convoluted bitching on why i hate sports

aside from a few painful minutes of witnessing the remaining members of my once favorite band embarrass themselves in front of millions of people and a couple quick glances at the family room TV while walking to and from the bathroom and kitchen, i didn't watch any of the Super Bowl. i didn't care. i derive absolutely no pleasure from watching grown men in grotesque costumes dash around a field and crash into one another in pursuit of a unassuming leather ellipsoid. i'm being [obnoxiously] facetious, but i genuinely just don't get it. and it's not only professional football, it's the culture surrounding all competitive sports from Little League on up.

that's not to say i dislike athleticism, or even the idea of sports in general. when it's on the level of a bunch of neighborhood kids playing field baseball, a couple friends engaging in a game of PIG, or even intramural sports at a school or business, i think sports can be a great thing. like any other game - video, card, board - the function of sports at this level is to foster camaraderie; it's all about connection and the satisfaction derived from working with other people towards a common goal. and good-natured competition can be rewarding, on both a personal and social level. of course, there's the health aspect as well, playing a sport is an excellent way to stay in shape [or so i'm told]. it's when sports go beyond an excuse for a group of people to get together and have fun/exercise that they become problematic for me:

- education:

it is inherently contrary to the goal, function, and purpose of education for a school - whether it be a small high school or an enormous public university - to slavishly devote so much time, effort, and monetary resources to the maintenance and promotion of athletic programs. and while this attitude may stem from my personal experiences in high school - i consistently felt that my GRAND ACCOMPLISHMENTS as a scholar and as a member of academic teams were undervalued by the faculty and completely overshadowed by the achievements of the star school athletes - it goes beyond petty envy. the administration at my school had a "sports director" position that paid well above and beyond a tenured teacher's salary; this is analogous to university-level coaches being among the highest-paid public servants in their respective states. considering how difficult it is for teachers to make a decent living and how entry-level positions at colleges are dwindling fast, this seems like a gratuitous and baffling waste of resources. then there's the type of people who get hired as coaches, and, by extension, P.E. and health teachers. they usually have no proper educational training and no real commitment to or interest in academics. my high school's baseball coach was a truly despicable human being - and i can say that about only a small handful of people i've known in my life - who was allowed to teach a health class where he would make such claims as "women who wear revealing clothing are asking to get raped." no wonder so many girls in my class were mothers or impregnated by the time of graduation; sex education should not be ordained by such an incompetent and destructive individual. yet, he was allowed to keep his job, presumably because he brought in so many victories on the baseball diamond. [i know that was tangential, but i had to get it out!] proclaiming that athletic programs bring in money for the school reeks of stat-juking bullshit. if sporting events do turn a profit - and i'm sure they do at a college level more so than at a high school level - how much of that money is pumped back into the program? maintenance of facilities and equipment is dauntingly expensive [it was always disheartening to hear that IU spent thousands and thousands of dolla dolla bills for a new basketball stadium or whatever]. it becomes another snake-eating-itself self-perpetuating cycle. school-sponsored athletics are a blight on public resources and anathema to education.

- social value:

1. gender issues: i don't want to delve too much into gender studies, but sports encourage a culture based on antiquated heteronormative and patriarchal social values. rabble-rouser Andrea James' provocative blog entry on this subject had me, a godless constructivist, feeling like a damn reactionary, but it's rather obvious that the stereotypes and gender divides associated with sports are woefully outdated. speaking from my own experience, it's obnoxious that as a dude, heteronormative values dictate that i should actively give a fuck about Peyton Manning or Ron Artest or whoever and that NOT caring signifies wimpiness, and by implied extension, femininity.

2. faux-regionalism and rivalry: i think regionalism is awesome in general, especially in a cultural sense, and i unequivocally support any attempt to preserve it. however, the "regionalism" associated with sports culture - whether it be rivalries amongst teams, supporting the "home team," or a arena or stadium becoming an integral part of a city's image - is superficial at best. to me, regional culture is based on food, language, art, music - idiosyncratic, organically developed elements that are singular to that specific city or community. from the very little i know of the history of professional sports, before the establishment of national leagues and codification of rules and regulations associated with them, each city had its own unique way of playing. professional sports are an extension of the monoculture that developed in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

[HISTORY DEGREE TANGENT] shifts in labor [increased wages and a shorter workday led to more leisure time], the growth of the middle class, and rapid changes in technology [the telegraph and, later, the telephone] and transportation [railroads and the automobile] fostered the development of a consumerist monoculture and the industries associated with it, including professional athletics.

monoculture isn't always a terrible thing, but it's infuriating when misconstrued as regionalism. so when you go "root root root for the home team," you aren't supporting the local culture of your city or community, you're supporting a national multi-billion industry developed a little over a hundred years ago to suck up your new found wealth and leisure time, you dirty, stupid proletariat.

and rivalries between college teams are just dumb and obnoxious, sorry.

3. the spectacle of public violence: there's a lot of theory out there stating that professional sports [and violent films, viral videos, etc.] occupy the primal need/desire in the popular consciousness for ritualized, public violence. thus, it replaces human sacrifice, public executions, blood sport, gladiatorial battle, and other such lovely endeavors. this thought process assumes a very cynical, Hobbesian view of human nature, and who knows, it may be somewhat correct. and if it is, how fucking sad is it that there's still a need for this type of spectacle. look at European soccer riots or the drunk, belligerent dad getting into fights at Little League games. are people really inherently violent, irrational, stupid beings?

i know i'm firing on all cylinders here and that i'm making some rather wild, spurious arguments, so i'll end things with a little list of why part of me CAN see the appeal of competitive sports:

1. aesthetics of shape and movement: artists have known it for millennia; the human form is beautiful. yeah, bodybuilders are nasty because they don't look natural, but a well-sculpted figure is undeniably aesthetically pleasing. the body in movement is even more so. this is the appeal of a sport like boxing for me, which i can easily associate with ballet and dance [Raging Bull captures this very well]. plus, it's really fucking cool to see a person move at seemingly impossible speeds [Micheal Phelps at the Olympics, for example]. even football can be engaging on this level. an acquaintance of mine made an incredible experimental short film [that i wish i could find on the internet] based entirely on found footage of OJ Simpson making touchdowns. it was hypnotically beautiful and absolutely compelling.

2. cults of personality and the romance: some athletes are undeniably badass. Muhammad Ali is the quintessential example, but i could name several others from every sport. and some sports, baseball in particular, have a certain romantic appeal based on folkloric legends and popular myth. in some senses, Babe Ruth, Joe DiMaggio, and even someone like Michael Jordan are just as integral to the American cultural heritage as Robert Johnson or Mark Twain or John Ford or any creator/chronicler/exemplar of the American experience.

3. camaraderie: i know i was kind of denouncing monoculture earlier, but i can certainly recognize its appeal. it plays into a fundamental desire to be a part of something bigger and grander than yourself. and when you're at a bar with your buddies downing cheap beer while cheering on your favorite team on the big screen TV, you're connecting to an intangible sentiment that unites you with hundreds, thousands, or millions of other people. it would take a real asshole to find fault in that.