Sportsiology

Public Sociology in a Sports Arena

Archive for the 'NBA' Category

Linappropriate

Over the past couple of weeks, I have had numerous friends and colleagues ask me what I think of the Jeremy Lin situation. I don’t think I could be a Knick fan and not be Linsane but I always bring up not only the opportunity this has provided for the Asian American community and Ivy League players in the NBA but also for culturally insensitive comments. Saturday Night Live made some very interesting points about our willingness to speak about Lin in ways we would not speak about other groups, specifically African Americans.

There are ways in which we haven’t had enough recent experience with discrimination against Asians. And maybe that is a good enough excuse for the things that have been said and, as Stephen A. Smith says, we just need to be told we are wrong and apologize. But perhaps there is more going on here. If people buy into the model minority stereotype–that Asians are more White than they are minority–cultural insensitivity doesn’t come off as such and it is allowed in a way that it wouldn’t for any other group.

We have to recognize as a culture that while racism is attached to power, stereotypes can be applied at all levels and regardless of the truths we may find in some of them, they all have to be interrogated and evaluated. If nothing else, Jeremy Lin represents a mirror through which we can examine our often ethnocentric view of the world and a lesson in how to fix that.

posted by Sociology Sports Girl in NBA and have No Comments

Relax…Release…

While we often think about deviance as being a negative for society, there are many sociologists who recognizehttp://www.wpclipart.com/cartoon/people/kids/boy_cartoons/more_boys/punch_in_the_eye_2.png.html a purpose for it. Durkhiem says that one of the four functions of deviance is to release tension, and while sporting events shouldn’t be deviant, fans do participate in deviant acts during sporting events like they wouldn’t any other place. The negative interactions that fans can have with players (like the events which led to the brawl at The Palace or Charles Barkley and the Miami fans or with each other (the Giants fan beat up in Dodgers stadium, the little kid in the Jets uniform tackled by a Browns fan represent, what we hope, is abnormal behavior in the non-sports life of sports fans. One hopes that because they have the release of the game, and the drinks and the rowdiness (or in other cultures, the hooliganism), they can control those urges in other places. I think the big question here is why are sporting events an allowable place for this? It seems as though there is historical precedence for this—the amount of rowdiness displayed by the Greek during arena fights comes to mind—but is this really why Jet fans at Gate D at Giants Stadium used to grope women and request flashing during halftime?

posted by Sociology Sports Girl in MLB,NBA,NFL and have No Comments

Under New Management

I’ve spoken before about dramaturgy and the fact that we represent ourselves the way we want to be seen. I mentioned the NFL owners and unions who wanted to make sure that the other person is seen as the bad guy. But what about players? What kind of impression management do they participate in? Masculinity seems to be a big one. I was surprised by the number of stories that came out, one after another, about players not seeming tough or hard or participating in some kind of behavior that is deemed not manly enough. But there are other things. What about Jay Cutler not seeming upset when he couldn’t get back into the game? Or all the times announcers say that they can tell when the team or players aren’t into it? The most recent example was last night’s game. I heard on the radio that some people felt that LeBron’s pregame speech was faked, that he was playing to the cameras. Is this something else that athletes have to do? Do they have to take each game as life and death because we fans see it that way and we want to know that they do too? And when they don’t, when they seem tired or don’t play as we expected, do we decide that they don’t take the game seriously and will therefore not have success? I wonder if this encourages them to pretend and play their role so they audience will come to their games and buy their jerseys. And if it doesn’t, why not?

posted by Sociology Sports Girl in NBA,NFL and have No Comments

Its all relative…

I know I’m a little late to the game (its been an insane month) but we are showing more and more how deviance is relative and how, as times changes, what outrages us changes too. Twenty years ago (maybe even 15 years ago) would the slurs of Joakim Noah and Kobe Bryant had the reactions that they did? Would the bigger reactions be against Sean Avery’s and Steve Nash’s support of the gay marriage bill in New York or Avery’s agent who chastised him for making his opinion known?

I don’t know if, as Charles Barkley claimed, current male athletes would be perfectly fine with openly gay teammates but the players, owners and managers who have come out recently also haven’t gotten the backlash that they may have years ago. The line that separates what is deviant from what is not for much of mainstream America (or at least mainstream sporting America) seems to have shifted…I’m looking forward to seeing where it is in another 2o years.

posted by admin in NBA,NHL and have No Comments

Making Private Public

C. Wright Mills encourages sociologists to make a connection between biography and history to be able to see themselves within larger societal structures. He specifically asks that social scientists connect private concerns with public issues in order to glance outside of the intricacies of individuals’ lives into the social institutions within which we exist. While the personal issues and concerns of athletes and sports teams are often aired in public, and public groups and authorities can get involved, we, as sports fans don’t make as many connections to public issues as we should. That is really much of the purpose of this blog, to bring us out of our own lives, teams and loyalties and to allow us to see the bigger pictures. Is Kobe’s homophobic slur only a public issue because it was accidentally overheard or does it represent the larger issues around sports and masculinity and the ways in which we equate homosexuality with the lack of such? Is the robot that will throw out the pitch at the Phillies game just a publicity stunt or an example of American society’s move into the biotech society that we have been promised, where we are able to use technology to overcome biological limitations? When your sociological imagination becomes second nature, we won’t have to ask these questions anymore.

posted by Sociology Sports Girl in MLB,NBA and have No Comments

Tears of a Man

I don’t know why but it’s been hard to get away from masculinity the last few posts. I’m enjoying watching the NFL Draft (sadly, I have a Christmas-like enjoyment of the event) and I look up to the TV as I hear Chris Berman say, “It looks like he’s been selected. He’s crying in the back room.” Crying in a room, huh? Where have I heard that before?

Masculinity in sports is surprisingly contextual. There are things we accept, and places that we accept them, and there are things that we won’t. The Miami Heat players crying in the locker room is, in Brannon’s words, ‘sissy stuff’ but draft picks crying because they have made it to the NFL is okay for the ‘sturdy oak’. Barbosa and Evans holding hands after beating Orlando generates controversy within the NBA but butt-slapping during a football game, or even one time I remember Nate Robinson jumping on Steve Francis’ back and riding him like a horse, are perfectly accepted. Do new members of sporting society know what the rules are? Where the boundaries of their masculinity lie? Or do they get socialized through our reactions and hazing processes—taking them to the line which defines that which is deviant, and not masculine—and then dragging them back?

posted by Sociology Sports Girl in NBA,NFL and have No Comments

The Big Broken Wheel

The end of any season brings with it player injuries. Whether the team can overcome them is often less important than whether the player can overcome them. Our first response to player injuries in all sports is “suck it up” and it is because of this response that games like Madden feel they have to promote the danger in playing with a concussion. While gender roles have changed over time, much of our perspectives on things like masculinity haven’t, especially not in sports. In the 1970s, we looked to Brannon’s characteristics of masculinity and, today in our sports, they are as true as ever. Our sports stars are always “the big wheel”—the successful individuals that we continue to look up to regardless of what they do. They “give ‘em hell” as we celebrate their aggressiveness, elbows to the face and bloody uniforms. We do not allow the “sissy stuff” and expect the “study oak” that represents being tough, hard and confident, and far away from anything that might be considered feminine. And so we expect Amar’e to play with back spasms and Kobe and Rose to play with sprained ankles. And we chastise Jay Cutler because he wasn’t study enough to not get hurt or giving them enough hell to force himself back into the game. Are our masculine expectations leading our athletes towards further damage? Or is that just the cost you pay to be the big wheel?

posted by Sociology Sports Girl in NBA,NFL and have No Comments

Mostly Homers

Watching the playoffs often means watching your favorite team through the eyes of a national audience. While many of us would deny our own analysts as “homers,” we still find a level of familiarity in them that often makes us turn to them in times of sport. As sports fans, we develop an “us” vs. “them” mentality—our team vs. their team, our fans vs. their fans. Without even thinking about it, we have defined our in-group and our out-group. Within our in-group, we have loyalty. We will follow our in-group and accept much of what they do, even if we wouldn’t stand for it from others. A foul is dirty when committed by someone in our out-group but it becomes justified, or not a foul at all, when a member of our in-group is accused. We accept criticism from our fellow fans, analysts and commentators in a way we would not from those in the out-group. Are we truer fans if we appreciate the challenge of listening to our out-group announce our games or, can we still be called fans if we find ourselves muting TNT and ESPN whenever we can?

posted by Sociology Sports Girl in NBA,NFL and have No Comments

Whites need not apply

Last week, after BYU was eliminated from contention, reporters asked Jimmer Fredette whether he thought his style would fit well in the NBA. It seemed to me like a perfectly natural question. However, whoever was taking over for Mike Greeneburg the next morning on Mike and Mike (I believe it was Doug Gottlieb), commented that no one asked Kemba Walker the same question. Gottlieb’s explanation was because Fredette is white and Walker is black. The idea that a white man might have more difficulty being drafted into the NBA than a black man might be referred to as reverse racism but, the way many sociologists think about is with a basis in power. The non-dominant group, which in American society is still black men, cannot be racist towards white men because they do not have the power to. Perhaps there is prejudice–the belief that one group is inferior or superior–which leads to discrimination–behavior which differentiates between people based on those prejudice but not racism.

I don’t watch enough NCAA post-game news conferences but could there also be other reasons why Fredette was asked that question? Is it also possible that someone did ask Walker the question and it just didn’t get the same amount of attention?

UPDATE: Jimmer Fredetter wins player of the year. Is this an apology for the previous racism? Or is this a way of saying he is player of the year in the NCAA but probably won’t be in the NBA?

posted by Sociology Sports Girl in NBA,Other and have No Comments

Good Boys Don’t Cry

I can’t sign off today without commenting on Crygate, as Eric Spoelstra named it (for some reason). First, I have to say that I am surprised that Coach Spoelstra said anything at all. He could have very easily made his point by just saying that his players were emotional after the game. That would have been enough. But he said it and now it’s out there.

So the question obviously arises as to whether the comments since directed at the Miami Heat are a result of our perceived gender roles. I’ve heard people bring up the fact that the NBA is, to use every related cliché I can think of, the No Boys League and, as we all know that boys don’t cry, there should be no crying in basketball. Is it because these players are supposed to be tough and manly, because that is how they have been socialized and how our expected gender roles tell us that men should act? Or is it because it’s too early in the season and not an important enough reason for tears…yet?

 

In making fun of the Heat, other players are able to reinforce their own masculinity. Correspondents also have used odd comparisons to the tears they shed after visiting a children’s cancer ward as a way to give the Heat space for their tears. Other people, like Kobe Bryant and Mike D’Antoni, simply stated that crying doesn’t mean anything, it doesn’t challenge your masculinity, you have an emotional reaction and sometimes tears are part of that. So, what do you think? Nature vs. nurture?

posted by Sociology Sports Girl in NBA and have No Comments