Sports in the United States are very popular, currently, which is good, but the realm of sports is still vastly male-dominated, which I believe is not so good. Sports for women, from what I have seen, are nowhere near as popular as are sports for men, and that is most unfortunate, in my mind. There is the WNBA, but it is not as popular as the regular NBA, and there is also the Lingerie Football League, but that is clearly intended to appeal to male fans, since the players of that league are clad very scantily apart from their football armor and helmets. At least the Olympic games are very egalitarian, from what I have seen, but those are held only every four years, leaving the male-oriented normal sports in constant focus, with female-oriented sports seen only on occasion.
What does everyone else say about this? Do you believe that sports for women shall ever become more popular in the United States? What can be done to increase their popularity?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Those who would trade their freedoms for security will have neither.”-Benjamin Franklin
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
The main issue is that male sports leagues are accepted as the real version of the sport, and women's leagues are seen as lesser-than versions of the real deal. That perception will always keep viewers away from women's leagues regardless of the inherent skill level and entertainment value of women's sports leagues.
When men begin seeing women's leagues as legitimate sports and not subpar versions of manly pursuits, then you'll see the popularity rise. Sports viewership is male-dominated and right now what men want to watch is other men playing sports, not women 'trying' to play those sports.
It depends on the sport. Women's basketball is less exciting because there aren't the same flashy plays. The number of dunks in WNBA history is six. Total. Ever. It's just not as exciting of a game.
On the other hand, women's tennis is very popular. Women's tennis sometimes gets more TV viewers than the equivalent men's events. In men's tennis, the power of the serves makes the game less interesting. Watching ace after ace is dull, and the women's game is the more entertaining one.
Plainly put, no. About the only time you'll see a fair amount of willingness to watch women's sports is during the Olympics. The rest of the time its a "subpar" product. Tennis to some degree as well. Women's volleyball too but I can assure you that has more to do with the uniforms than anything else.
The only women's sport I'll tune in to is soccer, but if you asked me to choose between the men or the women, I'd watch the mens game everytime
You also have to look at it from an establishment point of view. The WNBA is still fairly new in terms of professional sports leagues, and before it, there was nothing like it. (The MLS had a predecessor in the NASL). There is no clear organization of womens sports teams, that's entertaining or profitable right now. The WNBA has come so close to bankruptcy, year after year, most of the teams just feel like off-shoots from their NBA counterparts, and the product doesn't really have that much excitement. None of these things are components of a successful operation.
One of the big reasons men's sports are so popular is because they're ingrained in our being. Yeah there are tons of people who don't like any type of sport, and hate the thought of sports, but a big reason why these sports are popular, is our relatives. My father was a Minnesota Vikings fan, watching him made me want to be a football fan, growing up I lived in Wisconsin, making me a Green Bay Packers fan. There are special bonds that people share over sports. And in the end that's really what makes them super popular.
The main issue is that male sports leagues are accepted as the real version of the sport, and women's leagues are seen as lesser-than versions of the real deal. That perception will always keep viewers away from women's leagues regardless of the inherent skill level and entertainment value of women's sports leagues.
When men begin seeing women's leagues as legitimate sports and not subpar versions of manly pursuits, then you'll see the popularity rise. Sports viewership is male-dominated and right now what men want to watch is other men playing sports, not women 'trying' to play those sports.
Aren't womens leagues defacto less competitive then mens sports, if the two were combined there would be almost no female representation due simply to biology?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Don't you see that the whole aim of Moderators is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make infractions literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.
Make the average female athelete as strong, as large, as fast, and as durable as a the average male athlete of that sport. Then get rid of whatever rules that may differentiate the female version of that sport from the male. 6 foot 240+ pound female linebackers, that's what I'm talking about. Single league, no more separate leagues for men and women.
A large part of why many sports are so male dominated is because of biology. A team will try to use the biggest, fastest, hardest hitting player that is available. Not only do they win more, they're flashier. Often, these will be male. The result is that most sports heroes are male.
If biology can be made so that player A is as good as player B regardless of gender (ie they perform equally physically), then the audience will likely equalize more, too.
(incidentally, the only sports I watch in the olympics are gymnastics and figure skating, where being larger doesn't translate to being better at all).
There were guys on my high school basketball team that could slam dunk on 10 foot rims, but for some reason nobody in the WNBA can? I guess it has to be about more biology than opportunity, then. I remember that the owner of the Mavericks (Mark Cuban) had said he wanted to draft that one female college player that was supposed to be the best ever. I don't know if he drafted her or not but if so she hasn't made any impact.
I wonder about baseball, though. How come no woman can crack the MLB? I was watching women's softball a few months ago and it seems like half of them bat like slap hitters, they're out of the box as soon as the ball gets to the plate. I don't know if that's a softball thing or a woman thing.
I was thinking that the NFL could take a female track runner and covert her into a wide receiver, but I guess that the first time she crossed over the middle she would get blasted and it would be 'that's all folks' for her.
By the way, I would love it if women's sports took off! Because all my male teams suck consistently, so maybe I would have some better luck rooting for the ladies.
There were guys on my high school basketball team that could slam dunk on 10 foot rims, but for some reason nobody in the WNBA can? I guess it has to be about more biology than opportunity, then. I remember that the owner of the Mavericks (Mark Cuban) had said he wanted to draft that one female college player that was supposed to be the best ever. I don't know if he drafted her or not but if so she hasn't made any impact.
I wonder about baseball, though. How come no woman can crack the MLB? I was watching women's softball a few months ago and it seems like half of them bat like slap hitters, they're out of the box as soon as the ball gets to the plate. I don't know if that's a softball thing or a woman thing.
I was thinking that the NFL could take a female track runner and covert her into a wide receiver, but I guess that the first time she crossed over the middle she would get blasted and it would be 'that's all folks' for her.
By the way, I would love it if women's sports took off! Because all my male teams suck consistently, so maybe I would have some better luck rooting for the ladies.
I know womens softball has a pitchers mound much closer to the batters box then in mens baseball.
Also I think women track athletes are far too slow, I remember in on the of the previous threads about this during the olympics and the speeds of the runners were very different.
Though as you point out being fast is only part of it, playing a single pro-football game is like being in a car accident. Hell look at a lot of the male atheletes coming out of college like RG3, they basically arent prepared for the brutality of the pro level and do good untill they get broken by a lineman.
So if its any kind of solace its not just that women can't compete in the pro-leagues, most men can't compete in the pro-leagues. I think these threads pop up because its a lack of understanding at just how hard the pro-leagues are. Sure it looks easy from our couches but we aren't the targets of 300 lb 2% body fat Kaiju that pass a defensive lineman these day.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Don't you see that the whole aim of Moderators is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make infractions literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.
no just no! women can't compete on the same level as a man in any sport at all(im talking about sports not wussy stuff like dancing{even though football players do ballet}). it's all genetics man, there is no 300 pound woman that can hit as hard as a 300 pound man. there is no 6' woman that can jump as high as a 6' man it simply doesnt exist.
no just no! women can't compete on the same level as a man in any sport at all(im talking about sports not wussy stuff like dancing{even though football players do ballet}). it's all genetics man, there is no 300 pound woman that can hit as hard as a 300 pound man. there is no 6' woman that can jump as high as a 6' man it simply doesnt exist.
So? Does that mean that women's sports have no merit or entertainment value at all?
There were guys on my high school basketball team that could slam dunk on 10 foot rims, but for some reason nobody in the WNBA can? I guess it has to be about more biology than opportunity, then. I remember that the owner of the Mavericks (Mark Cuban) had said he wanted to draft that one female college player that was supposed to be the best ever. I don't know if he drafted her or not but if so she hasn't made any impact.
I wonder about baseball, though. How come no woman can crack the MLB? I was watching women's softball a few months ago and it seems like half of them bat like slap hitters, they're out of the box as soon as the ball gets to the plate. I don't know if that's a softball thing or a woman thing.
I was thinking that the NFL could take a female track runner and covert her into a wide receiver, but I guess that the first time she crossed over the middle she would get blasted and it would be 'that's all folks' for her.
By the way, I would love it if women's sports took off! Because all my male teams suck consistently, so maybe I would have some better luck rooting for the ladies.
I'm gonna address this post and then kinda lump it all in with my opinion on the subject at large. Lets talk about Britney Griner(the "best college female basketball player ever") for a moment. So let's first assume she is in-fact the best female basketball player ever(she isn't), and compare her to men that play the same position has she does in. She plays Center in the WNBA, She is 6'8", 207 lbs. She is tied for the tallest girl in the WNBA. An NBA center is typically 6'10 at the shortest. Which means she has to switch positions or be an undersized center. She's not going to overpower anyone at the NBA level at center for rebounds and I really am not sure she could even block some of the bigger Forwards(either a 3 or a 4 doesn't matter). The NBA centers would have the same advantage she has over her female counterparts(there are centers in the WNBA that stand 6'4"). Her skillset doesn't favor her being able to play Power forward(she'd also still be undersized) and she'd be guarding guys such as Dirk Nowitzki, Anthony Davis, Kevin Love, Tim Duncan, Blake Griffin. I don't think she could beat any of those guys in a one on one situation ever. Not strong enough, not fast enough. Probably because biology. And that is that the WNBA is inferior, because the most famous, considered best ever player in her position could not compete with her male counterparts in that position or any other position she has the skillset to play(she can't play Small forward, her outside shot is weak as hell and her ball handling isn't great). Also the game itself is less physical, and it's a bit slower with not as much of an inside game. Post play is practically non-existent.
Women don't play baseball, they play softball, and I think that is ridiculous. Get rid of the different rules, pitch overhand, and play with the small ball, and let's see what it looks like.
A female track runner would probably fair about as well as a male one in football, which is not well. Look at Jeff Demps. Gotta be able to run routes in the NFL and prototypical sprinting form doesn't allow for change of direction.
I think there is stigma behind women playing football which I don't get and I would love to see some real football played by women to at least see what it looks like before writing it off(I'd possibly watch it instead of mens college football).
The only sport I have watched that I don't notice a drastic difference in ability between men and women is MMA(Boxing too but I don't have an example because i'm not a huge boxing fan). Women fighting is every bit as physical and exciting as men. Ronda Rousey is a true athlete and is very impressive to watch. I guess tennis, as a few others said, but there is certainly a difference in ability(especially when you consider the one girl who could compete with men physically is the hands down GOAT). The difference may create a more interesting game but that's subjective. The only objective thing is that men's is much much faster(like 15-20mph difference on serves between men and any woman not named Serena).
Another big thing about women's sports that I think detracts from the sport is the most popular sports for women(college basketball and pro tennis) are pretty much dominated by one team or player. Take Connecticutt's women's team this year(and a number of other years for that matter), they have yet to be in a close game with anyone. they beat #2 Duke by 20 points. They beat #7 Baylor by 11 in a rather low scoring game that Baylor was never really in, and every game besides those two is a 30+ point victory. As for tennis, Serena Williams has 17 majors. Her sister Venus who has the same talent/build but was injury prone has won 7 majors. Only 4 other women currently active have won 2 or more. And Tennis has a history of being this way, Margaret Court in the 60s and early 70s, Chris Evert in the lates 70s early 80s, Martina Navratilova in the mid and late 80s, Steffi graf in the 90s, and now Serena for the past 15 years. It's really not that interesting watching a single dominating force that has little to no real competition. It's not fun watching sports if the outcome is never in doubt.
Actually, women do play baseball in the United States. Turns out they have been all along, it's just that, for the most part, people don't know or care.
The UFC is one place where women competitors are getting as much respect as their male counterparts. Events consistently have both male and female fights now for the last year or so that women have begun having their own weight class. This week in fact will be one of the bigger events. All of this is due in part to how awesome Ronda Rousey is. It simply took a lot of marketing and an impressive athlete to grab hold of fans.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
One of these day I have to get myself organizized.
The UFC is one place where women competitors are getting as much respect as their male counterparts. Events consistently have both male and female fights now for the last year or so that women have begun having their own weight class. This week in fact will be one of the bigger events. All of this is due in part to how awesome Ronda Rousey is. It simply took a lot of marketing and an impressive athlete to grab hold of fans.
They are certainly making strides in the UFC but to say women are getting as much respect as the men is quite a stretch. The entire women's division exists because of one woman and one woman alone. If something were to happen to Rousey today and she were to never fight again it's not much of stretch to speculate that the women would be out of the UFC within a year. Or that they'd be relegated entirely to the preliminary card with the exception of title fights which likely wouldn't be the headlining fight. With out the marketing juggernaut that is Rousey there's not a lot there to prop up the women's division. And at the end of the day Dana White cares about one thing and one thing only: $$$
And while she is the headliner of this weekends PPV I can guarantee you this PPV won't see anywhere near the kinds of viewership numbers the men can pull in. Rousey is a gifted fighter for sure, and at 135 lbs there's probably not a woman alive who could beat her. But I highly doubt she could beat anyone in the top 10 of the men's 135 lb division. And that's not a knock on Rousey or women's MMA, that's just the way it is at the moment.(for the record, I enjoy women's MMA, I personally think good technique is good technique regardless of size or gender).
You'd actually be pretty surprised. Rousey could potentially beat somebody in the top 10 of the men's 135 division, and its because of several factors. Rousey's style compensates heavily for her biologic disadvantages and at 135 lbs, there is not nearly as much muscle mass. No male in the 135 lb division fights the style Rousey does, and in a matchup of styles, its possible she could win. But MMA is a lot about how the fighters styles dictate the pace of the matchup. It also ought to be pointed out Rousey trains pretty much exclusively and spars against men. So it isn't like she is unfamiliar with the concept. I will be honest when I say that the likelihood of Rousey beating any member of the UFC 135 Men's top 10 is extremely remote however.
However it has to be stated that in no unequivable terms, in terms of athletics, males are biologically superior to females. There is just no getting around that face. And it isn't just with hormones. Females are biologically slower than males due to the design of their hips to allow for childbirth. The wider hips makes the runners gait that is mechanically slower than a males gait. There is no way to compensate for this difference.
Female tennis may be the only female sport that could be argued to be more popular in the United States than the male game. A lot of this has to do with the fact that the game is designed in such a way that it is more fast paced than the male game. Female players only play three sets to the male's 5. The 2 less sets means an increased importance on every shot, and it also increases the pace of the game significantly. This creates an entirely new experience that is different yet arguably superior to the mens game. Now granted this trend is only true recently due to the rise of the Williams Sisters, however Maria Sharapova has also become a hugely marketable name in the US, and actually has tennis skill to back it up unlike Anna Kornikova.
Though I suppose if you wanted an argument for a sport in which men and women could compete on an equal playing field, despite men's genetic advantages, that would be bowling and pool. Kelly Kulick won the 2010 PBA Tournament of Champions for example in bowling.
Speaking of tomorrow's Rousey fight...this fight will be a first in the UFC for both men and women. It will be the first time in UFC history that two Olympic medal winners will be fighting for the title. That's pretty cool.
So? Does that mean that women's sports have no merit or entertainment value at all?
Did he say that? No, you're making assumptions. OP asked if women's sports would ever be as popular, he said no.
Well, no. What he said is that women can't compete at the same level as men (can't hit as hard, can't jump as high), implying that women's sports are lesser than men's because of an inability for women to deliver the same way we expect men to. He wasn't speaking to popularity, he was speaking to quality of performance, and I think my question is a valid response to that.
I am only going to talk about the women's sports I know about WNBA, women's college basketball and Women's Hockey.
For the WNBA and women's college basketball, they put out a less entertaining product than the NBA and men's college basketball. The WNBA in particular is boring to watch as it lacks the high marks that the NBA has while having all the low makrs that the NBA has. It is just a question of where I would rather spend my sports watching time and I would prefer to watch the product I consider more entertaining.
For women's hockey, there is a completely different problem. You have Canada, the U.S., and then nobody else. Those two teams are like the NHL to the rest of the world's AHL. And watching those two dominate other teams gets old real fast as their is no suspense. And while U.S./Canada games are always great to watch. Watching the same two teams battle it out over and over again would just get boring after a while. You need three or four other countries to get to the U.S. and Canada's level and you could put out a product that would easily be as entertaining as any men's hockey game. But until there are those other teams, I could do maybe a game a year before I worry about getting too much of the same thing without something else.
What does everyone else say about this? Do you believe that sports for women shall ever become more popular in the United States? What can be done to increase their popularity?
In traditional sports that emphasize attributes like size, speed, and strength - I do not believe females in those sports will ever reach the athletic levels of their male counterparts. That doesn't mean they will never be as popular.
Women's sports have two advantages. One being titillation that emphasizes the attractiveness of the athletes. Something like the Lingerie football league (which you mentioned) would be an extreme example of this, but you also find it in other sports to varying degrees like women's tennis and beach volleyball. It's distasteful to some people because it emphasizes attractiveness over athleticism, but in pure terms of popularity it's undoubtedly a factor.
The other advantage ironically, is that sometimes having athletes who are not as large, fast or strong can make for a more entertaining or more competitive sport (ie women's tennis). If you look back at when most sports were invented, the average male athlete was not as large, strong, or fast as he is today. Most sports were invented with smaller athletes in mind. For some sports this can mean a significant change in the game since the players are gaining more size and power, but the equipment and playing field generally doesn't change to accommodate. ie more NBA players can dunk today than in the past, in MLB we see more homeruns, in Golf players can hit the ball farther, in the NHL and NFL the field can seem "smaller" than in the past because athletes are bigger and faster so there's less time and less room to make plays, etc.
You'd actually be pretty surprised. Rousey could potentially beat somebody in the top 10 of the men's 135 division
Honestly, as great as she is, this just is flat untrue. And 135 is one of the weakest division's in the UFC. Even without including guys outside of the UFC that are most certainly better than guys in the UFC Top 10 ranking(Dantas, Moraes, Galvao, Fernandes are all better than anyone outside of the top 6) I don't see Rousey beating half the list. Even though she got a TKO in her last fight, Rousey's stand up is still nothing special, especially compared to that of Renan Barao, Eddie Wineland, or Mike McDonald. Probably not even polished as some of the lower guys on the list like Caceres or Rivera that are known for their striking. If we use the Champ + the top 9 to make 10, that gives us Barao, Faber, Assuncao, McDonald, Wineland, Dillashaw, Easton, Mizugaki, Alcantara, and Perez(I don't think Perez or Easton deserve their spots at all considering Perez has a bunch of wins over no names and a pretty 1 sided lose to Mizugaki and Easton has lost 3 straight), She would lose to probably 7 of that list. Barao, Wineland, McDonald are for sure losses. Alcantara, Faber, Dillashaw, Assuncao are most likely losses with Dillawshaw the most likely to go down from that group due to how good Rousey is with dealing with wrestlers. She might beat Mizugaki cause he isn't really a finisher and she'd have a lot of oppurtunities but his size and strength could wear her down, and she would most likely beat Easton and Perez. But the next 3 guys on the list are Francisco Rivera, Dominick Cruz and Alex Caceres, and I don't see her even beating 2 of those guys. So even given the UFC's official(and fairly flawed) ranking, I don't see her beating 66% of the top 15(the two I didn't mention were Pickett and Caraway, and she'd beat caraway but Pickett would be a tough out). I honestly think she'd even have a tough time with some of the top Flyweights.
The other advantage ironically, is that sometimes having athletes who are not as large, fast or strong can make for a more entertaining or more competitive sport (ie women's tennis).
In Norway, there are plenty of sports where men and women are equally popular, and even some where women are more watched than men. Both men's and women's cross country skiing and biathlon are immensely popular & I'd say that they are considered equally important and prestigious. Women's handball (a sport I think barely exists in the US, but is quite popular here & in the rest of Europe) is actually way more popular than men's handball. When I grew up, I remember it being a consensus that football (soccer) was the male sport, while handball was the female sport, though that is obviously not true.
I think it just has to do with what we're used to. At some point, women's skiing wasn't really a thing over here either as a spectator sport, but it gradually became more accepted and mainstream, until they became equal. I can't remember hearing anyone suggest that men's skiing is "the real one" or somehow more important, even though the men clearly are faster, stronger, etc. But probably took the better part of a century to get there. Women's football has only really been a thing here for ~30 years, and it is not even close to the recognition that men's football has. Maybe it will get there in another fifty years.
It's just a cycle of: More mainstream -> More athletes -> Better athletes -> Increase in popularity as a spectator sport -> repeat.
What does everyone else say about this? Do you believe that sports for women shall ever become more popular in the United States? What can be done to increase their popularity?
“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”-Thomas Jefferson
“A vote is like a rifle; its usefulness depends upon the character of its user.”-Theodore Roosevelt
“Patriotism means to stand by one's country; it does not mean to stand by one's president.”-Theodore Roosevelt
When men begin seeing women's leagues as legitimate sports and not subpar versions of manly pursuits, then you'll see the popularity rise. Sports viewership is male-dominated and right now what men want to watch is other men playing sports, not women 'trying' to play those sports.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
On the other hand, women's tennis is very popular. Women's tennis sometimes gets more TV viewers than the equivalent men's events. In men's tennis, the power of the serves makes the game less interesting. Watching ace after ace is dull, and the women's game is the more entertaining one.
The only women's sport I'll tune in to is soccer, but if you asked me to choose between the men or the women, I'd watch the mens game everytime
One of the big reasons men's sports are so popular is because they're ingrained in our being. Yeah there are tons of people who don't like any type of sport, and hate the thought of sports, but a big reason why these sports are popular, is our relatives. My father was a Minnesota Vikings fan, watching him made me want to be a football fan, growing up I lived in Wisconsin, making me a Green Bay Packers fan. There are special bonds that people share over sports. And in the end that's really what makes them super popular.
Aren't womens leagues defacto less competitive then mens sports, if the two were combined there would be almost no female representation due simply to biology?
Make the average female athelete as strong, as large, as fast, and as durable as a the average male athlete of that sport. Then get rid of whatever rules that may differentiate the female version of that sport from the male. 6 foot 240+ pound female linebackers, that's what I'm talking about. Single league, no more separate leagues for men and women.
A large part of why many sports are so male dominated is because of biology. A team will try to use the biggest, fastest, hardest hitting player that is available. Not only do they win more, they're flashier. Often, these will be male. The result is that most sports heroes are male.
If biology can be made so that player A is as good as player B regardless of gender (ie they perform equally physically), then the audience will likely equalize more, too.
(incidentally, the only sports I watch in the olympics are gymnastics and figure skating, where being larger doesn't translate to being better at all).
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
I wonder about baseball, though. How come no woman can crack the MLB? I was watching women's softball a few months ago and it seems like half of them bat like slap hitters, they're out of the box as soon as the ball gets to the plate. I don't know if that's a softball thing or a woman thing.
I was thinking that the NFL could take a female track runner and covert her into a wide receiver, but I guess that the first time she crossed over the middle she would get blasted and it would be 'that's all folks' for her.
By the way, I would love it if women's sports took off! Because all my male teams suck consistently, so maybe I would have some better luck rooting for the ladies.
I know womens softball has a pitchers mound much closer to the batters box then in mens baseball.
Also I think women track athletes are far too slow, I remember in on the of the previous threads about this during the olympics and the speeds of the runners were very different.
Though as you point out being fast is only part of it, playing a single pro-football game is like being in a car accident. Hell look at a lot of the male atheletes coming out of college like RG3, they basically arent prepared for the brutality of the pro level and do good untill they get broken by a lineman.
So if its any kind of solace its not just that women can't compete in the pro-leagues, most men can't compete in the pro-leagues. I think these threads pop up because its a lack of understanding at just how hard the pro-leagues are. Sure it looks easy from our couches but we aren't the targets of 300 lb 2% body fat Kaiju that pass a defensive lineman these day.
So? Does that mean that women's sports have no merit or entertainment value at all?
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
I'm gonna address this post and then kinda lump it all in with my opinion on the subject at large. Lets talk about Britney Griner(the "best college female basketball player ever") for a moment. So let's first assume she is in-fact the best female basketball player ever(she isn't), and compare her to men that play the same position has she does in. She plays Center in the WNBA, She is 6'8", 207 lbs. She is tied for the tallest girl in the WNBA. An NBA center is typically 6'10 at the shortest. Which means she has to switch positions or be an undersized center. She's not going to overpower anyone at the NBA level at center for rebounds and I really am not sure she could even block some of the bigger Forwards(either a 3 or a 4 doesn't matter). The NBA centers would have the same advantage she has over her female counterparts(there are centers in the WNBA that stand 6'4"). Her skillset doesn't favor her being able to play Power forward(she'd also still be undersized) and she'd be guarding guys such as Dirk Nowitzki, Anthony Davis, Kevin Love, Tim Duncan, Blake Griffin. I don't think she could beat any of those guys in a one on one situation ever. Not strong enough, not fast enough. Probably because biology. And that is that the WNBA is inferior, because the most famous, considered best ever player in her position could not compete with her male counterparts in that position or any other position she has the skillset to play(she can't play Small forward, her outside shot is weak as hell and her ball handling isn't great). Also the game itself is less physical, and it's a bit slower with not as much of an inside game. Post play is practically non-existent.
Women don't play baseball, they play softball, and I think that is ridiculous. Get rid of the different rules, pitch overhand, and play with the small ball, and let's see what it looks like.
A female track runner would probably fair about as well as a male one in football, which is not well. Look at Jeff Demps. Gotta be able to run routes in the NFL and prototypical sprinting form doesn't allow for change of direction.
I think there is stigma behind women playing football which I don't get and I would love to see some real football played by women to at least see what it looks like before writing it off(I'd possibly watch it instead of mens college football).
The only sport I have watched that I don't notice a drastic difference in ability between men and women is MMA(Boxing too but I don't have an example because i'm not a huge boxing fan). Women fighting is every bit as physical and exciting as men. Ronda Rousey is a true athlete and is very impressive to watch. I guess tennis, as a few others said, but there is certainly a difference in ability(especially when you consider the one girl who could compete with men physically is the hands down GOAT). The difference may create a more interesting game but that's subjective. The only objective thing is that men's is much much faster(like 15-20mph difference on serves between men and any woman not named Serena).
Another big thing about women's sports that I think detracts from the sport is the most popular sports for women(college basketball and pro tennis) are pretty much dominated by one team or player. Take Connecticutt's women's team this year(and a number of other years for that matter), they have yet to be in a close game with anyone. they beat #2 Duke by 20 points. They beat #7 Baylor by 11 in a rather low scoring game that Baylor was never really in, and every game besides those two is a 30+ point victory. As for tennis, Serena Williams has 17 majors. Her sister Venus who has the same talent/build but was injury prone has won 7 majors. Only 4 other women currently active have won 2 or more. And Tennis has a history of being this way, Margaret Court in the 60s and early 70s, Chris Evert in the lates 70s early 80s, Martina Navratilova in the mid and late 80s, Steffi graf in the 90s, and now Serena for the past 15 years. It's really not that interesting watching a single dominating force that has little to no real competition. It's not fun watching sports if the outcome is never in doubt.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4675763
"Wussy stuff"?
Did he say that? No, you're making assumptions. OP asked if women's sports would ever be as popular, he said no.
They are certainly making strides in the UFC but to say women are getting as much respect as the men is quite a stretch. The entire women's division exists because of one woman and one woman alone. If something were to happen to Rousey today and she were to never fight again it's not much of stretch to speculate that the women would be out of the UFC within a year. Or that they'd be relegated entirely to the preliminary card with the exception of title fights which likely wouldn't be the headlining fight. With out the marketing juggernaut that is Rousey there's not a lot there to prop up the women's division. And at the end of the day Dana White cares about one thing and one thing only: $$$
And while she is the headliner of this weekends PPV I can guarantee you this PPV won't see anywhere near the kinds of viewership numbers the men can pull in. Rousey is a gifted fighter for sure, and at 135 lbs there's probably not a woman alive who could beat her. But I highly doubt she could beat anyone in the top 10 of the men's 135 lb division. And that's not a knock on Rousey or women's MMA, that's just the way it is at the moment.(for the record, I enjoy women's MMA, I personally think good technique is good technique regardless of size or gender).
However it has to be stated that in no unequivable terms, in terms of athletics, males are biologically superior to females. There is just no getting around that face. And it isn't just with hormones. Females are biologically slower than males due to the design of their hips to allow for childbirth. The wider hips makes the runners gait that is mechanically slower than a males gait. There is no way to compensate for this difference.
Female tennis may be the only female sport that could be argued to be more popular in the United States than the male game. A lot of this has to do with the fact that the game is designed in such a way that it is more fast paced than the male game. Female players only play three sets to the male's 5. The 2 less sets means an increased importance on every shot, and it also increases the pace of the game significantly. This creates an entirely new experience that is different yet arguably superior to the mens game. Now granted this trend is only true recently due to the rise of the Williams Sisters, however Maria Sharapova has also become a hugely marketable name in the US, and actually has tennis skill to back it up unlike Anna Kornikova.
Though I suppose if you wanted an argument for a sport in which men and women could compete on an equal playing field, despite men's genetic advantages, that would be bowling and pool. Kelly Kulick won the 2010 PBA Tournament of Champions for example in bowling.
Well, no. What he said is that women can't compete at the same level as men (can't hit as hard, can't jump as high), implying that women's sports are lesser than men's because of an inability for women to deliver the same way we expect men to. He wasn't speaking to popularity, he was speaking to quality of performance, and I think my question is a valid response to that.
Archatmos
Excellion
Fracture: Israfiel (WBR), Wujal (URG), Valedon (GUB), Amduat (BGW), Paladris (RWU)
Collision (Set Two of the Fracture Block)
Quest for the Forsaken (Set Two of the Excellion Block)
Katingal: Plane of Chains
For the WNBA and women's college basketball, they put out a less entertaining product than the NBA and men's college basketball. The WNBA in particular is boring to watch as it lacks the high marks that the NBA has while having all the low makrs that the NBA has. It is just a question of where I would rather spend my sports watching time and I would prefer to watch the product I consider more entertaining.
For women's hockey, there is a completely different problem. You have Canada, the U.S., and then nobody else. Those two teams are like the NHL to the rest of the world's AHL. And watching those two dominate other teams gets old real fast as their is no suspense. And while U.S./Canada games are always great to watch. Watching the same two teams battle it out over and over again would just get boring after a while. You need three or four other countries to get to the U.S. and Canada's level and you could put out a product that would easily be as entertaining as any men's hockey game. But until there are those other teams, I could do maybe a game a year before I worry about getting too much of the same thing without something else.
In traditional sports that emphasize attributes like size, speed, and strength - I do not believe females in those sports will ever reach the athletic levels of their male counterparts. That doesn't mean they will never be as popular.
Women's sports have two advantages. One being titillation that emphasizes the attractiveness of the athletes. Something like the Lingerie football league (which you mentioned) would be an extreme example of this, but you also find it in other sports to varying degrees like women's tennis and beach volleyball. It's distasteful to some people because it emphasizes attractiveness over athleticism, but in pure terms of popularity it's undoubtedly a factor.
The other advantage ironically, is that sometimes having athletes who are not as large, fast or strong can make for a more entertaining or more competitive sport (ie women's tennis). If you look back at when most sports were invented, the average male athlete was not as large, strong, or fast as he is today. Most sports were invented with smaller athletes in mind. For some sports this can mean a significant change in the game since the players are gaining more size and power, but the equipment and playing field generally doesn't change to accommodate. ie more NBA players can dunk today than in the past, in MLB we see more homeruns, in Golf players can hit the ball farther, in the NHL and NFL the field can seem "smaller" than in the past because athletes are bigger and faster so there's less time and less room to make plays, etc.
Honestly, as great as she is, this just is flat untrue. And 135 is one of the weakest division's in the UFC. Even without including guys outside of the UFC that are most certainly better than guys in the UFC Top 10 ranking(Dantas, Moraes, Galvao, Fernandes are all better than anyone outside of the top 6) I don't see Rousey beating half the list. Even though she got a TKO in her last fight, Rousey's stand up is still nothing special, especially compared to that of Renan Barao, Eddie Wineland, or Mike McDonald. Probably not even polished as some of the lower guys on the list like Caceres or Rivera that are known for their striking. If we use the Champ + the top 9 to make 10, that gives us Barao, Faber, Assuncao, McDonald, Wineland, Dillashaw, Easton, Mizugaki, Alcantara, and Perez(I don't think Perez or Easton deserve their spots at all considering Perez has a bunch of wins over no names and a pretty 1 sided lose to Mizugaki and Easton has lost 3 straight), She would lose to probably 7 of that list. Barao, Wineland, McDonald are for sure losses. Alcantara, Faber, Dillashaw, Assuncao are most likely losses with Dillawshaw the most likely to go down from that group due to how good Rousey is with dealing with wrestlers. She might beat Mizugaki cause he isn't really a finisher and she'd have a lot of oppurtunities but his size and strength could wear her down, and she would most likely beat Easton and Perez. But the next 3 guys on the list are Francisco Rivera, Dominick Cruz and Alex Caceres, and I don't see her even beating 2 of those guys. So even given the UFC's official(and fairly flawed) ranking, I don't see her beating 66% of the top 15(the two I didn't mention were Pickett and Caraway, and she'd beat caraway but Pickett would be a tough out). I honestly think she'd even have a tough time with some of the top Flyweights.
See Williams, Serena.
I think it just has to do with what we're used to. At some point, women's skiing wasn't really a thing over here either as a spectator sport, but it gradually became more accepted and mainstream, until they became equal. I can't remember hearing anyone suggest that men's skiing is "the real one" or somehow more important, even though the men clearly are faster, stronger, etc. But probably took the better part of a century to get there. Women's football has only really been a thing here for ~30 years, and it is not even close to the recognition that men's football has. Maybe it will get there in another fifty years.
It's just a cycle of: More mainstream -> More athletes -> Better athletes -> Increase in popularity as a spectator sport -> repeat.