INSIDE OLYMPICS - Greg Gantt

This article was well written. There are a lot of points that Ann Killion makes that I agree with. I was shocked to see that from the London Olympics that the U.S. women thirteen more medals then the men and twelve more gold medals. This just shows how much women have advanced in sports since Title IX. I am curious whether or not other countries have any policies similar to those in Title IX.

 I do agree that other countries do need to become more equal in sports when it comes to gender. But the biggest issue with this is a lot of countries still do not have equal rights for males and females just in their society. One thing the IOC needs to push more is equality between genders. This can be the spark for gender equality in these home countries such as Saudi Arabia and Japan. It amazes me that although every competing country had a woman on the team but did not have the same rights. I guess in a sense to start that equality push from IOC, the president Jacques Rogge needs to have more than one woman on his executive board.

It will be interesting to see what happens with softball, especially since this is a sport popular around the worldwide. Hopefully we will see changes sooner then later.

Sex Equilty: Aaron Snyder

I personally think that if a woman is capable enough to play in a men’s pro sport, she should be able to play. I don’t think that would ever happen in football or basketball but maybe in other sports. We pay to see the best of the best, so if a woman can compete against their male counterparts at the highest level, then let them. I could not see a woman play in the major leagues either, but you never know. There might be the next Justin Verlander or Hank Aaron as a female. We watched that sport science video where the woman actually hit harder than the man but if they actually fought in the ring against each other, would it actually be a good fight? I personally think the man would win just because they are the same weight class and I think the man could take more hits than she could throughout the fight. It was said that there was a woman that played in the NHL and she debuted in 1992. The NHL is kind of a tricky sport to judge but I think that a woman could definitely play in the last of the “big four” of sports. It would be interesting to see how other NHL players would treat her though. Would they take more cheap shots on her because she is a woman, or would they not attack her as much? Of the big four sports here in the US, I don’t think a woman could ever play in the NFL or NBA, might be able to compete in the MLB but she would really have to be good, and a very good possibility that a woman could find her way on the ice in the NHL.

Gender and Separation: Zane Langdon

Recently in class, our focus has been on if women and men should play sports together or not.  There are many potential views on this subject, with all of them having very valid reasoning to their thought process regarding the issue.  My personal stance is that girls and boys can play together up until a certain point, with a few exceptions.  I think that it is acceptable for boys and girls to play together at all ages when there is no physical separation between the boys in girls in terms of strength or speed, as a collective measure.  More specifically, I feel it is okay for boys and girls to play soccer together until

they reach 5^th grade or so because at this point in time boys and girls have the same speed, and relatively the same strength depending on personal development of the child.  I think this is okay because at this point in their life, the child is only evaluated purely on skill in comparison to physical attributes.  But once boys start to hit puberty and develop to where they could potentially hurt someone without realizing it, I feel it then becomes time to separate them as a whole.  But this is where I think it is okay to be a little more lenient in this viewpoint.  For example, if a girl wants to play football and her parents are comfortable with it, then I feel that she should be able to do that because that is her dream to do so.  But on the same hand, a boy who wants to play volleyball, if they offer no boys team, should be allowed to if he wanted to as well.  I think that it is okay for people to play sports competitively with the opposite sex as the majority if there is nothing comparable to their sport in their gender.  But I think society as a whole would be more welcoming to a girl playing a boys sport because she wouldn’t be as expected to succeed as if a boy were to play a girls sport then he may be looked down upon or held to a higher performance standard when compared with everyone else. 

Joshua Kovacs: Whats the Problem?

I am making this post in order to make up for the class I missed on 1-24-2013.

This article looks at the correlation between sports and political office. It brings the fact that 86 million people watched Superbowl XXXIX and only a mere 38.4 million people watched President Bush's State of the Union Address.  People take sport so seriously that some people think it is sort of a religion. Many former players and stars of professional sports leagues are encouraged and sometimes do actually serve in Senate and Congress. Sports are seen a masculine and if someone that is in office or is running for office is associated with professional sports then they are seen in a higher regard. This article tried to say that sports keeps a standard of gender roles and hinders women from gaining advantages in society. If it is true that some people follow sports as a type of religion then I guess that this article has a very good point but I don't personally see any ways of stopping it form happening because generally women and men are completely different when it comes to physical stature and ability.

Joshua Kovacs: Children Creating the Fiction of Gender

This is a post that I am making in order to make up for the class period on 1-22-2013 that I missed.

This article looks at a youth soccer league and the interactions of two teams "The Barbies" and "The Sea Monsters". The Barbies are the girls and The Sea Monsters are the boys; both of them are ages 4-5. They look at how the children react to a small spectacle showcasing a banner that the boys have with their team name on it and also a small float like thing that the girls have which has a barbie that rotates and a radio playing the barbie girl song. The boys were receiving all the attention and showing off then the girl started playing the song and took a lot of attention from the boys. The boys reacted by chanting and eventually disrupting the girl by getting into their personal space while the girl basically ignored them until physical confrontation occurred. The parents discussed how they knew that studies proved that males and females were basically the same but don't believe them after having children and seeing them in person everyday. The parents believed that children are "naturally" different based on gender.
Based on studies that show gender does not make boys and girl different naturally and my own personal opinion, I believe that our society and television/advertisement are the root cause of this so called "natural" difference. Society separates boys and girl from the moment they are born by wrapping the baby in blue (boy) or pink (girl) blankets and it only continues from there. Girl are always bought barbies, kitchen stuff, dolls, stuffed animals, and usually its pink in color. Boys are bought action figures, guns, sports equipment, and almost never are they bough anything pink in color. Pink is apparently a "Feminine" color based on our societies rules. Television is a major contributor in my opinion because it creates roles for genders. These ideas of roles can easily get caught in a young child's mind and stick with them their entire life because at young ages, children are like sponges and soak up all things around them.

Joshua Kovacs: Gender Issues In Sport and Court

This is a post that I am making in order to make up for the class period on 1-17-2012, which I missed.

This article about gender issues in sport and court rooms is very interesting because these kinds of things do not arise very often. I think this problem will have to be taken seriously now that there are people taking these problems to court. Organizations will have to start to prepare for these situations according to the rulings because they cannot discriminate. I think there must be a line drawn on what leagues these transgender people fit into because we don't want a man switching genders just to go into a women's league and dominate due to pure physical stature. Transgender people have been looked at as a taboo in the past but it is becoming more relevant and accepted along with other people such as gays. I like the idea of the International Olympic Committee in which they set a rule that allows transgender athletes as long as they have had reassignment surgery and at least 2 years of hormone therapy because it levels the playing field more if they do switch genders and sports leagues.

What's The Problem-Hunter Haas

As I read this article I kept the same opposing viewpoint that I had when we discussed this topic in class. If sports were divided and organized by skill, I do not think I would be a dominant activist towards either side, however I do have opinions on where it would take sport. In my honest opinion, I would almost consider this a step backwards in the gender equity battle. If more women were allowed in Men’s sports and it was based upon skill alone, I do not think that we would see an increased roll of women in sport. In fact, I feel that this would discourage women and that we would see fewer women involved in sport.

The fact of the matter is that a dominant female athlete most likely would not compete at a high level consistently with male athletes. With this in mind, I do not think we would see the great stories of female athletes inspiring younger generations to compete and get involved. If Jennie Finch had played against males in baseball her whole career and took part in baseball on the national level, I do not think we would have seen her make a difference in the race for female empowerment or inspire female softball players around the world.

As much as I believe in gender equity and the existence of women’s sports, I tend to believe that separated sports do more good for women then combining them would. This allows for women to be given a chance to succeed at the most proper physical level, while keeping them very much involved in the scene and future of sport.

What's the Problem- Tad Margolies

This week in class there was a lot of discussion on how to make sports equal for both males and females.  We also discussed if sports should be seperated by skill rather than gender.  I disagree with this statement for many reasons which will be explained below.

As a kid, i first realized that sport was different for males and females when kid pitch started.  This is when the girls went and played softball.  This was weird for me because I had girls on my T-ball and coach- pitch teams.  These girls were also very good players.  Along with baseball, i had girls on my soccer team until I started playing for a travel team.  Back when we were young, girls and boys had about the same skill level in sports.  It was not until about fourth grade in gym class playing dodgeball til I realized there was a difference.  The throwing strength of the average girl was not the same of the average boy.  I am not saying that there were acceptions, but this was usually the case. 

Going along with what I just stated about realizing the physical differences in males and females, I do not think that sport should be seperated by skill.  This would make it nearly impossible for females to be in the olympics or even participate collegiately.  For example, Jennie Finch is one of the best softball pitchers to ever live, but I highly doubt she would make it in college baseball at any level.  Same thing with Brittany Griner, She is the most dominant Women's Basketball player of all time, but she would not make it in Men's Basketball.  I feel like seperating sport would cause less equality because there would be so little female athletes.

As kids, I think that sports should be seperated by skill, but they should switch to gender a couple years before adolescence.  This will teach males and females to work in teams together as well as all the great things sports teach.  If sport was indeed seperated by skill alone, female athletes would go way down.

What's the Problem? - Adam Shanabrook

After reading this article and listening to class discussions this week, I believe that team sports should not be divided until a certain age and skill level, while individual sports should allow any athlete who wants to play and has the skill to compete.  I played many sports growing up, such as baseball, soccer, and basketball, and all of these sports were coed until we reached the age of 7 or 8.  At this age, boys start to become more physical and girls tend to focus more on technique.  This is where sport starts to change in aspect to gender because typically girls sports are more technical and focus on the skill of the game while boys sports typically are focused on the physicality of the sport.  In middle school, every once in a while we would scrimmage the girls team in basketball and we were told to be physical.  I remember one particular incident where we were playing the girls team and one of the boys had a hard foul on one of the girls and she ended up breaking her arm and ended her season.  This shows how boys and girls team sports are different because the girls were not accustomed to the physical nature of the boys game, one of them got hurt.  It is different though in individual sports, such as wrestling, golf, and tennis.  I feel that as long as the athlete has the skill level to compete,  they should be allowed to regardless of their gender.  There have been many success stories about women competing with and beating men at these sports because of their skill level.

What's The Problem John Ruppert

Throughout the past week in class we have discussed whether or not sport should be divided up based on gender.  After class discussion and reading this current article, sport should be divided up based upon gender but until a certain age.

 

Growing up playing just about every sport you could possible think of, at a young age I had girls on just about all of my teams.  From baseball to basketball, bowling to soccer we all played on the same field, court and lane. At a young age it should be okay to play a sport side by side with the opposite gender.  At that age sport is just about introducing it to the youth and getting them active. Also, the skill level and physical ability is predominantly about the same give or take a couple very gifted kids which most likely are already in an advanced level game.  However, when youth becomes ages of seven eight or even nine is when it becomes a different issue.  At this age this is where each gender starts discovering who they actually are.

 

Around this age is where I believe sport should be divided up based upon gender. This is where youth begin to develop their physical ability as well as their skill ability.  The nature of male sport is completely different than the nature of female sport as well as the way it is socially accepted.  For example, It is seen as “okay” or encouraged for males to fight or be very physical in sport, i.e. “Why do most fans go to hockey games?” “Why do most fans watch Nascar?” However, on the other hand most fans watch female sport for the execution of the game, they take the techniques and master them.  For example, I remember when I was in the 8^th grade and it was always a big deal when the guys team got to scrimmage the girls team. It always made the guys team very made because 75% of the time they would beat us because they had proper technique and would dominate the game, and we would always try and use our physical ability to try and beat them.  I also remember our coach telling us to rough them up a bit or play more physical, but whenever this would happen it would really fluster the girls team.

 

Based on reading the article and comparing it to my personal experiences and things that I have seen and noticed in sport I believe that sport should be divided up once youth reaches the ages of seven, eight, or even nine.

What's The Problem?- Dan Pesato

After reading through this article, I have decided to focus solely on the Sports and Masculinity section. This article was very thorough, but I feel like this section spoke to me more than any other. Athletics are a comfortable companion to power. This section states that there is chemistry between sports, politics, and business. Organized sports enforce a male power structure that reaches far beyond the field. Organized sports support a form of sex segregation that has been a hot topic throughout popular culture over the years. This section of the article seems to touch on the history of sport between males and females. This topic is brought up throughout social media and studies every year. The article states that practice and institutional rules first sort players as male or female, and that some people challenge sex discrimination in sports, but most “accept the status quo.” I never really thought of this before, but this made me truly realize that people actually do look over the fact that in some situations, women are actually discriminated in sports. Not so much today, but it still does happen.

This article challenges how we think about organized sports, as fans, parents, and participants. Athletics are a big part of American culture and it seems right to accept what is presented. Title IX may have gotten more women involved in sports, but it will never fully even the playing field. I find all of this very interesting, because I feel that this isn’t something people think about on a regular basis. Most people feel it is not necessary to focus much attention on fixing this issue. I believe that this is the true problem when it comes to sport discrimination.

Andrew Hayes - The Double Standard of Sex and Sport

     In class this past week we discussed whether sports teams should be split up and segmented by sex or by skill level.  Both of these segmentations have their pros and cons in different sports and situations.
     Segmenting participants and teams by sex makes perfect sense to me for team sports such as Basketball and Soccer.  Girls play in all girls leagues and guys play in all guys leagues.  There are equal opportunities for each sex, and if they believe that men and women have the capability to be athletically equal, then there should be no complaints.
     The problem arises when there are sports such as wrestling, softball, baseball, volleyball, and football where the teams are usually sex specific with a few exceptions.  Girls are allowed to join wrestling teams and football teams, and every once in a while you hear a success story from a woman on a male team.  I know that my high school had a girl kicker this past  year and she did very well.  But what happens when a male wants to play volleyball or softball?  Males are allowed to join cheerleading squads because it is not a directly competitive sport.  However, boys and males are not allowed (at least at my high school) to join the volleyball team or softball team.  There is a clear double standard in regards to competitive sports.
     I wonder what would happen legally if a male challenged his right to join a high school volleyball?  He would have a clear argument, especially with women joining mens' sports teams in football and wrestling recently.

What's The Problem Darion Delaney

As you can see, there has been a drastic change in how athletes look from the past to present. Males builds have gone from big to built. Women’s physiques have gone from petite to a much larger frame. With these new bodies, women have pushed sex barriers to the next level and can compete at higher levels. So much that people are beginning to question whether or not females should or should not be able to play with males. In the passage, What’s the Problem, the author tries to get readers to see the bigger picture with women. If you see a good dominant women at a sport, you assume she’s gay for example Brittany Griner and dominant female basketball player who dunks on women at will. Also in the article, the author explains how Title XI hasn’t done enough for women’s sport. It has allowed them to play however sports are still segregated between male and female for example football. How I feel on the situation is that sports should be segregated. Women that are elite at their individual sport no  offence suck against an average male. It was said in class the Serena Williams lost to the 200th male tennis player in the work. We all see Serena as a great however amongst males she less than average. If women played football it a joke. Find me a woman that runs a 4.3 40 yard dash. She would be small and fast but not the same muscle tone as males. Every sport females that have strived have come up short to male numbers. Swimming, track and field, football, basketball, tennis, you name it a male is more dominant. I applaud women at there efforts and strides but its not enough! I would really like feed back to know if people agree or disagree. Maybe I’m blind and I need someone to show me otherwise.

Separation of Sports and Gender - Jeff Kravetz

Male and female athletes are not what they used be.  In sports today, we are seeing taller, faster and stronger athletes than ever before, both for male and female sports.  Within the last decade females such as Brittney Griner, Serena Williams and Alex Morgan have made great strides in the promotion and improvement of female sports.  Those types of athletes are changing the game in the public eye because the gap between skill levels is closing in.  Soccer for example, had Mia Hamm.  No other female in the United States and even the world had the recognition and skill to back up her abilities.  Now we are seeing handfuls and groups of players that could be as talented as Mia Hamm.

Males are looking like the same way.  Basketball is a sport that is always talking about comparing players to the NBA’s past time.  We are seeing many players today that are being compared to the likes of Jordan, Magic Johnson and Kareem both by talent and success. Whether LeBron or Kobe is the most similar to Jordan might never end. So how many basketball players today are being compared, being discussed by sports shows, to the NBA’s legends? Every day it seems like.  And to back it up, there have been so many athletes breaking decade-long records and it is happening not only in basketball.  All these current athletes still playing in their sports, LeBron, Kobe, Tiger Woods, Drew Brees, are becoming the youngest or own the most records than ever before.

The point I am trying to make is with the separation of males and females playing together would never work.  The big sports such as basketball, football, soccer and baseball would be the most difficult.  We are seeing more dominant female athletes, but at the same time we are seeing the most gifted male athletes as well.  It could possibly work with individual sports.  Tennis would be the most interesting since males and females are stronger and can serve and hit faster.  Billiards, bowling and maybe even golf would turn some heads to see how males and females would do competing against each other.

Bottom line: The way sports are separated now is fine.  More male and female athletes are leveling the playing field and some are still dominant, which is making sports even more exciting to watch.   

Should Girls Play Sports with the Boys-Tyler Kieffer

The answer to that question is: yes and no. The answer would be yes due to the fact that in earlier years of growing up there are less distinguishable traits between boys and girls compared to when they are older. In the early stages of growing up, they tend to grow realativly at the same rate, and that is what makes it competitive on the playing surface. Another factor that can go into girls competing at a younger age is that they go through puberty at a younger age than boys do. That fact can show  us why some girls can dominate boys in certain sports at a younger age. I believe that we can use that fact to comprehend what that girl in Utah is doing in football at the age of 10. Her physical body has matured more than  the boys that she is playing against and gives her an advantage.

Now for the reason not to, the boys will catch up and most likely pass the girls in terms of maturity with a few after that. In high school and beyond most boys finally grow into their bodies, and continue to get stronger through weight lifting and other techniques. There are some girls that can play with the boys when we get higher up in skill level, but the percentages are low. The main reason why girls should not play with the boys later on in their development is due to the fact of how boys mature later and structurally their bodies are built more for the sports than are girls bodies.

But, if I had a daughter, I would support whatever decision she would choose. But, I would explain what is possible if they do choose to play more violent sports or with the boys. As a father, I would feel as though that is one of my jobs to support my kids in whatever they would do.

Joshua Kovacs: The Pro That The Pros Would Pay To See

This was a very interesting article and subject that SI researched. In the first part of the article they came up with the idea that $1,000 dollars would be the payment to get a ticket to see they athlete of choice. I find this a bit ridiculous due to the fact that the NFL average pay is 1.9 Million, NBA is 5.15 Million, and MLB is 3.31 Million. If added together the average pay of an athlete participating in "Big Three" is 3.45 Million. Paying $1,000 is 1/3450 of their average yearly salaries. For a person that makes $34,000 a year, that would be like paying $10 dollars to see an athlete of choice for an average person when compared to an athletes average salary. I think the $1,000 dollar number should have been higher so there is more risk involved that way the choice is more vigorous because when us fans attend an event, even for $100 dollars it is a major part of our income and we have to usually be highly selective even for minor events that doesn't involve our one choice athlete. The fact that Carmelo Anthony said he wouldn't pay that much money to see anyone is kind of insulting to the NBA fan base because that is most likely what people pay to sit on the floor and in suits for his games that happen 2-4 times every week.  

I thought that it was interesting that the NBA players listed the NFL players and vis versa. From media and reports I have seen or read in the past, a lot these athletes played both sports in high school and were in most cases very good at them. Lebron James was an All-State wide receiver, Allen Iverson was an All-State Safety and holds state records, Joe Thomas of the Cleveland Browns was a great basketball player and played in the same leagues at Lebron James, and Donovan Mcnabb played both basketball and football at Syracuse in college. When NBA and NFL had lockouts this past 2 years, athletes were reportedly considering trying out for the other sport leagues; Chad Johnson even made an MLS soccer team.

A lot of athletes were quoted as saying words like, Intensity, competitor, and Body. Athletes seem to be drawn to other athletes because of how hard they compete and train. Sex appeal was mentioned a few times and i'm not sure that is a good thing. If an athlete just wants to see another one because they want to gawk at their body and not appreciate what they do for their sport and how hard they compete, I find that kind of degrading whether is be female or male who said it.

Serena Williams had at least 6 votes based solely on her looks or outfit she was wearing. Michael Vick was completely different and received votes based on athleticism and excitement. Shaq won over the NFL athletes due to his size and toughness that was unmatched in the NBA. Barry Bonds won over his own league and the MLB players seemed to just admire how he dominated the game with hitting, this was prior to finding out he was on steroids though. Tiger woods received the most votes and had support from every major association. Athletes even said that they would pay more that $1,000 to see him play and even pay money to carry his golf bag or be around him.

I would personally chose to see Michael Vick (before dog fighting incident) and also Adrian Peterson. I do not have many reasons besides the fact that it would be exciting to witness some of the best athletes on the planet do what they do best, dominate!

The Pros the Pros Would Pay To See-- Alex Solis

The article “The Pros the Pros Would Pay To See” was an absolute great read.  Sports Illustrated released this article focusing on professional athletes and which professional athletes they would pay money to see perform. When reading the article it was interesting to see that some major athletes were surveyed. From Carmelo Anthony to Donovan McNabb, there was a showing across the board of well-respected athletes. The top athletes voted on include professionals like Serena Williams, Michael Vick, Shaq, Barry Bonds, and Tiger Woods. When broken down, it was even interesting to see the correlation of votes from athletes from the same sport.

I thought it was very interesting perspective to take when asking professional athletes who they would pay to see play. The article’s author, Jack McCallum, really asked some unique questions. After reflecting on this, it is amazing to think that some of the best athletes in their perspective sports have enough respect to pay the amount of money to go and be a spectator. Whether if those surveyed just wanted to see they athletes they picked for personal interest, out of respect, or based on talent, the athletes that ranked towards the top of the list were not a surprise to me.

When all of the surveys were turned in from 625 athletes, Tiger Woods remained on the top of the list. I personally agree with this result. I believe between what Tiger did for the game of golf, his talent, and the excitement he brings each round; he is the crowd favorite for many.  Now the question I leave for you: what athlete would you pay to see play?   

Adam Shanabrook - The Pros the Pros Would Pay to See

The Pros the Pros Would Pay to See looks at the admiration that athletes have for each other and asks the question "Who would you pay to see?"   I think this is something that many average sports fans would like to know.  I enjoyed reading this article because it not only showed which athletes were the most popular but also showed part of the athlete's personality in their responses.

I found it interesting that some athletes wouldn't pay to see any other athlete.  Carmelo Anthony and Barry Bonds were two of those athletes who stated that they wouldn't pay $1,000 to any athlete.  While Jared Reiner said he would "set up a bunch of mirrors" to look at himself.  On the other hand, there were some athletes, such as Tiger Woods, Barry Bonds, and Shaquille O'Neal, received many votes from athletes in many different sports.  This shows that athletes at the top of their game are revered by not only average sports fans but many of their peers as well.

I also found it interesting that three of the top five athletes picked would probably not be chosen today.  Tiger Woods and his incident, Barry Bonds and his steroid use, and Michael Vick and his dog fighting case; all of these athletes probably wouldn't be chosen by so many of their peers today based on their recent history.  I also found it shocking that many of the athletes chose Serena Williams based mainly off her her "catsuit" that she wears while playing tennis and not off her her athletic ability. 

The Pros the Pros Would Pay To See, Zane Langdon

The article, "The Pros the Pros Would Pay To See" is one of the most interesting articles I have read in a while.  I feel that it is an interesting subject and that you never think about the fact that these athletes are fans of other athletes too. I believe that some of the athletes may take for granted the position they are in to see these guys or may have just tried to been funny like Steve Francis and Gerald Wallace were in their responses to the questions. 

The athletes reaction to Serena Williams is one topic that stands out to me.  Four different athletes (Steve Francis, Gerald Wallace, Mike McKenzie, and Hollis Thompson) all stated that they would like to see Serena simply for her "cat-suit" or her "leopard print" uniforms that she wears during her matches.  Only two athletes (Mike Cameron and Erick Strickland) had something else to say about her in terms of her mentally not just viewing her in a physical aspect.

I found it interesting that most of the athletes voted outside of their sport, except for baseball who would pay to see Barry Bonds.  That is most interesting to me because most of those guys are actually PAID to see Barry Bonds.  These guys are in the dugouts and are on the field competing against him and they still wanted to pay to see Barry Bonds play, which is just astounding to me.  I also think its interesting that Amani Toomer wanted to see a Formula-1 racer which is something that is very rare.  Finally, I found it interesting that eventual teammates voted for their counter-part, (McNabb voted for Vick and Cassell voted for Garnett).

Erin Scott: The Pros the Pros Would Pay to See

In the article The Pros the Pros Would Pay to See, athletes from the MLB, NBA, and NFL named off other athletes that they would $1,000 to see play. The first thing that really stood out to me about the article was the fact that McCallum had failed to even bother asking any female athletes who they would like to see play. I think it would have been very interesting to compare who female athletes said they’d like to see play and who male athletes said they’d like to see play.

Another thing that really stood out about the article was the lack of female athletes who were named as athletes the pros would pay to see. There were only two players named, Gabrielle Reese and Serena Williams. Although some of the athletes said they’d like to see Serena because of her skill and performance, the majority of them said something about her cat suit. I’m sure she appreciates the compliments but she’s not a model, she’s an athlete. She has accomplished so much as an athlete and to have her outfit or her sex appeal be the main reason people want to see her play has to slightly offend her.

Other than that the article was very interesting. I didn’t expect Tiger Woods to be the athlete the majority of the pros chose to watch. Lance Armstrong was tied in the 10^th spot. I wonder how Lance admitting to doping will affect that standing. Tiger Woods and Michael Vick are still in the top 10, so maybe after a while people will overlook Lance Armstrong’s use of steroids.  

Gender Issues in Sport, Court- Tad Margolies

After reading this article, it opened my eyes to a whole new problem with sport and gender.  I never even thought about the challenges that transgender, intersex, and transsexual athletes face everyday.  I see nothing wrong with being any of these things because I think it is something that a person is born with and it is just who they are.  This is why I think these people should be treated equally.  In order for transgender, intersex, and transsexual athletes to be treated equally, they have to be granted equal opportunities to participate in athletics.  This poses an ethical question.  Is it fair to un-level the playing field to allow a transgender or transsexual athlete compete?  This is the question faced by the olympic committee and other professional sports leagues.

I personally believe that transgender people should be allowed to compete in athletics just like everyone else and I like the NCAA rule dealing with this issue.  If no hormones or drugs are involved, then the transgender athlete shall be deamed eligible to play with their biological sex.  I do, in fact think it would be wrong for a transgender on hormones to be able to compete.  This would be like taking PED's.  While I do think that transgender athletes should be granted equal opportunities in athletics, I find it a little odd because a female who is a transgender male wants everyone to treat them as if they were a male.  So it puzzles me why they would want to play a Women's sport and be called a he.

Since the emergence of Kye Allums, i think that more and more transgender athletes will be coming out and being open about who they are.  This means that the NCAA will have more and more transgender athletes.  I just hope that none of these athletes start to take hormones because that would make them ineligible due to the fact that it would give them a distinct advantage. 

The Pros The Pros Would Pay to See- Hunter Haas

This article was one of the more interesting articles I have read in a while. In our culture we spend so much time focusing on the celebrity status of athletes that we forget they are regular people like the rest of us. What really struck me was the lack of interest displayed by many of the athletes surveyed. If you take any semi-professional athlete or regular fan and ask them these questions I feel that you would have a sincere, excited response. When these athletes were asked who they would pay to see, many did not take the question seriously, and made jokes about seeing themselves or close friends. I feel that this occurrence can be owned by the fact that we have such a divide of wealth and power between average people and modern sport figures.

On the topic of gender, I found it interesting that women were not taken as seriously in their respective sports. With the exception to a few respecting fans, most of the athletes talked about the bodies and physical appearances of the female athletes. When on the topic of male athletes it was more about skill and mastery of the game, a completely different tone that was separate of women athletes. Multiple athletes discussed the cat woman suit worn by Serena Williams and the tight outfits that she wore, while only one athlete discussed her dominance on the court. Also, another athlete stated he would love to see Gabrielle Reese, a sand volleyball player. When given his reason, the player simply stated because of her body.

Although sport is a popular channel for sexuality to be distributed, I would have expected more from professional athletes. As an average sport fan I would hope that the pros I admire would have the same appreciation for sport and all that it encompasses, and sometimes this seems to not be the case. The least I can say is that I am glad all of America does not have this belief of body above all, or else the Lingerie Football League might have a sudden boom in attendance figures. 

Wesley Hall: Transgender Athletes

Wesley Hall: 

Transgender Athletes

After reading the three articles about transgender athletes, my eyes opened up to a struggle that I had never seen before. I think that being transgender is fine and if someone who is transgender can excel at athletics then that is even better! I feel bad for these people. They were ridiculed or denied what they deserved. An employer can't deny someone a job based on gender but the LPGA can deny Lana Lawless the right to compete, which is ridiculous. The LPGA needs to take another look at their rule book. If anything, having a transgender athlete would help the LPGA. I feel like a lot more people would watch if they let Lana play.
As for Caster Semenya, I am upset that people were so jealous and insensitive towards her. This woman came up from a poor farm town in South Africa that may or may not have running water to be a world champion athlete! She deserves respect and has earned mine. Honestly, if they should test her for anything it should be steroids.
I found the third article to be the most interesting. The Stella Walsh case was especially perplexing. The autopsy found male genitalia and Stella also had the male XY chromosome. Based on this I would consider Stella a man and a cheater. It is perfectly fine to be transgender but one must compete within their gender to be fair. To lie or hide your gender in order to win is cheating. Schinegger was born intersexed and I think if he would have not transitioned to being male, he should have been able to compete as a woman. He could not help that he was born how he was so he should not have been denied rights.
Although society's reactions to these cases do upset me, they do not surprise me. This is the world we live in. Society has a slow way of transitioning into new things such as interracial marriage (legalized just over 50 years ago), gay rights, and even the legalization of marijuana. I believe that it is easier to change the policies than it is to change the people. Hopefully, if the policies change then the people will to. An open mind and a little bit of tolerance can go a long way and we as a society can too.

The Pros the Pros Would Pay to See - Dan Pesato

The Pros the Pros Would Pay to See is an article that I enjoyed reading. This is something that I feel many people wonder. Would professional athletes pay a decent amount of money to watch a different athlete play? This article didn’t seem to throw any curve balls; the majority of the athletes that were voted for made sense. It was interesting to hear that NBA players preferred to watch NFL players, but NFL players were not quick to say they would drop 1000 dollars on NBA players. I feel that there could be a number of reasons why this is, but in the end it would be interesting to hear it from the actual source.

The sexual aspect in sport will always be relevant. After reading through the article, I noticed that Serena Williams was brought up quite frequently, and it was clearly not always because of her compassion and dedication toward tennis. Steve Francis stated, “You can’t beat that cat woman suit she wears" (McCallum). This quote was stated by three other athletes, which I feel is quite demeaning toward Serena Williams because she is not receiving feedback on her athletic ability, but only receiving it toward her body. This just goes to show that some people based their votes off of looks and not ability.

At the end of the article, Tiger Woods is revealed as the winner of this contest. I feel that this is an accurate statement for the year that this was released, but it is crazy to think about how much respect he lost after his huge incident. I think that it would be interesting to see this poll taken again in 2013.

The Pros the Pros Would Pay To See - John Ruppert

After reading the article, The Pros the Pros Would Pay To See written by Jack McCallum this article does not surprise me at all.  Even though athletes are paid large amounts of money they are still willing to pay just as much money as us fans do to see our favorite athletes.  Just like us, athletes are fans of the game as well.  For instance, how many games on television have announcers made it a point to show all the athletes that are attending the game as well?  In my opinion, and agreeing with the article I think athletes are more willing to pay to see more action related sports such as boxing, UFC, football and basketball.     

 
However, I do seem to find this article a little misleading.  Athletes have money their is no doubt about that, but If Tiger Woods was the number one most picked athlete to see and Bonds the second, why is it that other athletes are never seen or shown at golf tournaments as well as baseball games?  Then with Shaq and Vick being third and fourth numerous of athletes have actually paid to see them and have been showed doing so.  In comparing these I believe the ability to dominate in sport no matter who it may be has nothing to do with athletes paying to see, I feel that it has to do with the popularity of the sport along side the action produced by the sport.

 
Also with this article I think that the reason why most athletes in the NBA state they would pay to see athletes in the NFL and vise versa is because they relate better and have more in common.  What I mean by this is the way their sports coincide with each other, and as well as their background of the sport.  For example, If Lebron James and Calvin Johnson were to switch positions for one game their skill level would be very close if not the same.  They both have to be big, strong, athletic, fast, able to catch, have quick feet, and able to withstand some kind of contact, also you could assume they both had a background in each others sport.  So for this reason I believe that this is why there is a strong correlation between athletes such as these two.

Andrew Hayes - The Pros the Pros Would Pay to See

The article "The Pros the Pros Would Pay to See" focuses on the world's most famous athletes and their respect for other athletes.  Not only does the article shed light on each athlete's particular preference and admiration for other athletes, but it shows a bit of their personality as well.

Some athletes, such as Carmelo Anthony and Barry Bonds, showed their true feelings and personality when both said they wouldn't pay to see anyone.  Carmelo, who said he "wouldn't pay a thousand dollars to see nobody", and Bonds who answered that he would "put that money in the stock market and go to the event on someone else's ticket", showed a bit of narcissism and cockiness with their answers.  Even Shaquille O'Neal showed his ego when he said he would pay to see Randy Couture because he is the "Shaq of Ultimate Fighting".

The other interesting part of this article is to see the change in the public opinion of specific athletes from 2004 to 2013.  Three of the top five athletes chosen by their peers (Tiger Woods, Michael Vick, and Barry Bonds) have fallen from the graces of the common fan.  Tiger's personal issues that became public, Vick's dogfighting scandal, and Bonds' known steroid usage have caused them to now be three of the most despised and rejected athletes of our time.  The comparison of the list of athletes that athletes would pay to see then and what we would assume they would say now shows how much importance the we, as a society, put on an athlete's personal life and morals.  We see them as more than just athletes, they are role models.

Pros Would Pay to See - Aaron Snyder

 The top five athletes that other athletes from the big three sports (NFL, NBA, MLB) would of paid $1,000 to see almost ten years ago included Tiger Woods, Barry Bonds, Shaquille O'Neal, Mike Vick, and Serena Williams. That list will obvisouly be different now as both Barry and Shaq are both retired and Vick doesnt even start for the Eagles anymore. If I were to take a guess, I would probably think most pro athletes would pay to see LeBron James just because he just dominates the league along side partner in crime Dwayne Wade. Another pro basketball player that I think would crack the top five would be Kevin Durant. Durant is probably the best pure scorer in the NBA today as he has won back-to-back-to-back scoring titles. A player from the MLB that I think would crack the top five is the reigning triple crown winner, Miguel Cabrera. I think he would get in there just because he just put up one of the best seasons for a hitter in awhile. A player from the NFL that I think would crack the top five, also the guy I picked I would pay to go see, the best Quarterback in the NFL today, Super Bowl MVP, the guy that holds regular season passer rating record, postseason passer rating record, single season passer rating record, last years MVP, Aaron Rodgers. I think he's the best player in the game today as he has no running game to help him and a terrible, terrible defense, and I feel as if others would agree with me too, so I believe he would crack the top five. My last player that I think would crack the top five is a guy younger than me, reigning Heisman winner, Johnny Manziel. I just feel after the Alabama game, he has turned into one of the most exciting players in college football. I also feel that Tiger Woods and Serena Williams could still be on the list, as well as Brittany Griner could be as well, Ray Lewis if he wasn't retiring, Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, Messi, and maybe even Dwight Howard.

The Pros the Pros Would Pay To See - Jeff Kravetz

The article, “The Pros the Pros Would Pay To See” discussed who would athletes pay to see other athletes play from the big three sports (basketball, football and baseball).  The introduction brought up a very interesting point that had the question been asked during the 1990s, Michael Jordan would have an overwhelming amount of votes.  What stood out to me about the athlete’s votes and asked why they voted is that these athletes probably had a prior background in that particular sport.  Steve Nash voted for French soccer legend Zinedine Zidane (most known for the head-butting incident in the 2006 World Cup) because he understands the game of soccer after growing up playing and stood out playing at Santa Clara.  In class, a good point was brought up that football and basketball players probably had backgrounds in both sports growing up, which is why both sides voted for one another the most.  The article also suggested that athletes, such as Shaquille O’Neal wanting to see Randy Couture, wanted to see others compete because they reminded them of themselves.  What was really not surprising to me, and what I thought more athletes would of said, is Chicago Bulls rookie center Jared Reiner saying he would pay to watch himself.  I have never heard of this guy and he would pay $1,000 to watch himself play with mirrors around him? Either he’s a humorous guy or his ego is way up in the nosebleed sections.  After reading the article I was glad to see Tiger Woods being the athlete most would go see.  Being an African American dominating the game of golf by himself is something anyone would of liked to see in person.  I would also like to add I would pay money to see a now retired Jordan play at his age in the league. 

Ladies Day-Tyler Kieffer

In the article, Ladies Day, it was discussed that women's sports here in America are struggling to gain level footing with male sports in terms of compensation. Yes, there are stars that help bring people to watch them play. But that is only for short periods of time that those fans interest can be held. During the Olympics, and the World Cup that is when all the attention of the sporting world is on them. With the worlds eyes set on one event that is where the stars are made. But within a few months after the event, most of those that were created from the huge stage begin to fade back into the crowd.
For women's sports to begin to get to the level of where men's sports are in this country, women need to have a transcendent superstar to help the game. All of the sports have had a star or moment that has helped make it what it is today. In baseball, Babe Ruth helped people fall in love with the home run that continues to this day. Basketball had Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain had thier rivalry, along with Larry Bird and Magic Johnson rivalry. Football had the game on National TV between the Giants and the Colts which captivated America. Women sports have had one of these stars in Mia Hamm, but the timing of her rise was more towards the end of her career.
For professional women's sports to gain on the men, they need to have young, transcendent stars. The WNBA is about to have the chance to capitalize on three young stars: Skylar Diggins, Ellena Delle Donne, and Brittney Griner. These three women are seniors and are about to enter the WNBA. If the WNBA can market these three women, and get them in certain markets there is a chance that they can make the WNBA more mainstream. It is hard to create a mainstream league without stars. But with stars the sky can be the limit.

Introduction- Taylor Redd

My name is Taylor Redd and I was born in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. I moved just down the road to Findlay, Ohio when I was in third grade. In high school I played football all four years for Findlay High School. Prior to high school I also played basketball, baseball, and ran track. Since coming to college I continue to play most sports for my fraternity, Delta Chi, at the intramural level and have also trained and participated in two half marathons in Columbus. Continuing from my introduction in our first class, I chose Hope Solo as my female athlete that I would want to see, and for my male athlete I chose Tiger Woods. Ignorant or not (you be the judge) I chose Hope Solo primarily based off of her looks. It is a shame that society primarily judges female athletes mostly off their looks and sex appeal instead of their talents. Having said that, I chose Tiger Woods based off of his fierce competitiveness and fanatical desire to win. Tiger can be considered in the league with athletes such as Michael Jordan because he has completely dominated his sport. Not only is Tiger dominating on the golf course, but he is also close to becoming the first billion dollar athlete. That is absolutely incredible to think about. Many critics have bashed Tiger and tried to ruin his reputation because of the events that surfaced surrounding his multiple affairs. However, I do not care what Tiger does off the golf course, and neither should you. Many people look at athletes and want them to be role models for their kids, great people on and off the field, etc. I do not understand this. They are regular people who happen to excel in a sport. We appreciate what they do on the field, but their personal life should be left alone. Feel free to comment.