PDA

View Full Version : Stereotypes in Women's Sport??



SeymoreHockey
11-22-2009, 11:55 AM
Interesting article..Comments?

http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/677096

dhmn
11-22-2009, 01:16 PM
Interesting article..Comments?

http://www.thespec.com/News/BreakingNews/article/677096

All I'm going to say is.. if the people who "create" the stereotypes actually watch the sports, they'd know better. I haven't seen women's soccer in person but have on tv, and even the girls high school soccer, and it's as physical a game as watching the guys play. It's just like the people who rip on Women's hockey while never seeing a single game, or saw a game like the RIT/Potsdam 17-1 game from Saturday and wrote off the women playing the sport.

CrazyDave
11-22-2009, 10:15 PM
The article seems to frame the following two sentiments as contradictory, whereas I see them as complimentary...

Laura Pappano, co-author of a book about gender in sports and a writer-in-residence at Wellesley College, has written a couple of blogs assessing reactions to the Lambert video.

“The image of female athletes as more than skilled players — as good, wholesome people — is a centrepiece of women’s sports and a staple of marketing, promotion, and ticket-selling,” Pappano wrote. “This has been both a benefit and a limitation that has helped shape women’s sports as ’gentler’ fare.”

However, Carl Cannon, deputy editor of PoliticsDaily.com, suggested the intense public reaction to the Lambert incident was different from cases involving male athletes.

“It’s as though we expect women to play fiercely competitive sports — like men — and yet retain some of the traditional notions of femininity,” he wrote.

The way I read these two together is that the marketing is matching the expectations (the "notions of femininity"), but those expectations don't always align with reality. :rolleyes:

As far as hockey is concerned, though, I've heard some men's hockey fans imply that the problem is just the opposite. They feel that the body checking prohibition in the women's game is catering to the "notions of femininity" that don't have place in hockey.

While I can see their point, I do not advocate a rule change... body checking would ruin the highly-skilled game we currently know today, and said game is still highly energetic without the checking.

5 4 Fighting
11-24-2009, 11:53 AM
While I can see their point, I do not advocate a rule change... body checking would ruin the highly-skilled game we currently know today, and said game is still highly energetic without the checking.

Crazy I agree with you, the women's game can have more fluidity to it at times as puck carriers have a sense that they aren't going to get clocked coming through the nuetral zone.

One thing I see time and time again is the subjective nature of the calls as they relate to the all encompassing "Body Check" in the women's game. There seems to be no set rule as to what a body check is. I often wondered if they were to call boarding and open ice hits as penalty's, a compromise on the rule change if you will and then let them play what would happen?

I remember asking a group of girls (15/16 yr olds) that I coached one year what they thought of not be able to body check. One response was..."Why do they keep teaching us to be inferior."

sheba
11-24-2009, 02:25 PM
Crazy I agree with you, the women's game can have more fluidity to it at times as puck carriers have a sense that they aren't going to get clocked coming through the nuetral zone.
...

I remember asking a group of girls (15/16 yr olds) that I coached one year what they thought of not be able to body check. One response was..."Why do they keep teaching us to be inferior."

The strongest reply for that would have been it is NOT "inferior" to have better finesse - skating agility, stickhandling, playmaking - than a neanderthal mentality to knock players down. It has often been the strategy of lesser skilled teams to go more "physical" to make up for their lack of speed - it doesn't matter who is the faster skater if they are knocked down. Better yet, when you can be the stronger, faster skater - its tough to knock down what you can't catch. I really hate any negativity or "inferior" label given to the women's game just because there isn't any body checking. I don't want to see women dropping their gloves and starting brawls either -- and that would be "inferior" IMO.

I don't think teaching stronger skating, stickhandling, playmaking, and shooting skills is about being "inferior" at all. Women's ice hockey shouldn't be like roller derby on ice. I have watched countless games where the girls wind up for these booming noise making slap shots that go wide or get blocked - when a well placed snap shot on net scores the goal much more efficiently. A nicely executed back door play is a joy to behold (unless you are the hapless defending team) - that could hardly be described as "inferior".

Hockeydad4two
11-24-2009, 03:14 PM
The strongest reply for that would have been it is NOT "inferior" to have better finesse - skating agility, stickhandling, playmaking - than a neanderthal mentality to knock players down. It has often been the strategy of lesser skilled teams to go more "physical" to make up for their lack of speed - it doesn't matter who is the faster skater if they are knocked down. Better yet, when you can be the stronger, faster skater - its tough to knock down what you can't catch. I really hate any negativity or "inferior" label given to the women's game just because there isn't any body checking. I don't want to see women dropping their gloves and starting brawls either -- and that would be "inferior" IMO.

I don't think teaching stronger skating, stickhandling, playmaking, and shooting skills is about being "inferior" at all. Women's ice hockey shouldn't be like roller derby on ice. I have watched countless games where the girls wind up for these booming noise making slap shots that go wide or get blocked - when a well placed snap shot on net scores the goal much more efficiently. A nicely executed back door play is a joy to behold (unless you are the hapless defending team) - that could hardly be described as "inferior".

I'm not a fan of the "physical" type of play either. The women's game still has the stick checks, rubbing off on the boards, shoulder to shoulder contact, etc. The only thing the women are really missing are the "legal" body shots that either make the crowd groan or the boards to go boom. I can live without those.