Women and girls should reclaim baseball. As far ago as the mid 1800’s it was fine for women to play baseball. But by 1900 sexism shoved them aside. Baseball expert Jennifer Ring, explained in a July 19, 2009 article in the L.A. Times:
"This was the thinking: Girls needed exercise," Ring said. "But not too much because it could make them like men. And besides, by the '30s, baseball was being sold as the national sport. Back then, you don't want a national sport that is for girls. . . . Hasn't changed all that much" (“A national pastime for only half the nation,” by Kurt Streeter). Link.
Women and girls were told their alternative should be softball which had a lower rank, smaller field and used a softy ball which sexist people felt was more appropriate for delicate ladies. They were basically telling women we shouldn’t play “hardball.” Author of "Stolen Bases: Why American Girls Don't Play Baseball," Jennifer Ringer said “It's just a sham that our national game basically excludes half the population. Women are pretty much shut out of this game." How can a national game exclude half the nation’s population.? That’s wrong.
Seventies lawsuits finally allowed girls to play Little League baseball with boys. But even now almost every girl baseball player is forced to give up her dreams of baseball triumph by age 12 or 13.
Other countries such as Japan respect female baseball players. Japan’s Osaka Silver Sisters is made up of women who played professional baseball half a century ago! A July 15, 2009 Reuters article reported:
...the players meet every Friday for an hour of practice followed by a game with a much younger, all-boys team -- which they often win.
"I'm really surprised by the level of their baseball," said Hajime Morioka, captain of the Nakayoshi Genki Club which plays against the Osaka Silver Sisters.Link.
So if women in their 70’s can win games against young males, clearly women and girls can be excellent baseball players and deserve an equal place in our national Furthermore, women’s baseball should be an Olympic sport. Officials are currently working to add women to the baseball roster for the 2016 Olympics. The sexism should end. No more broken dreams. The future is bright and I see women’s and girls’ baseball glowing on the horizon.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Baseball: Beyond the Field of Broken Dreams.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15138
Interesting.
I remember being 8 or 9 and being completely in love with baseball. When the Little League had tryouts, my dad took me. I was the only girl there. Part of me wanted to stay and buck the system and show just how awesome a girl could play. But another part just wanted to play and not make a "statement" about it. So I joined softball the next day. The ball is NOT softer. But I still loved playing and kept with it until high school.
Kudos to all of the girls who can both play and buck the system. I'm glad I went the softball route because I love playing competitively with other girls, but there's still that question in my head of what would have happened if I'd have been a braver 8/9 year-old.
The ball is NOT softer.
I don't recall ever playing softball so I can't personally verify but Kurt Streeter, author of the L.A. Times, story said the ball used in softball is "trundled in padding" so since it's padded I assumed it's softer. Plus why would people call it softball if the ball wasn't softer than baseball? Furthermore, Wiktionary also says softball is played with a softer ball than baseball:
A game similar to baseball but played with a larger and softer ball which can be thrown overhand or underhand.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/softball
Sorry, I should have added context
It's less compact (dense), yes. If there's any padding difference, it sure feels almost negligible, and not something that's going to result in much less injury if caught wrong. It was one of those things that surprised me when I switched sports. There are some extra padded "softballs" that I've seen, but they're not regulation softballs in the leagues I've played.
It was just one of those things that was an inside joke amongst softballers, "Softballs ain't soft."
It's less compact (dense), yes. If there's any padding difference, it sure feels almost negligible, and not something that's going to result in much less injury if caught wrong. It was one of those things that surprised me when I switched sports. There are some extra padded "softballs" that I've seen, but they're not regulation softballs in the leagues I've played.
The point that you had raised was that there was no difference in hardness, not that softballs were supersoft like Nerf balls. You had said "The ball is NOT softer." If the balls are equally hard I don't know why they are defined as being softer on the Wiktionary site and why the term softball is used.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softball#Equipment
When I played softball (fast pitch), the ball was just as hard as far as I could tell, just bigger. Adult casual leagues tend to use the squishy ones, but the pro leagues, as far as I know, do not.
As far as the original post goes:
I played in Little League until I was 12 or 13. I was the only girl on my team, and one of two girls in the entire area to still be playing baseball. I eventually gave it up for a number of reasons, chief among them being that I would never be able to do it past junior high (unless I was better than all the boys, which I was not, despite being a good player for my age group, you know the drill with girls trying to play in 'boy' sports), which made me sad. My hero players were, of course, male, because there weren't any women's leagues. Which sucks. So anyway, right on, great post! Lots of interesting history I didn't know, which I always appreciate. I could go on on this topic for quite a while, but I won't! :-)
P.S. I can see why people love playing softball, but I hated it. I really only like baseball. So I only played fast pitch softball for one year.
That last sentence was meant to indicate that I would have continued with baseball, given the option, but was 'stuck' with softball, which is similar, but NOT the same game, and it's not fair that girls who love baseball get shunted into an entirely different sport just because they're girls. I am not putting softball down, it just wasn't for me!
I had a softball when I was younger, and I wondered why it was called soft. It feels much harder than a baseball. If I had to be hit in the head by either a softball or baseball, I'd choose a baseball.
In gym class we practiced catching balls with this machine that shot a softball up into the air. The sun was blaring so I didn't see the ball coming straight towards my face. My face can testify that a softball is in fact not soft.
Plus why would people call it softball if the ball wasn't softer than baseball?
Because little bundles of sugar and spice and everything nice need a kinder, softer, gentler game where they aren't allowed to slide (heavens, they might get dirty!), lead, or steal bases.
I don't know if them's the rules in Real Softball, but when I got shunted out of baseball and into softball like all the other eleven-year-old girls, those were the rules and boy was I ever pissed off.
In addition to what everyone else has said about size and density, softballs are a lot less springy than baseballs--hit a baseball with the sweet spot of your bat and you can get a nice line drive easily, do the same thing to a softball and it'll make a hollow 'thwack' and end up as a grounder. It's kind of like kicking a soccer ball vs. kicking a wooden crate.
With regards to why baseball is called hardball and softball is considered soft the answer is related to how dangerous the respective balls are. A baseball is denser with a smaller surface area and has less wind resistance, thus it maintains speed better, and causes significantly more severe injuries than a softball normally does. Both can kill you if they hit your temple, but a baseball has been known to kill on chest shots.
Physically there is no reason girls cannot play baseball, but physical ability differences in strength and speed make it hard for women to compete with men after puberty. Thus it is unlikely that girls baseball will flourish unless there was a separate league and softball was eliminated as competition for the available pool of players.
You know, even though I hate the whole "men and women are different sizes and that's why they play different sports" argument, there are some sports that I do see where men and women cannot compete because of average physical size differences--football and basketball being the two most obvious. I think baseball is one of the sports where men and women can compete regardless of any size differences after puberty. While hitting does require strength and power (and hence the whole steroids deal) there is a lot more technical skill and finesse to the game. Men and women can throw a baseball probably equally as well. There might be certain positions that men and women differ at, but I don't think there is any physical reason why women couldn't play baseball with men. It's not like football, where there is physical contact, or anything.
I played baseball with the boys until I was 10, if only because there weren't any girl only leagues in my area. All the kiddie leagues (I never played little league) were coed baseball. In middle school, I switched to softball and hated it. It was boring. The ball didn't go as fast or as far when hit, so it was boring.
Ive played at the semi pro and above level in both sports and I can verify that there is a huge difference in men and women. Men run faster, have dramatically stronger arms and have faster wrists and swings. Net result is a pretty dramatic difference in ability.
Ive played at the semi pro and above level in both sports and I can verify that there is a huge difference in men and women. Men run faster, have dramatically stronger arms and have faster wrists and swings. Net result is a pretty dramatic difference in ability.
I'm not sure if you're referring to men playing against women that you have seen. One of the most accurate ways to gouge the difference in male and female baseball players is to have all-male and and all-female teams play against each other. The players should have the same years and level of training, the players should have the same practice time including individual workout time, and the teams should have the same time working together as a team (practice and number of games played). Only then can we gouge any differences with some semblance of accuracy. Also, note that Reuters reported that the Osaka Silver Sisters often beat the all-male team they play against every week:
Article
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE56E1ZA20090715?feedType=RSS&feedName=lifestyleMolt
Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx45mskKNPI
I might have missed something, but I don't think anyone was suggesting that all-women teams play against all-men teams. There are plenty of sports where there's a women's league, including basketball, golf, and football.
Women can play professional baseball in "a league of their own", and I don't think it's even necessary for the dimensions of the field to be smaller than current MLB regulations (320-ft down the lines, 400-ft to dead center). Home runs are fun to watch, but it's not the object of the game. Most baseball teams have, tops, three heavy home run hitters. I don't think baseball fans would miss the home runs if they can see some great hits, base running, fielding and pitching. Besides, there's always the possibility of inside-the-park home runs in women's baseball, which are extremely rare in men's MLB and a real joy to watch.
Sorry I was unclear. I meant that women, would have a difficult time playing in the Major Leagues. Actually, I don't think there is any rule preventing them from playing there now. With regards to a women's professional league my point was that softball and baseball would be competing for the same players and the same fans and only one would survive. The same point would also apply to college athletics.
Interestingly, the size of the field and the focus on home runs is a direct result of marketing. A large number of fans really love the home runs and they appear to bring in more fans than games that dont have them. Not really enamored of them myself, but pro teams really watch what brings in revenue.
I agree with BackOfBusEleven that no one was suggesting that women be added to the men's baseball league. I had assumed that people knew I meant that women should have their own league like they have a separate basketball and soccer league. Even in the Olympics it is rare for women to compete with men; men and women almost always compete against their own gender.
Perhaps I confused you when I mentioned the elderly women's baseball team (Osaka Silver Sisters) competed against a boys' team. That was to show that it is possible for females to win against males even when it is elderly females versus young males. That clearly shows baseball is a sport that women can perform well in. Also, the Sisters might be competing against men because when I saw the video of the Reuters story it showed the women competing against male players who looked like men and the commentator said the Sisters were competing against "a local, younger men’s squad every Friday.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx45mskKNPI
My central point is that since baseball is our country's national sport women should be given equal opportunity as men to play it. It is morally wrong to have a national sport that systematically excludes an oppressed group that represents 51% of our population. Women's baseball is a respected sport in many other countries, so it is strange that it is not respected in the U.S. where it is our nation's defining sport.
If you want women to be able to play baseball you will have to eliminate softball. It's almost impossible to have similar sports in existence competing for the same fields, players and fans. One will eventually drive the other out of popularity. For example, men do not play much fast pitch softball anymore because slow pitch has driven it out of most places. It's hard to find fast pitch leagues. Another example, only large high schools or selected states, have boys volleyball because it competes with football.
I assume girls and women will prefer to play the national sport baseball based on what I have heard here and because it's more glamorous and higher status.
I think it's fine if baseball replaces softball for women and girls. Either way, it is important that women have the opportunity to play our great national sport to the same extent that men do.
I don't think your assumption is true. At least from what i've heard from college and pro female softball players. I also think that too much effort is invested into women's softball for a switch to baseball to work. Remember that women's fast pitch softball is unique at the college and pro level. Men rarely play it so women have a sport where they are NOT always unfavorably compared to men by armchair analysts. A not inconsiderable benefit according to many players i've known.
I don't think your assumption is true. At least from what i've heard from college and pro female softball players.
That's anecdotal evidence so neither of us knows for sure. However, consider what will happen when the door is opened for girls to play baseball in secondary school and for women at the college level. Because it's more expensive to have both a softball and baseball team, and little boys will almost certainly want to play baseball instead of softball because most boys avoid doing girly things, then if a school or other youth organization has to choose between either baseball or softball they will prefer baseball. Girls and boys can share the same equipment, it's cheaper and girls know they can continue it throughout their lives which, along with the much higher status, will encourage them to play baseball. Thus, baseball would almost certainly replace softball.
I also think that too much effort is invested into women's softball for a switch to baseball to work. Remember that women's fast pitch softball is unique at the college and pro level. Men rarely play it so women have a sport where they are NOT always unfavorably compared to men by armchair analysts. A not inconsiderable benefit according to many players i've known.
The financial issue I mentioned earlier will encourage organizations to switch from girls softball/boys baseball to girls/boys baseball. It's financially easier for families too who can offer old equipment to the younger child. Also, there are sports where females routinely beat males. In Olympics men and women compete in sailing and equestrian. Also women win fishing competitions and don't forget the Osaka Silver Sisters often beat men at baseball. But the most important thing as I've said many times is baseball's unique status us the U.S. national sport. The morality is on the side of women's baseball. A national sport should never exclude half the population.
I want to see men and women on the same teams in the same events.
Why?
This is the problem with all of the arguments about equality in mens and womens sports: at some point, to make women's sport competitive, you'll have to make some concessions which serve to make the sport "unequal" to men's.
So let women play baseball on a normal-sized field. Half of the outfield would never be used because women can't hit the ball that far. There will never be homeruns because, again, they can't hit that far. The level of competition and the excitement of the game will be minute.
Softball merely attempts to correct and account for the sex differences of men and women. Women aren't as strong or fast. The base paths are shorter and the fences are pulled in. Women ARE more delicate than men, therefore the use of a less dense ball.
In softball, you have a sport that is competitive and is actually about the only women's sport I watch (besides women's tennis, but that's just b/c of the short skirts). Why mess with it for the sake of equality when women's baseball still won't be fully "equal".
This is the problem with all of the arguments about equality in mens and womens sports: at some point, to make women's sport competitive, you'll have to make some concessions which serve to make the sport "unequal" to men's.
What are you talking about? What do you mean when you say concessions would transform woman’s sport from being equal to unequal to men’s?
let women play baseball on a normal-sized field. Half of the outfield would never be used because women can't hit the ball that far.
Do you have evidence of that?
There will never be homeruns because, again, they can't hit that far.
Do you have evidence that in the history of baseball a women or girl has never been able to hit a homerun?
The level of competition and the excitement of the game will be minute.
That’s wrong. Women can be equally competitive as men. And people can be just as excited watching a woman’s game. The biggest sports event of the last decade was the -99 Women’s World Cup. The women’s soccer team sold out Giants Stadium, something even the Giants had never done. It’s sexist to assume women’s games can never be more popular than men’s.
Softball merely attempts to correct and account for the sex differences of men and women. Women aren't as strong or fast. The base paths are shorter and the fences are pulled in. Women ARE more delicate than men, therefore the use of a less dense ball.
Softball wasn’t created to “correct and account for sex differences.” Softball was created by a man (George Hancock) so that players could practice baseball indoors during harsh weather. The reason the bases are shorter is so the game could be played indoors in a room with limited space. As to women’s strength and speed, some women are stronger and faster than some men. And it’s not true women are more delicate because we live longer than men in almost every country. And as to the ball being less dense to protect women, it can injure a woman and man equally.
Why mess with it for the sake of equality when women's baseball still won't be fully "equal".
Women deserve to have the honor, to the same extent as men, of playing America’s national game. That honor should never be just reserved for men. You don’t define equal so it’s not clear what you mean. But irregardless of your personal definition of equality, more important is that women can play baseball well, women’s teams have beaten men’s teams, and if a women’s baseball league is marketed right it can be popular.
Thank you for this!!!
"Women aren't as strong or fast. The base paths are shorter and the fences are pulled in. Women ARE more delicate than men, therefore the use of a less dense ball."
Ummm FAIL? In case you haven't heard this general rule, bukowski, but there are many, many more differences AMONG the sexes than BETWEEN them. To say that men are stronger/faster/less delicate than women is crap. Yes SOME men are stronger/faster/whatever than SOME women. You might even be okay to say that many men are stronger & faster than many women. But there are some women that could kick most guys' asses. There are some women who could play in the major leagues WITH men. The fact that there aren't can't be excuse because women are more delicate--it's because women have been channeled into playing softball from a young age, so of course that's what they play in high school & college. If women aren't playing baseball at secondary levels, OF COURSE they're not going to semi-pro or pro. It's not because they ALL have less physical ability.
When you argue, bukowski, that the fences would have to be pulled in because women can't hit the ball that far, are you basing that on instances of women hitting a baseball or a softball? Of course softballs aren't hit as far as baseballs (even by, gasp, big strong men) because they are BIGGER--they cannot be thrown as fast, so when they are hit it requires much, much more force to go far. Anyone who's ever played both softball and baseball knows this.
I'm not necessarily trying to say that women should play major league baseball next to men. I'm saying some women could. Men and women could play baseball together at lower levels for sure, especially at high school. And there is NO GOOD REASON why women should be relegated to softball while baseball is a "man's" sport. Not physical ability, not "delicateness", just gender bias.
Oh, and a softball really isn't soft to protect the delicate flower that is the womenz. It hurts like hell when you get hit with it. I know getting hit with a baseball does hurt a lot worse, but getting hit with a softball is not like getting licked by kittens or anything. If the big strong men really wanted to protect women they would have given us a wiffle ball.
Of course softballs aren't hit as far as baseballs...because they are BIGGER--they cannot be thrown as fast, so when they are hit it requires much, much more force to go far.
Correct. And since softball was created to be played indoors as practice for baseball, then that would explain why the ball was made larger than a baseball-so that it wouldn't go far to protect the walls. Baseballs could not be used for an indoor sport because they would slam and break the walls of an indoor room. So logically, the creator of softball designed the ball specifically to fall after a short distance, thus protecting the walls from damage. To understand the purpose of softball-to practice for baseball indoors when the weather is too harsh to play outside-it is helpful to know that it was originally called "indoor baseball." Softball was never meant to be played as a sport, it was designed to practice playing baseball.
What are you talking about? What do you mean when you say concessions would transform woman’s sport from being equal to unequal to men’s?
S/he means that "concessions" (I prefer to think of them as "differences") need to be made in women's sports in order to make the game somewhat entertaining. You see it in every sport. Softball is really no more different from baseball then, say, women's basketball is from men's. Honestly, it seems to me that you're just hung up on the language- you basically are angry that softball is not actually called "women's baseball". And I have to ask- why? What exactly is so wrong with the term "softball"? It seems to me that- according to you- softball is inferior because men don't play it. And I disagree with that. Softball can, in its own way, be just as entertaining as baseball can. However, "women's baseball", under MLB rules, would, suffice to say, not be.
Do you have evidence of that? [women could never hit to the outfield or hit a home run]
Of course. "Over the fence" home runs are somewhat rare in softball leagues, and like someone has said "inside the park" home runs are more common. Furthermore, women's softball uses smaller dimensions, and if you measure the distances of the average home run in softball... suffice to say it would not be a homer under MLB's rules. It's common sense, but I can get statistics if this doesn't satisfy you. Of course there are *occasional* instances in which a woman may hit it to an MLB outfield or even out of the park, but these are VERY rare.
You repeatedly claim that "an elderly women's team beat a boy's team". This doesn't work. Try a young adult women's team versus a young adult men's team, both with the same amount of training. If you played a hundred games the women would not win a single one. Sorry.
And has it never occurred to you that the things that make softball different from baseball--namely, slow-pitch with a bigger, clunkier, less-dense ball--are what contribute to the different home-run stats, rather than the gender of the players?
Hit a baseball and a softball with equal force and the baseball will go farther, higher, and faster than the softball. Try it for yourself--go to Sports Authority or Target or wherever, get a baseball and a softball, and try bouncing them both off a wall. Now bounce the baseball off the wall with a fast overhand pitch, and try doing the same to the softball with a slow underhand pitch. Then come back and tell me the two games are functionally the same, that women should stop whining about being stuck in a sport that isn't really inferior, and that our precious frail physiques are the reason behind softball's home-run stats.
So yes, I am angry that softball is not women's baseball. Not that it isn't called women's baseball, but that it is a toy version of baseball and you're sitting here telling us that because our little plastic hammer can't pound in as many nails as a real one, we don't deserve a real hammer. Fuck that.
Sorry guy(ette), but you're just wrong. An average MLB player would be able to deposit a 60 mph softball pitch over the fence, and an average female softball player would not. There is not a significant difference.
Use some common sense. Why are so many MLB players using steroids to boost their power? It's because steroids increase *muscle mass* and *more muscle mass* allows for more power, and thus more home runs. Because women naturally have far, far less muscle mass then men, they would not be able to compete in the hitter's box. Again, sorry.
If you want to think of softball as a "toy version of baseball", go ahead. If you want to think of women's basketball as a "toy version of the men's version", again, go ahead. Women are smaller then men, and so the proportions of the game will reflect that.
Women are smaller then men, and so the proportions of the game will reflect that.
I'm not sure what you mean by proportions, but you fail to realize that women's bodies can do some things better than men's bodies. For example, women's bodies tend to be less stiff than men's. Women have already proven to be excellent baseball players; for example they have played professional baseball in other countries. Women have been proven to beat male teams.
The important thing is that women can play baseball well, that a women's league can be marketed to make it popular, and that women deserve to have equal opportunity to play our country's national game. Those are the important things and parsing other less important things takes away from what we should be focusing to do what is best,
S/he means that "concessions" (I prefer to think of them as "differences") need to be made in women's sports in order to make the game somewhat entertaining. You see it in every sport.
I would like to know more about these concessions with examples from at least three sports. Also, females compete directly with males in some sports like wrestling and they do win some of those matches where both sexes follow the same rules.
Softball is really no more different from baseball then, say, women's basketball is from men's.
I recommend that you list the differences of basketball rules for men and women's basketball to prove your point.
...it seems to me that you're just hung up on the language- you basically are angry that softball is not actually called "women's baseball".
I never said that. Baseball is very different from softball. And since baseball is our national sport it should not exclude women.
It seems to me that- according to you- softball is inferior because men don't play it.
Again you are making a false accusation. I never said softball was inferior to baseball. I said that it is very different from baseball and that it was created for the purpose of practicing baseball techniques indoors when the weather didn't permit playing baseball.
Softball can, in its own way, be just as entertaining as baseball can.
I assume some people find softball just as entertaining as baseball. However, women and girls should have an equal opportunity to play baseball if they enjoy it more than softball.
"women's baseball", under MLB rules, would, suffice to say, not be.
That's your personal opinion that women's baseball would not be as entertaining as women's softball. In many countries women's baseball is a respected sport.
"Over the fence" home runs are somewhat rare in softball leagues, and like someone has said "inside the park" home runs are more common.
That's because the equipment is different. For example, the softball was apparently designed to fall down more quickly than a baseball-which it does-because it was for indoors only and it would damage the walls if the ball went too far.
women's softball uses smaller dimensions, and if you measure the distances of the average home run in softball... suffice to say it would not be a homer under MLB's rules. It's common sense, but I can get statistics if this doesn't satisfy you.
I asked bukowski for evidence that women have never, in the history of baseball, hit a homerun. I wasn't referring to softball that uses a ball designed to fall down quickly.
Of course there are *occasional* instances in which a woman may hit it to an MLB outfield or even out of the park, but these are VERY rare.
You would need to provide statistics to prove that. You can get statistics from countries like Japan where women have played professional baseball.
You repeatedly claim that "an elderly women's team beat a boy's team". This doesn't work. Try a young adult women's team versus a young adult men's team, both with the same amount of training. If you played a hundred games the women would not win a single one.
Strangely, the Reuters story refers to the all-male team as a boys team but when I looked at the Reuter's video the all-male team dressed in blue and white appears to be adult men and the video refers to the players as men:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx45mskKNPI
The story says the women often win games against the all-male team, so since women over the age of 70 can beat a younger men's team it's obvious that a young women's team can beat a young men's team.
Wow, talk about a lot of misconceptions from people who have obviously not played the game much. First a softball will travel a long distance. I used to be able to routinely put 15 in a row out of a major league ballpark and played with a guy who once managed 78 in a row. Admittedly that was slow pitch, but the softball will fly a great distance. The reason you have so few fast pitch homers is because the ball is moving so much that you cant sit down on it and really swing. Its harder to hit a fast pitch softball than a baseball.
Second, the modern rules for softball use shorter bases and field dimensions to make the game more fun, not because it started indoors. The ball does not travel fast enough on the infield to allow the base paths to be much longer. If they were most fast guys could slap the ball down and beat out all the throws. Go play softball on a baseball field and you will see what I mean. Women's softball hasn't moved the bases because a 60 ft. path is about the limit for most women's arms and any farther out and very few women shortstops could get the ball to first without having to place too much arc on it.
Third, I don't know of any women that could play major league baseball. They are allowed to play and it is disingenuous to claim they can when none have ever made it into triple a ball. I have heard of a couple of girl pitchers who were good but definitely no fielders. They just lack the arm strength and speed. They also cannot hit the ball as far.
Fourth, a 70 yr old women's team is not going to be beating teams of young Japanese males. That is like saying the senior's i volunteer with at the senior center routinely beat me in tennis. Yes, they do, but I am letting them win. If you've ever played any serious coed ball you know the 70 yr old women's team won because they let them.
Fifth, women's baseball will not be an olympic sport. They dropped softball because not enough countries play it and even less play baseball. Frankly, the only country I know of that plays women's baseball is Japan and knowing many Japanese male baseball players I wouldn't call it a respected sport. I think the OP is extrapolating way too much from a single human interest piece news article.
Sixth, women's softball is way too entrenched in the US for a women's baseball movement to be successful. Every athletic director and coach in the nation would fight it tooth and nail.
a softball will travel a long distance.
A long distance is a matter of opinion. I have been saying that baseballs can travel longer. Can you prove that the same amount of force using a sofball bat and softball will travel an equal or greater distance than using a baseball bat and baseball?
the modern rules for softball use shorter bases and field dimensions to make the game more fun, not because it started indoors.
Can you prove that softball dimensions used to be equal to baseball dimensions and that old softball dimensions were bigger than modern softball dimensions?
Women's softball hasn't moved the bases because a 60 ft. path is about the limit for most women's arms and any farther out and very few women shortstops could get the ball to first without having to place too much arc on it.
Women's softball hasn't moved the base from what? Do you have any evidence that women's softball rules were created for women or are you guessing? This is not a discussion about softball, it is a discussion about baseball. Can women play baseball well? Yes. Can women's baseball be marketed to be popular? Yes. Should women have an equal opportunity to play our national sport? Yes.
I don't know of any women that could play major league baseball. They are allowed to play and it is disingenuous to claim they can when none have ever made it into triple a ball.
It's impossible for you to know if you know any women who could play major league baseball since no women have been allowed to have a women's major league baseball team. You can't know something you've never seen.
And what are you talking about when you say "they are allowed to play." Women are not allowed to play major league baseball.
As I've said before on this thread: "One of the most accurate ways to gouge the difference in male and female baseball players is to have all-male and and all-female teams play against each other. The players should have the same years and level of training, the players should have the same practice time including individual workout time, and the teams should have the same time working together as a team (practice and number of games played)."
a 70 yr old women's team is not going to be beating teams of young Japanese males.
Why is it so hard for you to accept the truth? I have provided a story link to a prestigious news source and I have provided video footage. Here it is again:
Article
http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE56E1ZA20090715?feedType=RSS&feedName=lifestyleMolt
Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx45mskKNPI
women's baseball will not be an olympic sport.
Men have been blocking women from playing in the Olympics for a long time. At one time men were successful in totally blocking women from participating in the Olympics. But women are winning the battle against sexist men. In the recent Olympics in Greece women were 42% of the competitors.
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/11190147/
I think the OP is extrapolating way too much from a single human interest piece news article.
There's a lot of information about women baseball players on the Internet. For example:
"Mamie “Peanut” Johnson (born September 27, 1935) was one of three women, and the first female pitcher, to play in the Negro Leagues. She was signed by the Indianapolis Clowns in 1953, played with the team from 1953 to 1955, had a 33-8 won-loss record..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamie_Johnson
Johnson played against men and was very successful. It's obvious women are capable of playing baseball well.
women's softball is way too entrenched in the US for a women's baseball movement to be successful. Every athletic director and coach in the nation would fight it tooth and nail.
I believe there are athletic directors and coaches who have feminist beliefs who think women and girls should have the opportunity to pursue baseball at the high school, college and professional level. Parents, players, feminist organizations and other groups can merge their resources to create opportunities for girls and women to play baseball. This is not about stopping softball; it is about allowing women and girls to play baseball at all levels. The two sports are very different. I assume some women softball players wished they could have had the opportunity to play baseball. On this thread there have been women who have said they prefer playing baseball. It makes no sense to have women's baseball and soccer leagues yet ban women from having a baseball league, especially since it's our national sport.
Thank you for all the great info. When I see commenters like the one above, I go into RAGE mode and cannot form coherent arguments, so I appreciate someone knowledgeable doing it for me!
I've been thinking of picking up a bat again and seeing how out of shape I am, and this thread has inspired me to look up women's baseball leagues - turns out there's at least one team in my area, so I'm looking into it!! I'm quite excited. I've been missing playing baseball since Little League, and I'd like to finally learn how to pitch (my LL coach was happy to help any of the guys on the team learn to pitch (even the ones that couldn't throw to save their lives), but I got one 'tryout' with no prep and was then mostly ignored. Sigh), and now maybe I can!! I just need to find a non-leather baseball glove so as to not compromise my vegetarianism. ;-)
my LL coach was happy to help any of the guys on the team learn to pitch (even the ones that couldn't throw to save their lives), but I got one 'tryout' with no prep and was then mostly ignored.
Coaches are supposed to encourage players not discourage them. The worst kind of sexism is sexism against children. I suspect the biggest reason U.S. men are against women and girls playing baseball is because their egos have a difficult time accepting it. Baseball is America's oldest popular team sport, enormously popular and has patriotic value so because it is a huge status symbol some sexist men in the "old boys club" don't want to share it with women.
a. Softball and baseball are not very different. Anyone with eyes can see the two are very very similar. Oh, no doubt at the pro level there are significant differences in strategy or whatever, but to the average player or spectator the games are virtually identical with the exception of the pitch. A women's baseball movement would crash and burn because people would see.
b. There is absolutely no rule barring women from the MLB, so in that sense, there already in a women's baseball league in the fact that the MLB is technically coed. Now, you can argue that coaches discourage women from pursuing baseball, and that claim would have merit. But why would that change if, say, the Olympics added women's baseball? Girls would still be encouraged- and probably want- to play softball because it has so much history and is seen as an established sport. Why would they play in an upstart baseball league when they can play in an established league that essentially plays the same game anyway?
c. To say that there is some sort of vast conspiracy to "exclude" women from the "old boy's club" of baseball is ludicrous. Women are not in the MLB due to the fact that they can't compete. Full stop. If I had to guess, there are maybe one or two women in the world who could perhaps pitch for an MLB team, and these unnamed women undoubtedly chose softball- where they would excel- over men's baseball, where they would be below average players.
d. You continue to claim that women's teams have beaten men's teams, yet you offer nothing more then vague claims of a group of elderly women who beat boys. Again, find an anecdote of a pro women's team that defeated a pro men's team of *roughly equal age*, and I'll revise my position. Until then, your claim has no merit.
natbsat, I'm sorry you're so angry. I'm simply bewildered at the amount of anger over this. I mean, I could get pissed off over the lack of a men's softball league. But I don't, because I realize *baseball is the same sport, and there is no demand for men's softball*
Softball and baseball are not very different.
That’s a matter of opinion. I believe softball is very different because of the bigger ball that doesn’t go so far, the smaller field and different rules which are listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_baseball_and_softball Wikipedia says there are “pronounced differences” between the games and the differences are enough to make some girl baseball players decide not to play softball when they reach an age when baseball opportunities are no longer offered to them. People on this thread have said they think baseball is more interesting. And of course there’s the huge difference in status with baseball having much higher status.
A women's baseball movement would crash and burn because people would see [alleged similarities between softball and baseball]
People would see the differences, compare and choose the one they like better and I assume they’ll generally prefer women’s baseball because apparently it is more fun and interesting based on what I have read. Consider this: would men prefer watching men’s baseball or men’s softball? Of course they would prefer watching the baseball game.
There is absolutely no rule barring women from the MLB, so in that sense, there already in a women's baseball league in the fact that the MLB is technically coed.
Organized baseball banned women from the major and minor leagues in 1952 and the ban exists today.
you can argue that coaches discourage women from pursuing baseball, and that claim would have merit. But why would that change if, say, the Olympics added women's baseball? Girls would still be encouraged- and probably want- to play softball because it has so much history and is seen as an established sport. Why would they play in an upstart baseball league when they can play in an established league that essentially plays the same game anyway?
As I’ve said before, softball is a very different game. Also, as I’ve said before, this thread is not about the Olympics. The primary point is that women and girls in the United States should have equal opportunities to play baseball at all levels. I disagree with you that girls would prefer softball if they had the same opportunities to play baseball-opportunity to play in all-girls teams or coed, knowing that they could continue to play in high school, college and the major league, the same amount of scholarships, etc. Baseball is much more high status and from what I read people tend to think it’s more interesting. Also, women’s baseball has a longer history than women’s softball.
To say that there is some sort of vast conspiracy to "exclude" women from the "old boy's club" of baseball is ludicrous.
I never stated there was a conspiracy to exclude women from baseball. However, there is an “old boys club” mentality that a lot of men have that makes them think women and girls shouldn’t be part of baseball. For example, on this thread natbsat described how her LL coach discriminated against her by treating the boys much better.
Another example:
“Little League started a boy’s softball program in 2000 because 500 boys were playing in Little League softball leagues around the U.S., but the organization failed to start a girls’ baseball program, when thousands of girls are playing baseball in Little League baseball leagues around the U.S.” http://www.seaternal.com/baseball/history.htm
And men ganged up against women in 1952 to ban them from playing major and minor league baseball.
If I had to guess, there are maybe one or two women in the world who could perhaps pitch for an MLB team, and these unnamed women undoubtedly chose softball- where they would excel- over men's baseball, where they would be below average players.
Most girls are not given the choice of continuing baseball in high school. In contrast, boys are much more likely to get an opportunity to play baseball at higher levels. The system is rigged against girls. The only way we will know if girls prefer softball is by giving them an equal choice of either playing softball or baseball at all levels.
And evidence indicates you’re wrong that women would be “below average” baseball players. I’ve already provided examples on this thread of women beating men at baseball. Here’s another example:
“In 1931, Jackie Mitchell (woman player) signed a contract with the minor league Chattanooga Lookouts. Mitchell pitched against the New York Yankees and struck out their two star players, Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig!!!” http://www.articlesbase.com/baseball-articles/women-in-baseball-an-era-in-baseball-history-1006989.html
Also, in the old days it was popular to create women’s baseball teams for “battle of the sexes” competitions that attracted public interest in seeing local men’s teams challenged by a women’s team. The barnstorming women’s teams often beat the men’s teams. http://www.seaternal.com/baseball/gender.htm
It’s obvious women can be great baseball players. I believe women baseball players should have their own major league.
I could get pissed off over the lack of a men's softball league. But I don't, because I realize *baseball is the same sport, and there is no demand for men's softball*
Baseball is not the same sport. That is a fact. And you didn’t mention that baseball has much higher status than softball.
Softball and baseball are not very different.
That’s a matter of opinion. I believe softball is very different because of the bigger ball that doesn’t go so far, the smaller field and different rules which are listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_baseball_and_softball Wikipedia says there are “pronounced differences” between the games and the differences are enough to make some girl baseball players decide not to play softball when they reach an age when baseball opportunities are no longer offered to them. People on this thread have said they think baseball is more interesting. And of course there’s the huge difference in status with baseball having much higher status.
A women's baseball movement would crash and burn because people would see [alleged similarities between softball and baseball]
People would see the differences, compare and choose the one they like better and I assume they’ll generally prefer women’s baseball because apparently it is more fun and interesting based on what I have read. Consider this: would men prefer watching men’s baseball or men’s softball? Of course they would prefer watching the baseball game.
There is absolutely no rule barring women from the MLB, so in that sense, there already in a women's baseball league in the fact that the MLB is technically coed.
Organized baseball banned women from the major and minor leagues in 1952 and the ban exists today.
you can argue that coaches discourage women from pursuing baseball, and that claim would have merit. But why would that change if, say, the Olympics added women's baseball? Girls would still be encouraged- and probably want- to play softball because it has so much history and is seen as an established sport. Why would they play in an upstart baseball league when they can play in an established league that essentially plays the same game anyway?
As I’ve said before, softball is a very different game. Also, as I’ve said before, this thread is not about the Olympics. The primary point is that women and girls in the United States should have equal opportunities to play baseball at all levels. I disagree with you that girls would prefer softball if they had the same opportunities to play baseball-opportunity to play in all-girls teams or coed, knowing that they could continue to play in high school, college and the major league, the same amount of scholarships, etc. Baseball is much more high status and from what I read people tend to think it’s more interesting. Also, women’s baseball has a longer history than women’s softball.
To say that there is some sort of vast conspiracy to "exclude" women from the "old boy's club" of baseball is ludicrous.
I never stated there was a conspiracy to exclude women from baseball. However, there is an “old boys club” mentality that a lot of men have that makes them think women and girls shouldn’t be part of baseball. For example, on this thread natbsat described how her LL coach discriminated against her by treating the boys much better.
Another example:
“Little League started a boy’s softball program in 2000 because 500 boys were playing in Little League softball leagues around the U.S., but the organization failed to start a girls’ baseball program, when thousands of girls are playing baseball in Little League baseball leagues around the U.S.” http://www.seaternal.com/baseball/history.htm
And men ganged up against women in 1952 to ban them from playing major and minor league baseball.
If I had to guess, there are maybe one or two women in the world who could perhaps pitch for an MLB team, and these unnamed women undoubtedly chose softball- where they would excel- over men's baseball, where they would be below average players.
Most girls are not given the choice of continuing baseball in high school. In contrast, boys are much more likely to get an opportunity to play baseball at higher levels. The system is rigged against girls. The only way we will know if girls prefer softball is by giving them an equal choice of either playing softball or baseball at all levels.
And evidence indicates you’re wrong that women would be “below average” baseball players. I’ve already provided examples on this thread of women beating men at baseball. Here’s another example:
“In 1931, Jackie Mitchell (woman player) signed a contract with the minor league Chattanooga Lookouts. Mitchell pitched against the New York Yankees and struck out their two star players, Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig!!!” http://www.articlesbase.com/baseball-articles/women-in-baseball-an-era-in-baseball-history-1006989.html
Also, in the old days it was popular to create women’s baseball teams for “battle of the sexes” competitions that attracted public interest in seeing local men’s teams challenged by a women’s team. The barnstorming women’s teams often beat the men’s teams. http://www.seaternal.com/baseball/gender.htm
It’s obvious women can be great baseball players. I believe women baseball players should have their own major league.
I could get pissed off over the lack of a men's softball league. But I don't, because I realize *baseball is the same sport, and there is no demand for men's softball*
Baseball is not the same sport. That is a fact. And you didn’t mention that baseball has much higher status than softball.
I was with you until you said that women's baseball should be an olympic sport. A sport has to be popular worldwide before it can become a new olympic sport. There are other games that deserve inclusion before baseball.
Thus my comment is not actually based on fender issues, rather I reject your USA centric view of what the olympics should be.
The sports with the greatest viewership and participation world wide are actually: football (soccer), cricket, hockey and tennis. Cricket has over 100 nations affiliated with the world body, and has established mens and womens world cups. Surely cricket is more deserving of an olympic place than baseball.
gender issues, gender issues – stupid lack of editing.
I was with you until you said that women's baseball should be an olympic sport. A sport has to be popular worldwide before it can become a new olympic sport.
I'm not sure if you're referring to me. I never said women's baseball should or should not be an Olympic sport. I said women and girls should be allowed to play baseball at all levels in the United States, especially since it's our national sport.
I was referring to this sentence "Furthermore, women’s baseball should be an Olympic sport." But on re-reading I guess I took that a bit out of context.
You are correct. I forgot I said that and I do believe it. I wrote that three days ago in my original post (last paragraph) and I had forgotten.
My original post and the main point I have been hammering is that since baseball is the United States national sport women and girls in this country should have an opportunity to play it at all levels.
A sport has to be popular worldwide before it can become a new olympic sport.
I never heard of that. I would appreciate a link stating that it is a rule that a sport has to be popular worldwide before it is included in the game roster.
There are other games that deserve inclusion before baseball. ...The sports with the greatest viewership and participation world wide are actually: football (soccer), cricket, hockey and tennis. Cricket has over 100 nations affiliated with the world body, and has established mens and womens world cups. Surely cricket is more deserving of an olympic place than baseball.
Just because I think women's baseball should be added to the Olympics does not imply that other sports shouldn't be included. I agree with you that other sports deserve to be included.
This is a link to some of the criteria that potential (and current) olympic sports are judged on:
http://multimedia.olympic.org/pdf/en_report_953.pdf
You might be interested to know that gender equity is a consideration, as are popularity, number of participating nations, venue costs, history, etc.
There is a limit on the number of sports that can be included at an olympic games. The minimum is 15, the maximum 28. The full 28 slots were filled at the last olympics. So, if you want to add a sport you have to get rid of an existing one.
There is a limit on the number of sports that can be included at an olympic games. The minimum is 15, the maximum 28. The full 28 slots were filled at the last olympics. So, if you want to add a sport you have to get rid of an existing one.
It would have been great if you told me what page the information was on. The PDF file you linked to was over 200 pages long. I checked Wikipedia which said that in 2002 it was decided that the Summer Games Program would have a maximum of 28 sports. There are currently 33 Olympic sports including the winter games. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_Games
Apparently the Olympic committees change the number of sports depending on the situation. They could decide to add more sports so it wouldn't be necessary to eliminate a sport in order to add baseball.
Yeah, if there was a concise summary somewhere I'd have linked to that but the IOC can obfuscate at times. Section 2.1 (I think it was) is the most informative.
It is true they could add some sports but they've resisted the calls for that recently. They feel the games would become unwieldy if it becomes much larger.
When I was in middle school I played softball and my coach told me that softballs can actually hurt people more because they are larger and larger objects thrown at fast speeds can hurt you more than smaller objects thrown at fast speeds.
I am not sure if this is true though.
This requires a physics answer, and seeing as how I happend to be a physicist I feel I should oblige.
If we assume the larger ball is heavier and all other things are equal, i.e. the balls are made of the same material and are travelling at the same speed, then what you were told is likely to be true just on a force/energy basis.
The only caveat to that is the shape of the objects. If you are hit by a large flat object then its force is dissipated over a larger area than a small sharp object. A softball is a bit bigger, and because it is round is therefore a bit flatter in terms of the impacting surface, so this will have some effect, though it will be small.
However, baseballs and softballs are not made from the same materials. The softball has more padding close to its surface. This means it is like a car with a bigger crumple zone; the force of the impact is dissipated over a longer time and therefore will hurt less. I've played ball games with both softballs and baseballs and I'm incliined to believe this is the most significant effect.
We should also consider though, that the size of the softball means that it is more difficult to accelerate it to the same speed as a baseball. Meaning our initial assumption of equal speeds is on average violated.
So, in short, the baseball is more likely to hurt you.
Softball and baseball are not very different.
That’s a matter of opinion. I believe softball is very different because of the bigger ball that doesn’t go so far, the smaller field and different rules which are listed here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_baseball_and_softball Wikipedia says there are “pronounced differences” between the games and the differences are enough to make some girl baseball players decide not to play softball when they reach an age when baseball opportunities are no longer offered to them. People on this thread have said they think baseball is more interesting. And of course there’s the huge difference in status with baseball having much higher status.
A women's baseball movement would crash and burn because people would see [alleged similarities between softball and baseball]
People would see the differences, compare and choose the one they like better and I assume they’ll generally prefer women’s baseball because apparently it is more fun and interesting based on what I have read. Consider this: would men prefer watching men’s baseball or men’s softball? Of course they would prefer watching the baseball game.
There is absolutely no rule barring women from the MLB, so in that sense, there already in a women's baseball league in the fact that the MLB is technically coed.
Organized baseball banned women from the major and minor leagues in 1952 and the ban exists today.
you can argue that coaches discourage women from pursuing baseball, and that claim would have merit. But why would that change if, say, the Olympics added women's baseball? Girls would still be encouraged- and probably want- to play softball because it has so much history and is seen as an established sport. Why would they play in an upstart baseball league when they can play in an established league that essentially plays the same game anyway?
As I’ve said before, softball is a very different game. Also, as I’ve said before, this thread is not about the Olympics. The primary point is that women and girls in the United States should have equal opportunities to play baseball at all levels. I disagree with you that girls would prefer softball if they had the same opportunities to play baseball-opportunity to play in all-girls teams or coed, knowing that they could continue to play in high school, college and the major league, the same amount of scholarships, etc. Baseball is much more high status and from what I read people tend to think it’s more interesting. Also, women’s baseball has a longer history than women’s softball.
To say that there is some sort of vast conspiracy to "exclude" women from the "old boy's club" of baseball is ludicrous.
I never stated there was a conspiracy to exclude women from baseball. However, there is an “old boys club” mentality that a lot of men have that makes them think women and girls shouldn’t be part of baseball. For example, on this thread natbsat described how her LL coach discriminated against her by treating the boys much better.
Another example:
“Little League started a boy’s softball program in 2000 because 500 boys were playing in Little League softball leagues around the U.S., but the organization failed to start a girls’ baseball program, when thousands of girls are playing baseball in Little League baseball leagues around the U.S.” http://www.seaternal.com/baseball/history.htm
And men ganged up against women in 1952 to ban them from playing major and minor league baseball.
If I had to guess, there are maybe one or two women in the world who could perhaps pitch for an MLB team, and these unnamed women undoubtedly chose softball- where they would excel- over men's baseball, where they would be below average players.
Most girls are not given the choice of continuing baseball in high school. In contrast, boys are much more likely to get an opportunity to play baseball at higher levels. The system is rigged against girls. The only way we will know if girls prefer softball is by giving them an equal choice of either playing softball or baseball at all levels.
And evidence indicates you’re wrong that women would be “below average” baseball players. I’ve already provided examples on this thread of women beating men at baseball. Here’s another example:
“In 1931, Jackie Mitchell (woman player) signed a contract with the minor league Chattanooga Lookouts. Mitchell pitched against the New York Yankees and struck out their two star players, Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig!!!” http://www.articlesbase.com/baseball-articles/women-in-baseball-an-era-in-baseball-history-1006989.html
Also, in the old days it was popular to create women’s baseball teams for “battle of the sexes” competitions that attracted public interest in seeing local men’s teams challenged by a women’s team. The barnstorming women’s teams often beat the men’s teams. http://www.seaternal.com/baseball/gender.htm
It’s obvious women can be great baseball players. I believe women baseball players should have their own major league.
I could get pissed off over the lack of a men's softball league. But I don't, because I realize *baseball is the same sport, and there is no demand for men's softball*
Baseball is not the same sport. That is a fact. And you didn’t mention that baseball has much higher status than softball.
[For some reason I was not able to reply directly to Cank, so I'm replying to the original post.]
See, again, you have yet to link to a specific example of a pro- or semi-pro women's team defeating a pro or semi-pro men's team of comparable status and age. You link to a vague article that states women would "often" defeat male teams back in the 1930s. Link me to a modern, recorded *single game* in which pro women beat pro men, and I will admit error in a second. I'm not saying women can't be athletes, and I certainly can believe that a female pitcher would be capable of racking up a few outs against pro men. But that is the exception rather than the rule.
No, baseball and softball are not the same sport, but they are very similar, as I have stated before. The only notable differences are the large size of the ball and the smaller proportions of the field.
Furthermore, you are wrong in that women are not allowed in the MLB. I'm not a historian, perhaps they were banned at some point, but under modern rules, a female could hypothetically play for a pro team. If you have a link, provide it to me.
See, again, you have yet to link to a specific example of a pro- or semi-pro women's team defeating a pro or semi-pro men's team of comparable status and age.
What do you mean by again? You never asked me for information about a pro- or semi-pro women’s team defeating a pro- or semipro men’s team of comparable status and age. That’s a very narrow requirement. What you said was:
Try a young adult women's team versus a young adult men's team, both with the same amount of training. If you played a hundred games the women would not win a single one.
I provides examples of women playing on male/female teams who were successful at beating men (Johnson and Mitchell). I provided evidence of women’s teams beating men’s teams (Osaka Silver Sisters and American barnstorming teams of the early 20th century). I don’t have statistics to compare the exact amount of training and ages of the players of the “battle of the sexes” games, but obviously there was a great variation because the women played in many different locations. I provided enough evidence to prove that women can beat men playing with men on the same team and women’s teams can beat all-male teams and that individual women can outplay top-ranking male players like Babe Ruth and Lou Gehrig. That proves beyond a doubt that women have the capability to be excellent baseball players and that’s all that’s necessary to create an excellent women’s major basketball league in the United States. Whether or not an all-women’s team can beat an all men’s team “of comparable status and age” is not my criteria of whether women should be allowed to play the major league. The criteria of whether women should have a major league baseball team is can women play baseball well? Yes. Can women’s baseball be marketed to be popular? Yes. Should women have an equal opportunity to play our national sport? Yes.
I'm not saying women can't be athletes, and I certainly can believe that a female pitcher would be capable of racking up a few outs against pro men. But that is the exception rather than the rule.
You don’t know if it’s the exception to the rule in the U.S. because there has never been a time in U.S. history when women and girls had equal opportunity to play baseball as men and boys. Because men and boys had far greater opportunities, there have always been many more professional men players so it’s impossible to gouge the average differences between men’s and women’s baseball skill with any degree of accuracy. The only way to do that is in an environment of relative equal opportunity for baseball, equal number of players, equal amount of training, equal amount of games played at all levels.
you are wrong in that women are not allowed in the MLB. I'm not a historian, perhaps they were banned at some point, but under modern rules, a female could hypothetically play for a pro team. If you have a link, provide it to me.
"1952 — June 23, organized baseball banned women from the minor leagues; the ban remains in effect today" http://www.checkswing.net/profiles/blogs/womens-baseball-timeline
Eleanor Engle signed with the Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Senators, a Class B minor league team that year. George Trautman, a minor league president, voided her contract and warned clubs that they would be severely punished if they signed or attempted to sign a woman. Shortly afterward baseball commissioner Ford Frick made an official ruling banning women from playing major or minor league baseball (Source: Cooperstown Symposium on Baseball and the American culture 1999 By Alvin L Hall, Peter M. Rutkoff, State University of New York College at Oneonta, National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, page 255). There’s a lot of information about the ban on the Internet if you want to research it.
..... you're not getting me. Okay then. If women are so capable of playing in the MLB, there should be ample evidence of a female team beating a male team. I want a single anecdote of a women's team that played a close game against an MLB team, or hell, even a minor league team. No, I am not going to accept vague indications on random Internet articles that women "played competitively". Anyone can say anything online. I want records and hard facts. Of one game. Can you get that? Because I sure as hell can't.
If women are so capable of playing in the MLB, there should be ample evidence of a female team beating a male team.
How many times do I have to repeat that I am supporting a women's major league baseball team? I am supporting women's teams playing against women's teams, like women's basketball and women's soccer. Even in the Olympics women almost always compete against other women. It's ludicrous to imply that baseball is the exception, that women have to be exactly equal to men in order to be allowed to have their own league. Why should there be different standards for a women's baseball league than other women's sports? And as to evidence of women beating a male team I provided plenty of evidence. Now it's your responsibility to research it further if you want to learn more.
I want a single anecdote of a women's team that played a close game against an MLB team, or hell, even a minor league team.
There has never been a women's major league baseball team. Women and girls have had far fewer opportunities to play baseball than men and boys, therefore because of the discrimination against us we have done the best we could despite being systematically blocked from playing the game. As to minor leagues, I'm not a baseball expert so I don't know the exact definition of minor league but I do know that women's baseball teams have beat men's baseball teams at levels where women's teams have been allowed to compete with men's teams, for example, the Osaka Silver Sisters and the women's barnstorming teams. Also, you focus on teams but it's just as important that individual women have been valuable players on dual sex teams, for example, Jackie Mitchell and Mamie Johnson.
I am not going to accept vague indications on random Internet articles that women "played competitively". Anyone can say anything online. I want records and hard facts. Of one game.
On my original post I proved that women baseball players can compete with men and win (Osaka Silver Sisters) and I provided a link to the news article from the prestigious Reuters news organization. The fact that even old women can beat young men is proof beyond doubt that women can play baseball well. Also, when I wrote about the barnstorming teams I provided this link: http://www.seaternal.com/baseball/gender.htm If you choose to not believe the information that's your decision but if you checked the link you would have found that the women's baseball teams information was from a scholarly non-web source:
Smoot-Kimble, N. Apple Pie and Thigh-Highs: Gender Roles and Women's Baseball in the 1940's. The Online Journal of Christopher Newport University's Department of History and the Zeta Mu Chapter of Phi Alpha Theta. The Sextant, Volume 1, Summer 2003.
Therefore, since a scholarly journal documented that women's baseball teams frequently beat men's teams I consider it factual because the source is respected.