Should I have been offended?

[NotAboutEgo]

I would like to hear people's opinions on something. I was at a Tiger game last season sitting with a female friend who has season tickets and who knows baseball inside out like myself and others (she doesn't play but is a die-hard fan like me). A really nice guy was sitting in front of us, and he overheard us talking about the game throughout the day. We were analyzing plays, players, the team, etc. He eventually turned around and said he was impressed with our indepth knowledge of baseball. He was a complete gentleman and was in no way trying to patronize us. However, I wasn't sure how to feel about it. The reason I wasn't sure how to feel about it was because I get sick and tired of a case being made everytime someone hears a female talking about baseball and knowing what she is talking about.

I know how I feel about it now. Even though he was not making fun of us, I didn't feel it was necessary to have to point out how one thinks it's something when a woman knows a little about baseball. It's basically indirectly saying, "I didn't expect you to know anything about baseball because you are women, but you know a lot and therefore, I am impressed." He did mention the fact that he was impressed that a couple of women know so much about baseball. Even though he was not coming from a sexist, stereotypical angle (not consciously, anyway), it was a sexist comment, influenced by the overall ignorance of our society.

When you are in situations similar to these, you get sick and tired of feeling like you are part of a "freak show." I have other examples similar to this, by the way. What I'm trying to say is, I am put off by the ignorance and close-mindedness of our society.

[JeepingBaseball]

I can totally understand what you're saying. However, I dont think he intentionally was trying to mock you or anything. It's easy to be impress by someone and come off in the end misunderstood at the same time. It happens. No harm no foul is what I say.

I'll give you an example. However, my example has not a single thing to do with baseball but it's my life experience.

I was born deaf. Im completely profoundly deaf since birth in both ears. After many years of speech theraphy and countless number of hearing aids, I get by with reading lips and hearing out of one hearing aid. The stereotype that came with it all thru my childhood to this very day still remains intact. "Deaf and dumb", "deaf and blonde", ect... all that nice sweet stuff. :rolleyes:

I will admit it made me angry and i fought back with such a passion. Today, I'm so used to it by now, that 98% of the remarks roll off my back. But that small 2%... do not be in my direct path is all i can say.

However, being deaf hasnt stopped me for another love I have besides baseball. And that's music.

Yes, you read that right... MUSIC.

My father was a music teacher and taught me everything from Elvis, to the Beattles, to Frank Sinatra, to Ricky Nelson, to Billy Joel, to the Rolling Stones, and so and on and on.

I can listen to them all, sing along with them all, tap the beat along with it, I go to concerts as often as I can (just attended the Def Leppard / Journey concert a few weeks ago) and my reviews of the shows are usually spot on with the critics i read in the paper a few days later.

I could sit and talk about music with anyone all day long. And my friends usually sit there in amazement wondering how the hell I know so much about it if I'm deaf. Most people are shocked. I realize the irony of it, of course. I usually get a good chuckle out of it but more than happy to explain to them how my hearing works, what i can and cannot hear. I communicate and talk just like everyone else. As a matter of fact, I dont admit to anyone at first I'm deaf till they get to know me. As weird as that sounds... they dont realize Im deaf at first. (which kinds of throws the whole 3rd and 4th dates into a bit of a mess... but thats another story lol)

I try to make it an educational experience for them, because nothing is worse than ignorance. I know I cant change the world, but I can help educate the person in front of me... one person at a time. It doesnt always work. I still get mocked and insulted and ignored daily. But I've accepted that part of my life as i considered those people afraid of what they dont know.

So back to your post, yes I do understand. And when it comes to baseball knowledge.. God gaves us all a brain. Few of us choose to use it :)

[NotAboutEgo]

Very cool story about yourself, JeepingBaseball. I know what you are saying. After so long of getting the "looks" and hearing the comments, you start to let them go and ignore them. However, this one time it bothered me a bit... not because of the guy who made the comment, but because of how ignorant our society still is about so many things... your story, for example. You are right, though. One has to sit back and think about the people making the comments, whether they are trying to make fun of someone or not, and then think that they are the ones missing out because they are the ones who are uninformed and who are scared of what they don't know.

I used to get so affended when people, both men and women, would stare at us when we practiced and played baseball. It's like they couldn't believe that their eyes were seeing women playing real baseball. I am way over that now. I now use it as motivation to perform better and try my best to do my best. Hopefully soon, our society's perceptions will change.

I agree. All we can do is stand our ground when needed and educate those who are uneducated about something that we are educated about. I do get sick of explaining the same things, though... "yes, we play on regulation-size baseball fields, we do pitch overhand, we do throw a REAL baseball, we play play by official baseball rules with a few modifications (roster modifications to get as much play in as possible in little time... but playing rules remain the same as MLB), etc."

[Captain Cold Nose]

Did he try to engage you in conversation about baseball? If he really were interested that you do know about the sport, he would have done so. I wouldn't be offended, but there's not much you can do to change a stereotype when people won't look past it.

[Hammerin Hank]

None of my female friends know anything about baseball. But, then, neither do any of my male friends. I'm the only one in our group who really has any interest in the game.

[NotAboutEgo]

No, he didn't engage in conversation about the game or baseball. He simply turned around and made the comment, and he was nice about it, but it still is sexist.

There are many people out there who don't know anything about baseball, whether it be males or females... like Hammerin Hank said about his male and female friends. It has nothing to do with your gender, color, race, etc. Unfortunately, not everyone thinks like we do!

[Captain Cold Nose]

No, he didn't engage in conversation about the game or baseball. He simply turned around and made the comment, and he was nice about it, but it still is sexist.

There are many people out there who don't know anything about baseball, whether it be males or females... like Hammerin Hank said about his male and female friends. It has nothing to do with your gender, color, race, etc. Unfortunately, not everyone thinks like we do!
Yes, it is. I don't have too many friends who are as into baseball as I am, but when I'm at a game with them, and someone is talking in depth about the sport, heck, I'll join them. A baseball fan is a baseball fan. I was at a minor league game a few years back, and I was able to joke with another guy sitting in front of me about the opposing manager, Von Hayes, whom we both remembered from his playing days. If you have the opportunity to talk about smething you know a lot about, you do it.

[NotAboutEgo]

Exactly!

I have never ever, since the time I was little, thought twice about being so into baseball and hockey and other sports and talking indepth about them, so when people make comments that it stands out to them in some way when females are into them so much, I just don't get it and I tend to get offended.

I'm the same way about talking to people at baseball games. I don't know how many times I've started talking with strangers at the games when they were talking about baseball, and it is very fun. I have made so many friends by doing that.

[sandlot]

I realize that this is a thread about women's baseball, but I feel that what's being discussed is how people, irrespective of gender, choose to react to what they feel to be discriminatory conduct or speech.

I would imagine that at one time or another, many of us have taken offense at something that another person meant as a compliment, but which they phrased badly. To become miffed or angry is natural, especially when it happens often, but it's rarely the productive response. I've found a lot's to be gained by recognizing the person's intent -- to compliment, not to cause slight -- and just say "thanks." That opens the way to more communication. A smile and a benign reply can elicit more exchange, and you never what surprising things people will say.

E.g., I live in China but am not Chinese. The racial difference gives rise to a whole lot of daily circumstances where presumptions and stereotypes come into play. One of the more common involves eating with chopsticks, which have their own etiquette. Chinese, especially on the mainland, observe foreigners when we use chopsticks and they will often pass comment upon our usage. As it happens, I'm aware of chopstick etiquette and am often complimented, but it grates like hell when I can tell that what the person really means is, "Wow, you're a foreign devil and you can actually get rice grains into your mouth without spilling them!" So, one time a young stranger seated at a restaurant table turns to me and says, "I see you use chopsticks well." I hadn't been in China very long, and I was getting a little p.o.'d by this kind of comment. So I said, "So, you're surprised that a foreigner can use them?" Thankfully, he ignored my rudeness, and what he said really took me back: "Oh no, it's not that. It just so happens that I am a professional pianist, so I care a great deal about hands, and watching how you hold your chopsticks makes me worry that, one day, your fingers are going become painfully crippled." I then asked him to show me what was wrong, and he taught me how to hold chopsticks in a truly proper and balanced way. I had to begin to learn how to eat all over again. We became friends for a few years, then life took us in different directions. But every time I pick up chopsticks, he is in my mind. I could have been offended, and become surly or silent, and he could have thought to himself, "Ah, ignorant foreigner -- what's the point?" But the stereotypes got set aside, thanks to him, and 20 years later my hands aren't crippled. Point: We have to be careful when making assumptions about people's motives. To borrow a familar phrase, it's Not (Always) About Ego.:waving

[NotAboutEgo]

Thanks for the good insight, Sandlot. It's hard to let go of comments like those that we and many other people have heard over and over. But, I have learned, like you said, a lot of things people say get miscontrued because of their perception of the comments and not knowing the true meaning of them. I know the guy was complimenting us. I guess I was more irritated with the fact that our society is still ignorant about women being knowledgeable about sports, about liking them, and about women playing them and being good at them. I know the guy wasn't trying to make fun of us, but our society has shaped such things as how the comments come out. It's up to each person to overcome that.

[5LilPlayers]

I was at a minor league game a few years back, and I was able to joke with another guy sitting in front of me about the opposing manager, Von Hayes, whom we both remembered from his playing days. If you have the opportunity to talk about smething you know a lot about, you do it.

Exactly!

Personal story: At our local minor league team's game, a few years ago, I was with one of my friends who just wanted to get out and do something. NOT a big baseball fan...in fact, she knows about as much of the sport as a dog does. LOL But she agreed to go with me. After the 10 millionth time of her asking "What does 'that' mean?" and my answering her, the guy in front of us commented on "People shouldn't come if they don't know the game." At least he did say people and not women...so I didn't take too much offense then.

However, shortly after that...names are long forgotten now, unfortunately...but the batter hit a hard one, right back to the pitcher. It was slightly in the air, no one had touched it, and it ended up hitting the pitching rubber, then bounced away between 2nd and 3rd base. No one made a move to get the ball. My friend asked me, "Why aren't they moving?" I told her, "It's simple, really. No one's touched it and it bounced off the rubber. If the ump rules it properly, it's a foul ball." The umps, at that point, had gathered...doing the typical "who had the best view" conference to make the correct call. While they were talking, the guy in front of me looked at his son (probably around 8 or 9...maybe 10 years old) and said "Ignore people who don't know what they're talking about. The ball went up the middle, it's a fair ball in any ball game and someone's gonna get on base, maybe even a double out of it." At that point, the ump turned around and signaled that it was, indeed, a foul ball. At that point, the man's son turned to me, "How do you know so much about baseball?" I knew it was the "female thing"...but kids are more brutally honest than adults, and the boy obviously noticed that not many girls/women play...may not have known ANY who did...so I can be a bit more..."relaxed", I guess...with children. So I just told him, "I've been a fan of baseball practically since I was born. I'm sure that pretty much like you, my father passed down the love of the game to me." He just said "Oh" and turned around. But it was kind of cute, because for the rest of the game, when there was a close call, or the umps had another little conference, he'd turn around and look at me "How would you rule that one?"

I can't help but think that maybe...just maybe...when that little boy grows up, he won't be so quick to judge when women start talking sports. It's so different with a child making a comment like that...you just can't get mad at them. They're too innocent, and a lot of children's thoughts are influenced by their same-sex parent...be it the same thoughts, just because dad/mom thinks so...or totally different, just to be "difficult".

Parents, of both genders, need to watch what they say (as well as how they act) around their opposite-gendered children...and I think that's where a lot of it stems from, too. How many books about baseball mention "Fathers and Sons" compared to "Mothers and Daughters"...or even "Fathers and Daughters" in their titles or subtitles? Most newer books now mention the "family ties"..."family game"...family, family, family...at least hinting that mothers or daughters are involved, but I have yet to see a book on baseball geared specifically towards females (whether it be a "beginner" book for those who don't know much/are just getting into being a fan or an "advanced" book with a "Bet you didn't know" theme).

I'M the one who gets my kids out there to play. I'M the one who teaches them as much as I can. I'M the one who plays endless games of catch in the yard. I'M the one who's been trying to get them interested...and trying to keep that interest alive, once they've found it.

Yes, I admit, if a male comments on my knowledge, no matter how it's intended, I often do take a bit of offense...but unlike a lot here, it's because I DIDN'T have to put up with the stereotypes growing up. The boys and men that I have played with...all but one...knew from the start that I could play and were more than happy to accept me as a teammate, no matter my gender. I really think it hurts me more when adult males make comments like that towards me, with my past, because so many boys and men knew that I could play. I try to cut some slack whenever possible, as I didn't grow up with those men at the game who make comments..but thankfully, from childhood until now, I just haven't heard quite the array of comments so many others have.

I guess I was one of the lucky few...

[Chelle]

I don't think I would have been offended. Had he said...I'm very impressed that as women you are so knowledgeable about baseball...I would have been offended (maybe dumped a soda on his head..JOKE)...but I've gone to games with one of my female friends and people say that to us. I've also gone to games with my boyfriend (another baseball geek) and people say it to him and I. So I don't think it's gender issue..I think it's just we're that baseball freaky.

Most people like baseball, as a general social event, but a lot of people don't really LIVE baseball (like the pepople on this forum) who wake up everyday and run to rotoworld (or the like) to see OMG what happened..who got traded...who pitched well, and please lord...I know I fell asleep in the bottom of the ninth during the O's game but don't let anything have happend.

So, the fact that in our heads we keep the not only the 40-man roster but the fact that didn't that high school kid finally show up to low single A for the O's last week...sometimes amazes people....and the feel the need to coment on it. And our gender has nothing to do with it.

[NotAboutEgo]

I enjoyed reading the stories from both 5LilPlayers and Chelle. I'm sure most of us/many of us have had similar experiences. I don't get mad at what children say, for the moat part, either, because they are innocent, learning, growing, not completely responsible for what they say (sometimes they know what they are saying and doing, but it's arbitrary whether they are completely responsible... but for what we are talking about, I don't hold them responsible and don't take offense to it).

I had to deal with a lot of "you can't play baseball because you are a girl" and "girl's don't play baseball" and all that, so when someone flat out makes a sexist comment (or other stereotypical, racial, out of line, etc. types of comments), I take offense to it whether they meant to be prejudiced or not. I guess that's why I was confused as how to react to the guy when he said he was impressed with us because we are women who nkow a lot about baseball. It just tells us what our society is like, and that's what frustrated me. Even though I try not to let the ignorant ones annoy me and get me worked up, I still get sick and tired of hearing such things.

I have heard so many comments at Tiger games slamming women in one way or another. I hear so many of the typical comments like "you throw like a girl/woman," and "you play like my mom." I shut one guy up when he yelled at a player and siad he plays like a girl. I (there just happened to be a few of my teammates sitting in the same area) told him there are a lot of female baseball players sitting by him, and if he thinks he's so good, we will take him on any day. He didn't make one other comment about it the rest of the game. I have also said other things like, "If you think you're so good, why aren't you on the field?"

To Chelle, do you think people would make sexist comments to you if your boyfriend wasn't with you? Maybe they would... who knows. At least with my experiences (I have gone to so many Tigers home games in the past 3-4 years, I have gotten to know many people who have season tickets and who go often), people don't make those comments when they are at a higher level of the mind, and also when they see you at games all the time and know you are really into baseball, they know you know what you are talking about. It's the ignorant ones who need some schooling.

One time, during a women's baseball tournament in South Bend, Indiana, a bunch of us who were playing went to a Silver Hawks game. We were from teams like Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, the East Coast, South Bend, Manitoba, etc. We all were sitting in the same area, and this guy who was with his daughter (she was about 8 or 9) was yelling like a lunatic at some players, making some of the same sexist comments putting down women. We all "attacked" him by saying we were there playing in a women's baseball tourney, and that he should stop making those comments because they are very rude and offending. I'm sure we said more, but he immediately began apologizing and groveling, and he even went on to say he was going to get his daughter into playing baseball!

I know a lot of people make comments and don't even think about them first. They use the cliched comments but don't think why they are using them, who they may offend while using them, and they just don't give it much thought, period. I guess what we can do, as supporters of women who play sports (whether you are male or female), is say things in a positive way to change their minds. At least it may make them stop and think and let go of their stereotypes in some way... hopefully all the way.

[Captain Cold Nose]

I enjoyed reading the stories from both 5LilPlayers and Chelle. I'm sure most of us/many of us have had similar experiences. I don't get mad at what children say, for the moat part, either, because they are innocent, learning, growing, not completely responsible for what they say (sometimes they know what they are saying and doing, but it's arbitrary whether they are completely responsible... but for what we are talking about, I don't hold them responsible and don't take offense to it).

I had to deal with a lot of "you can't play baseball because you are a girl" and "girl's don't play baseball" and all that, so when someone flat out makes a sexist comment (or other stereotypical, racial, out of line, etc. types of comments), I take offense to it whether they meant to be prejudiced or not. I guess that's why I was confused as how to react to the guy when he said he was impressed with us because we are women who nkow a lot about baseball. It just tells us what our society is like, and that's what frustrated me. Even though I try not to let the ignorant ones annoy me and get me worked up, I still get sick and tired of hearing such things.

I have heard so many comments at Tiger games slamming women in one way or another. I hear so many of the typical comments like "you throw like a girl/woman," and "you play like my mom." I shut one guy up when he yelled at a player and siad he plays like a girl. I (there just happened to be a few of my teammates sitting in the same area) told him there are a lot of female baseball players sitting by him, and if he thinks he's so good, we will take him on any day. He didn't make one other comment about it the rest of the game. I have also said other things like, "If you think you're so good, why aren't you on the field?"

To Chelle, do you think people would make sexist comments to you if your boyfriend wasn't with you? Maybe they would... who knows. At least with my experiences (I have gone to so many Tigers home games in the past 3-4 years, I have gotten to know many people who have season tickets and who go often), people don't make those comments when they are at a higher level of the mind, and also when they see you at games all the time and know you are really into baseball, they know you know what you are talking about. It's the ignorant ones who need some schooling.

One time, during a women's baseball tournament in South Bend, Indiana, a bunch of us who were playing went to a Silver Hawks game. We were from teams like Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, the East Coast, South Bend, Manitoba, etc. We all were sitting in the same area, and this guy who was with his daughter (she was about 8 or 9) was yelling like a lunatic at some players, making some of the same sexist comments putting down women. We all "attacked" him by saying we were there playing in a women's baseball tourney, and that he should stop making those comments because they are very rude and offending. I'm sure we said more, but he immediately began apologizing and groveling, and he even went on to say he was going to get his daughter into playing baseball!

I know a lot of people make comments and don't even think about them first. They use the cliched comments but don't think why they are using them, who they may offend while using them, and they just don't give it much thought, period. I guess what we can do, as supporters of women who play sports (whether you are male or female), is say things in a positive way to change their minds. At least it may make them stop and think and let go of their stereotypes in some way... hopefully all the way.
I'm sorry that's happened to you. While Detroit fans are great for the team overlal in every sport, there are plenty of boorish people, as well. But that's anywhere. Intelligent baseball fans aren't going to make comments like that. But they are only part of the stadium equation.

A team made it all the way from Manitoba for that tourney?

[Chelle]

Great post by the way....and way to bring up an intersting topic.

By first point, I work in an mostly main dominated field...so I'm used to sexist comments..they don't phase me

I agree that "higher baseball minds" as you called it, don't care what your gender is. They are so excited to be talking to another baseball geek that they will just start bursting forth excitedly with stats about their favorite players (and who MUST be traded right now before the deadline, or in the off season) they just want to talk baseball. It's the people who "think" they know baseball that scare me.

I was at Camden with a guy pal of mine for his birthday. He's just a social fan and we were enjoying the game. He started talking to the guy next to him about the game. My buddy said something about bring up Adam Loewen (this was early in the season) and this guy started arguing about it being to soon and he needed at least another year or two in the minors. Well, to help my guy friend out (who isn't really schooled on baseball) I leaned over and said...well, Adam has to be up by the end of the year anyway (and as I was finishing the sentence he said "Hon, we're talking babeball here"). Like, I wouldn't understand.

So, I waited until he made another comment about Loewen coming up in 1-2 years, and I said. Acutally, his contract stipulates that he has to be playing in the majors by 2007. Then I laughed.

Many people make the assumption that if your a woman you may know a bit about the major league team, but you won't know anything about the farm teams...and you SURE won't be able to play.

I went on a baseball vacation with my boyfriend to California because I want to see all the major league parks before 2010. Every fan we met asked him, how did you get her to agree to that? He had to say over and over again. It was her idea...I wanted to go to Jamaica.

It used to bother me, now I use it as a meter to judge if someone is worth talking to. If they are the kind of person who is going to think that you can't be baseball intellegent because you're a women....then most likely they've never been on a baseball forum or blog, and never have met some of the women that I have who astound me with their baseball skills. So they aren't really baseball savy themselves.

Waste of your time.

[NotAboutEgo]

You are right, Captain Cold Nose. Yes, there was a women's team from Manitoba in the Great Lakes Women's Baseball League in 2003 that played in that tourney, but unfortunately they folded after a season because of lack of commitment of the players. They were a really fun team to play, and the people who ran their org. were awesome!

[NotAboutEgo]

Will write more later to comment on Chelle's latest and perhaps other things.

[Mattingly]

Since I don't hear much analysis at a game on every single play, player's, lefty-righty matchups, what who's throwing or whether the pitcher should've thrown to 3B or 1B, I figure that good baseball talk is good baseball talk. If someone enjoys what they're hearing, doesn't make mention of the person's gender, I'd take it as a compliment.

[NotAboutEgo]

I agree, Mattingly. But this guy did say he was impressed with us because we are women who know a lot about baseball. He did mention that, so I didn't know how to respond because he was very polite and nice, but it seemed sexist even if he didn't mean it that way.

It's funny. My friend and I have often gotten into conversations with guys at the games, when they think we don't know anything, and we pretty much show them up so they end up shutting up. Don't mess with a woman who knows baseball!!! LOL :laugh

[DownUnderDodger]

I have read this thread with interest.

NotAboutEgo said: He eventually turned around and said he was impressed with our indepth knowledge of baseball. He was a complete gentleman and was in no way trying to patronize us. However, I wasn't sure how to feel about it.

From what I read into that comment is that the guy was passing a compliment and to take it any other way could be seen as being thin skinned. Had the remark been sarcastic or rude then yes, he was a stereotypical, sexist smart ass. It also shows in a way that it is sometimes very hard for a man to make a comment or an action towards a woman without being seen as sexist, or male chauvinistic. Very often a man will make an innocent comment or do something he sees as being complimentary and respectful, such as opening a door for a woman, only to get scorned.

I do know what you are saying about stereotyping and I am sure we have all been on the receiving end of stereotyping (and have probably all made stereotypical remarks). I know many years ago when I was in Melbourne visiting a friend and we watched an Australian Football match. My friend was 'impressed' with my knowledge of the game, given, at the time, it was not a very popular game in Sydney. He figured I only knew about Rugby, which was the most popular sport in Sydney. I have also had comments about how much I know about baseball from family in USA after I married an American lady (whom I met at Dodgers Stadium). Being from Australia I was obviously not meant to know anything about the great American pastime (Baseball). On the other side of the fence, I met a Texan in a bar in San Francisco in 1977 and he knew a lot about Australia and Aussies. My immediate reaction was to stereotype this guy as being American, hence he should be ignorant about Australia, as I found most Americans I had met during this trip were. I did not make the mistake of saying anything to him, I just enjoyed our conversation and walked away knowing that not all Americans were ignorant beyond their shores......on the same trip I asked someone in New Orleans how much it would cost to send an item to Australia and was asked where in Europe Australia was?? I do know that Americans are generally now more worldly than they may have been 30 years ago.

[NotAboutEgo]

I really enjoyed your post, DownUnderDodger. You are so right about everyone being in that type of situation and also about giving out such comments as well. I guess I've just had my fill of comments about women playing and knowing baseball, but I've learned how to ignore most of them. I like your stories about your travels. I know what you mean about Americans not being so aware of other countries and their people. I hear people making stupid comments all the time about Mexico (based on what they see from Hollywood). My ex-husband is from Mexico, and the way Hollywood portrays Mexico is so off! It's a very beautiful country with beautiful people, terrific food (not just tacos, either), a beautiful culture, etc. I have been there so many times... deep in the interior of the country, and I've had REAL Mexican food, which is one of my favorite cuisines.

So, how did you meet your wife at the Dodgers game, if I can ask? Sounds like a great way to meet someone. I thought I would meet a good guy at a Tigers game, as much as I've been to them, but it hasn't happened. I've met plenty of people, but no one special. That's cool.

Saw your post about softball. I'm not into softball much, but go ahead and make posts. I don't have any problems with that. Do you play?

[DownUnderDodger]

Thank you for your comments NotAboutEgo.

Firstly, I was in USA in 1986 with a Surf life Saving (Lifeguard) team from Sydney Australia and we were hosted at the time by the LA County Lifeguards. We were invited to Dodgers Stadium by the Lifeguards, as the LA County Beaches and Harbors (their management) social club had organised the night out for the employees. My now wife was part of B & H group, and I sat next to her and pestered her throughout the game . I visited her at her office the next day, and things flowed from there. After an on/off/on long distance relationship we were married in LA in 1999.

Secondly.....no I don't and have never played baseball or softball. In fact I knew very little about baseball which was a relatively unknown sport in Australia when I was growing up. I came to enjoy the game during a trip the USA in 1978, when I was following the exploits of a then 'clean' Pete Rose. My first live game was in July 1978 at Montreal Stadium, and my second game was the 'fateful' night in 1986 at Dodgers Stadium - coincidentally featuring the Expos (the Dodgers beat the Expos 5-2 I think). I became a Dodgers fan during this trip.

I too am a lover of Mexican food although I have not experienced 'real' Mexican cuisine from within the country itself. My only journeys into Mexico have been to Tijuana (hardly representative of true Mexico). My wife grew up in Phoenix Az and lived most of he adult life in LA so she was exposed to some reasonably genuine Mex food, and she cooks mean enchiladas. I love cooking them too, and I also occasionally prepare chicken Quesidillas. I once worked with a gal from Mexico and she was a charming, friendly outgoing young lady.

[tmorss9]

Ego, I really enjoyed your post.. If I were you, I wouldn't take any offense to what the guy said. My dad actually does it all the time. Truth is that I'm impressed when someone knows baseball whether they look like Cindy Crawford or Carl Crawford. While I don't think I would have mentioned anything about you being a woman who really knows the game, I would have mentioned that it was clear you knew what you were talking about. Quite honestly, anytime I'm at Comerica, I just hope that the people next to me know the game, or at least ask to try to learn more if they don't. It's refreshing to hear people talk baseball at a game instead of business.

Then again, take that as from coming from a guy who graduated from a high school where the girls softball team would have destroyed the boys baseball team;)

[sandlot]

One individual can at times represents something larger, like one dumb guy = entire history of patriarchy, but most of the time a person represents only him- or herself. I believe that if we respond on each occasion as if we were confronting a system, rather than just a single person, it distorts our own responses and eventually alters us in what can be unpleasant ways. We get conditioned, and when that happens, our responses become as stereotypical as the thing that we think we're reacting to. To break that cycle is difficult, but it helps to remember what somebody once said about Freudian analysis: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar." Or, sometimes a compliment is just a compliment. I realize that this is easier said than done, but as some of the comments on this thread show, it's possible. I think DownUnderDodger has nailed it pretty well on the head.

Speaking of which: When I want to talk baseball with somebody here in China, my best mate is an Australian lawyer. He loves baseball, tapes every game he can, knows a huge amount about history of the game and often greets me with a comment about the latest Yankees or Red Sox game. Was I surprised when I first learned this about him? You bet. Entirely unexpected. And I said about the same thing to him that the guy said whose comment started this thread. And not long ago, I was sitting at a bar here watching baseball on TV and the guy next to me, a 30ish fellow from the West Indies, made remarkably astute comment followed by a perfect historical reference. I was floored, and asked how a West Indian -- whom I'd expect to be a cricketer -- knew so much about baseball. I hope he didn't take offense, and I don't think he did, because he said he was in fact a cricketer (a bowler), but one day he was sitting at an airport bar -- in the U.S. -- and made some wisecrack about cricket being superior to baseball, just to get a little chatter going. So the guy next to him says, "Ah, that's because you know nothing about the game within the game. I could explain a little, if you're interested." So they start talking and the West Indian guy, who knows the inner game of cricket, has his eyes opened wide. When they get ready to leave, the West Indian guy introduces himself and says, "So how did you learn so much about baseball yourself?" And the other guy says, "Oh, I used to play a little. My name's Don Drysdale." True story.

[DownUnderDodger]

Great post Sandlot!! When I first took an interest in baseball....as I previously mentioned, in 1978......I learnt everything I could from the newspaper and TV as I knew no-one in USA I could talk to. Forums such as this are fantastic for foreigners like me to continue to learn about the game.

[sandlot]

Thanks, DUDeb.:) Just an addendum: Although I've never held a cricket ball or swung (if that's the right word for it) a cricket bat, I was required at one point in my working life to learn how to read a cricket line score -- lbw, and all that. One night a story went by my desk with a cricket line in it, and I spotted an apparent error. As etiquette required, I sent off a very gentle query to Oz asking whether the line shouldn't read differently. What I got back was an astonished note that read: "But I thought you were a YANK!" A few minutes later there followed a corrected line score. I had a grin on my face for days.:D I wish now that I'd saved those notes for framing.

The last Ashes, btw, were fantastic.

[bluezebra]

Great post Sandlot!! When I first took an interest in baseball....as I previously mentioned, in 1978......I learnt everything I could from the newspaper and TV as I knew no-one in USA I could talk to. Forums such as this are fantastic for foreigners like me to continue to learn about the game.

I hope some Americans can learn something here also. The ignorance of many Americans, especially those involved with youth programs, is appalling.

A little advice my Aussie friend, if you watch games on TV, DO NOT believe anything Joe Morgan and/or Tim McCarver have to say about baseball rules.

Bob

[SoxSon]

NotAboutEgo--
I've enjoyed reading your posts (and everyone else's, too!). I have a question for you. If a man turned and said "It's really refreshing to hear a women who's knowledgeable about baseball," would you feel offended by that? Truthfully, I haven't known many women who have been crazy about the sport, aside from those here at BBF. I'm afraid I may blurt something along those lines someday, and the last thing I would ever want is to be offensive to anyone. If I said this, it would be out of a sense of joy, if that makes sense.

So...whaddya think? :)

[Mattingly]

I agree, Mattingly. But this guy did say he was impressed with us because we are women who know a lot about baseball. He did mention that, so I didn't know how to respond because he was very polite and nice, but it seemed sexist even if he didn't mean it that way.

It's funny. My friend and I have often gotten into conversations with guys at the games, when they think we don't know anything, and we pretty much show them up so they end up shutting up. Don't mess with a woman who knows baseball!!! LOL :laugh
To me, it's a two-headed coin. I've known guys who were mystified when a woman knew her baseball. I've known women who did who weren't interested in being known as female (since many guys presumed that all the people who knew baseball were male).

I've known one person who called herself "Joe", but was really a Josephine. She could give great analysis, say why it was great that the ace was pitching the next day, why the setup guy was brought in too early. All kinds of stuff like that.

Since at a game, unlike when online, you can't hide your gender very easily, I wouldn't worry about "shutting anyone up". To me, baseball is a thing t be shared. If someone knows mroe than myself, I'll accept that. I've known a Yankee fan whose father watched Ruth play in the Bambino's later years. People pass things on, and they in turn pass things onto others.

I'll get into a little trivia, but even with that, such as Mickey Mantle trivia, that's not my questioning whether or not the person really knows the game. What if I'd asked you some trivia to test your knowledge? Does that mean I'm saying you don't know the game? As it turns out, yesterday, a big fan of the game (he's the History Mod on another board) was asked all kinds of trivia, and we'd surprised him, just to see if we could stump him. He's always looking into his books, notes and online. This time, we caught him.

If someone told me they were a fan of a team for 30 years, I'd ask them questions. If someone believes I'm only asking because of the gender, I feel that may not be what I'm looking for. Trivia at a game is either good fun or to see if you can stump the person who's knowledgeable. Kind of like asking trivia to Alex Trebek.

I think that if we get into the "take that!" type of replies ... quite frankly, I think that would make the women as bad as some of the guys I've tried to avoid at ballgames. Just my thought. :)

[5LilPlayers]

If a man turned and said "It's really refreshing to hear a women who's knowledgeable about baseball," would you feel offended by that?

I can't speak for NotAboutEgo....but personally, I'd much rather hear "Finally! I've found someone who knows as much (or "more") about baseball than I do."...or..."Finally, someone I can relate to!"....or...just something along those lines. Even, going with that line, "It's really refreshing to hear someone who knows what they're talking about." I know finding female fans (other than here) is still somewhat rare, especially in certain areas, but to me, it's like pointing out the obvious.

It's kind of like saying..."That male bartender over there in the red hat..." if ALL the rest of the bartenders are women or even if all the rest of bartenders are males, but none of the others are wearing a hat. "The bartender in the hat" is pretty descriptive alone...there's really no need to point out the gender.

I'm not saying, personally, that I would take offense...but in certain situations, pointing out gender isn't really a "necessity".

Does that make sense?

[NotAboutEgo]

It's late and I have to work tomorrow. There are so many great posts here. I will put my two cents in sometime tomorrow, as this thread has become even more interesting with even more angles to it. Thanks, all!

[sandlot]

...it's like pointing out the obvious.

It's kind of like saying..."That male bartender over there in the red hat..." if ALL the rest of the bartenders are women or even if all the rest of bartenders are males, but none of the others are wearing a hat. "The bartender in the hat" is pretty descriptive alone...there's really no need to point out the gender.

I'm not saying, personally, that I would take offense...but in certain situations, pointing out gender isn't really a "necessity".

Does that make sense?Honestly, to me, yes and no. It really varies by context. There's a difference, to my little mind, between the obvious and the gratuitous. If there are five bartenders, all male, and one wears a hat, I would probably refer to him saying.. "the guy with the hat." Even though they are all male, and "guy" is a redundancy ("guy" is also turning into a genderless word). If there were four hatless women and one guy wearing a bowler, I might ask, "Who's the bloke in the hat?" If there were five bartenders, four male and all wearing hats, and one woman with no hat, I am far more likely to say "the female bartender" than to say "the one who's not wearing a hat." The latter would sound forced and intentionally PC. But gratuitous, and open to negative reaction because it could be taken either way, might be, "That woman bartender pours a good drink," especially if more than one bartender is female. Sexist for sure would be, "She's not a bad bartender, for a woman."

But I have to say that living in this part of Asia has had a big effect on de-politicizing many things for me. People here are generally very polite, and exquisitely sensitive to questions of "face," but many of them have little hesitation pointing at someone (for example, me) and saying, "You're getting too fat!" or, ""Wah! You look like your pregnant! Stop eating oily food!" The basic thinking seems to be, if something's already obvious, why not mention it? In fact, if people feel free enough to say something like that, it means they also feel emotionally close enough to you to be able to say it -- and you should immediately understand when you hear it that they are expressing that warmth. A very different way of looking at things. (The example I gave was about fat, but believe me, it doesn't stop there!) :)

[5LilPlayers]

Okay, the bartender thing probably wasn't a good example....LOL It was late and I was getting tired, it was just the first thing that popped into my head. Context has a lot to do with it, too, of course. But there are certain situations where pointing out gender isn't necessary...or when mentioning gender could get you in trouble with the extremely PC crowd, or when someone could just plain take offense to it....like with baseball.

Solely speaking of baseball, as stated, I'd much rather hear "Finally, someone I can relate to!"....or if the male thinks the female in question is pretty...and again, this depends on the female but, I'd even take a joking comment of: "You know as much as I do about baseball...I've finally found my soul mate....Will you marry me?" (granted, that would only work if neither of you are wearing a wedding ring, of course LOL) but it's much preferable (IMO) to the "Wow, you know a lot about baseball for a woman." or any other flat-out comment coming from a man's surprise about a woman knowing the game.

The only way I wouldn't take even slight offense when mentioning gender is if it was a situation calling on one of those little known/hardly used rules. Even the most die hard fans don't know all 13 ways a pitcher can commit a balk with runners on base. But even then, I think...for ME to make that comment...it would come out more of "Wow, I didn't think anyone knew them all" rather than "I didn't think any men/women knew all of them".

There is a point when "PC" should be banned, but there some people who are just overly sensitive and will take offense at anything said to them, or in their general direction, so we all can't constantly watch every little thing we say. I guess it comes down more to "go with your gut"....if you think the person may be hurt or take offense, be careful. If you know the person really well and joke like that often...it won't matter.

[NotAboutEgo]

NotAboutEgo--
I've enjoyed reading your posts (and everyone else's, too!). I have a question for you. If a man turned and said "It's really refreshing to hear a women who's knowledgeable about baseball," would you feel offended by that? Truthfully, I haven't known many women who have been crazy about the sport, aside from those here at BBF. I'm afraid I may blurt something along those lines someday, and the last thing I would ever want is to be offensive to anyone. If I said this, it would be out of a sense of joy, if that makes sense.

So...whaddya think? :)

SoxSon, I guess I would feel the same way as I did when the guy at the Tigers game made the same type of comment. Even if I knew the PERSON wasn't trying to be sexist and put me down and was polite as can be, it would still irritate me for the simple fact of the PERSON saying it's refreshing to hear a woman who is knowledgeable about baseball. It's not so much about the PERSON just saying that, but it's about the fact that their expectations of my knowledge of baseball are low and it's because I am a female. I think that's the part that pisses me off more than anything when people treat me like I can't do something just because I'm a woman.

Like I have said in other threads, I have been into sports, especially baseball and hockey (began watching both at such a young age, I don't really remember when it was... I think I started watching hockey at age 5 when my parents started taking my sister and I to IHL games in Grand Rapids, Michigan and other Midwest cities [Grand Rapids Blades, Owls, Grizzlies] and have absolutely loved it since... went to my first Tigers game when I was 4 but I'm sure I saw games on TV and listened to games on the radio before that, as my dad and other relatives were always into the team). So, for me, to know a lot about baseball and hockey and to be into them so much is completely normal and is part of who I am. That is why I get pissed when people undermine my intelligence for the things I love.

When someone says something like they are surprised I know so much because I am a woman, it's based on pure ignorance, whether it's handed down from the status quo of society or it's a personal ignorance on the part of the person making the comment or both. It irritates me just as much if a woman says she is surprised about my knowledge of the game because I am a woman. To me, it is like saying she has low expectations for women in general and is adding the to sexism thing because of that. It doesn't matter to me whether she knows a lot about baseball or not. I would "assume" she is just not into that much, but I wouldn't think that just because she is a woman. I don't expect everyone to be as much of a baseball junkie as I am.

So, I guess it's more about undermining someone's knowledge and intelligence of something and then adding the component of sex in there just adds fuel to the fire. To assume women don't know much about baseball is just plain ignorant, just as much as ignorance plays a part of the situations that others have described in this particular thread.

[Chelle]

NotAboutEgo--
I've enjoyed reading your posts (and everyone else's, too!). I have a question for you. If a man turned and said "It's really refreshing to hear a women who's knowledgeable about baseball," would you feel offended by that? Truthfully, I haven't known many women who have been crazy about the sport, aside from those here at BBF. I'm afraid I may blurt something along those lines someday, and the last thing I would ever want is to be offensive to anyone. If I said this, it would be out of a sense of joy, if that makes sense.

So...whaddya think? :)

I think it's depends on the tone of voice and the way it's said to me also. Sometimes when someone says "It's really refreshing to hear a women who's knowledgeable about baseball" in a matter-of-fact tone...I guess I would be flattered. But if it was more of a "Wow" shock...awe. I think I would take it a bit different.

It depends on the moment. If you said it with a sense of joy...I'm sure it would be inturpreted as such...once baseball fan to another.

[WonderMonkey]

I would like to hear people's opinions on something. I was at a Tiger game last season sitting with a female friend who has season tickets and who knows baseball inside out like myself and others (she doesn't play but is a die-hard fan like me). A really nice guy was sitting in front of us, and he overheard us talking about the game throughout the day. We were analyzing plays, players, the team, etc. He eventually turned around and said he was impressed with our indepth knowledge of baseball. He was a complete gentleman and was in no way trying to patronize us. However, I wasn't sure how to feel about it. The reason I wasn't sure how to feel about it was because I get sick and tired of a case being made everytime someone hears a female talking about baseball and knowing what she is talking about.

I know how I feel about it now. Even though he was not making fun of us, I didn't feel it was necessary to have to point out how one thinks it's something when a woman knows a little about baseball. It's basically indirectly saying, "I didn't expect you to know anything about baseball because you are women, but you know a lot and therefore, I am impressed." He did mention the fact that he was impressed that a couple of women know so much about baseball. Even though he was not coming from a sexist, stereotypical angle (not consciously, anyway), it was a sexist comment, influenced by the overall ignorance of our society.

When you are in situations similar to these, you get sick and tired of feeling like you are part of a "freak show." I have other examples similar to this, by the way. What I'm trying to say is, I am put off by the ignorance and close-mindedness of our society.

I 100% see your point. And I agree. At times a compliment can be more of a slap. I think, to sum it up, that anytime you are doing something that is outside of the accepted "norm" then a compliment for doing it can be potentially hurtful. The difference, to me, is the intentions and presentation of the complimenter. If he would have said "You broads aren't as dumb as most chicks!" then that would have been uncool. The way that guy presented it and it's seemingly sincerity would make allow me to appreciate and accept the compliment.

[NotAboutEgo]

I think it's depends on the tone of voice and the way it's said to me also. Sometimes when someone says "It's really refreshing to hear a women who's knowledgeable about baseball" in a matter-of-fact tone...I guess I would be flattered. But if it was more of a "Wow" shock...awe. I think I would take it a bit different.

It depends on the moment. If you said it with a sense of joy...I'm sure it would be inturpreted as such...once baseball fan to another.

For me, I would have the same reaction that I mentioned, regardless of tone of voice, because it is still saying that the person didn't expect me to know much or anything at all about baseball just because I am a woman. To me, no matter what way you peel the orange, it's still a sexist comment. It's not that I will go crazy and will want to beat someone up if they say it, but it still gets on my nerves. It's like they are putting me down as a person, so it's about the sexist comments and also about me as a person.

[WonderMonkey]

For me, I would have the same reaction that I mentioned, regardless of tone of voice, because it is still saying that the person didn't expect me to know much or anything at all about baseball just because I am a woman. To me, no matter what way you peel the orange, it's still a sexist comment. It's not that I will go crazy and will want to beat someone up if they say it, but it still gets on my nerves. It's like they are putting me down as a person, so it's about the sexist comments and also about me as a person.

It's sexist at it's core, but not it's intent. I think that should be considered.

I used to be a single dad and constently females were shocked that I could care for my child or would assume I couldn't, etc. I did not get offended by it except in certain cases because I know that for the most part it was well meaning people that were saying it. Usually I would say "I can take care of my son just fine, thanks..." and then they would realize what they said and usually apologise profusely.

Again, I think the intent is the key.

[NotAboutEgo]

It's sexist at it's core, but not it's intent. I think that should be considered.

I used to be a single dad and constently females were shocked that I could care for my child or would assume I couldn't, etc. I did not get offended by it except in certain cases because I know that for the most part it was well meaning people that were saying it. Usually I would say "I can take care of my son just fine, thanks..." and then they would realize what they said and usually apologise profusely.

Again, I think the intent is the key.

I think so, too, for the most part. People often don't really think too much about what they are saying until someone points out to them what they said. :eek:

[DownUnderDodger]

I think this all goes back to the sterotypical world we live in, and in line with what wondermonkey said that anytime you are doing something that is outside of the accepted "norm" then a compliment for doing it can be potentially hurtful it is all about how we react to someone who genuinely admires someone who is able behave/react/speak outside the "norm". Some people will accept that it was a compliment because they understand the sterotypical world we live in, while others reject such comments as complimentary because they expect everyone else to live outside the 'norm'. We really have to face it - we live in a sterotypical world, and we have to just accept that, and plug away at trying to change it - not by being offended and getting upset, but by proving ourselves. As I stated previously, we have all stereotyped someone else at some stage during our lives. Perhaps the fact that NotAboutEgo was able to show this guy that some women do know as much about baseball as him may just change his apparent stereotyping of women and baseball, and he will now respect that women are capable of being part of what was probably once seen as a male's domain (and probably will always be to those who chose not to move out of the 'norm'). Hope I make sense here.

I will now be on the lookout for bartenders wearing a red hat!! :crazy

[WonderMonkey]

I think this all goes back to the sterotypical world we live in, and in line with what wondermonkey said it is all about how we react to someone who genuinely admires someone who is able behave/react/speak outside the "norm". Some people will accept that it was a compliment because they understand the sterotypical world we live in, while others reject such comments as complimentary because they expect everyone else to live outside the 'norm'. We really have to face it - we live in a sterotypical world, and we have to just accept that, and plug away at trying to change it - not by being offended and getting upset, but by proving ourselves. As I stated previously, we have all stereotyped someone else at some stage during our lives. Perhaps the fact that NotAboutEgo was able to show this guy that some women do know as much about baseball as him may just change his apparent stereotyping of women and baseball, and he will now respect that women are capable of being part of what was probably once seen as a male's domain (and probably will always be to those who chose not to move out of the 'norm'). Hope I make sense here.

I will now be on the lookout for bartenders wearing a red hat!! :crazy

Agreed. The more someone goes outside the norm the more it has a chance to become "normal" and potentially accepted. Take a look at how female atheletes have been treated in the last 25 years. Though it still sucks, females are being paid attention to as atheletes at the youth level like never before. Title X (is that the one, or was it 9) forced it upon the colleges and slowly it trickled down. Great examples like the WNBA and the great softball Team USA has thrust upon the USA has really done a ton of good towards those efforts. Etc. etc.

And heck, the fact this forum exists is a small part of that as well. I'm glad it has activity and I don't get run off on the occasion I participate.

[5LilPlayers]

I will now be on the lookout for bartenders wearing a red hat!! :crazy

No fair. I said I was tired when I typed that! LOL :p

[digglahhh]

The really grating thing is that most of the people who are impressed by your knowledge of the game, are ironically, probably not even as knowledgable as you are. Listen to sports-talk radio for 10 minutes and it becomes painfully obvious that being interested in sports doesn't automatically translate to understanding the game, the business, the rules or knowing what you are talking about in any way. If I have to hear another moron talking about how he thinks the Yankees can get Miguel Cabrera for a package of Scott Proctor, Melky Cabrera and Andy Phillips, I might actually kill somebody.

My girlfriend and I both work for MLB.com in the Stats Department. Our overarching responsibility to make sure that the stats recorded by the teams and the rulings made by official scorers are accurate and within the rules. These people are often not too cordial about being corrected, it is worse for my girlfriend than I. Try having to convince a Triple A pitching coach that he doesn't really know an esoteric rule that is going to make the runs his pitcher just gave up earned, even though he wants them to be unearned. Try doing it as a woman, I don't envy her. Many people within the game do not want to be corrected by a woman, even one who is quoting Rule 10.8(b) off the top of her head...

[NotAboutEgo]

The really grating thing is that most of the people who are impressed by your knowledge of the game, are ironically, probably not even as knowledgable as you are. Listen to sports-talk radio for 10 minutes and it becomes painfully obvious that being interested in sports doesn't automatically translate to understanding the game, the business, the rules or knowing what you are talking about in any way. If I have to hear another moron talking about how he thinks the Yankees can get Miguel Cabrera for a package of Scott Proctor, Melky Cabrera and Andy Phillips, I might actually kill somebody.

My girlfriend and I both work for MLB.com in the Stats Department. Our overarching responsibility to make sure that the stats recorded by the teams and the rulings made by official scorers are accurate and within the rules. These people are often not too cordial about being corrected, it is worse for my girlfriend than I. Try having to convince a Triple A pitching coach that he doesn't really know an esoteric rule that is going to make the runs his pitcher just gave up earned, even though he wants them to be unearned. Try doing it as a woman, I don't envy her. Many people within the game do not want to be corrected by a woman, even one who is quoting Rule 10.8(b) off the top of her head...

Exactly!!! They are like the guy I talked about in an earlier post, who sits in his seat yelling at players and calling them names and all that, but yet he's one of those who's sitting in his seat acting a fool instead of being on the field playing the game in ANY way, shape, or form.

I can just imagine how it must be to have that sort of job, whether being male or female. I know females get even more sarcasm from others. I used to teach hitting lessons with Barbaro Garbey, a former MLB player. He was the manager and all-around baseball coach for my women's team for a while. I was teaching both girls and boys, and I could clearly see differences in how our society has "shaped" each one (read Leslie Heaphy on how our society has created the "idea" of how a woman should be and how it affects her performance in sports).

For example, when I worked with the girls, they were always really shy at first and were hesitant about trying what I was teaching them. Once they got used to it and became comfortable with being instructed, they were fine and did great. They improved greatly from hitting lessons.

When I worked with the boys, most of them (not all) gave me these looks as if they were saying (they probably were, mentally), "What's this woman doing teaching me about baseball?" I remember Barbaro telling them that I know what I'm doing, I've played for a long time, and to listen to me and repsect me. Funny how he mentioned that right off the bat to the boys before we even got started. He never said anything to the girls about it. Some of them seemed to not want to listen but didn't make any comments. Others were respectful and were thankful of the help. This type of thing is a product of our society.

I have also had good experiences with teaching boys about baseball. A guy I know from the Tigers fantasy camps asked me to do a catching clinic for his son's team (11-12 year olds), so of course I accepted the offer. He told the boys the same type of thing in the beginning that Barbaro did. ALL of the boys listened and worked hard and gave me respect, so it was very fun and fulfilling.

[sandlot]

It's very hard to affect, much less control, the behavior of others. But I believe that we can do a lot to control ourselves. For one thing, we can try to stop ourselves from having automatic reactions to circumstances and people; we can choose not to blame; we can pause to remember that we are dealing with flesh-and-blood individuals, not analytical specimens; we can react in ways that don't reinforce sterotypes; we can choose to determine the value we place on an opinion based on how it is expressed, not on the age/race/gender/whatever of the author.

If the guy in the row in front says something that hits a nerve, we have choices, and the outcome of the experience will be likely determined not on the original comment, but on how we choose to react to it, and that's within our power to decide. I think that's was the point being raised by the original question: How should I have reacted? Just my two cents, but I believe that if someone comments on our baseball knowledge, dining etiquette or diaper-changing abilities, it's important for us to choose a reaction that doesn't play into the stereotype, and that doesn't inadvertently reinforce some other stereotype. I hope this makes some sense and doesn't seem abstract, as my intention is to be practical. Because if someone's goal is to create change, especially social change, then maybe it's more important to determine outcomes than it is to feel justified, IMHO.

[SoxSon]

SoxSon, I guess I would feel the same way as I did when the guy at the Tigers game made the same type of comment. Even if I knew the PERSON wasn't trying to be sexist and put me down and was polite as can be, it would still irritate me for the simple fact of the PERSON saying it's refreshing to hear a woman who is knowledgeable about baseball. It's not so much about the PERSON just saying that, but it's about the fact that their expectations of my knowledge of baseball are low and it's because I am a female. I think that's the part that pisses me off more than anything when people treat me like I can't do something just because I'm a woman.

Like I have said in other threads, I have been into sports, especially baseball and hockey (began watching both at such a young age, I don't really remember when it was... I think I started watching hockey at age 5 when my parents started taking my sister and I to IHL games in Grand Rapids, Michigan and other Midwest cities [Grand Rapids Blades, Owls, Grizzlies] and have absolutely loved it since... went to my first Tigers game when I was 4 but I'm sure I saw games on TV and listened to games on the radio before that, as my dad and other relatives were always into the team). So, for me, to know a lot about baseball and hockey and to be into them so much is completely normal and is part of who I am. That is why I get pissed when people undermine my intelligence for the things I love.

When someone says something like they are surprised I know so much because I am a woman, it's based on pure ignorance, whether it's handed down from the status quo of society or it's a personal ignorance on the part of the person making the comment or both. It irritates me just as much if a woman says she is surprised about my knowledge of the game because I am a woman. To me, it is like saying she has low expectations for women in general and is adding the to sexism thing because of that. It doesn't matter to me whether she knows a lot about baseball or not. I would "assume" she is just not into that much, but I wouldn't think that just because she is a woman. I don't expect everyone to be as much of a baseball junkie as I am.

So, I guess it's more about undermining someone's knowledge and intelligence of something and then adding the component of sex in there just adds fuel to the fire. To assume women don't know much about baseball is just plain ignorant, just as much as ignorance plays a part of the situations that others have described in this particular thread.

Thanks for the response, NotAboutEgo. Language is a tricky vessel. The same words can be both liberating and humiliating, I suppose, to two parties. Personally, I'm glad to hear anyone feel passionate about baseball. It doesn't make a difference to me whether that person is male or female. I just wish I heard it more from women, that's all. I think you're right, though, in that my sense of "joy" with saying this also could possibly add to the stereotype in question, even if I don't mean it that way myself.

[SoxSon]

I think it's depends on the tone of voice and the way it's said to me also. Sometimes when someone says "It's really refreshing to hear a women who's knowledgeable about baseball" in a matter-of-fact tone...I guess I would be flattered. But if it was more of a "Wow" shock...awe. I think I would take it a bit different.

It depends on the moment. If you said it with a sense of joy...I'm sure it would be inturpreted as such...once baseball fan to another.

It's interesting, Chelle. For me, it definitely would be matter-of-fact. Not surprise, in the sense that I can't believe it, but rather appreciation for what I myself have unfortunately had little contact with.

After reading NotAboutEgo's response, though, I think she has a point. Regardless of how I mean it, it would be too easy to take another way, and it may also be part of the problem, on some level.

[NotAboutEgo]

It's very hard to affect, much less control, the behavior of others. But I believe that we can do a lot to control ourselves. For one thing, we can try to stop ourselves from having automatic reactions to circumstances and people; we can choose not to blame; we can pause to remember that we are dealing with flesh-and-blood individuals, not analytical specimens; we can react in ways that don't reinforce sterotypes; we can choose to determine the value we place on an opinion based on how it is expressed, not on the age/race/gender/whatever of the author.

If the guy in the row in front says something that hits a nerve, we have choices, and the outcome of the experience will be likely determined not on the original comment, but on how we choose to react to it, and that's within our power to decide. I think that's was the point being raised by the original question: How should I have reacted? Just my two cents, but I believe that if someone comments on our baseball knowledge, dining etiquette or diaper-changing abilities, it's important for us to choose a reaction that doesn't play into the stereotype, and that doesn't inadvertently reinforce some other stereotype. I hope this makes some sense and doesn't seem abstract, as my intention is to be practical. Because if someone's goal is to create change, especially social change, then maybe it's more important to determine outcomes than it is to feel justified, IMHO.

For me, it's not about control of others and their behavior, because control is not natural for anyone or for any living being for that matter (it's anti-productive and anti-progressive). But, we can affect others positively just by what you said... choosing our responses and reactions and being positive when all possible. That will, in turn, change people's opinions, actions, behaviors, etc. Ideas, opinions, modes, etc. spread easily, so we can help spread change. It's up to each person to take responsibility for thier own actions and to decide whether they will grow as a person, and by doing it ourselves, it will catch on with a lot of people.

[NotAboutEgo]

Thanks for the response, NotAboutEgo. Language is a tricky vessel. The same words can be both liberating and humiliating, I suppose, to two parties. Personally, I'm glad to hear anyone feel passionate about baseball. It doesn't make a difference to me whether that person is male or female. I just wish I heard it more from women, that's all. I think you're right, though, in that my sense of "joy" with saying this also could possibly add to the stereotype in question, even if I don't mean it that way myself.

I don't think your comment adds to the stereotype, because it is more than likely based on your experiences and perceptions, but I can see what you mean. SOmeone could take it the wrong way. It could be that you haven't known a lot of women who love and know baseball. I think that there are way more women who like baseball and who know about it, at least from a game persepctive... how it is played and the rules... but they may not be so into trades and all the pertinent details of a team.

[NotAboutEgo]

It's interesting, Chelle. For me, it definitely would be matter-of-fact. Not surprise, in the sense that I can't believe it, but rather appreciation for what I myself have unfortunately had little contact with.

After reading NotAboutEgo's response, though, I think she has a point. Regardless of how I mean it, it would be too easy to take another way, and it may also be part of the problem, on some level.

I guess it's based on experience and perception for everyone... and that does affect one's opinions. What is meant as an innocent compliment can be taken differently by someone like me who has heard so much putting down of women in conjunction with baseball and other stuff. For others, they may not have experienced it the same way or may have never heard a negative comment in conjunction with women and baseball, so to them it wouldn't bother them. I can see there are so many different views of this, and they all are relevant. What isn't relevant is when someone says something like softball is for women and they can't play baseball and shouldn't play with men and all that. And then you have society's generic perception about it that affects the reaction of people. I guess my thought when this guy said this (I didn't say anything out loud to him, but rather, I was contemplating whether I should be happy about the comment or upset with it... at first I smiled but then I thought... "Is there something wrong with what he said?") was more a reaction to how our society thinks as a whole. We all are responsible for that.

It just aggrevates me to no end when people make comments that are stereotypical in nature and when they have to do with traditional gender roles and women being seen as not being able to do certain things. I can think of so many examples, not just with baseball but also with the coed roller hockey league I play in and in other situations.

So, for me, I will think before reacting in those situations, and I will do all I can to help educate people and open their minds.

[sandlot]

"Is there something wrong with what he said?") was more a reaction to how our society thinks as a whole. We all are responsible for that.

It just aggrevates me to no end when people make comments that are stereotypical in nature and when they have to do with traditional gender roles and women being seen as not being able to do certain things. I can think of so many examples, not just with baseball but also with the coed roller hockey league I play in and in other situations.

So, for me, I will think before reacting in those situations, and I will do all I can to help educate people and open their minds.I have no idea how "society" as a whole (or in part) thinks about anything, really, and I honestly don't see the notion of "society" as a useful tool for operating in one's daily life -- although it's easy and attractive shorthand. "Society" is also useful as a punching bag or straw man (straw person?:)). IMHO, discussion of "society" is fine for theoreticians, anthropologists, ideologues, politicians, columnists and other folks who like to expound or write books, but every day you can meet individuals who'll explode any stereotype you want to mention -- just as you can meet people who'll confirm any generalization in the books. I totally agree that I am responsible for myself, but am I also reponsible for some amorphous, notional collective called "society"? With respect, I think not. But, if I have core beliefs with which I view the institutions of society to be at odds, then I have choices to make and one of the options is to seek to change the institutions. I remember hearing the civil rights leader and comedian Dick Gregory speaking to an audience at the University of Alabama, and saying "You have the right to be a racist. What you do not have is the right to institutionalize that racism." This, to me, is the same with sexism. You want to be a sexist -- whether anti-female or anti-male? Fine by me. Just don't try to turn your personal prejudice into laws, rules, regulations, dress codes, lending practices, admissions policies or so-called "norms" -- an even vaguer notion than "society."

When you say that you'll "think before reacting in those situations," I'm behind you all the way. But when you go on to say you'll try to "help educate people and open their minds," I get uneasy. That sounds like code for trying to change people, and that's a dangerous and slippery slope. As I wrote in another post, people don't change unless they have incentive. They also might not want to have their minds "opened" and would greatly resist it. It suggests that one party is enlghtened and the other is not; but enlightenment is a rather condescending notion, and no one likes being looked down upon, even (especially?) when wrong. In the right circumstances, however, a person might begin to look at things differently and to alter him- or herself. We can each help to create such circumstances through awareness of our own automatic responses and the by conscious guiding our reactions. The old soft-drink slogan "the pause that refreshes" is not a bad place to start. And a little good humor often can go a long, long way. (When the company using that slogan first came to China, they translated it on billboards using characters that could also be interpreted as: "Brings dead ancestors back to life!" Sales went through the roof. :D )

[NotAboutEgo]

I have no idea how "society" as a whole (or in part) thinks about anything, really, and I honestly don't see the notion of "society" as a useful tool for operating in one's daily life -- although it's easy and attractive shorthand. "Society" is also useful as a punching bag or straw man (straw person?:)). IMHO, discussion of "society" is fine for theoreticians, anthropologists, ideologues, politicians, columnists and other folks who like to expound or write books, but every day you can meet individuals who'll explode any stereotype you want to mention -- just as you can meet people who'll confirm any generalization in the books. I totally agree that I am responsible for myself, but am I also reponsible for some amorphous, notional collective called "society"? With respect, I think not. But, if I have core beliefs with which I view the institutions of society to be at odds, then I have choices to make and one of the options is to seek to change the institutions. I remember hearing the civil rights leader and comedian Dick Gregory speaking to an audience at the University of Alabama, and saying "You have the right to be a racist. What you do not have is the right to institutionalize that racism." This, to me, is the same with sexism. You want to be a sexist -- whether anti-female or anti-male? Fine by me. Just don't try to turn your personal prejudice into laws, rules, regulations, dress codes, lending practices, admissions policies or so-called "norms" -- an even vaguer notion than "society."

When you say that you'll "think before reacting in those situations," I'm behind you all the way. But when you go on to say you'll try to "help educate people and open their minds," I get uneasy. That sounds like code for trying to change people, and that's a dangerous and slippery slope. As I wrote in another post, people don't change unless they have incentive. They also might not want to have their minds "opened" and would greatly resist it. It suggests that one party is enlghtened and the other is not; but enlightenment is a rather condescending notion, and no one likes being looked down upon, even (especially?) when wrong. In the right circumstances, however, a person might begin to look at things differently and to alter him- or herself. We can each help to create such circumstances through awareness of our own automatic responses and the by conscious guiding our reactions. The old soft-drink slogan "the pause that refreshes" is not a bad place to start. And a little good humor often can go a long, long way. (When the company using that slogan first came to China, they translated it on billboards using characters that could also be interpreted as: "Brings dead ancestors back to life!" Sales went through the roof. :D )

I do believe you, as much as everyone other person on this planet, are responsible for society, because we all are a part of what is our society. So, if we grow and learn and take responsibility for ourselves, then we are contributing to our society in some way. If one says they are not responsible for how our society is, then it is the same as saying they are not a part of it in any way, shape, or form, and that, to me, is quite impossible.

You stated, "In the right circumstances, however, a person might begin to look at things differently and to alter him- or herself. We can each help to create such circumstances through awareness of our own automatic responses and the by conscious guiding our reactions." Don't you think this will change the way a group of people thinks, when one takes it upon themself to look at things differently?

It is apparent to me when a collective society feels and thinks a certain way about a particular topic such as women's baseball. I'm not using it as a useful punching bag; rather, I'm point out what I have experienced in conjunction with being a female and playing baseball. The sum of the parts equals the whole, and each part affects the whole.

If 80% of the people in society each decide to start taking responsibility for thier actions and stop hurting others, stop taking advantage of others, etc. (and themselves), that will shift society and things will change. If every single person on the planet decides to stay just as they are, then nothing changes. We are our society. Why does one culture have certain "beliefs, traditions, modes"?

When I speak of helping to educate people and open their minds, I am speaking of giving people info of what I have experienced when they are open it receiving the info. I'm not at all speaking of controlling one and forcing info down their throats. When there is an opportunity to educate others about women's baseball, I will take advantage of it. That is what I'm speaking of.

I'm not speaking of trying to change everyone and force things upon them. I disagree that people don't change unless they have incentive. There are plenty of people who change just because they want to.

[sandlot]

We are not so far apart. If each invidual assumes responsibility for her- or himself, it will indeed affect society. That is laudable and to be hoped for. It's in fact what I was suggesting. But social change is an effect, not a duty. If enough people do assume responsibility for themselves, in positive ways, a critical mass might eventually be achieved and change could occur on a larger level. But what happens too often when seeking to take responsibility for the amorphous mass, is that individuals themselves become changed in the process, and rarely for the better. As frustrations compound and aggravation mounts, hostility arises. This is largely unconscious. Radicalization also occurs (not a bad thing, in limited doses, as it brings things to the surface); also, as mentioned earlier, human nature strongly inclines us to turn us into what we hate. (Stalin was a Marxist, helped overthrow the imperial family, and became an imperial dictator of almost unrivaled proportion. A similar story with Mao, etc.) When people decide to change because they want to, they want to for a reason. That reason, whatever it may be, is the incentive. Sometimes people just get tired of dragging certain things around, or fighting the same battles; sometimes they discover, like Walt Kelly's Pogo character, that "we have met the enemy, and he is us." Sometimes people change with age -- that's decision, just slow decision. I am not arguing for doing nothing, nor am I suggesting irresponsibility. I am saying that I can't and won't be responsible for what other people think, even if there's millions of them insisting on the same thing. What I can do, as I wrote, is to resist the institionalization of what I find unacceptable. As regards baseball, the decision to bar women from the MLB needs to be explained and justified (which, of course, it can't be), and pressure should be brought on the Office of the Commissioner to do just that, because it is the institutionalization of gender discrimination. What Bud Selig personally thinks about women in baseball is entirely irrelevant to me, and I could not possibly care less -- so as long as any prejudicial sentiments were not concretized and enforced. He inherited the bar against women, but he is under no duty nor obligation to continue it. And if he were to eliminate it simply because it made him personally uncomfortable, that's reason enough. He needn't consider for an second the effect on society of that decision; it might have considerable effect, and probably would, but that's just effect, and should not be confused with cause or motivation. I believe that if we spend time analyzing our own motivations honestly, and act accordingly and consciously, the effects will take care of themselves.

[NotAboutEgo]

We are not so far apart. If each invidual assumes responsibility for her- or himself, it will indeed affect society. That is laudable and to be hoped for. It's in fact what I was suggesting. But social change is an effect, not a duty. If enough people do assume responsibility for themselves, in positive ways, a critical mass might eventually be achieved and change could occur on a larger level. But what happens too often when seeking to take responsibility for the amorphous mass, is that individuals themselves become changed in the process, and rarely for the better. As frustrations compound and aggravation mounts, hostility arises. This is largely unconscious. Radicalization also occurs (not a bad thing, in limited doses, as it brings things to the surface); also, as mentioned earlier, human nature strongly inclines us to turn us into what we hate. (Stalin was a Marxist, helped overthrow the imperial family, and became an imperial dictator of almost unrivaled proportion. A similar story with Mao, etc.) When people decide to change because they want to, they want to for a reason. That reason, whatever it may be, is the incentive. Sometimes people just get tired of dragging certain things around, or fighting the same battles; sometimes they discover, like Walt Kelly's Pogo character, that "we have met the enemy, and he is us." Sometimes people change with age -- that's decision, just slow decision. I am not arguing for doing nothing, nor am I suggesting irresponsibility. I am saying that I can't and won't be responsible for what other people think, even if there's millions of them insisting on the same thing. What I can do, as I wrote, is to resist the institionalization of what I find unacceptable. As regards baseball, the decision to bar women from the MLB needs to be explained and justified (which, of course, it can't be), and pressure should be brought on the Office of the Commissioner to do just that, because it is the institutionalization of gender discrimination. What Bud Selig personally thinks about women in baseball is entirely irrelevant to me, and I could not possibly care less -- so as long as any prejudicial sentiments were not concretized and enforced. He inherited the bar against women, but he is under no duty nor obligation to continue it. And if he were to eliminate it simply because it made him personally uncomfortable, that's reason enough. He needn't consider for an second the effect on society of that decision; it might have considerable effect, and probably would, but that's just effect, and should not be confused with cause or motivation. I believe that if we spend time analyzing our own motivations honestly, and act accordingly and consciously, the effects will take care of themselves.

I agree that social change is an effect and not a duty. No one should feel that they have a huge burden on their shoulders to change things on a huge scale; rather, they should take responsibility for themselves and when the opportunity arises to give knowledge and info to another (when the other is open to it), then they should take advantage of that. I agree that no one is responsible for another's thoughts, actions, ideas, etc. I wasn't suggesting that but was suggesting that everyone contributes to the whole of society. Of course, as you stated, if 80% of the population is doing something a certain way, and the other 20% is doing it differently, the 80% way will be reflected in society more. I agree with your statements in this post. Good post.

[DownUnderDodger]

I firmly believe that each of our own actions has an effect on society, maybe not directly, but thru flow on effects. Take the guy who commented to NotAboutEgo about her knowledge of baseball. Perhaps he had stereotyed all women as not knowing anything about baseball, and NotAboutEgo has changed that perception in his mind. He may now lose his sterotypical idea of women's knowledge of baseball and he may even try to pass that on to others. Whatever flow-on effect that has is a step to changing society, albeit in a very small way.

Society in a way is huge bunch of followers lead by a few leaders. Society is easily misled, so anyone who wants to lead, with positive and sensible actions, regardless how small those actions are, is doing something to change society positively. Unfortunately there are too many negatives which influence the followers in society......totally negative news reporting, concentrating on all the bad things, TV shows such as Big Brother, heck even in sport the bad things are given the most publicity. I could go on. We could all help change society if we react positively and deflect the negatives (hard I know). For every one person we can influence, there could be countless others influenced by the flow-on effect.

[digglahhh]

Ohh, I finally found the place for the sociological musings that I get lambasted for engaging in on the other threads. I won't tell if you won't..:)


Here's a problem that I'm sure NotAboutEgo can attest to. Her "battle," though sandlot and others might not agree with the war analogy, is uphill. It's like building a sand castle; a day's work can be erased in the blink of an eye. The demographics of many of the baseball settings that I have been in, work or otherwise, have been dispropontionately male. In one respect that is a problem; it is unequal. But, you also must be careful what you wish for. The inclusion of one new female in the circle who acts in a manner that perpetuates the stereotypes about women in sports serves to undermine all the progress and acceptance that the other knowledgable professional women have worked so hard to achieve. While inclusion is a goal, careful selection is a somewhat conflicting priority as well. The sports arena (no pun intended) exacerbates the gender roles even further through the pre-existing dynamic that the women in turn attempt to alter.

Such an imbalance can indulge or engender so many unhealthy outcomes. The women can be co-opted by the male dominated mindset, similar to the way that many critics view the evolution of black students at traditionally white, elite universities and thus become disdainful of their fellow woman who chooses to remain clueless about sports, once again fueling divisiveness. The women can just become the objects of scorn, ridicule a resentment. The woman can embrace the sexual attention she inevitably will gather when the ratio of men to women is like twenty to one, perpetuating several stereotypes at once. But what if the just wants to have a serious relationship with a fellow sports fanatic?... Virtually all of these possiblities are possible "traps" for the woman to fall into. The men on the other hand don't have to tread so carefully, considering the ramifications on the greater dynamic of every, even seemingly mundane, action.

It is a minefield out there. What makes change so difficult is that the attitudes and expressions are so implicit that so many of the indiscretions are not even recognized as such by the perpetrators. Sometimes I feel that my girlfriend makes much ado about nothing regarding some of the experiences she has, but I can't blame her for interpretting the instances the way she does. Of course, I also feel, frequently, that her gender-based interpretations of specific interactions are rather valid.

[PopTop]

Wow, took me a while to read through the thread. Very interesting and well-posted discussion.

It comes down, in my opinion, to what is the norm for different people. Being something of an old fart, it wasn't 'normal' 40 years ago to find ladies so knowledgeable about baseball as right now. At least it wasn't as prevalent. Certainly there were women who knew the game back then, but it was a different time and their numbers were vastly smaller. I was lucky --- Didn't always feel that way back in the 50s and 60s --- to live in a house with a bunch of sisters, two of which really did understand the game. So that was 'normal' for me.

It's only in the last 10 years or so, and forums like this have really brought it out, that more and more women have been able to truly show off their knowledge of baseball and other previous 'manly sports.' If there had been an internet or some of these humongous 300-screen sports bars 40 years ago, you wouldn't have seen as many women on-line or in the bars watching the Yanks-Sox or Michigan-Ohio St football games as you do now. Thankfully, the 'barriers,' for lack of better word, that existed then no longer are around. That doesn't mean there aren't any sexist morons out there still; just fewer people who put up with it or find that attitude to be the norm any longer.

Take that from a guy who was routinely picked behind one of his sisters for sandlot sports :laugh

[NotAboutEgo]

I firmly believe that each of our own actions has an effect on society, maybe not directly, but thru flow on effects. Take the guy who commented to NotAboutEgo about her knowledge of baseball. Perhaps he had stereotyed all women as not knowing anything about baseball, and NotAboutEgo has changed that perception in his mind. He may now lose his sterotypical idea of women's knowledge of baseball and he may even try to pass that on to others. Whatever flow-on effect that has is a step to changing society, albeit in a very small way.

Society in a way is huge bunch of followers lead by a few leaders. Society is easily misled, so anyone who wants to lead, with positive and sensible actions, regardless how small those actions are, is doing something to change society positively. Unfortunately there are too many negatives which influence the followers in society......totally negative news reporting, concentrating on all the bad things, TV shows such as Big Brother, heck even in sport the bad things are given the most publicity. I could go on. We could all help change society if we react positively and deflect the negatives (hard I know). For every one person we can influence, there could be countless others influenced by the flow-on effect.

BINGO!!! Exactly! That is a great way to put it, DownUnder. We just need more positive leaders than negative, egotistical leaders like you stated. Somehow the negatives got all the power, but there needs to be a shift.

[NotAboutEgo]

Wow, took me a while to read through the thread. Very interesting and well-posted discussion.

It comes down, in my opinion, to what is the norm for different people. Being something of an old fart, it wasn't 'normal' 40 years ago to find ladies so knowledgeable about baseball as right now. At least it wasn't as prevalent. Certainly there were women who knew the game back then, but it was a different time and their numbers were vastly smaller. I was lucky --- Didn't always feel that way back in the 50s and 60s --- to live in a house with a bunch of sisters, two of which really did understand the game. So that was 'normal' for me.

It's only in the last 10 years or so, and forums like this have really brought it out, that more and more women have been able to truly show off their knowledge of baseball and other previous 'manly sports.' If there had been an internet or some of these humongous 300-screen sports bars 40 years ago, you wouldn't have seen as many women on-line or in the bars watching the Yanks-Sox or Michigan-Ohio St football games as you do now. Thankfully, the 'barriers,' for lack of better word, that existed then no longer are around. That doesn't mean there aren't any sexist morons out there still; just fewer people who put up with it or find that attitude to be the norm any longer.

Take that from a guy who was routinely picked behind one of his sisters for sandlot sports :laugh

Thanks for your "humble" perspective, PopTop! I'm glad you mentioned, along with mentioning that 40 years ago there weren't as many women into sports as there are now, that there were more barriers back then affecting this. So many people are quick to point out that women weren't so much into sports in the past and that's why they haven't had many opportunities, but they fail to think about or mention WHY they weren't, or didn't "seem" to be, into sports. I think it's part perception, part bias, and part women beinng quiet about it if they did like sports because of the biases.

I saw a program on HBO a while back about this same topic. I don't remember what it's called, but it is about how women "back then" were afraid to express and voice their interest in sports, because they were labled as dikes and lesbians if they did. Because of the stereotypes of the time, their actions were influenced. The ones who spoke out about it and played sports anyway were few... and, some of them were in fact lesbians. So, that is probably where those bigots who still exist today get the idea that all females who play sports and like sports are lesbians.

I have a personal account of how one woman didn't play sports in school because of the lack of opportunity provided to her and because of the stereotypes of the time. She said she would've tried sports if they were offered, because she likes them, but women were told they couldn't play. That woman is my mom. She enjoys most sports... watching them... and she would have loved to play some. Women in her days of growing up had to fight just to wear blue jeans and pants. She played on some company softball teams a few times, and for someone who has never played sports, she did great. She has good raw mechanics and could be very good if given the proper time to gain experience and to be shown how to improve and polish her skills. What do I see there? Someone who was denied a chance to enjoy something she likes, and, someone denied an opportunity to do something bigger in her life... if that's what she would have chosen.

I have worked with other women around my mom's age (she's 60) who have similar stories. Some fought the status quo and played anyway, but most didn't because of the crap they had to put up with.

[NotAboutEgo]

Ohh, I finally found the place for the sociological musings that I get lambasted for engaging in on the other threads. I won't tell if you won't..:)


Here's a problem that I'm sure NotAboutEgo can attest to. Her "battle," though sandlot and others might not agree with the war analogy, is uphill. It's like building a sand castle; a day's work can be erased in the blink of an eye. The demographics of many of the baseball settings that I have been in, work or otherwise, have been dispropontionately male. In one respect that is a problem; it is unequal. But, you also must be careful what you wish for. The inclusion of one new female in the circle who acts in a manner that perpetuates the stereotypes about women in sports serves to undermine all the progress and acceptance that the other knowledgable professional women have worked so hard to achieve. While inclusion is a goal, careful selection is a somewhat conflicting priority as well. The sports arena (no pun intended) exacerbates the gender roles even further through the pre-existing dynamic that the women in turn attempt to alter.

Such an imbalance can indulge or engender so many unhealthy outcomes. The women can be co-opted by the male dominated mindset, similar to the way that many critics view the evolution of black students at traditionally white, elite universities and thus become disdainful of their fellow woman who chooses to remain clueless about sports, once again fueling divisiveness. The women can just become the objects of scorn, ridicule a resentment. The woman can embrace the sexual attention she inevitably will gather when the ratio of men to women is like twenty to one, perpetuating several stereotypes at once. But what if the just wants to have a serious relationship with a fellow sports fanatic?... Virtually all of these possiblities are possible "traps" for the woman to fall into. The men on the other hand don't have to tread so carefully, considering the ramifications on the greater dynamic of every, even seemingly mundane, action.

It is a minefield out there. What makes change so difficult is that the attitudes and expressions are so implicit that so many of the indiscretions are not even recognized as such by the perpetrators. Sometimes I feel that my girlfriend makes much ado about nothing regarding some of the experiences she has, but I can't blame her for interpretting the instances the way she does. Of course, I also feel, frequently, that her gender-based interpretations of specific interactions are rather valid.

I agree with you, digglahhh, if I have understood you correctly. I agree that a ton of work can be broken down in just one day. I have seen a lot of women who play into the stereotypes of women, and, they make them even greater. The ones I am talking about are the girls who go to pro (and otherwise) baseball games, not for the sport, but because they are so insecure with themselves that they seek the attention of pro male athletes and are not shy about broadcasting what they are after. Yes, they are the ones who stand by the dugouts in their scant outfits and pretty much advertise who they are. My friends and I sit there and laugh at them because it's like a freak show, and it's disgusting. I don't understand that mindset at all.

And then there are those females who hang out with guys just because they get attention from them, in the wrong way, and they think they are getting somewhere from that. They seek this kind of attention because it makes them feel that they are the best thing that ever happened and that they are on top of the world.

But, I know there are a lot of guys who do similar things, but those things usually aren't brought into things like guys being told they can't do something. I agree with your points... some females do play into the stereotypes... but it should have nothing to do with women trying to play baseball and people not seeing that there are plenty of women who love sports and who are very knowledgeablwe about them.

Somehow, women who are disrespectful to themselves are usually brought into discussions about women who are fighting for something, but I haven't really experienced the same thing happening for males. Also, a lot of males play into this as much as the disrespectful women do. Why do males go after such sleezy women, when that is how they see them, and then dog the women? To me, the guys are just as guilty.

[digglahhh]

NAE,

I don't disagree with what you said. Your point about women who disprespect themselves often being brought into discussions about women fighting for inclusion and equality patriarchial institutions is incredibly salient. Most don't even notice this phenomenon and it is very frustrating to somebody coming from a feminist viewpoint.

Perception is powerful though. When a group is under-represented each one of their actions becomes more powerful in terms of other people's tendency to make generalizations about them. If somebody from one of the teams deals with a woman in my office who is incompetent there is a real possibility that if he has to deal with my girlfriend in the future, he will assume that she too is incompetent. That is much more likely than the same guy assuming I'm incompetent because he spoke to an incompetent male member of the staff in the past.

A funny little anecdote is that my girlfriend's favorite player for a long time was Mike Piazza. She would go to the games and wear his jersey, but she would always say to me that she hates the fact that there are probably many people at the game who just assume she liked Mike because he was good looking and well known. I told her that she could always rectify that by adopting Ezuquiel Astacio as her new favorite player.:laugh But seriously, many men have virtually no understanding of how far down this stuff trickles.

I think she is trying to convince herself to like Reyes better than Wright right now. But it is hard not to love David Wright if you are a Met fan.

[SoxSon]

I'm not going to pretend that I don't love the discussion, guys...I really do.
However, you all do need to bring this back to focus on baseball and baseball-only, ok? The thread's currently hanging on to that premise by a hair. Them's the rules.

digglahhh...I know you saw this coming. ;)

[Wade8813]

A really nice guy was sitting in front of us, and he overheard us talking about the game throughout the day. We were analyzing plays, players, the team, etc. He eventually turned around and said he was impressed with our indepth knowledge of baseball. He was a complete gentleman and was in no way trying to patronize us. However, I wasn't sure how to feel about it. The reason I wasn't sure how to feel about it was because I get sick and tired of a case being made everytime someone hears a female talking about baseball and knowing what she is talking about. I like to think I know a fair amount about baseball, and I'm still impressed with some people's indepth knowledge about the game (and often, on this forum, I don't even know if they're male of female).

Now imagine that someone who's just a casual baseball fan hears someone talking about VORP, or opportunities created ratios, or league quality adjustments, and imagine how impressed they'd be. They've never heard of anything of that depth in almost any endeavor, much less baseball.

Did he try to engage you in conversation about baseball? If he really were interested that you do know about the sport, he would have done so. I wouldn't be offended, but there's not much you can do to change a stereotype when people won't look past it. Not necessarily. Someone in the situation I described above might feel way out of their league, and feel that it would be too awkward and time consuming to try to learn while watching a game.

Exactly!

Personal story: At our local minor league team's game, a few years ago, I was with one of my friends who just wanted to get out and do something. NOT a big baseball fan...in fact, she knows about as much of the sport as a dog does. LOL But she agreed to go with me. After the 10 millionth time of her asking "What does 'that' mean?" and my answering her, the guy in front of us commented on "People shouldn't come if they don't know the game." At least he did say people and not women...so I didn't take too much offense then. I think that what that man said is a far worse statement to make. It's rude, arrogant, and self-defeating (one of the best way to learn about the game is to go to games). And if your friend was starting to enjoy the baseball game, and heard a comment like that could easily ruin the entire experience, and she might not want to go to any games any more.

the guy in front of me looked at his son (probably around 8 or 9...maybe 10 years old) and said "Ignore people who don't know what they're talking about. The ball went up the middle, it's a fair ball in any ball game and someone's gonna get on base, maybe even a double out of it." At that point, the ump turned around and signaled that it was, indeed, a foul ball. At that point, the man's son turned to me, "How do you know so much about baseball?" I knew it was the "female thing"...but kids are more brutally honest than adults, and the boy obviously noticed that not many girls/women play...may not have known ANY who did...so I can be a bit more..."relaxed", I guess...with children. Again, I don't think this statement is necessarily a "female thing". I guarantee that when I was 10 years old, if someone had said the same thing to me, I'd have been impressed (and surprised).

The really grating thing is that most of the people who are impressed by your knowledge of the game, are ironically, probably not even as knowledgable as you are. I don't understand why that's grating. If I know as much as you do, why would I be impressed? It's impressive when someone exceeds what you think possible.

Regardless of how I mean it, it would be too easy to take another way, and it may also be part of the problem, on some level. EXACTLY. We need to be careful about saying things that can be misconstrued. On the flip side, we should try to not jump to conclusions that people are saying things to be hurtful.

[CuriousBoston]

I'm not going to pretend that I don't love the discussion, guys...I really do.
However, you all do need to bring this back to focus on baseball and baseball-only, ok? The thread's currently hanging on to that premise by a hair. Them's the rules.

digglahhh...I know you saw this coming. ;)


Given: Baseball is a religion. Baseball is also a slice of culture on this planet. We are discussing how to make the future better for the 12 year old girl that started this thread.

We are discussing the past, present, and future of women in baseball, given the present and past.

With the increased number of females at baseball fever, discussions similar to this between males and females IN THIS FORUM are likely, and should be accepted.

I feel strongly that discussions like this will benefit the 12 year old that started this thread. And her younger brother.

I think it would be appropriate to discuss this here, as the participants, well, this is GREAT discussion. I hope to see at last a female ump on day, I feel this discussion, with six degrees, will lead to that.

[SoxSon]

Given: Baseball is a religion. Baseball is also a slice of culture on this planet. We are discussing how to make the future better for the 12 year old girl that started this thread.

We are discussing the past, present, and future of women in baseball, given the present and past.

With the increased number of females at baseball fever, discussions similar to this between males and females IN THIS FORUM are likely, and should be accepted.

I feel strongly that discussions like this will benefit the 12 year old that started this thread. And her younger brother.

I think it would be appropriate to discuss this here, as the participants, well, this is GREAT discussion. I hope to see at last a female ump on day, I feel this discussion, with six degrees, will lead to that.

I can completely see and understand where you're coming from, CB. Like I said, I've really enjoyed the discussion myself.

However, when it has moved away from baseball itself, an ongoing discussion about society's expectations for gender is pushing the boundaries of Baseball Fever. All I'm asking is that everyone keep the discussion firmly rooted in its premise, that of gender roles/expectations in and around baseball itself.

That still leaves room for good discussion. Thanks. :)

[digglahhh]

With all due respect these are personal experiences about myself and me girlfriend and our experiences working within the game of baseball. The greater context, filtered through baseball, lead to the experiences, ideas and phenomena being discussed.

I think this thread has done remarkably well at staying within bounds. Whether or not a knowledgable female fan feels misunderstood for wearing the jersey of a player widely regarded as attractive is a social thing, you are correct. But, specifically it is the manifestation of social forces through baseball as a fan, employee or whatever the case.

We can't isolate who were are. Nobody is just a fan. I am a baseball fan. I am a man. I am in my mid 20's. I am a Marxist... All of these filtration systems work at once, not in isolation but in unison. A women interpretting baseball is going to interpret those events through the eyes of a woman.

Additionally the inverse of most of the perspectives here are articulated ad naseum, and present via implication even when absent in explicit terms. When speaking of a hypothetical player the writer basically just uses the pronoun "he" without hesitation. That is a comment about gender issues in sports, but it is the status quo, so it is not treated as such by those who focus on the explicit discussion of these issues. These issues are in tons and tons of posts here; it's obvious in the subtext.

[NotAboutEgo]

With all due respect these are personal experiences about myself and me girlfriend and our experiences working within the game of baseball. The greater context, filtered through baseball, lead to the experiences, ideas and phenomena being discussed.

I think this thread has done remarkably well at staying within bounds. Whether or not a knowledgable female fan feels misunderstood for wearing the jersey of a player widely regarded as attractive is a social thing, you are correct. But, specifically it is the manifestation of social forces through baseball as a fan, employee or whatever the case.

We can't isolate who were are. Nobody is just a fan. I am a baseball fan. I am a man. I am in my mid 20's. I am a Marxist... All of these filtration systems work at once, not in isolation but in unison. A women interpretting baseball is going to interpret those events through the eyes of a woman.

Additionally the inverse of most of the perspectives here are articulated ad naseum, and present via implication even when absent in explicit terms. When speaking of a hypothetical player the writer basically just uses the pronoun "he" without hesitation. That is a comment about gender issues in sports, but it is the status quo, so it is not treated as such by those who focus on the explicit discussion of these issues. These issues are in tons and tons of posts here; it's obvious in the subtext.

Picking up on your comment about how "people" think that a female wears an attractive player's jersey only because of the attraction (if there even is one) is just as sexist and closed minded as "people" thinking women know nothing about baseball. I'm sure a lot of people think I go to games just to see the guys in tight uniforms and to get noticed, but they are SO wrong. Yeah, sure, I think some of the guys are attractive and look good and it doesn't hurt my eyes to look at them, but that's not why I go to games. I go because I love the game of baseball, being there in person is the best way to enjoy a game, and I have friends with season tickets, and we have a blast at the games and hanging out afterward. It's the fact that I love baseball and that it's a good social activity for me that keeps me going back. Also, I have been into baseball most of my life, so it's a part of me.

[CuriousBoston]

With all due respect these are personal experiences about myself and me girlfriend and our experiences working within the game of baseball. The greater context, filtered through baseball, lead to the experiences, ideas and phenomena being discussed.

I think this thread has done remarkably well at staying within bounds. Whether or not a knowledgable female fan feels misunderstood for wearing the jersey of a player widely regarded as attractive is a social thing, you are correct. But, specifically it is the manifestation of social forces through baseball as a fan, employee or whatever the case.

We can't isolate who were are. Nobody is just a fan. I am a baseball fan. I am a man. I am in my mid 20's. I am a Marxist... All of these filtration systems work at once, not in isolation but in unison. A women interpretting baseball is going to interpret those events through the eyes of a woman.

Additionally the inverse of most of the perspectives here are articulated ad naseum, and present via implication even when absent in explicit terms. When speaking of a hypothetical player the writer basically just uses the pronoun "he" without hesitation. That is a comment about gender issues in sports, but it is the status quo, so it is not treated as such by those who focus on the explicit discussion of these issues. These issues are in tons and tons of posts here; it's obvious in the subtext.

This is not a thread for "What he/she said." But, I'd like to point out I proposed Marriage to Digglahhh in a different forum; it was not ruled off topic. In yet another forum I am discussing what kind of biscuit yankeebisscuitfan is.

In yet another forum (!another) poll has started, asking if the Hank Aaron Award should have it's name changed.

Our discussion here will lead to the day when a female will step onto a MLB field, as a player, as an umpire, as a trainer, as a coach, as an owner. Baseball-fever is a critical mass; a group of males and females, very interested in baseball, very knowledgeable about baseball, with every demographic any media could want. Respected by a larger and larger group of people.

15K members? How many more as guests? We have reached critical mass. Imagine for three days each member wore a T-shirt that said baseball-fever.com? Plus any message that BF supports?

Or, "Female for baseball-fever.com."? Or ???

ps-he turned me down, gently..

[CuriousBoston]

I can completely see and understand where you're coming from, CB. Like I said, I've really enjoyed the discussion myself.

However, when it has moved away from baseball itself, an ongoing discussion about society's expectations for gender is pushing the boundaries of Baseball Fever. All I'm asking is that everyone keep the discussion firmly rooted in its premise, that of gender roles/expectations in and around baseball itself.

That still leaves room for good discussion. Thanks. :)

I like you. You're a good guy.:clapping You are fair, with an even temperment. :clapping

You've been a guy since you have been on the planet. Your brain, my brain have been scientifically proven to process information differently. Twins, one male, one female, same house, schools, are growing up in different cultures.

This influences how we think about baseball. Possible for the moderators to discuss a female moderator for this forum? :clapping (I am NOT moderator material, am NOT volunteering.)

[SoxSon]

Possible for the moderators to discuss a female moderator for this forum? :clapping (I am NOT moderator material, am NOT volunteering.)


I think that's a great idea, CB, and will mention it in the mod forum. :) However, you understand, I hope, that any female mod here will also be expected to reign in off-baseball talk?

For a perfect example of how to discuss this topic while sticking to baseball, see NotAboutEgo's post #67. Excellent.

[Mattingly]

Our discussion here will lead to the day when a female will step onto a MLB field, as a player, as an umpire, as a trainer, as a coach, as an owner. Baseball-fever is a critical mass; a group of males and females, very interested in baseball, very knowledgeable about baseball, with every demographic any media could want. Respected by a larger and larger group of people.
By "[o]ur discussion here", do you mean this specific thread or the entire AAGPBL/Women's forum?

I can see this forum on BBF being used to discuss the potential for a woman player, ump, trainer, but I don't see how it could actually lead to this. Since BBF isn't involved in creating news, but rather discussing baseball news and opinions on this, I don't see the discussion here leading directly to anything about women's advancement in baseball.

If you're so interested in a woman playing in MLB, or being an ump, a trainer, etc, you may wish to post about this.

Effa Manley (http://www.nlbpa.com/manley_effa.html) (1900-1981) is now the only woman in the HoF (http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers_and_honorees/hofer_bios/Manley_Effa.htm), as she was an owner of the Newark Eagles in NJ.

http://www.aaregistry.com/african_american_history/2357/Effa_Manley_Queen_of_the_Negro_Leagues

If you have anything to add about her, you may wish to post this into another thread under this forum or the Negro Leagues forum, as I believe they would be relevant in either place. In fact, Thursday would've been her 106th birthday. :)

If you feel like researching other women's influence on the game of baseball, feel free to share your findings with us.

[Mattingly]

Picking up on your comment about how "people" think that a female wears an attractive player's jersey only because of the attraction (if there even is one) is just as sexist and closed minded as "people" thinking women know nothing about baseball. I'm sure a lot of people think I go to games just to see the guys in tight uniforms and to get noticed, but they are SO wrong. Yeah, sure, I think some of the guys are attractive and look good and it doesn't hurt my eyes to look at them, but that's not why I go to games. I go because I love the game of baseball, being there in person is the best way to enjoy a game, and I have friends with season tickets, and we have a blast at the games and hanging out afterward. It's the fact that I love baseball and that it's a good social activity for me that keeps me going back. Also, I have been into baseball most of my life, so it's a part of me.
It's strange how a female Yankee fan sometimes gets criticized for wearing something like a Jeter #2 jersey, but her husband gets no criticism for wearing the same. It's unfortunate, since both could simply enjoy the way he plays the game, rather than worrying about his looks.

Hopefully, people won't have to explain their feelings so much upon why they wear a certain player's jersey, and moreso how they feel about their team and why. Preferably an interest conversation can begin at the ballpark, regardless of one's gender. :)

[NotAboutEgo]

It's strange how a female Yankee fan sometimes gets criticized for wearing something like a Jeter #2 jersey, but her husband gets no criticism for wearing the same. It's unfortunate, since both could simply enjoy the way he plays the game, rather than worrying about his looks.

Hopefully, people won't have to explain their feelings so much upon why they wear a certain player's jersey, and moreso how they feel about their team and why. Preferably an interest conversation can begin at the ballpark, regardless of one's gender. :)

Exactly! That's why I've refrained from wearing any player's jersey... simply because people will think I'm only there to watch them in the wrong way and that I'm a groupie. Now, if I went to a Detroit Shock game and wore a player's jersey, would I be labeled as a lesbian? Most likely... just as bad... because it's not the truth and is stereotypical. Do guys get labeled as being perverts and as watching girls play only for one reason if they wear a player's jersey... probably. But, I don't see guys getting called gay because they wear a male player's jersey. It's seen as very manly and expresses the "brotherhood" of men (in the eyes of most people).

[5LilPlayers]

I can see this forum on BBF being used to discuss the potential for a woman player, ump, trainer, but I don't see how it could actually lead to this.

I can, to a degree.
Being here...this forum (not necessarily "just" this thread)...talking about women in baseball...being offended by a male's comment on their knowledge of the game, the women's leagues and teams that have and are starting around the country, a 12 yr. old whose father won't let her play....I can see this leading to women in MLB. Not overnight, of course.

But the more females who truly love the game (want to play) that sign up for BBF, the bigger this section (AAGPL/Women's Baseball) has the potentional to become.

The more of "us" (females) there are...the more these girls and women see other girls and women who love the game, the more they will know that they're not alone in that love.

If that young girl who asked how to get her dad to let her play does...eventually...talk to her dad and he allows it. If there are other young girls reading, but not necessarily posting...it might inspire them to play. If there are women reading whose daughters/nieces/granddaughters want to play (like my daughters do) it might inspire them to create a girls' league in another part of the country (as I am trying to do). If girls/women are looking at this particular thread, they will know the labels, rude comments (said intentionally or not) and stereotypes and may rise above them...knowing what to expect from the close-minded individuals can help shoot down the negativity and stereotypes. Females will also see, upon looking through the threads and various posts, what they might not have known - that there are girls'/womens' leagues forming, some colleges have, or are starting, women's teams, etc.

With the proper skills, discussions on subjects about training techniques(Baseball 101 forum), and everything else on BBF, in a SMALL way...a little girl just may be inspired enough to break through all the negative stuff women have to deal with, improve her game, and make the big leagues some day.

Does any of that make sense? It did when I was thinking about it....

[NotAboutEgo]

I can, to a degree.
Being here...this forum (not necessarily "just" this thread)...talking about women in baseball...being offended by a male's comment on their knowledge of the game, the women's leagues and teams that have and are starting around the country, a 12 yr. old whose father won't let her play....I can see this leading to women in MLB. Not overnight, of course.

But the more females who truly love the game (want to play) that sign up for BBF, the bigger this section (AAGPL/Women's Baseball) has the potentional to become.

The more of "us" (females) there are...the more these girls and women see other girls and women who love the game, the more they will know that they're not alone in that love.

If that young girl who asked how to get her dad to let her play does...eventually...talk to her dad and he allows it. If there are other young girls reading, but not necessarily posting...it might inspire them to play. If there are women reading whose daughters/nieces/granddaughters want to play (like my daughters do) it might inspire them to create a girls' league in another part of the country (as I am trying to do). If girls/women are looking at this particular thread, they will know the labels, rude comments (said intentionally or not) and stereotypes and may rise above them...knowing what to expect from the close-minded individuals can help shoot down the negativity and stereotypes. Females will also see, upon looking through the threads and various posts, what they might not have known - that there are girls'/womens' leagues forming, some colleges have, or are starting, women's teams, etc.

With the proper skills, discussions on subjects about training techniques(Baseball 101 forum), and everything else on BBF, in a SMALL way...a little girl just may be inspired enough to break through all the negative stuff women have to deal with, improve her game, and make the big leagues some day.

Does any of that make sense? It did when I was thinking about it....

Yes it does, and I agree with you completely.

[Mattingly]

Exactly! That's why I've refrained from wearing any player's jersey... simply because people will think I'm only there to watch them in the wrong way and that I'm a groupie. Now, if I went to a Detroit Shock game and wore a player's jersey, would I be labeled as a lesbian? Most likely... just as bad... because it's not the truth and is stereotypical. Do guys get labeled as being perverts and as watching girls play only for one reason if they wear a player's jersey... probably. But, I don't see guys getting called gay because they wear a male player's jersey. It's seen as very manly and expresses the "brotherhood" of men (in the eyes of most people).
My answer is multi-faceted. On one hand, I've known female fans who used usernames (Chris, Joe, Alex, Danny, etc), which mostly implied their being male, but could in fact mean Christine, Josephine, Alexandria and Danielle. Perhaps because online, most of the better fans were men, they'd not wanted to be asked their gender, so the male-sounding names kept these kinds of questions at bay. It was all about the baseball, nothing about the "Oh, you're a woman, I see" thing.

On the other, we have two very fine female Mods here in VTSoxFan and Dodger Deb, both of whom (especially Dodger Deb) have been passionate fans for decades.

Jeter I'd picked because he's a Yankee, my team's captain, and I've seen Moms and their daughters wear his jersey. It's like his jersey has been transformed into a socially good thing to wear, with his playing ability making that safe from a baseball viewpoint. Still, I could imagine some women avoiding wearing his jersey, as they'd want to avoid being seen as just admiring him or avoiding those types of comments. Nobody would ever say that about a Yogi Berra jersey, but Mantle and DiMaggio were both fine players and physically attractive. Still, nobody says anything when a heavyset balding male wears a Jeter jersey or t-shirt.

I can't speak about the WNBA thing (yes, I'm familiar with that thing about their female fans, as the NY Liberty is convenient to me, plays at Manhattan's Madison Square Garden), but I did grow up watching women's tennis in the Chris Evert, Martina Navratilova and Billie Jean King era. I'd thought in my youth that they were excellent players on the grass and clay courts.

As to guys wearing the t-shirts or jerseys of other men, since it's a sport involving men, I'd think that since most, as I presume, fans at a game are men, that would be expected. In the men, I believe they're supporting the guys on the team. I just wish the women would get the same treatment. Rather than worrying about whether Albert Pujols is good-looking, but how well he can swat the ball.

When he was in Boston, several women were accused of wearing Johnny Damon's jerseys because of his physical attraction. I'd rather give women the benefit of the doubt, since he did score often and was often the guy plated whenever David Ortiz swatted an RBI.

[EchoTrain2]

I'm just not sure that so much umbrage should have been taken. It's simply a historical fact that there are far more male baseball fans than there are female BB fans. The reasons for this, of course, don't necessarily reflect well upon the patriarchy. But that's where we are right now. It's not as though the guy was saying, "You sure know a lot about baseball, for a girl." Sounds more like he was saying, "It's nice to see that more women are now taking such interest in the game, and it's nice to hear anybody who really knows the game." Sort of like a woman telling some guy, "Boy, you are one of the few men I know who really 'gets' Nora Ephron." I've had to endure listening to a lot of dumb palaver among male fans sitting near me at ball games (and I'm not pretending that I'm the most in-the-know fan in the world, so, at the ballpark, I try to keep most of my opinions to myself or relatively quiet, limited to the persons I've come to the game with). Now, I've been at games where guys sitting in nearby seats were having really sharp conversations about the game, but I just didn't feel compelled to tell 'em that I thought so. Maybe that you are female made it a little easier for the poor fella to share his feelings with you. I've been at a high school football game where a female friend of my sister's (whose son, like my sister's son, was playing in the game) was giving my sister (not a big football fan, unless her son is playing) an expert account of what was going on in the game and was practically calling the next play before it happened. I never said anything during the game, but afteward I told my sister that her friend really knows football. Turns out her friend had coached several sports for years and was really into football. My thought wasn't, "she sure knows a lot about football, for a girl." Rather, I was just impressed to hear someone who really understood the game. Sure, it was somewhat "different" that she was female... but only because of the social fact that more men than women are "into" football. As I suggested before, the reasons for this don't always speak well for the "patriarchy." I guess I'm kinda glad that I didn't say anything to my sister's friend during the game, as it might have been received as an insult.

[5LilPlayers]

It's simply a historical fact that there are far more male baseball fans than there are female BB fans.

Not necessarily. Based on who attends the games...maybe. Based on who plays the game (at all the professional levels), it's possible. What about the older generation who were put down just for being fans (not even playing themselves) and still are somewhat afraid to loosen up about their love of the game? What about the female fans who don't have any big league (from MLB down to Class A) ball parks near them and don't have the funds to get to the "closest available" one? You don't...can't...know it's fact until you've talked to EVERY person in the world.

No one twist my words here. I do think there are more males fans vs. female fans...but I wouldn't say that there are "far more" males than females who love the game.

If there were some way to possibly poll even JUST baseball fans (not the "whole world"), I'm sure it would probably be closer to 60/40 or 70/30 than, say, 80/20 or 90/10, percentage-wise, of the males vs. females.

I guess it also depends on your own personal definition of "far", too...someone (like me) reading that may think you mean 90/10, another might think far more means the (what I think is closer) 70/30 percentage...

[EchoTrain2]

I guess it also depends on your own personal definition of "far", too...someone (like me) reading that may think you mean 90/10, another might think far more means the (what I think is closer) 70/30 percentage...

Point taken. And I'm sure the gap is closing, too.

[NotAboutEgo]

Point taken. And I'm sure the gap is closing, too.

That gap will keep closing, too, as it is a lot more "socially accepted" for girls to play sports now. Take a look at the days of Chris Evert Lloyd and before... it was not very socially excepted for females to play. Now, I see young girls all over the place wearing soccer uniforms, basketball shirts, fast pitch shirts and unifrms, etc. Everytime I see this, I smile and think, "Good for you. Keep on playing."

I agree with what 5LP has said about women in the past liking baseball but not letting it be known because of the status quo. If women were not treated as they have been for so long, then there probably would have been just as many women fans as male fans from the beginning. Going by the fact that women started playing organized baseball right around the time that men did (1866), it suggests that women have been into sports just as long. But, as many of us have said, the way women have been treated and the status quo that results from that heavliy affects the actions of women in certain situations. As I've stated before, read Leslie Heaphy's research papers on this very topic. She talks about how women have been treated as inferior to men affects a woman's confidence, the way she walks, the way she talks, the way she plays sports, many of her choices, etc.

http://eteamz.active.com/detroitdanger/files/WomenPlayingHardball.html

[mac195]

I know how I feel about it now. Even though he was not making fun of us, I didn't feel it was necessary to have to point out how one thinks it's something when a woman knows a little about baseball. It's basically indirectly saying, "I didn't expect you to know anything about baseball because you are women, but you know a lot and therefore, I am impressed." He did mention the fact that he was impressed that a couple of women know so much about baseball. Even though he was not coming from a sexist, stereotypical angle (not consciously, anyway), it was a sexist comment, influenced by the overall ignorance of our society.

When you are in situations similar to these, you get sick and tired of feeling like you are part of a "freak show." I have other examples similar to this, by the way. What I'm trying to say is, I am put off by the ignorance and close-mindedness of our society.
I understand how you feel. As a long time foreign resident of Japan, I've been in similar situations. Japanese people are sometimes overly impressed with my knowledge of Japanese language or culture, as if a foreigner wouldn't be expected to know how to use chopsticks, understand sumo, etc.. The more I think about it though, the less reason I see to be annoyed. Is it "ignorant" for a Japanese person to expect that non-Japanese don't know much about Japanese customs? No. Foreigners with a good knowledge of things Japanese are in fact rare, and it's only natural for people to be surprised when encountering them.

Women with an expert knowledge of baseball aren't quite so rare as white people who speak Japanese but still, they are unusual. The man who complimented your understanding of the game was reacting in a perfectly normal way. As long as he was nice about it, there really is no reason for you to have taken offense.

[NotAboutEgo]

I understand how you feel. As a long time foreign resident of Japan, I've been in similar situations. Japanese people are sometimes overly impressed with my knowledge of Japanese language or culture, as if a foreigner wouldn't be expected to know how to use chopsticks, understand sumo, etc.. The more I think about it though, the less reason I see to be annoyed. Is it "ignorant" for a Japanese person to expect that non-Japanese don't know much about Japanese customs? No. Foreigners with a good knowledge of things Japanese are in fact rare, and it's only natural for people to be surprised when encountering them.

Women with an expert knowledge of baseball aren't quite so rare as white people who speak Japanese but still, they are unusual. The man who complimented your understanding of the game was reacting in a perfectly normal way. As long as he was nice about it, there really is no reason for you to have taken offense.

Although it may be rare for a white person to know so much about the Japanese culture, I think there still is a certain amount of ignorance (being uninformed) and prejudice when a person comments about what they think about it in the ways they have to you. Even though rare, does one have to bring up the fact that for someone who's not Japanese, you know a lot about them? Anyone on this planet has the power to be knowledgeable and informed about anything they desire to be knowledgeable and informed about, even if it does not fit at all within the past or current status quo. So, to me, even if the intentions aren't to degrade someone by making comments about it and pointing it out, it is still stereotypical and prejudiced and ignorant. It's not having an open mind to think that there could be people out there who know a little something about an interest they have that the status quo sees as not being a part of them. To me, that is degrading.

So, it's the same in the case of the guy who said he's impressed because we know a lot about baseball for women. Saying something like he is impressed with our knowledge of baseball and not mentioning the fact that we are women would have been suggesting that he's impressed with anyone's indepth knowledge of baseball. But, he pointed out that he's impressed because we are women and know a lot about it. Even if his intentions weren't to degrade us, he is still ignorant to some degree and is close minded to some degree and is unintentionally degrading us, because he's saying he doesn't expect women to know so much about baseball. Regardless of whether women knowing a lot about baseball is the "norm" or not, it was a stereotypical, sexist statement.

The decisions I can make in a situation like that are to help educate others to the fact that a lot of women DO know a lot about baseball and that people should stop segregating things so much and let things be the way they are without categorizing. Also, I can choose to be positive in those situations and not eact in a negative way, which I didn't. I simply was questioning the situation in my mind and wondering how I truly felt about it. So, somehow it sparked a question in my mind, and I was simply trying to figure out where I should be with my thinking.

[EchoTrain2]

I think that life is too full of serious hardships, complicated questions, gray areas, real and imagined slights, and sometimes unfortunate social and historical realities to take offense at the guy's statements unless he flat out said, "You sure know a lot, for a girl." I go back to my half-serious Nora Ephron example: for whatever reason, it's unusual to find guys who get into Nora Ephron's work. Doesn't mean they are incapable of it. It's just somewhat unusual to come across such guys. Maybe the guy at the ballpark was operating on some preconceived notions (which most people, male and female, probably share), but that doesn't make him "ignorant" or "prejudiced" in the pejorative sense. You can't expect people to ignore their own experiences and observations, particularly when they jibe with the experiences and observations of most other people. I don't see that guy as particularly close minded. And, anyway, you probably opened up his mind a little bit.

[NotAboutEgo]

I think that life is too full of serious hardships, complicated questions, gray areas, real and imagined slights, and sometimes unfortunate social and historical realities to take offense at the guy's statements unless he flat out said, "You sure know a lot, for a girl." I go back to my half-serious Nora Ephron example: for whatever reason, it's unusual to find guys who get into Nora Ephron's work. Doesn't mean they are incapable of it. It's just somewhat unusual to come across such guys. Maybe the guy at the ballpark was operating on some preconceived notions (which most people, male and female, probably share), but that doesn't make him "ignorant" or "prejudiced" in the pejorative sense. You can't expect people to ignore their own experiences and observations, particularly when they jibe with the experiences and observations of most other people. I don't see that guy as particularly close minded. And, anyway, you probably opened up his mind a little bit.

But he did say he is impressed with our baseball knowledge because we are women. Regardless of what words he used, he said he is impressed that we know a lot about it because we are women. So, it's the same thing as what you said... "You sure know a lot, for a girl." And, it's not so unusual for women to know a lot about baseball. It's not like women just started watching the game yesterday. It's a little bit different than the example you gave. I don't even know who Nora Ephron is, and I know nothing of her work. I have no idea what it even refers to. Should I know, just because I'm a woman?

[Wade8813]

But he did say he is impressed with our baseball knowledge because we are women. Regardless of what words he used, he said he is impressed that we know a lot about it because we are women. So, it's the same thing as what you said... "You sure know a lot, for a girl."You should have specified that in the first post; my response would have been different...

And while it's understandable for someone to be surprised if a foreigner understands Japanese customs (or a highly knowledgeable), and should probably be at most should minorly offensive, it isn't so rare that they are completely excused for their words, IMO.

[EchoTrain2]

I don't even know who Nora Ephron is, and I know nothing of her work. I have no idea what it even refers to. Should I know, just because I'm a woman?

No.


Everyone's entitled to his own perception, so I'm not denying you your own take on the encounter.

Still, that guy's perceptions were not "ignorant," as they were supported by a simple socio-historical fact. Don't mistake the way things ought to be for the way they are. Suppose the best thing for him to do would have been to mutely make note of what he observed/overheard and move along.

[mac195]

Even though rare, does one have to bring up the fact that for someone who's not Japanese, you know a lot about them?
I've come to think that it is normal to be surprised at things which are genuinely unusual. If I perceive offense where none is intended, the fault is with me.

Anyone on this planet has the power to be knowledgeable and informed about anything they desire to be knowledgeable and informed about, even if it does not fit at all within the past or current status quo.
I'm sure the man you encountered would agree, as would just about anyone. Had he thought about the women/baseball issue at length before, and decided to himself that women were incapable of understanding the game? Or was he just pleasently surprised to encounter a woman that really knows the game, maybe for the first time in his life. The latter explanation seems more likely.

So, to me, even if the intentions aren't to degrade someone by making comments about it and pointing it out, it is still stereotypical and prejudiced and ignorant.
From your description, he did not degrade you in any way.

[NotAboutEgo]

You should have specified that in the first post; my response would have been different...

And while it's understandable for someone to be surprised if a foreigner understands Japanese customs (or a highly knowledgeable), and should probably be at most should minorly offensive, it isn't so rare that they are completely excused for their words, IMO.

I did fail to mention in my first post that the guy said he was impressed with our knowledge because we are women. I know I should have mentioned that right off but forgot even though I was thinking it, and I mentioned it in a later post.

[NotAboutEgo]

No.


Everyone's entitled to his own perception, so I'm not denying you your own take on the encounter.

Still, that guy's perceptions were not "ignorant," as they were supported by a simple socio-historical fact. Don't mistake the way things ought to be for the way they are. Suppose the best thing for him to do would have been to mutely make note of what he observed/overheard and move along.

I agree with you to a point, but there was some reason the comment didn't bother me at first, but then out of "nowhere" the thought that it was somewhat offending to me popped in my mind, and that's when I began to wonder how I should take his comment.

I guess things like that are offending in a way, because I have been into baseball for so long and that's a part of who I am. It goes along with people making a big deal when they see how I play baseball and hockey and make comments that seem to be patronizing rather than complimenting. That's who I am, a person who plays baseball and hockey and who likes just about any sport there is, and me being a female has never held me back from doing what I want to do. I have never had the mindset that I shouldn't play a sport or be into it if I choose to just because I'm a female, so when people make comments like that, it bothers me.

I agree, and hope, that the instance did open the guy's mind up more. It is up to each person to go beyond the status quo and stereotypes and all that and not be caught up into what most people think. Having the most open mind you can have will help see things in a different way.

[Wade8813]

If I perceive offense where none is intended, the fault is with me.Not true. If someone is in a coach, then the fault is generally with them if there's a lack of communication. However, people can say incredibly mean or offensive things without intending offense, because they actually didn't know. There are numerous examples of people who grew up around racist attitudes, and while starting to learn what is/isn't ok, make bad comments. It's still offensive.

[SoxSon]

Not true. If someone is in a teaching position, then the fault is generally with them if there's a lack of communication. However, people can say incredibly mean or offensive things without intending offense, because they actually didn't know. There are numerous examples of people who grew up around racist attitudes, and while starting to learn what is/isn't ok, make bad comments. It's still offensive.

So, back to baseball now...

[mac195]

Wade, I was not positing that as some iron rule that applies to all cases where someone might give offense without intending to.

[Wade8813]

So, back to baseball now... I apologize.

I do have a question however. How far is too far? I had no intention of making a prolonged disussion that's not baseball related, and my post was in direct response to a baseball thread. It seems that conversations might be left unfinished if each post has to specifically relate to baseball, as opposed to relating to something that relates to baseball.

Wade, I was not positing that as some iron rule that applies to all cases where someone might give offense without intending to. Fair enough. It's just something that needed clarification, IMO.

[BaseballHistoryNut]

But he did say he is impressed with our baseball knowledge because we are women. Regardless of what words he used, he said he is impressed that we know a lot about it because we are women. So, it's the same thing as what you said... "You sure know a lot, for a girl." And, it's not so unusual for women to know a lot about baseball. It's not like women just started watching the game yesterday. It's a little bit different than the example you gave. I don't even know who Nora Ephron is, and I know nothing of her work. I have no idea what it even refers to. Should I know, just because I'm a woman?

I think your take on the encounter is exactly right.

In my first-year law school class (in 1982), there were precisely three times as many men as women (81/27). Many times during that awful year, I saw intellectually mediocre young men who were destined to flunk out asking one another for help with one or more of the first-year subjects. I also recall a very bright woman in the class named Katharine. She regarded me as an intellectual peer and we spent much of the year discussing Law, especially Torts and Criminal Law. Like myself, she witnessed many instances of the blind trying to lead the blind. Near the year's end, she told me she had never once been asked for her opinion on any legal subject during the year, except by me. I was dumbstruck.

Today, both of California's U.S. Senators are women, and 3 of the 7 members of the California Supreme Court are women. Moreover, I am a criminal defense attorney--a typically liberal and very "progressive" part of the profession--and I'm at the top end of my rare part of the criminal bar (appeals). Yet I routinely hear male colleagues refer to "lawyers" (men) and "female lawyers," and "judges" (men) and "female judges." I am the only male California attorney I know who thinks that two of the three brightest members of our State Supreme Court are Joyce Kennard (#1) and Kathryn Werdegar.

You've come a long way, baby, but you've still got a long way to go. Sighhh.

BHN

[Edgartohof]

To answer the original question, I see no reason to be offended by what was said, even including the fact that he mentioned that he was surprised by the fact that you were women.

Pick any subject that is considered to be a "woman's" subject, and if I suddenly hop in and talk intelligently about it, I am sure that many people (men AND women) would be surprised, and would say so. Since most men do not know much about whatever this topic may be, yet I can discuss it intelligently, I would not be astonished to receive a comment regarding this "rarity". Yet I would not take offense to it.

For whatever reason, the way society is set up, more men are drawn to certain things, and women to differing ones. This is not an absolute, but it is quite clear in everyday life. This starts from the moment we are born. The first question is what? Boy or girl? Blue or Pink? The boys are given toy cars, the girls are given Barbies (yes I know, I am seriously generalizing this), but do we (as a society) have a problem with that? Generally no, though recently these issues have been brought closer to the forefront.

So we are set apart (male or female) from the beginning, so it is no wonder that we see differences later in life, so when one person finds there way into an area associated predominantly with the other sex, there is still some astonishment by some, though I would say (and hope) that there will be less and less in time.

After all of that, I personally don't ever find it a surprise to find a woman interested, or knowledgeable about sports. In part this is due to the immediate culture I was raised in, which was surrounded by women, including my mother, who truly loves sports (is the one who got me into sports), and can talk all day about any of them, from baseball to football, to hockey, to track. I also have a sister who I can talk to about baseball, and I have many female friends that are in similar situations.

But still, for people who were not raised in the same or similar situation as me, may not have had the opportunity to get to know women who are as into sports, and so it may be a surprise to them. Maybe they have tried to strike up conversations with women involving sports (or any other subject that is predominantly "male" in nature), and has not had any luck. I will say that for every woman that I know that is into sports, I know two or more that are not, including two of my own sisters. And I am sure you could find similar numbers when you compare knowledge of fashion or the like.

Many people are surprised to see a male nurse, and yes there are considerably fewer male nurses than female, yet why should I or anyone be surprised about a guy being a nurse. If he likes it and is good at it, all the more power to him. Do I think less of a guy because he isn't a nurse? No.

If I meet a woman and they like sports, then great, if they don't, then great again, there are many other things out there, not everyone likes the same things, get on with it. I like to crouchet (sp?), and I'm a guy. Most guys don't crouchet - who cares (I'm not great at it, but it's something to do...). If you want to change the differences that society creates, then by all means, do so. More women should learn about sports, more men should learn to crouchet (much cooler than knitting - that's for grandma's :laugh ), but no matter what, you won't get me wearing pink anytime soon.

[sandlot]

So, back to baseball now...A reminder gently made, and thanks for that, but IMHO uneeded and misplaced: Because baseball creates feelings, and because we bring feelings to the experience of baseball, and because we are sharing these feelings on a baseball forum, then it's all about baseball by definition. We all think about baseball, but not in a vacuum; it's part and parcel of our thinking about other things as well. If we talk about what we think, but don't discuss why we think it, or how it is we came to think these things, or whether we are right or wrong to think this or that, then it's a shallow discussion with little resonance. For the people taking part in this exchange, there nothing to get back to, because none of us has ever left. I cannot see how this thread (and some of the related ones in this section) are any less (or more) related to baseball than, e.g., some of the abstractions of sabremetrics; that's mathematics and statistics brought to baseball, and it's perfectly valid. Most of it's either over my head or just outside my interest, but now and then I comprehend something and it adds to my appreciation not only of the game, but to my appreciation of the variety of people who love it. So too with this thread: Perhaps many readers will come to it and find nothing of interest, while a few others will delve in because the discussive, meandering, philosophical style suits the way they think about things -- including baseball -- because that's simply the way their existence is integrated. When it wanders too far, forumers seem either to ignore posts, or try to steer discussion. The level of exchange suggests to me that this is one thread the mods need lose no sleep over, leaving them free to turn their attentions elsewhere. BTW, I am pleased to see today that the first woman to be elected to the HOF now has her plaque on the wall. May she not be the last.

[NotAboutEgo]

I think your take on the encounter is exactly right.

In my first-year law school class (in 1982), there were precisely three times as many men as women (81/27). Many times during that awful year, I saw intellectually mediocre young men who were destined to flunk out asking one another for help with one or more of the first-year subjects. I also recall a very bright woman in the class named Katharine. She regarded me as an intellectual peer and we spent much of the year discussing Law, especially Torts and Criminal Law. Like myself, she witnessed many instances of the blind trying to lead the blind. Near the year's end, she told me she had never once been asked for her opinion on any legal subject during the year, except by me. I was dumbstruck.

Today, both of California's U.S. Senators are women, and 3 of the 7 members of the California Supreme Court are women. Moreover, I am a criminal defense attorney--a typically liberal and very "progressive" part of the profession--and I'm at the top end of my rare part of the criminal bar (appeals). Yet I routinely hear male colleagues refer to "lawyers" (men) and "female lawyers," and "judges" (men) and "female judges." I am the only male California attorney I know who thinks that two of the three brightest members of our State Supreme Court are Joyce Kennard (#1) and Kathryn Werdegar.

You've come a long way, baby, but you've still got a long way to go. Sighhh.

BHN

Thanks for your post and example, BHN. Just goes to show that the sexist stereotypes (along with others) should be broken down, and they are built from one's insecurity and ego that results from that insecurity. Thanks for not being afraid to speak out about exactly how you feel instead of going with the status quo (even if you feel differently then that) because it's a lot more comfy.

[NotAboutEgo]

To answer the original question, I see no reason to be offended by what was said, even including the fact that he mentioned that he was surprised by the fact that you were women.

Pick any subject that is considered to be a "woman's" subject, and if I suddenly hop in and talk intelligently about it, I am sure that many people (men AND women) would be surprised, and would say so. Since most men do not know much about whatever this topic may be, yet I can discuss it intelligently, I would not be astonished to receive a comment regarding this "rarity". Yet I would not take offense to it.

For whatever reason, the way society is set up, more men are drawn to certain things, and women to differing ones. This is not an absolute, but it is quite clear in everyday life. This starts from the moment we are born. The first question is what? Boy or girl? Blue or Pink? The boys are given toy cars, the girls are given Barbies (yes I know, I am seriously generalizing this), but do we (as a society) have a problem with that? Generally no, though recently these issues have been brought closer to the forefront.

So we are set apart (male or female) from the beginning, so it is no wonder that we see differences later in life, so when one person finds there way into an area associated predominantly with the other sex, there is still some astonishment by some, though I would say (and hope) that there will be less and less in time.

After all of that, I personally don't ever find it a surprise to find a woman interested, or knowledgeable about sports. In part this is due to the immediate culture I was raised in, which was surrounded by women, including my mother, who truly loves sports (is the one who got me into sports), and can talk all day about any of them, from baseball to football, to hockey, to track. I also have a sister who I can talk to about baseball, and I have many female friends that are in similar situations.

But still, for people who were not raised in the same or similar situation as me, may not have had the opportunity to get to know women who are as into sports, and so it may be a surprise to them. Maybe they have tried to strike up conversations with women involving sports (or any other subject that is predominantly "male" in nature), and has not had any luck. I will say that for every woman that I know that is into sports, I know two or more that are not, including two of my own sisters. And I am sure you could find similar numbers when you compare knowledge of fashion or the like.

Many people are surprised to see a male nurse, and yes there are considerably fewer male nurses than female, yet why should I or anyone be surprised about a guy being a nurse. If he likes it and is good at it, all the more power to him. Do I think less of a guy because he isn't a nurse? No.

If I meet a woman and they like sports, then great, if they don't, then great again, there are many other things out there, not everyone likes the same things, get on with it. I like to crouchet (sp?), and I'm a guy. Most guys don't crouchet - who cares (I'm not great at it, but it's something to do...). If you want to change the differences that society creates, then by all means, do so. More women should learn about sports, more men should learn to crouchet (much cooler than knitting - that's for grandma's :laugh ), but no matter what, you won't get me wearing pink anytime soon.

I agree with what you said about male nurses. I also don't think it's a big deal when there is a male nurse or whatever, but some people can't seem to handle that, and if they make a sexist comment based on their insecurity, it's not right.

I also agree with your statements about how our society is... "For whatever reason, the way society is set up, more men are drawn to certain things, and women to differing ones." But, I highly disagree with the idea that it just happens how it happens and it's OK. It's called "social conditioning" and is purposeful and is about certain people who are insecure with themselves in many ways have to "tell" people how they should be and how they should experience their life. It's like herding cows into stantions.... put them all in a row, line them up and lock them in, keep them confined, don't let them wander, control them to get what one wants out of them to benefit the one who is "in" control.

Why do you think people have the idea that pink is for girls and blue is for boys and cars are for boys and dolls are for girls? It's because someone came up with the idea, who knows when, and people who choose not to think on their own and consider these things go with the flow and follow these types of things. That's how society happens the way it happens and these kinds of ideas become part of a culture and a society. Is it right? In a lot of cases, the traditions of a culture and society are not right, and them being tradition for years and years and years doesn't make them right. Would it be right for a particular society to chop the heads off of people who don't "obey" the leaders even if it has been tradition for thousands of years?

Social conditioning is something that is created by people who "need" to be in control and who want everyone to do what they say and who want everyone to think how they want them to think without having any creativity, thinking of their own, unique and original concepts, etc. That is why "pink is for girls and blue is for boys."

For people, men and women, who have not been raised in families or environments where women are into sports and so they have closed minds about women playing them and being knowledgeable about them, they are the ones who have made the choices to not go beyond the social conditioning they had placed upon them while growing up, and they are the ones who choose to be closed minded and not "allow" others to do what they choose to do. Just because one is raised in a certian type of environment doesn't mean that's how they "have" to live forever. They are fully capable of and are responsible for thinking on their own and growing beyond that. If they don't, then they only have themselves to blame for it. We all can make our own choices.

So, when someone, regardless of whether they are male or female (I have gotten plenty of patronizing comments from women as well as from men... in this thread I used the man's comment as an example, because that is the one that happend most recently and it's the one I remember more because of that) makes a sexist comment about women knowing a lot about baseball, it's up to them to open their mind and to start thinking on their own and to stop being so influenced and controlled by social conditioning.

Even if someone is surprised by the fact that a person knows a lot about something that society doesn't think they know a lot about, they can choose to have an open mind about it and not make comments that offend others.

I appreciate your comment about not seeing a reason to be offended. That is how you perceive it from your experiences, so that's they way it is. But for me, I did get somewhat offended from the comment, because throughout my whole life I've had many encounters where I've heard statements like that one, not just directed towards me, but directed towards females in general. One gets a bit sick of it after a while!

[Sliding Billy]

I did fail to mention in my first post that the guy said he was impressed with our knowledge because we are women. I know I should have mentioned that right off but forgot even though I was thinking it, and I mentioned it in a later post.
Of course the comment was inadvertently offensive, but [ALERT: GENDER STEREOTYPE FOLLOWS] a lot of us guys get flustered starting up a conversation with women we admire and blurt out just the wrong thing, to our own horror.

It's entirely possible that the guy went home from the game and spent the rest of the evening banging his head against the wall. "YOU JERK! :eek: You actually said it: 'You're pretty smart for a girl.' The shame! The agony! She's probably posted it on the internet! D'OH!"

[NotAboutEgo]

Of course the comment was inadvertently offensive, but [ALERT: GENDER STEREOTYPE FOLLOWS] a lot of us guys get flustered starting up a conversation with women we admire and blurt out just the wrong thing, to our own horror.

It's entirely possible that the guy went home from the game and spent the rest of the evening banging his head against the wall.

LOL... :laugh Thanks for your humor. I know what you are saying, but not ALL women are that way. Perhaps it's just the women you are around most of the time.

I know a lot of guys who are quite clueless about baseball and hockey and other sports as well. It's basically a personal choice whether someone is into baseball or not and has nothing to do with gender. But, social conditioning tends to heavily influence things such as women not being into baseball as much in the past, even though some of them really enjoyed it and would have gotten into it more if they wouldn't have been ridiculed for liking it. Who would want to be involved with something if they constantly got ridiculed for it? They make the choice to ignore it altogether and not be involved, or they choose to stand up and not be afraid to tell people what they think and why it's wrong to control them and tell them they can't like something, be involved with it and play it. Guess what choice I make over and over? :laugh

[SoxSon]

A reminder gently made, and thanks for that, but IMHO uneeded and misplaced: Because baseball creates feelings, and because we bring feelings to the experience of baseball, and because we are sharing these feelings on a baseball forum, then it's all about baseball by definition. We all think about baseball, but not in a vacuum; it's part and parcel of our thinking about other things as well. If we talk about what we think, but don't discuss why we think it, or how it is we came to think these things, or whether we are right or wrong to think this or that, then it's a shallow discussion with little resonance. For the people taking part in this exchange, there nothing to get back to, because none of us has ever left. I cannot see how this thread (and some of the related ones in this section) are any less (or more) related to baseball than, e.g., some of the abstractions of sabremetrics; that's mathematics and statistics brought to baseball, and it's perfectly valid. Most of it's either over my head or just outside my interest, but now and then I comprehend something and it adds to my appreciation not only of the game, but to my appreciation of the variety of people who love it. So too with this thread: Perhaps many readers will come to it and find nothing of interest, while a few others will delve in because the discussive, meandering, philosophical style suits the way they think about things -- including baseball -- because that's simply the way their existence is integrated. When it wanders too far, forumers seem either to ignore posts, or try to steer discussion. The level of exchange suggests to me that this is one thread the mods need lose no sleep over, leaving them free to turn their attentions elsewhere. BTW, I am pleased to see today that the first woman to be elected to the HOF now has her plaque on the wall. May she not be the last.

I respect you, sandlot, and I agree...outside of Baseball Fever. Anyone who knows me also knows that I love discussing larger issues. However, discussion based on gender and roles in society, minus the context of baseball, is not what this forum is for. I've now asked twice to keep discussion centered around our beloved game, to little avail.

[SoxSon]

With the exception of NotAboutEgo's last post, the last several posts, while being quite interesting and insightful, have had little to do with baseball. The original query: Should I have been offended? clearly asks for posters to analyze a baseball situation from a sociological standpoint, and that's ok. My feeling, however, is that the original question has been satisfied, and discussion is now almost entirely centered around the sociological issue, and that's not ok for Baseball Fever.
While I respect all here, I'm closing this thread for now. Thanks.