In 1973, after Billie Jean King said that “the unequal pay situation stinks,” the top female tennis players at the U.S. Open got the same prize money as the men.
But it was not because of the people who ran the tournament. Ban Deodorant said it would make up the difference. Now, 43 years later at Rio 2016, the women still are not treated equally. Medal Winning Opportunities At Rio 2016, the female athletes can participate in 137 events while the men have 169. Consequently, women cannot possibly win as many medals. Yes, the gender participation gap has narrowed: However, asked about why we have not reached 50/50, the IOC (International Olympic Committee) reminds us that new events will be gender equal.
Gender Gap In The Us
Doing the math though, you see that gender equal additions mean the percent chance for women to win medals climbs ever so slowly, destined never to be the same as the men. Furthermore, there are more men-only events than women’s (just rhythmic gymnastics and synchronized swimming). And, making it still worse, many events have a lower quota of female athletes. Just look at football (soccer) with 16 men’s teams and 12 for the women or that the men’s Olympic ice hockey team has 25 men and the women can have no more than 21.
Event Bias Too often, Olympic rules perpetuate outdated assumptions about female frailty. The 50 km race is exclusively male and for cross country and downhill skiing, wherever there is a difference between men and women, the female race is shorter. During the London Olympics, the women’s water polo team competed in a smaller pool than the men.
I assume it is the same in Rio. We also will only see male swimmers do a 1,500 meter race and in cycling, the men’s race is 250k while for the women, 140k!
We could go on, but you see that women have unequal opportunity at the Olympics. Our Bottom Line: The Athletes’ Gender Pay Gap Olympiad inequities take us to developing female to its fullest and an expectations bias that could be a self-fulfilling prophecy. However, my primary concern is money.
Whenever female athletes are relegated to a lower rung, the bias explicitly and implicitly reinforces lower pay. In markets for female athletes, pay is far below the men. To the curve, we need the synergy that more media, consumer and commercial appeal will create. And let’s applaud Billie Jean King. My sources and more: I was delighted that called attention to gender inequity at the Olympics in a front page article. Looking for additional data, I discovered a from the Centre for Sport Policy Studies at the University of Toronto and a. Elaine Schwartz has spent her career sharing the interesting side of economics.
At the Kent Place School in Summit, NJ, she has been honored through an Endowed Chair in Economics and the History Department chairmanship. At the same time, she developed curricula and wrote several books including Understanding Our Economy (originally published by Addison Wesley as Economics Our American Economy) and Econ 101 ½ (Avon Books/Harper Collins). Elaine has also written in the Encyclopedia of New Jersey (Rutgers University Press) and was a featured teacher in the Annenberg/CPB video project “The Economics Classroom.” Beyond the classroom, she has presented Econ 101 ½ talks and led workshops for the Foundation for Teaching Economics, the National Council on Economic Education and for the Concord Coalition.
Since Title IX became a federal law in 1972, the data at the collegiate level depict a perplexing shift towards more male coaches of women’s sports teams. Specifically, the number of women’s teams coached by women for all collegiate sports has gone from 90% in 1971 to 43% in 2017, as cited by the Women in Sports Foundation. Yet, at the collegiate level, lacrosse is an outlier.
For the 2016-17 season, 84% of the NCAA Division III women’s teams had a female head coach. For Division I, the number was 86%. This is almost double the national average for other sports. It is harder to provide a snapshot at the youth and high school level since there isn’t comprehensive data on the gender of youth coaches nationally. Anecdotally, many leagues and areas do lament the difficulty in retaining female coaches in their programs.
In the US Lacrosse membership base, only 52% of the members who are youth coaches in the women’s game are female, while 65% of the certified coach trainers for the women’s game are female. Personally, in my own coaching world, I have experienced a preponderance of male coaches at the youth and club level in the mid-Atlantic area. Last spring, in our local Baltimore girls’ club league, I only faced two opponents in 12 games where the head coach was a woman. In a hotbed area of the sport, where presumably there is an abundance of women with experience in the sport, this seems striking and gives fuel to perceptions and concerns that women are less likely to step up to coach at the youth and high school level. What is appropriate? Is there an ideal gender makeup for a coaching staff?
Do coaches who are the same gender as the kids they are coaching have a more natural affinity to understanding their athletes on and off the field? Should we aspire to have female coaches only for female teams, and conversely male for male? Many advocates of this position argue that a female coach provides a critical opportunity for a strong role model and mentorship to encourage young girls to embrace female leadership and envision themselves in comparable roles. As a female coach, I am 100% personally committed to that messaging and goal for young female athletes. I also would love to see more young women go into the coaching profession, and see more mothers commit to coaching their daughters and sons. Addressing the concerns, obstacles, and opportunities for change, the and the University of Minnesota’s have done important work and have great resources on getting more women involved in coaching, and the various challenges that surround the biases and trends around gender and sports. US Lacrosse is hosting a panel at this weekend to explore these issues in more detail: Saturday, at 12:45 p.m.
In Rooms 321-323. We have some great collegiate coaches bringing their talents and experiences to our panel discussion: Jen Adams from Loyola University Maryland; Ricky Fried from the 2017 U.S. National Team and Georgetown University; and Regy Thorpe from Syracuse University. They will be joined by our subject expert, Maureen Monte, and they are all prepared to debate and dissect the pieces of this puzzle. Specifically, our panelists will discuss perceptions and experiences around the gender issue and how it impacts the athletic experience and development of female players. Women do not corner the market on good coaching, nor men on good or bad coaching, and the reality is that currently there are a lot of men coaching women’s teams. Given that reality, are there unique issues related to having male coaches of female teams?
(The reverse presumption would be that female coaches face comparable obstacles when coaching boys.) It is arguable that a male coach may not relate in the same way to how a young girl acts in a team environment or competitive setting as a female coach. There is extensive literature that claims that female athletes have different needs and tendencies than male athletes, but can we uncover data on this? Is there a science behind this or is it nurture versus nature consequence?
We know that all coaches can often misjudge or mishandle athletes and this may turn the player off from the sport. Coaches can also mistakenly slot a cerebral or late bloomer into an athletic non-starter. I do think that we as sports community should be intentional to educate all coaches that it is O.K. To understand that being a passionate athlete may look different for the different genders.
We as coaches should not prejudge a player based on how our society has traditionally depicted an athlete. We should also be intentional to look at what male coaches bring to the table for a female athlete.
Do they speak the same language? What does a successful male coach look like in our sport? What strengths and weaknesses do they bring to the game? We hope to see you at Saturday’s panel discussion, and I invite anyone who wants to be part of this conversation, or would like additional resources on the topic, to reach out to me directly. Caitlin Kelley serves as senior manager of the women’s game at US Lacrosse. She can be reached.
Don't be fooled that the gender gap - the measurable difference in the way women and men vote for candidates and in the way they view political issues - is disappearing. To the contrary, it is driving the 2012 election. Nate Silver of the New York Times' blog, after a thorough analysis of many presidential polls, concluded on October 21st: 'Gender Gap Near Historic Highs.' Digieffects torrent.
Silver's calculus revealed an 18 percent gender gap, with President Obama up among women by 9 percent and trailing among men by 9 percent. But women and men do not cancel each other out. Women will be casting 10 million more votes than men in the 2012 election. Women both register and vote in higher percentages than men. In 2008, women cast 9.7 million more votes than men, according to the. Overall, Gallup found that 53 percent of the vote was cast by women and 47 percent cast by men. More important than national polls, Obama is leading in swing states precisely because of the gender gap.
In Ohio, for example, a newly released (October 31) of likely voters has Obama leading 50 percent to 45 percent with 56 percent of women for Obama and only 44 percent of men, creating a 12 percent gender gap. According to the same poll, in Florida and Virginia, Obama is leading by a slight margin and is boosted by a 10 percent gender gap. I have been studying women's political behavior since the early 1970s and first identified the gender gap in 1980 with the help of legendary pollster Louis Harris. In those days, most analysts considered the gender gap unimportant because Ronald Reagan won the presidential election despite a gender gap in voting. Since I first identified it, the gender gap has only grown and no serious analyst or, for that matter, political professional can ignore it any longer. The gender gap first appeared during the Equal Rights Amendment campaign in 1980.
The Gender Gap Game
It persisted and has grown because of the increasingly different stances of the two major political parties and most of their candidates on women's rights. Issues ranging from equality in pay and employment, abortion and contraception, Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security have all fueled the gender gap. In 2012, it is no wonder the gender gap is so pronounced. Displaylink driver cleaner.
A blizzard of hostile legislation (over 1,000 bills) has been introduced in the past two years against women's reproductive rights in Congress and in many states controlled by Republican legislators and Governors. In the legislative War on Women, the Paycheck Fairness Act has been endlessly filibustered by Republicans in the Senate, the Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act is being blocked by House Republicans and several hundred extreme anti-abortion and birth control measures have been passed in state legislatures and the US House. In an obvious attempt to placate women, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney refuses to even say where he stands on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act even though his party has led the fight against it in Congress. For the same reason, he is trying to muddle his hostile stance on Roe v. Wade to make it appear that abortion rights will not be threatened by a Romney presidency. In an attempt to attract older women who are more dependent on Medicare than men, the Romney campaign is engaged in deception about President Obama's actions on Medicare.
Despite repeated allegations from Romney and Vice Presidential nominee Paul Ryan that Obama is cutting $716 billion from Medicare for Obamacare, it is actually the proposed Ryan budget that would cut $716 billion in benefits and would end Medicare or privatize it for all people under 55 years of age. President Obama has not cut any benefits to the seniors on Medicare and, in fact, has increased Medicare benefits for seniors. The gender gap is also making a pronounced impact on many key U.S.
Gender Gap In Education
Senate races. For example, according to the October 31st Quinnipiac poll, in Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown (D) leads challenger Josh Mandel because of a 12 percent gender gap. In Connecticut, Chris Murphy (D) leads against Linda McMahon with a 10 point gender gap, despite the tens of millions of dollars McMahon is spending on her race. For a more comprehensive list of key US Senate races with gender gap data, see an by Jennifer Jackman, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Salem State University, MA. Women's votes will make the difference in 2012. The fight for women's votes - once gained - will never be ignored again in American politics.
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |