On Serena and Hope

Within the last week or so, Serena Williams won her 695th* Grand Slam and Hope Solo – the greatest goalie in US soccer history - helped her team win the world cup.
* Slight exaggeration.

And despite such grandeur of individual and collective athletic achievement, a lot of news inevitably includes the fact that Ms. Williams is continuously subjected to racist invective and body shaming, while Ms. Solo is ridiculed in almost frat-boy hilarity for numerous transgressions against family and friends – including assaults and drunken behavior.

Ultimately many reasonable people fear (with not a little justification) that these two women are treated unfairly and are subjected to criticism that would not be directed to male counterparts.

To which I say, they are, and a small element of that is actually a sign of female sports progress.

True, most typical guys can’t handle all that is Serena.  Oh sure, we men can appreciate a great technical female tennis player who can simply play the game much better than us.  However, many cannot accept the fact that unless we are a world-class athlete in our own right, she would beat us in EVERYTHING. We have a hard time wrapping our minds around the fact that her athletic prowess and her mental toughness and her utter devotion to excellence are far better than we can even imagine. Serena Williams is a better athlete and better at her craft than almost any male in any sport ever.

And so we do what men do: we hate and find ways to tear down.

With Hope, we snicker and roll our eyes when we probably should gasp and shout.  We openly laugh about a disorderly conduct and physical assault when we should react with the same disgust as we did with Ray Rice or Greg Hardy.  But we don’t – because she’s a girl.

And so we do what men do: we hold firm to our belief that only men can cause trauma and fear.

That is how both women are treated unfairly. One is hated and derided for being physically better than we are; the other is let off the hook for terrible transgressions because we can’t accept that a woman could really be a monster.

I posit however, a bit of a silver lining in all this. In some ways these two amazing athletes and all the attention they garner is a step in the right direction. Even if some or most of the attention they are being paid is for the wrong reasons – the fact that attention is being paid on par with what male superstars get, is a sign of real progress.

First, in no way am I condoning or pardoning the sexism, body shaming, double standards and racism that these women face. It is wrong. 100 percent.

However, behind a lot of those evil and vile thoughts is a common thread that is woven into the sports fabric of men’s sports as well: Pettiness.

To wit:

LeBron James is in arguably the greatest basketball player in the game today and arguably the greatest ever.  Further, he is tremendously charismatic, unbelievably unselfish for a superstar and by all accounts a good person, husband and father.

Yet, I cannot think of another male athlete who has suffered as much pure pettiness as he. From dozens of blogs carping about his hairline, to the incontrovertibly stupid fact that ESPN hosts and broadcasters continue to this day to castigate his primetime show called “The Decision” when he announced his intention to leave Cleveland and go to Miami – despite the fact that it WAS ESPN’S IDEA AND THEY BROADCAST THE SHOW!!!!

Finally, no player has ever taken less talented teams to the NBA Finals than he did with both Cleveland teams, yet millions of people chirp about his 2-6 Finals record.

Terrell Owens was a great wide receiver, perhaps even a Hall of Famer.  He certainly embodied the near-Olympic ideal of the freak athlete wide receiver that was bigger than linebackers but faster than defensive backs. Terrell Owens won everywhere he went. He helped the 49er’s and the Cowboys make the playoffs and he helped take the Eagles to the Super Bowl.  He never had any issues with domestic violence, drugs, or really any issues off the field at all.

Yet, Terrell Owens is almost universally hated by petty NFL fans: fans who openly routed for wife beaters, cocaine users and fathers who skipped out on their kids but booed him mercilessly because he had an ego and he liked to boast and brag. And now that he is out of football and suffering financial difficulty, the schadenfreude is amazing.

But pettiness has its roots in something far more fertile and closer to our core as humans and males: jealousy.

We hate on male sports stars because we are jealous: of their fame, of their prowess of their money of their sexuality of their lifestyle.  The hate and pettiness disguises are true feelings of envy and want. 

And so, the pettiness toward Serena and Hope is the awkward and strange transference or our male jealousy on female form.

We are jealous of Serena because she is big and powerful and competitive and fierce and she loves to show off and preen and strut and vanquish. Just like we would do if we were in her shoes.

We are jealous of Hope because – despite her unforgivable and loathsome abuse toward family – she’s a bad-ass who lives very much like the renegade outlaw biker we secretly fantasize about.

And if there is jealousy there is also relevance. No matter what gets you to the match or the TV be it hate and pettiness, you still watch. You still have conversations, albeit conversations filled with snide and derisive comments, but still, you talk about Williams and Solo.  Like you talk about James and Owens.

That is progress for women’s sports. In fact, the conversation is even more important than the watching.  We watch women’s tennis, but we talk about Serena. We watch women’s soccer, but we pontificate on Solo.   

Same for James and Owens. The conversation is so much more important because conversations equal true mind share that hooks us like dope. We aren’t addicted as sports fans to quality games and athletic precision – no, we are addicted to conflict and argument and posturing and the feeling of superiority.  And a controversial athlete that evokes an emotion is so much more important to the long-term viability of the sport they play.

Academics and Football - Time Constraints on Alpha Males

At first, when I read this, I didn't know what to make of it.  Almost all the top high schools in the nation DO NOT have football teams? 

Why?
 

They have other sports teams, and seemingly have all the other trappings of high school sports – games, pep rallies, school spirit etc.

So why does a lack of football go with top academic high schools, and – by extension – does football go with the lower rung of high schools?

I have a theory. And my theory has nothing to do with any perception about the “dumbness of football jocks” or brain damage or anything else.

My theory relates to a simple concept: time.

Like it or not, high schools tend to be dominated in terms of culture, and social structure by alpha males. In a traditional football high school, the alpha males tend to play that sport. Like almost every other mammal, alpha males are the biggest, strongest and fastest – which happen to be necessary for football. The other necessary ingredient in football: time. Football devours time.

Football is the most intense and time consuming of all sports. From the length of the games, to the amount of training to the amount of off-the-field preparation and off-the-field celebration and worship; football takes a huge amount of time and effort.

As such, if a particular school’s alpha males are consumed by one thing (football), then those males do not have a lot of spare time to dictate culture and social structure. So like a pack, the rest of the students may be left with a sense of passive following.

Further, the alpha’s effort in football really only benefits themselves and their select colleagues (other members of the team). In other words, the football alpha’s are celebrated and worshiped, but that celebration and worship doesn’t translate into anything truly shared and tangible. The student body can’t emulate them. Football by its very nature (necessitating size strength and speed) is exclusionary.

However, what if a school’s alphas were not help prisoner to the time and effort constraints of football?  What if they had more free time? Free time to dictate culture and social structure, a larger portion of which could theoretically by dedicated to academics?

In many ways it comes down to a simple math equation.

Let’s say the average number of hours in a school year is around 1,000. At a typical football high school, the alphas might have 20 to 40% of those hours taken up by football. At non-football high schools, the alphas that play less time-intensive sports like baseball, basketball and soccer have around 10% of their time taken away. That’s an extra 100 hours per year dictating culture and social structure.

You don’t think an extra 100 hours per year doesn’t make a difference?

Alpha male at football-playing high school A might be throwing touchdowns and leading his team – and by extension – his high school to gridiron glory, but, because of the huge time commitment, that’s about all he can do and little else for the rest of the school.

However:

Alpha male at high school B without football isn’t quarterbacking any team. Instead, he’s using his time to do other things, and since he’s in an educational environment, many of those other things include academics. 

And unlike Mr. alpha at high school A, where his major contribution is something no one else at school can do (throw touchdowns), the alpha at high school B can lead by example through academics, which is something a lot more students can follow.

Close the Beaches but Not the Highways

We are American's, we don't do nuance or incremntalism.

You have an 11 million to one chance of being killed by a shark.  you have a 1 in 100 chance to die in a car crash at any point in your life. 

There have been six shark attacks off the east coast in the last few weeks - non fatal.  In that same amount of time, there have been - according to statistical modeling - 121 auto deaths in states along the same coast for roughly the same amount of time.

Beaches however, will close. Roads and highways will not.

We know for an absolute fact that there will be a certain number of deadly car crashes per number of cars and miles driven.  We do not know for any ascertainable fact when and where the next shark attack will happen - fatal or otherwise.

For beach goers there is no "safe" time to go into the water, just as their is no "unsafe" time to go into the water.  Shark attacks are mind-numbingly rare and they always will be.

For drivers, anytime you get on the road, you risk your safety and that of your passengers. 
But, we have to have cars and travel and commerce.  We don't have to have swimmable beaches. 

So we panic over something insignificant and completely ignore and gloss over something that is incalcuably more dangerous. Driving.

Not, taking one for the team

It's always been a contention of mine that conservatives tend to be some of the nicest people I know.  The key part of that sentence is "I know," because the obvious linkage of these words is that the conservatives I'm referring to also know me. 

In my experience, the conservative people in my life tend to be every bit, if not more, warm and gracious and caring than any liberal person in my circle.

Case in point:  Once I was living in Seattle during a fairly significant earthquake.  Literally, before I could even compose myself, a colleague of mine (and one of the most conservative people I've ever known) called my phone and breathlessly asked if I was OK.  This friend also knew that my wife was pregnant with our first child and immediately told me - not asked me - to go home and be with her and that he would take over for me and handle any of my duties. None of my liberal friends and co-workers did anything remotely like that.

Indeed, a true friend. But also a true friend who has no apprehension at all about publicly castigated and denigrated all poor people as lazy, good-for-nothing welfare cheats.  He emits the same hatred for environmentalist, Muslims and homosexuals, among others.

The funny thing is that I've seen this friend go out of his way to offer help and support to:

• a colleague of his who had a major drug problem and lost all his money
• a Muslim neighbor who needed a reference
• A gay family member who needed refuge when her parents threw her out of the house

Why the different treatment, between the people he knows by name and the people he only knows by group?

I believe it has to do with the concept of team - something we learn at a very early age.  For many, and I believe overwhelming conservative people, the relationship of team is easy to buy into.  If you are on my team, I will support you, protect you and celebrate you.  If you are NOT on my team, I will hate you.

I am on my friend's team.  The bankrupt and drug-addicted colleague, the Muslim neighbor and the gay cousin are all on his team as well.  But, the millions of poor people, the entire Muslim community and the throngs of LGBT people are not.

And this is increasingly a problem for the Republican party.  The inability to see huge groups as individuals and the failure to extend tolerance toward people they don't know personally. It's what alienates the party from minorities, women and even moderate voters.

Many may completely disagree with many Republican economic principles, but most can at least understand the logical and utility of their argument.  But the social platform they've cobbled together is a recipe for disaster in attracting supporters - especially younger supporters - who could become the foundation of the party for years to come.

On a bit of a roll

Wow.

Didn't it seem like the Obama presidency was headed for the proverbial dustbin of history?  Didn't it seem like the man and his team were just kind of running out the clock until 2016?

Turns out...not so much.

Yes, this happened today.  The ACA remains the law and will remain the law for a long time to come. So, scoreboard detractors.  The man (and many in congress and the Roberts Court of all things) just put it out of reach of repeal.  Done.  The signature of his presidency is now safe.  And no matter what comes now, he's an historic president for something other than being the first African American in the Oval Office.

and to think about it, the man has some serious skins on the wall.  To wit:

• Went from 10% unemployment to 4.5%
• ACA, as mentioned
• Got Osama Bin Laden
• No major terrorist attacks on US soil since taking office
• Economic growth, Dow is past way up
• Huge gains for LGBT
• Ended the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
• Dodd Frank and other financial reforms
• Moderate gains in environmental reforms

Oh, and by the way, here's what didn't happen under the man's watch:

• Were not socialist
• We didn't get attacked
• We didn't crater the economy
• We didn't take everyone's guns away (not my favorite, but hey, everyone on the right said he would)
• We didn't set up death panels
• We didn't get run over by Russia, terrorists, Mexico or any other nation

Wow.  If McCain or Romney had won in 08 or 12, the right would have a tickertape parade for the exact same accomplishments.

Again, wow.

Tis' Always Easier to Want Than to Do

My son has become not just a big basketball fan, but he's become a huge fan of the intricacies of putting an NBA team together.  He's obsessed with the draft and free agency and the decisions that go into building a great pro team.

And like so many of us, he wants the teams that he follows to make the bold and exciting moves that can bring about great success.  "Trade this player; cut this one; draft this guy."

Of course often times - as is the case with most teenagers, and quite a few adults - he doesn't see the other side of the bold and exciting move: the difficulty in finding a trade partner, the difficulty in cutting a player with a guaranteed contract, the uncertainty of the draft,.

I raise all this as an example of something that afflicts us all: wanting vs. actually doing.

I just heard the now famous podcast between Marc Maron and President Obama and have been fixated on one thing the president said: it's easy to have a political philosophy and to boldly pronounce that we need to do X to put our country on the right track. It's an entirely different matter to actually do something that is going to get passed and going to work.

He brought up the Affordable Care Act as a perfect example.  Easy to say that all American's should have access to quality affordable health care.  Entirely a different matter to actually do it.  The ACA is the most ugly and hated piece of political sausage any of us could remotely stomach. It's so far removed from the pure and ideal concept it started out to be.  But in order to get something even remotely close, it had to be stuffed through a grinder of political machinations most of us can't even imagine.

The president talked about the idea that in our democracy, one can only steer the vast ocean liner about 2 degrees to the north in order for the huge ship to reach its intended port some ten years down the line.  You simply can't turn it 50 degrees and get it docked immediately where you want it to go. If you did, the whole ship would simply explode.

That's the thing we have to learn as we grow older and accumulate more experience.  Nothing will ever be perfect, least of all national policy.  The best you can hope for is small, measured and incremental changes that hopefully over time get you close to your original goal.  And you probably won't be around to see the actual benefits in action.

Nothing could be finer than to not be from Carolina

South Carolina that is. 

The big news today is that the governor and seemingly every Republican candidate for president are breaking their own ankles whilst reversing field and now declaring with righteous indignation that the confederate flag most come down from atop the capitol dome.

And in a small way, I kind of feel bad for these pols.  Because they have to pretend to care and support the idiotic, racist and white trash leanings of some in this backwater state.  I know this is satire, but is it really far from the truth?  A bunch of inconsequential people in a largely inconsequential state, holding onto the past because they are too ashamed and afraid to embrace the future.  A future largely cast without them even playing a small part.

To borrow the set up from Jeff Foxworthy's bit about rednecks:

• If you truly believe the confederate flag is a glorious symbol of southern heritage - you might be an inconsequential bubba.
• If you take part in Civil War reenactments - you might be an inconsequential bubba.

And all the Republican candidates for higher office have to curry favor with this (hopefully) small, yet active group of deviants.