Randomnity
insert random title here
- Joined
- May 8, 2007
- Messages
- 9,485
- MBTI Type
- ISTP
- Enneagram
- 6w5
- Instinctual Variant
- sp/sx
It only works that way because that's how the spectator machine works. That's a problem with team ownership and the franchise being a money maker rather than some inherent gender problem.
Women's teams don't HAVE to be cut but they are because people are less interested in watching them on the whole. That isn't the fault of those who want to play competitively in the game itself, or of those who just want to play.
Exactly....they're already underfunded, and I'm guessing get more money from grants or whatever than from actual ticket sales (usually income negative rather than income positive like the men)....so if there's even a theoretical option for women to play on a "co-ed" team (i.e. something they can point to if there's an outcry), I'm guessing a lot of universities etc. would start thinking about cutting their women's teams.
Ticket sales are lower because most people want to watch the very best athletes and for nearly all sports that is men. Plus there's the established culture of "pro sports=men" around it, which has arisen in part due to sexism when pro leagues first started and women were actively discouraged from physical activity (so in that sense discrimination has played a role), but sexism isn't a major factor in maintaining this status quo, IMO.
I think funding sports teams for women is a positive thing overall, though. Not everyone would agree (you may not).