I posted this last November, actually.

posted by mcwetboy at 09:13 PM on January 20, 2003

patrickje, while Blainey-Broker's comments are en passant and don't go into detail, I don't think they necessarily support the reading you're giving to them. "Women can match men . . . " -- what does this mean? That women can stay in the pack and remain reasonably competitive? That women can break the top 10? Top 100? Top 1000? How many women must place at what rank before you change your position? You can't say that she's completely wrong without knowing what she's referring to. And providing some data from your end would have helped, too (i.e., "she's completely wrong, and here's why [link] . . . "). top female athletes are still nowhere near a top male athlete That's as may be, but I think her point was that women could be competitive, not dominant. Again, maybe not top 10 or even top 100 (depending on the competition), but they wouldn't automatically finish dead last. You talk as though not being able to finish first means there's no point in participating. (Of course, that could be my Canadianness speaking. Going for the bronze, oh yeah.) We're not talking top echelons, we're talking the entire range of the minor- and major-league and professional circuits. Can top women athletes hold their own against utility players, for example? I think they can. Against the best of the best? Now you're just moving the goalposts back. I also somehow think you're underestimating women athletes. I think the Williams sisters would do better than the "average" pro tennis player -- it depends on what you mean by "average" -- and I suspect a women's college basketball player could absolutely mop up at the YMCA. But that's just my hunch, which is probably no worse than yours.

posted by mcwetboy at 03:34 PM on October 07, 2002

"When female athletes are not being depicted as sex objects, they're often portrayed as too masculine, or—gasp—as lesbians."

Seems to me that part of the problem (which I don't think Goldman addresses) is that there are fewer women's sports that are at a professional level equivalent to the NBA/NFL/etc. Is amateur/minor-league sports coverage that much better on the men's side? Is men's volleyball? Mind you, that leaves aside the question of why women's sports aren't at a level equivalent to professional sports (except for tennis, which some would argue is precisely due to the T&A factor).

posted by mcwetboy at 10:39 PM on July 13, 2002