thought that in the US football / soccer was considered more of a womans game anyway? I am from the UK and yesterday I was lucky enough to watch my first ever womens soccer match - the Olympic final at Wembley. Womens football in the UK gets absolute zero coverage (I didnt even realise that there was an English womens national team until the Olympics). I was actually quite suprised by the quality of play that I saw it really wasnt too bad, the atmosphere in the stadium was a little non existant but I believe there were 80,000 or so people watching - it might kick start womens football in my country? who knows. Anyway back to my point - I dont know how sexist soccer is in the US but believe me its gotta be a whole lot better than in most parts of the world, I feel a little sorry for the women playing elsewhere who undoubtadly have skill and comittment but get absolutely nothing back in return!
To answer the OP: Women's sports are given little regard almost everywhere. There isn't anything unique about the US. Women generally prefer men sports over women. Women's sports is better received in countries where women enjoy more equal social status. Nuffsaid I never heard soccer to be a women's sport in the US. Most US high schools would have a boys team before a girls team. I never heard it the other way. I know when I was growing up there were several stories of girls fighting to play on boys team because the school didn't have enough interest to have a girls team. My only guess to why you are anyone would think otherwise must be because of Title IX, which refers to college sports only. Universities have to have an equal number of men and women sports teams. Because of American football has no female equivalent, soccer is usually the chosen sport. Generally, universities will have "club" teams instead. ------
Sports are sexist in the sence that there is absolutely no interest in them, at least on the professional level. There is a reason that women's professional leagues - regardless of the sport - all ultimately fail. The only reason that the WNBA still exists is that the NBA agrees to and continues to subsidize it and accept throwing that money down an empty pit that will never return anything back. My daughter played soccer for years, and while I always loved watching her play - the last game she played was probably the last women's soccer match I will ever watch. Women's sports, at least soccer/basketball/etc are completely unwatchable and uninteresting. Maybe I'll take some flack for daring to express that opinion - but it is obviously the opinion of the vast majority when you look at reality, and reality is that it's not going to change.
Its a lot better in America than say Brazil. The Brazil federation from what I've heard on television gives their women's team the bare minimum funding. The players have to arrange their practices on their own etc. Imagine that team if they actually had proper funding from their federation. I believe that even though sports are sexist in the fact that people would much rather watch a male sporting event than a female sporting event, the rest of the world is just trying to catch up with the equality that America is trying to create
It's not the be all and end all, but attitudes like these often start from the very top. ...really, besides the fact that FIFA is monstrously corrupt and occasionally criminal, is it much of a stretch that an organization headed by Sepp Blatter is decently sexist on it's own? Women's sports obviously don't get nearly the attention their male counterparts do across the board, but for soccer, the rot starts from the very highest echelons of the governing body.
I am not sure what you mean by the WNBA is subsidized by the NBA. I cannot find any information on that. The league has had a similar history to the MLS; a series of expansion, contractions and relocation. Overall, it has expanded from 8- 12 teams. It has existed for 15 seasons. While the viewership and attendance is in a slight downward slope, I didn't read that the league is in financial trouble. After posting my response. I found this tidbit on Wikipedia. It mentions the subsides, but actually downplays it by comparing the financial situation with the NBA. I guess its a matter of taste. I have a friend who likes women's basketball because it is more pure to how the game was originally intended to play (without all of the slam dunking). I have to admit I am not a huge basketball fan, but his argument makes sense to me. Personally, I use to watch my college softball team play. It was a little easy because they were always ranked in the top 10 of the country. Softball is different than baseball, so its a different experience altogether even though the game is very similar to baseball. I can say the same thing about women's soccer. Women think different than men; and, therefore, its a different style of play. The women's game lacks the explosive speed the men's game has, but it makes up for it with great team work. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Whether you enjoy the women's game or not, it is no different than preferring the Bundesliga to Serie A. The fact is women social equality is not even close to men in most nations. The US is not even the most social equal society in the world (its actually Scandinavia). This is speaks volume considering the US still have a long way to go to accepting women as equals socially. Its moving in he right direction, so I do not share your pessimism that it won't change. -----
Of course it's going to be downplayed, but the fact is that the WNBA teams are owned by NBA owners, and the league does not stand on its own. It has never come remotely close to breaking even, the NBA pours good money after bad just to maintain it. That is why teams have closed shop and new ones popped up and all of that - because it is a black hole that eats money and returns nothing. It is a matter of taste, and women's sports is a taste that society does not, and likely never will acquire. It is not the same thing as Bundesliga vs Serie A. There is vastly more similarity in the various mens' leagues than there is in womens' to mens' soccer. And you sound silly equating the viability of womens' professional sports leagues to womens' rights movements. Women having equal rights has absolutely nothing to do with the viability or profitability of womens' professional leagues. The viability of womens' professional leagues (or any professional league) comes down to profitability. For league to exist they have to be financially viable. There is not a significant market for womens' professional sports, and it has nothing to do with sexism or unequal rights. It has to do with taste. Womens' professional soccer may have a place similar to what it has in England, run as a semi-pro kind of league tied to men's professional teams. Basically the WNBA model, but lower profile, and with less penchant to throw money down the drain. But to dream of a day when women's pro leagues have equal or even anywhere similar standing to men's leagues is to be living in a fantasy land. And it has nothing to do with unequal rights.
It exists they don't think the women's game is a big deal. Even here in NYC the old time coaches would never even think of coaching a women's team. That is why our women's professional league folded. In Germany where they have a very good womens national team they are not going out of their way to see them play like they do with the men's team.
The professional league did not colapse because people didn't want to coach them, and it is NOT sexist. Sexism, like racism, implies a discrimination, an opposition to it. Women's professional leagues don't fail because of discrimination, they fail because there is no market for them. There is no inherant right to have a professional sports league. Professional sports exist only because there is a market for them, and there is no market, no desire, no demand for women's professional sports. That's not sexist, it's a simple matter of taste and fact.
I like watching womens soccer when they go all out to win and play hard. I have watched Long Island uniteds womens team play they are fun to watch because they go all out.But paying to see them play I would not do that the game is to slow for me. The coaching in the womens game is just not that good over all. Most of the coaches on the coaching site I like to post on coach the womens game, and not the mens game. I have been retired from coaching for a long time now. If I was still coaching I would not have the time to post on a coaching site they do.
So, you are drawing a conclusion on the assumption that David Stern is being purposely dishonest, and you make no attempt to show evidence to why or if he is, in fact, not truthful??? Interesting! BTW, David Sterns stated that the "NBA is less profitable than the WNBA." It doesn't sound like a "blackhole" to me. It sounds more like you are making a wild supposition. The league has expanded over a course of 15 years of it's existence and it recently signed another TV deal. Again with the wild suppositions! A century ago women didn't even have the right to vote or have many options employment. Yet, today, women are free to pursue virtually any job and have the right to vote. A century ago, men like you, said the same thing...never! You actually made my point for me. By stating that both leagues are more similar, you are admitting that the Women's game is quite different and worth noting and perhaps watching. If both leagues offer little differences then it will be women's game that will offer you a different perspective on how the game should be played. Yes, that would be silly if that is what I have done; fortunately for me, I did not. There is a difference between social equality and legal equality. The women's equal rights movements is about changing the laws in a given country to give women equal opportunity (or a legal recourse). This has little to do with women's status within a society. In countries where women's social status or equality is low, there opportunities would be limited even though the law may allow them to do so. What I stated that in countries where women's status is highest, those countries have a greater acceptance of women doing traditionally male activities. As that increases, so does the market for women's sports increases. (ok, I had to strike the unequal rights thing, that is either a crappy strawman or your misunderstanding of my previous posting). I find it interesting you use the term" significant." This indicates you believe there is a market, just not a large one. The question is why? Yet, when you ask people why they do not want to watch women's sports is has nothing to do with "taste." Most say something like, "I rather watch a chick flick than watch a bunch of women run around." This is what I heard every time I asked someone to come with me to watch a softball team ranked in the top 10 in the nation. You also see this attitude in popular culture. For example, the movie, Bend it like Beckham. The attitude had nothing to do with "taste" (or style of play) at all. It was just inferior. Inferior because it was women. Yes you right it has nothing to do with political rights. It has to do with what I stated social equality or equal status. When women are no long viewed as inferior to men!
The US is one of the best places when it comes to "soccer equality." The reality is that men's sports are generally more interesting to people, and as a result they make more money and money is everything. It's not sexism it's physiology. There are some professions that women dominate, and some professions that men dominate. Men are better physical athletes when it comes to the big money sports, so people find men's competitions more interesting. It's similar to people not caring much about youth competitions. It's not that people are ageist, people just prefer to watch the highest levels of the sport. Same goes for lower levels of leagues in many cases.
The best criminal lawyers are women. Then after you beat the government they are definitely more fun to hug
Their is sexism still in the work place. We don't notice it because were men. My daughter has been telling me that, but I never could see it. She worked in the corporate office of Modells. She did pretty well their made good money, got all kinds of awards from them. Then because of the economy they decided to down size. She and another women were let go. Not because of job performance, but because they did not want to lay off any family men. But a family women no problem.my daughter was shocked. They did give her a very good separation package but it was not fair. The day she left she put all her performance awards on his desk. The good news she got a job in NJ that paid a lot more money. So she landed on her feet, but she complains tge boss is working her to death. I told her what do you care they are paying you a lot of money live with it.
Only half the WNBA teams are owned by their male counterpart team. That was the case at launch,but Atlanta, Chicago, Connecticut, Los Angeles, Seattle and Tulsa are not NBA-owned. They all, however, enjoy the benefit of NBA marketing and the power of its TV negotiations. The NBA obviously benefits from having a summertime, distaff version as a marketing extension, and there is a demand for the product. That demand appears to be higher than for women's pro soccer, but less than for men's pro basketball.
WNBA average attendence last three seasons - 7,834 ; 7,954 ; 7,721. Lowest average for a team in those seasons = 4,293 ; 4,828 ; 4,922. MLS average attendence last three seasons - 16,037 ; 16,675 ; 17,872. Lowest average for a team in those three years - 9,883 ; 9,659 ; 11,858. And people talk about the MLS not being a profitable league yet at this point. The WNBA is only around because of the NBA bankrolling it. Is there a market for it? Yes, a very, very small one. No one cares about it. Women's sports are not popular, and it has nothing to do with sexism, sexual discrimination or women's rights. It has to do with taste - people don't like women's sports. They aren't as fast, explosive or entertaining as men's versions of the same sports.
Between the wars, the FA in England banned women's football from the grounds of any FA member as it was felt the game was getting too popular. It was probably just a passing fad, but with crowds of up to 53,000 watching them play, they didn't take the risk. There are some exceptions when in comes to popularity. Beach volleyball is an obvious one, although that has little to do with sport. Tennis has a very popular women's tour, even though there is a quite marked difference in speed if you see men's and women's matches back to back.
You keep "debating" this as if this is discussion. It isn't We all know it isn't as popularity; the question is why? I am not sure why you insist on defining the issue when the OP did a perfectly good job explaining it. Let's look at you present..... You keep stating taste, but you really do not explain what you mean. However, now you appear to make an approach. You stated(1) it "isn't as fast or as explosive; then you conclude it isn't as "entertaining." The problem here is any lower division sport would lack the speed and explosion of a top division, but there doesn't seem to be as most aversion as for the Women's game. If lower division men's matches are not as fast and explosive, then how can they be entertaining. In England lower level division teams have almost rabid support from fans despite tremendous drop in skill from the top divisions. Your explanation just doesn't explain the difference away. There is something more. Fortunately, you supply what "isn't" the answer as well. Let's look at them. You identify three things that isn't the reason... Well, actually, you "boo Boo" here. Sexism and Sexual discrimination are exactly the same thing. (Well, its technically Gender or Sex discrimination, not "sexual." That is something different. Unfortunately, you didn't explain why it isn't. You just identify. Although you did reiterate the "taste" argument. I do not get the women's rights statement??? I con only guess you are again misunderstanding the difference between social inequality (or women's social status within society) and women's legal rights. Again, you do not explain, you only identify. Notes: (1) You mentioned explosiveness. Interesting, because this was part of my original definition of the differences between women's soccer and men's soccer. Moreover, I concluded this led to more individualism in the men's game, while it leads to more team play in the women's game. In any event, the undercurrent to your posts are that women's sports are by their nature inferior to the men''s game, but you fail to state that explicitly. Perhaps this is why you do not want to discuss sexism. Additionally, I find it interesting that in sports that women draw well they are more or less displayed like trophy pieces before the audience.
I've never heard anyone talk about rhythmic gymnastics. Never. Not even when the Olympics are on. Artistic gymnastics, on the other hand, is fairly popular, especially during the Olympics. And to answer the original question, yes, there is a large amount of sexism when it comes to women's sports. Others in this thread have made those points pretty well.
When the women are good enough to play in the men's leagues, then I will watch them. Women are the sexist ones for making teams only for women.
I'd like to point out that women's tennis is not nearly as popular as men's, but they have some kind of deal where they have to shove it down your throat alongside the men's tennis.