Why don't women follow women's sports?

enfant terrible

seamus wrote: »

I actually disagree.

Women's tennis is the one example I'd throw out here (though there are others). It's arguably as popular as men's tennis, even if they don't earn as much.

People aren't really interested in seeing the strongest or the fastest unless that's the primary measure in the sport - e.g. Boxing or the 100m sprint.

But it's not in most sports. Tennis is a game of skill and strategy first, athletic performance second. So too are the majority of other sports. A professional womens' football game involves just as much excitement and skill as a mens' game.

A team of fat former professionals in their 40s will steamroll a team of physically fit 20-year-old non-players every day of the week. Soccer is a game of skill first and foremost.

It's not about the raw physicality. That's not why people watch sports.

The only reason female tennis players are paid as much as men is because they play in the same tournaments.

If they were separated their prize money would drop significantly because the skill and athleticism level is much lower.

Halloween Jack

Andre 3000 wrote: »

Women's tennis is nowhere near as popular as men's tennis. Not even close.

It is however one of the most visible of women's sports. The reason for this is the fact that the women's grand slam events occur alongside the men's events, meaning they get exposure that other women's sports can only dream of. It wouldn't work for every sport but it could be an idea to getting more exposure and hence earnings for female athletes.

enfant terrible

Halloween Jack wrote: »

It is however one of the most visible of women's sports. The reason for this is the fact that the women's grand slam events occur alongside the men's events, meaning they get exposure that other women's sports can only dream of. It wouldn't work for every sport but it could be an idea to getting more exposure and hence earnings for female athletes.

But why would you want to do that, watch a lower standard of play. It would be like the tennis.

Andre 3000

Halloween Jack wrote: »

It is however one of the most visible of women's sports. The reason for this is the fact that the women's grand slam events occur alongside the men's events, meaning they get exposure that other women's sports can only dream of. It wouldn't work for every sport but it could be an idea to getting more exposure and hence earnings for female athletes.

Also to do with the fact it's a rich person's sport.

sullivlo

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

With all the sport on Telly this year and the probable success of Ireland's Gold hopeful Katie Taylor, the question why women do not follow women's sports is annoying me.

Katie Taylor has won one Olympic gold and five world titles in boxing. Yet I cannot name any of the women she defeated.
Why is this? I asked myself.
It does not get enough coverage why does it not get coverage = not enough interest in the viewing public. You would think at least the women would show show more then a token interest in thier own sports? Thereby increasing interest.


I then thought about the women's Rugby, Camogie and Ladies Football. Wouldn't you think the women would support thier own games and follow the teams in greater numbers?
Yet when the men's equivalent sports are on the women go to games!? (This maybe because it is a good day out, a chance to be seen there, or to get a fella! Who knows?)

Now I realise that statistically women prefer to go to the theater/show rather then follow sport. In fact relationships could be said to be the female sport of choice. To discuss who is going out with who from the celebrity world or down the road. Or better still who broke up with who. Soap operas are created for this market.

But then why do women not go to the soap operas that are played out in sport between female competitors?

I found an American article which discusses this dated 2003!
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/15/weekinreview/ideas-trends-why-don-t-women-watch-women-s-sports.html

Nothing much seems to have changed.

Way to tar all women with the same brush :rolleyes:

I couldn't name any of Katie Taylors opponents. Mind you I couldn't name any of Paddy Barnes' either. Because I don't follow boxing.

I could probably name more Irish female soccer players than Irish male soccer players.

I follow rugby. And I go to more womens games than mens. I go to AIL women's games and interpros. I can name all of the women on the Ireland squad.

Andre 3000

sullivlo wrote: »

Way to tar all women with the same brush :rolleyes:

I couldn't name any of Katie Taylors opponents. Mind you I couldn't name any of Paddy Barnes' either. Because I don't follow boxing.

I could probably name more Irish female soccer players than Irish male soccer players.

I follow rugby. And I go to more womens games than mens. I go to AIL women's games and interpros. I can name all of the women on the Ireland squad.

You're an outlier. The point is still valid.

Rothko

seamus wrote: »

A professional womens' football game involves just as much excitement and skill as a mens' game.

No, it doesn't. At all.

PressRun

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Tennis appears to be one of the few exceptions. But this may be due to the fact that men watch women's tennis so more women go there as consequence because it is high profile.

So women only watch women's tennis because men do. :rolleyes:

Women are capable of watching a sport and enjoying it on their own.

Jack Killian

namloc1980 wrote: »

In general I enjoy individual women's sports, but men's team sports are superior.

Disagree.

Men's Gaelic Football is a spiteful and cynical dig-and-dragfest, whereas Ladies Football shows - ironically - "sportsmanship".

wakka12

The majority of women I know, vast vast majority in fact, are only interested in some of the big finals of world cup or all irelands etc and other events like olympics and wimbledon. Im the same really.
But I don't know of any women who would follow seasons of rugby or football or gaa or any sport throughout the year religiously

sullivlo

Andre 3000 wrote: »

You're an outlier. The point is still valid.

Not amongst my friends I'm not.

wakka12

mdwexford wrote: »

Male or female, nobody wants to sit through the horror show that is the majority of women's sporting events.

The majority of olympics events in particular are no less impressive in the womens section really. In fact some sections seem more elegant and probably more highly anticipated such as gymnastics

I'd watch women's oly or power lifting if I watch any at all
Female gymnastics is always amazing as well

Not really into watching other sports though

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Andre 3000

Women's gymnastics is incredible alright. It's scary to think how early they retire though. Only two of the Fierce Five are still competing and they're all only like 20 years old.

Joe_ Public

Andre 3000 wrote: »

Women's gymnastics is incredible alright. It's scary to think how early they retire though. Only two of the Fierce Five are still competing and they're all only like 20 years old.

Remember reading Joan Ryan's Little Girls in Pretty Boxes a few years ago, frightening stuff. I was under the impression that the average age of Olympic medallists was going up, but not sure about that.

Corruptedmorals

I follow women's gymnastics. Mens gymnastics is more powerful but I find the events they do are boring. There's something spectacular about women's gymnastics and it's much more popular, in terms of spectators it's up there with athletics and swimming.

2 members of the fierce 5 retired this year alright, it's unusual to compete in more than one Olympics although less so than it used to be and average age is now trending upwards. Kyla Ross grew about 5 inches since London which gave her back problems and McKayla Maroney gave in to her shopping list of injuries, she was already broken by London anyway.

Corruptedmorals

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Remember reading Joan Ryan's Little Girls in Pretty Boxes a few years ago, frightening stuff. I was under the impression that the average age of Olympic medallists was going up, but not sure about that.

A lot has changed thankfully. Such as body type, it's a lot more free now. They compete much harder stuff than they did back then so they need to be strong, pixie types aren't the be-all and end-all. Check out Simone Biles, she is triple world champion and is poised to possibly take 5 golds in Rio. Greatest gymnast ever and she is ripped.

Corruptedmorals

Corruptedmorals wrote: »

A lot has changed thankfully. Such as body type, it's a lot more free now. They compete much harder stuff than they did back then so they need to be strong, pixie types aren't the be-all and end-all. Check out Simone Biles, she is triple world champion and is poised to possibly take 5 golds in Rio. Greatest gymnast ever and she is ripped.

Just checked her out on youtube, holy moly!
That's some skill

Joe_ Public

bluewolf wrote: »

Just checked her out on youtube, holy moly!
That's some skill

Same here, look forward to more of that in Rio!

Maireadio

The sports I mostly follow are athletics and tennis.

Athletics, I watch both men and women.

Tennis, I watch both men and women and these days I think women's tennis is better to watch.

gormdubhgorm

PressRun wrote: »

So women only watch women's tennis because men do. :rolleyes:

Women are capable of watching a sport and enjoying it on their own.

Not the exactly the majority of women do not seem capable of watching a sport and enjoying it on thier own.

Men are more likely to go to spectator sports then women are. Some of these men will bring women with them and/or attract women to them. As a big social event. Because the sports men follow will mean there will be more people there so this will result in even the causal fan going to "be seen" at the big event for the atmosphere or the craic.

If women were capable of watching a sport on thier own more there would be more women following women's sports. As men do not follow the majority of women's spectator sports there is less of a profile for the sports and even less of a reason for the women to follow women's sports.

In summary more men watch sports. More people means an interest in the sport as a "social event".

PressRun

Corruptedmorals wrote: »

A lot has changed thankfully. Such as body type, it's a lot more free now. They compete much harder stuff than they did back then so they need to be strong, pixie types aren't the be-all and end-all. Check out Simone Biles, she is triple world champion and is poised to possibly take 5 golds in Rio. Greatest gymnast ever and she is ripped.

I caught a bit of her performance at World Championships last year. Some athlete. Very powerful, but still retains the artistic aspect.

metaoblivia

Yeah, Little Girls in Pretty Boxes was written in the early 90s - gymnastics has changed quite a bit since then. The skills have gotten so difficult that the gymnasts need to have strong muscles and a little more weight on them to pull it off, especially on vault. The US women's team that won the 2015 world championships had no one on the team under 18. There's even a gymnast who'll be in Rio who is 40+ years old. Her name is Oksana Chusovitinia and she first competed in the 1992 Olympics and has competed in every Olympics since. She has a great shot at vault finals and a good shot at a medal if she can pull off her Produnova (the hardest vault in women's gymnastics).

In the US, women's gymnastics gets a lot more coverage than men's gymnastics. I'm going to the US Olympic Trials for the women in July (yes - I'll get to see Simone compete live and in person!) and that competition sold out months ago. Meanwhile, the men's trials won't even fill half the arena. College is the same. There are over 200 collegiate women's teams and a few even sell out 14,000+ arenas regularly for simple dual meets. Meanwhile, men's team have dwindled down to under 15 total and most meets are free to try and incentivize attendance. Still, no one goes.

Gymnastics is the odd sport out in this regard.

mdwexford

wakka12 wrote: »

The majority of olympics events in particular are no less impressive in the womens section really. In fact some sections seem more elegant and probably more highly anticipated such as gymnastics

I'm talking more professional regular sports here to be honest.

I said already I enjoy a lot of women's events in the olympics.

Corruptedmorals

PressRun wrote: »

I caught a bit of her performance at World Championships last year. Some athlete. Very powerful, but still retains the artistic aspect.

She's so good that she gets randomly drug tested very, very often. Yes, the beauty of her gymnastics is that she does everything perfectly whereas many powerful gymnasts traditionally fall down on execution and skills look sloppy. I have seen her in action twice ☺

Potatoeman

osarusan wrote: »

Actually it's the other way round - if the LOI had all the funding the Premier League had, it would be just as good - the players would just move to the LOI instead - as many of them now move to Russia or China or wherever will pay them a massive wage. It would still be the LOI, but all the players would be different.

But the women's league, even with a level funding that could make it the best women's league in the world, would still be at a lower level of skill, pace, and physicality, to the best men's league.

Things are changing in some sports though - the women's football world cup gets a lot of crowds and coverage these days. I think maybe we don't notice it in Ireland because the women's team is never there.

In other sports like tennis and gymnastics, the women's versions are popular in their own right.

They don't have the funding because they don't have the population or the interest to raise the funding. If the interest was there the funding would grow.

Two Tone

Hot oil wrestling, foxy boxing... and such and such.

PressRun

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Not the exactly the majority of women do not seem capable of watching a sport and enjoying it on thier own.

Men are more likely to go to spectator sports then women are. Some of these men will bring women with them and/or attract women to them. As a big social event. Because the sports men follow will mean there will be more people there so this will result in even the causal fan going to "be seen" at the big event for the atmosphere or the craic.

If women were capable of watching a sport on thier own more there would be more women following women's sports. As men do not follow the majority of women's spectator sports there is less of a profile for the sports and even less of a reason for the women to follow women's sports.

In summary more men watch sports. More people means an interest in the sport as a "social event".

It's hardly a secret that generally speaking more men watch sports than women. But women are capable of going to sporting events and enjoying it without there needing to be a man present to validate their going. I know women who are interested in sport in their own right and men who couldn't give a fiddlers and only go for the "social event". Saying that women aren't capable of watching a sport without a man being present or that women only attend sporting events because of the "atmosphere" is just plain silly, tbh. Some women do only go for the atmosphere, but not all, and so do some men.

And I don't think women not being interested in sport is the sole reason for women's sport not being popular. I don't know who you hang about with, but I know plenty of women (members of my own family being some of them) with a very keen interest in GAA who follow it throughout the year, but would mainly watch the men because it's faster, harder hitting, etc., and the men's game seems to have reached almost professional levels that the women's game hasn't. It's just a matter of what's more exciting to watch. Some sports are more exciting in the men's categories and some in the women's (as mentioned, gymnastics, though I know people who like women's athletics and tennis too). I'm not going to blame people for wanting to watch events that are going to be the most interesting/exciting/competitive/etc.

babaracus

Men have a natural physical advantage when it comes to most sports and people generally will go in greater numbers to see the very best. Hence men's sports have a bigger following. One example:

This was back in 1998 so Serena would have been only 18 but the men's 203rd ranked player beat Serena and Venus 6-1, 6-2. His preparation before the game was a couple of shandies:

http://www.theguardian.com/observer/osm/story/0,,543962,00.html

The US women's soccer team (Womens World Cup Champions) were also beaten 8-2 by the U-17 men/boys national team.