After Atalanta

 Most semesters I start off my ethics course with an article about the connection between sports and character building. It inspires debate, requires an assessment of data, and sets the tone for the course in which I am asking my students to check their preconceptions in order to effectively engage in a process of moral reasoning.  We discuss definitions of character and how those definitions are often shifted or ignored when considering actions and decisions that happen in the context of sports. While many students will start to see that sports are not automatic character builders, that mere participation does not make someone a better person, they will take exception to the idea that unethical things done "in the heat of battle" does not make one unethical or speak badly of sport itself. In other words, the drive to win sometimes makes people do unethical things, but that's kind of just the nature of sports.  But doesn't an ethical person, by virtue of being ethical...

I ended yesterday's post with a line about female Olympians, who are the minority gender at the Winter Olympics, receiving a greater piece of spotlight. The caveat (in addition to the fact that it actually might not be true if one does a thorough content analysis of media coverage) is that the spotlight they are under highlights their sexuality, or rather their performance of their (hetero)sexuality/femininity. Obviously in most other arenas (pun intended) the spotlight on female athletes and women's sports is pretty dim. So much so that the media sometimes forgets altogether that women's sports exist. Because when "women" gets placed in front of "sports" it has some kind of cloaking effect, rendering women's sports invisible to the world. This phenomenon was on display last year when Andy Murray won Wimbledon, the first Brit to do so since Fred Perry in the 1930s. Except for Dorothy Round Little, Angela Mortimer Barrett, Ann Haydon-Jones, and Virg...

It was a pretty gay-focused week in sports. Here's what happened:  Rutgers fired head men's basketball coach, Tim Rice, after ESPN got hold of a video--which then went viral--of Coach Rice engaged in conduct unbecoming of a coach, and that was according to New Jersey governor Chris Christie. In addition to physical abuse, Rice dished out a heavy dose of emotional abuse in the form of homonegative and misogynistic slurs. The Outside the Lines story can be found here . Glad this made news but a few ahem moments that were the topic of discussion in boot camp this morning in between pop squats, long-strider jumping jacks and rainbow deadlifts. First, Rutgers knew about this behavior last fall when they fined and gave Rice a three-game suspension. The power of a viral video...We tell young people--especially intercollegiate athletes to be careful about social media; maybe college athletics administrators should take their own advice. Oh my, I just learned that Rutgers AD is no...

I was compelled by the lure of being in the NYT to think critically about the comments play-by-play announcer Brent Musburger made about the girlfriend of Alabama QB AJ McCarron during the BCS Championship earlier this week. But since my comments didn't quite make the cut, I shall them--and more!--here. I didn't watch the game, didn't hear about the comments until I got queried by a reporter. (And admittedly did not know Musbuger by name--I did recognize his voice though.) I think the reporter wanted me to make some kind of direct link to the status of women's sports and female athletes. And I couldn't do that. Because there isn't really one that can be made. All I could say was the somewhat derivative "well, it's all the same patriarchy." When Musbuger encouraged little boys in Alabama to be throwing the football around with dad so that they too could land a beauty queen like Katherine Webb, he wasn't saying anything new rather he was simpl...

One of my favorite college administrators had a lot of interesting axioms, which those of us who worked with her believed were largely of her own creation. But now I realize, they were just old. Like nineteenth century old in the case of one of my (and I believe her) favorites: a tub on its own bottom. The exact phrase is "every tub on its own bottom" and is apparently used all the time at Harvard (of course). It means a decentralized economic system and is employed up by university administrators to describe the way each unit is in charge (for better or worse) of its own finances--its own success, and arguably its own demise. She used it in reference to the athletic department at my undergraduate DI school. I have, being the good marxist feminist (kind of) that I am, taken a cultural interpretation of the phrase as well, and translated it to mean a unit of the university that is so financially different than others that it has its own, exclusive culture. And this is certa...

I had heard that Chick-Fil-A was not exactly pro-gay, but it didn't much matter to me since I hadn't eaten there since I was a teenager, have no franchise near me, and don't eat fast food anyway. In other words, I had no occasion nor desire to frequent them--an unintentional boycott. I had not made the connection, however, between the company and its sponsorship of a college bowl game. Now that the president of the company has come out and explicitly stated his position as anti-gay marriage (because he worries that god's wrath will be brought down upon us for defying Jesus's will) what will the NCAA do? Will Chick-Fil-A be prevented from sponsorship of NCAA events? We shall see...

...against the sexualization of female athletes as epitomized by the Lingerie Football League. It didn;t happen here in the US. But the Australian Minister of Sports had a few choice words for the Lingerie Football League which is trying to expand its brand down under. Those words included: degrading, cheap, and perv(erted). I am sure if the US had a minister of sport, s/he would speak out against the LFL. And the Lingerie Basketball League. And the new inline Bikini Hockey League. Maybe we need a Minister of Sport.

I was having deep discussions with my collaborator just yesterday about how to make changes in intercollegiate athletics that benefit both women and racial minorities. Football always seems like this monstrous blockade to potential solutions. It's hard to simply say "nix football." But someone has. The writer of Friday Night Lights, Buzz Bissinger, has written a column for the Wall Street Journal saying that football serves no purpose in colleges and universities--causing more harm than good. He focuses mostly on the economic harms and the false promises football makes. He doesn't even mention the physical harm to players, an issue that has become even more salient since Junior Seau's suicide last week. Frank Deford does though in his weekly NPR piece . He notes that even as former NFL players pursue their class action suit against the league over safety issues, that the lower levels of the game should also be concerned. According to Deford, 5 million teens ...

Several men in my life* have sent me word of a former female soccer player at LSU who is trying out to be a kicker on the football team. Obviously this is not soooo out of the ordinary. Many people know of the story of Katie Hnida, who actually entered college with intentions of being a kicker on the football team. After a troubling (to put it mildly) time at Colorado, Hnida went to New Mexico where she became the first woman to put points on the scoreboard in a DI football game. So Mo Isom is not going to have that "first" opportunity. But it seems that she has a lot more support than Hnida received (at least when she was at Colorado). LSU coach Les Miles is giving her a fair shot at a spot on the team. She has had access to LSU football staff as she goes through the tryout process. What I find interesting is the reporting on the story. This is the headline from one of the links I received. It is from The Advocate, which seems to be a local paper out of Baton Rouge. LSU...

A couple of weeks ago the Columbus Dispatch ran what I am sure they thought was a cute story about a new motivational system being employed the coaching staff at Ohio State.  The coaching staff as you will recall is new and is using the colored shirt system as a way to reward and/or punish/stigmatize players during their off-season workouts. Lavender--the exact word used by the coach to describe the color--was the "leftover" color and assigned to players who were loafers, i.e. the weakest link.  The jersey allegedly was to be worn at practices, in the weight room, classroom. OSU's version of the Scarlet Letter.  The weakest links wear lavender. An OSU law student blogged about it--quite astutely. First, and the focus of my concern, while being masked as a tool to build a competitive team environment, forcing a player to wear a lavender jersey as punishment is patently homophobic, sexist, misogynistic, etc.  It takes a color that is feminine—and regularly a...

Joe Paterno to retire . At the end of the season.  Scandal= "retirement" Scandal = resignation (hmm...) I may actually watch the game this weekend to see what the atmosphere is like. 

So I've been thinking and discoursing a lot about this Atlantic article about the "shame" of college sports. And I have a lot more to say--it's forthcoming (I think). Since it seems like the corporatization of college sports isn't going anywhere and given the desire of so many corporations to put their names on everything--including just regular, non-post-season, non-bowl games--my father and I decided that one contest in particular needed such a sponsorship. This weekend's game between Ohio State and Miami: The Scandal Bowl. Sponsored by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. We're open to other sponsors too. Enron? Goldman Sachs? Bank of America?

Intercollegiate sports are played all year round--except for a couple of those "summer" months where there are no official contests--but it's always around September, or probably more accurately, mid-August, that the talk of misdeeds among college athletics comes to the fore. Why? Because it's football season. So we get to hear about the suspensions issued at the end of last season or in the off-season ( a la the Ohio State ) and then whatever findings were made during off-season investigations into various programs (a la Miami ). That is what stays the same--the perpetual/annual misdoings. Here's what seems to be different. And note that I am not a longtime close observer of college football--I'm more of a foul weather observe; like a tornado chaser--but less thrilling, more disgust-inducing. So I might not be the best person the make these observations. But here's what I think I have seen. There is more widespread attention to the athletic programs as...

I like to see/read stories on women in the so-called non-traditional sports; as in non-traditional for women; not non-traditional as in Ultimate Frisbee (which is not an insult--I like non-traditional sports or sports done in non-traditional ways; check this out ). And so I do read the stories about women playing American football with interest. This one was not the best I have ever read. But it raised a few interesting points. 1. I think the title is a little misleading: Women Thriving in Traditionally All-Male American Football. Perhaps personally as some of those quoted in the story recount. But also noted in the article is that several of the dozen or so leagues have folded. Also of note but not mentioned in this particular piece is that a lot of these leagues are semi-professional and the level of funding is not so good. Players incur all kinds of costs from equipment to travel. 2. The ability of sport to change one's mental attitude was a good point raised during a discussio...

I don't have too much to say over the conundrum in Buckeye Land. I do think OSU President Gee's comment about firing Tressel was telling. He said he hoped Tressel didn't dismiss him . This was disappointing from Gee given that he was responsible for eliminating Vanderbilt's athletic department (during his tenure as chancellor) and incorporating it into the Division of Student Life. This move drew both criticism and cheers--from then-NCAA president Myles Brand in fact. Guess things must be different at OSU. Still it's disappointing that Gee, who reined things in at Vanderbilt, seems more comfortable letting things get out of hand at OSU. Anyway, two anecdotes related to this situation. One, this past winter/spring in a new gym (for me) I frequently saw a 20-something guy lifting large amounts of weights and often sporting OSU football gear--t-shirts, shorts--all worn (i.e. not crisp and new). He clearly knew what he was doing in terms of form and routine. He also had...

Inside Higher Ed ran a piece last week about the experiences of gay intercollegiate football players based on a preliminary research study. I have been meaning to post about it but things in Title IX land last week kept me pretty busy. (Not to mention those piles of papers in need of grading.) But it's still worth noting, even a week later. I am, as many know, generally skeptical of progress narratives. (For a related skeptic's take see Diane's recent experience at Starbucks .) And this study illustrates that things are not necessarily getting better, even as we hear more people come out and talk about positive experiences playing sports. I had the pleasure of hearing former Bloomsburg University football captain Brian Sims speak positively of his experience coming out to his team. But it seems, based on this study, that for every Sims-like experience there are many more troubling ones. Like a player who "mangled" his own legs so he could no longer play and thus ...

Because I said so. I know that is the mom response. But it is actually true. Last week's NYT piece about the ways in which schools not-so-subtly manipulate their roster numbers to make it appear that they are closer to providing equitable opportunities than they really are has generated a lot of response. One such response is the suggestion that we not count football in order to make things more equal. This is not in any way a novel "solution." It was proposed when Title IX was passed and football supporters feared for their sport when they realized supporters of women's athletics were going to use the new gender equity law to claim their fair share. Title IX will be the death of football, people claimed. But the fear was never realized. Football, however, has been the death of other sports and silently hides (a shocking ability given its massiveness: stadia, rosters, coaching staffs, etc.) while other male student-athletes lose their opportunities and everyone turns...

How did the end of the week come so quickly? And how did all these things build up? It's not so much that I missed the following news/events, it's more that I haven't found a good moment to mention them. On Tuesday night the Texas A&M Aggies beat Notre Dame in the championships of the Women's Final Four Tournament. Thankfully the score and the quality of play was indeed better than the men's game the night before. Or else I would still be blushing sheepishly and hanging my head. Erin Whiteside at the Sports, Media, and Society blog (out of Penn State's Curley Center) notes the problematic way Twitter users were comparing the men's game (as it was ongoing and immediately afterwards) to the women's game. As in, even the women can do better than this kind of sentiments. I tried, in my own post about this issue, to note that the complaints about women's basketball never ever being able to be as interesting as men's basketball are false generaliza...

This one was not as bad as last week's. Actually, I agreed with Deford this week. We have that kind of chewing gum relationship, it seems. Stretches thin at times but never quite breaks. This week's piece on Morning Edition was about cuts to athletic departments--focusing on non-college sports. Deford argues that cuts to sports are just as damaging as to other extracurriculars such as art and music, especially given the increasingly sedentary lives of many American children. And then he says that the sport that makes the most sense to cut is football. (I love (sarcasm) that Frank Deford can get away with that suggestion while when I or other people who identify as feminists do so get raked over the coals in (im)personal attacks, but anyway...) Why? Because it's expensive and its dangerous and only boys play it. Yep. Though let's recall that there have been earlier attempts to eradicate football. When the game was in its infancy, certain moral types wanted the game to go...

Wow--I mean wow. This attention to Tom Brady's hair has reached shocking levels of outrage. And it's also reached those subtle (and not-so-subtle I would imagine in conversations among fans--and enemies) levels of homophobia. Because Tom Brady has been spotted wearing a headband , and a ponytail (and dancing badly *--which may or may not have anything to do with any of this). I found out about the headband scandal when a Facebook friend posted the above picture on her wall. It has garnered some impassioned responses: "omg-gross!" "he's so feminine now" "he's trying to be prettier than his wife" (I've heard versions of that one before) I care this much about Tom Brady. But I care a lot more now that his masculinity is being questioned because of the way he chooses to wear his hair. Because here's the deal, people. The 80s are back. I don't like it either. Skinny jeans and plaid and leggings. I just try to avert my eyes until it ...