9 Module #3 Notebook:

Part #1: (Navigating this chapter)

Prompt: (1) In about 50-70 words, consider Joel Bervell’s question: why do we feel the need to extrapolate the athleticism of one Black athlete to all Black people when we do not do the same for white athletes?

People choose to generalize and focus on traits shared by a group as a means of sectioning them off, lessening their accomplishments, or promoting stereotypical biases within discourse. For example, I’m a Jewish male, and my stereotypical generalizations range from a large nose, likely obsessed with money, and likely a higher esteemed profession whereas people are people, and there’s little else to it. People (who lack the mental fortitude to assume from another perspective) represent the lowest common denominator in the highest quantity and reinforce the belief that democracies are doomed to succeed given public perspectives on given things. It’s why the news is almost dumbed down to its simple understanding because that is the demographic they are looking for.

Prompt: (2) What are some strategies for resistance that Rajack and Joseph identify in their article as a means of pushing back against and resisting misogynoir?

Their point is related to the assumptions people make about many things and removing that stereotypical barrier that stands between a fact and an assumption. For instance in the NBA it’s a given that when a white guy is drafted the stance is “I bet he can shoot” whereas when a black guy gets drafted it’s assumed it’s mainly for his elite athleticism; subtle generalizations dominate common discourse creating future assumptions and I feel that when we discarded statistics in favor of opinions we began to regress socially.

Part #2: (Part 1- The Fundamentals)

Prompt: (1) What do the authors of the article call for as a way of challenging how mainstream sports journalism privileges neoliberal feminist concerns?  (50 words max)

The authors call for a shift towards intersectional feminist approaches, challenging the neoliberal focus on individual success and marketability. They advocate for focusing on systematic inequalities while having diverse voices in sports allowing for social justice to move beyond empowerment narratives.

Part #3: (Making Connections)

Prompt: (1) Agree? or Disagree? Sports article;

I agree and disagree; the stance should never be promoting a group over another we should aspire to merit based success however the narrative should never be promoted by those with a vested interest (i.e. Billionaires) and if anything these leagues proved their mailability when faced with a social issue which is to appease the groups with the loudest voice. The NFL exercised suppression where leagues like the NBA and Soccer allowed for individual expression of ones opinion. Various athletes won’t risk their future and careers on a moral issue because their are benefiting from the current situation, it then also becomes harder to trust these privileged people who speak down on the masses from a position of wealth they earned. Not to say Colin Kaepernick isn’t a prime example that people can take the leap and sacrifice their careers with the hope of making social change but many people who are making money and reaping the rewards of life don’t feel it’s their fight. It may sound like a cop out but the major differences between people isn’t racial or gender motivated it’s a systematic collection of various values and ideals that represent what people believe of a given group or people; shifting perspectives is the solution.

Mini Module Assignment: In your Notebook, analyze the representation of a racialized athlete activist in a show (television or film or novel) of your choosing.  What strategies do athetes employ to speak out? What is the commentary on athletes using their voices in these shows? How do race and/or gender or other *identities inform this representation? How do these representations shape how we understand the sports themselves?

The athlete I’ve chosen less fit’s the criteria of sports activism as Michael Jordan from the movie Space Jam had ties to the movements that took place in the ladder half of the 1900s centralizing around black equality and fair treatment for women. The movie was likely promoted as a means of giving the people what they wanted. An athlete like Michael Jordan was not the biggest activist yet his persona motivated appreciation of the mans ability over any other aspect of his visage allowed for people to accept a norm that would be inconceivable to those before shattering the status quo and fielding an age of dominance for black athletes in basketball. It’s the argument I have for the WNBA all they need is there Michael Jordan to shatter the norms people have associated to gender constraints unbreakable and unmovable. Space Jam displayed how Michael transcended race or bias pushing the limits of what people can perceive and accept; reality must fit the narrative you push if that exceeds the social climate or falls short the people will struggle to relate with or accept the material. Ironically however it seemed that Michael lived in a time where it would have made him the minority and further supporting my last prompt athletes won’t destroy their future at the chance they can make change especially if it’s a goal they have been aspirating to from childhood.