A history lesson

Outsports has a nice piece on Jenny Fulle, the first girl who was officially allowed to play Little League Baseball in 1974. It recounts the history of her case against LLB and the many obstacles she encountered on a local and national level.
When I was doing research last year on how Ms. magazine covered women's sports, I came across Fulle's story more than once. This, along with the help she received from the her local chapter of the National Organization of Women (NOW), is a good example of how mainstream or liberal feminism did see the importance of, and worked for, girls' access to sport and other physical activities--something that is not often discussed or even considered in historical accounts of this period.
And what's Fulle been up since fighting her way onto the diamond? Fighting her way to the top in another male-dominated business--movie production. She's an executive VP and executive producer for Sony Pictures Imageworks. And she's coaching her son's Little League team.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I just was referred to your blog by a friend and have been enjoying it. As I read this entry I just wanted to ad that I too played Little League baseball, in Charlottesville, VA IN 1974. It wasn't easy in spite of the fact that I was big for my age and a good player, reliable hitter. There were plenty of fights and one pitcher from an opposing team pitched basically threw the ball at me, crackign my femur.
January 09, 2008 11:08 AM
Anonymous said…
sorry about forgetting the spell check
January 09, 2008 11:09 AM
ken said…
Thanks for reading, Rob.
Crazy about the unabashed violence against a child who just wants to play a sport. A colleague of mine, when she started playing Little League in the 70s, was subject to taunts from the other team's mothers! I think someone should start collecting the stories of women who played Little League in the early days. They are all so interesting (mostly in that sad, doesn't-it-make-you-crazy-to-think-about-how-misogynist-sports-are kind of way).
[No worries about the spell check. I won't ban your comments for a few typos :)]
January 10, 2008 7:29 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The trans athlete ban: Part 3a: NCAA hypocrisy

 [this is cross-posted with Title IX Blog where I will also post something about the announcement that NIL is not subject to Title IX] The NCAA's new policy banning transwomen from competing in women's sports arrived (seemingly) minutes after the administration issued its executive order banning transwomen and girls from participating in school-sponsored sports teams.  The NCAA did include verbiage though which is worth looking at.  This is the synopsis at the top of the press release:  Men's category open to all eligible student-athletes, women's category restricted to student-athletes assigned female at birth, schools directed to foster welcoming environments on all campuses. But it is not accurate.  The women's category--for competition purposes--is open to people students assigned female at birth who are not taking testosterone. What we see here is a different standard. Testosterone levels matter only for some people. Taking it knocks you out of the women's...
Read more

The trans athlete ban, Part II: Capitulation

 The same day as the president signed the executive order banning transwomen in school-sponsored sports (which WILL have more widespread effects--i.e., recreational sports for youth and adults), the NCAA issued its own change on transwomen in collegiate sports which, for the purpose of "consistency" will also prohibit transwomen from competing in women's NCAA sports.  [I wrote about the effects the EO will have on Title IX compliance which is something that NCAA purports to care about, at Title IX Blog .] I would have been surprised (in a good way), if they had not. They give in to outside pressure regularly (with positive and negatives effects). But this policy is another example of their failure to protect athletes. [Lack of penalties for schools that shield predatory coaches and doctors as well as athletes who commit sexual assault; their exploitation of Black men who help them make their billions every March; their laughable adherence to an ahistorical definition of ...
Read more

No NIL for you!

  This much belated post about the administration's reversal of Biden (out-the-door) era g uidance on distribution of NIL  monies is cross-posted at the T itle IX Blo g.  I feel a lot of anger...I feel, and not just anger because of a [military] ban, I feel anger and disappointment at large, just you know trans and non binary people have become public enemy one; and once you start taking away the rights of trans and non binary people, the rest of the chips begin to fall.               Sam Rodriguez, Petty Officer US Navy ( Today, Explained ; Vox Podcasts) This has clearly come to bear already and I would hope most of us are not surprised. Appalled, yes. Surprised, no. The Kennedy Cente r canceling the Gay Men's Chorus  performance is just one example of how public acceptance for violence against trans people. Denying women athletes equitable shares of NIL monies is another chip. This news is old by now. (Though t...
Read more