Audri Swisher's Blog

How do sports change our views of what it means to be a man?

In his article “What’s ‘manly,’ what’s not for athletes,” LZ Granderson examines this question. Professional athletes are held to different standards from other celebrities in terms of their “manliness.” Athletes who take advantage of their good looks, who put family ahead of their career, who appear in a men’s fashion magazine – many are criticized for, essentially, doing “women’s” work. Granderson wonders if sports could eventually take a step ahead of the rest of society to redefine what it means to be manly.

“The Televised Sports Manhood Formula,” published in 2000, analyzes and defines manhood according to a range of different sports on television. Its conclusions result in a formula of a “real man”: aggressive, gutsy, a fighter; someone who’s willing to compromise his own health to win.

The YouTube video is a SportsCenter countdown of the top ten most extraordinarily creative hockey goals. Impressive!

Response:

Confession: I’ve never been an avid watcher of televised sports. On the rare occasions I do, it’s usually golf or tennis – the quiet, individual sports – or the very end of the Super Bowl. But even with my limited background, I can see where the authors of both articles are coming from. The Formula seemed right on the money in its definition of a Real Man according to the world of televised sports. I would be curious to see the statistics for today, as opposed to 1999. I’m betting that both the gender and race numbers would be less glaringly male and white than twelve years ago.

I really liked the point about Tiger Woods that Granderson made in his article. First of all, I don’t think that professional athletes should be propelled to role model status in areas beyond their sport, but that’s kind of beside the point. If Tiger Woods was condemned for cheating on his wife, why is Sergio Romo similarly condemned for taking time off for the birth of his child? I feel as if we have some skewed priorities here, people.

Taking a different tack…

My friend and I have had this ongoing argument for a while. She hates sports – watching, playing, sweating, etc. I, on the other hand, love them. She wrote an article a while back for our high school paper entitled “Art vs. Sports: The Debate Lives On” and asked me to proofread it. The opening read: “Which is more important? Self-expression and creativity or physical fitness and athleticism?” I wrote, “Are you suggesting that athletics are not a form of self-expression or are not creative? Because I heartily disagree.”

True, sports are not and never will be the same as art. But take a look at that YouTube video of the top ten creative hockey goals (note: creative). They took work, they took heart, they were unique, and they certainly stirred emotion. Isn’t that creative? Isn’t that beauty?

I’ll leave you with a few choice quotations, each paired with an appropriate theme of the Televised Sports Manhood Formula:

Sports is a Man’s World: If the Bible has taught us nothing else, and it hasn’t, it’s that girls should stick to girls’ sports, such as hot oil wrestling, foxy boxing, and such and such. ~ Homer Simpson, The Simpsons

Boys Will Be (Violent) Boys: I went to a fight the other night, and a hockey game broke out. ~ Rodney Dangerfield

Give Up Your Body for the Team: Pain heals.  Chicks dig scars.  Glory lasts forever. ~ Vince McKewin, from the movie The Replacements

Show Some Guts!: Losers quit when they’re tired.  Winners quit when they’ve won. ~ Unknown