Carrol,
Thanks for the below. I'd like to syncopate some with what you say.
Clip-
We observe as an empirical fact that many (but not all -- perhaps not even a majority) u.s. citizens give varying amounts of time to viewing certain sports on tv. A smaller number give varying amounts of time viewing certain sports in the stadiums and playing fields. (I don't know what the figures are now. The most popular sport in terms of sheer numbers watching games each year has always been high school basketball. Is this still the case?)
^^^^ Charles: I think we can say with some certainty that sports spectating is a bit more of a male than a female thing. Surely , the sort of "main" American sports fans, football, baseball, basketball, hockey, boxing , are men. I don't feel like I'm going out on a limb in saying that. In fact, we are talking about all men teams in most of this big time spectating. The heroes are heroes .
The implication of this is not that we men sports fans should stop watching sports because it's male chauvinist , or something like that, however , in the spirit of nothin' but the best for the working class, we men sports fans who also value highly the consciousness of the masses should just note this pattern. For one thing, because there can be some male "pushiness" that spins off of such a heavily male thing, Fellas.
So, we pass judgments because our attitude is nothing but the best for the working class. Since we see that the working masses are into sports, we, for one might want to be or stay into sports ourselves so we can in another way stay "part" of the working masses. But we don't just go into ( or in some cases stay into ) sports without, like everything else, thinking critically about it. Thinking critically doesn't mean "not doing it." It means doing it with a practical-critical state of mind - part of the time, a very small amount of the time. Just being aware that it has some political implications.
For example, athletes are potential leaders, exactly because they are so celebrated. If we could develop All-Americans in the Paul Robeson tradition, then we'd be cooking with gas again.
But overall, I agree that we shouldn't spend too much time on critique of the fans. We should be continuing to try to change the structures of the sports industry, as when we helped break the color barrier in sports.
It's really an issue of two avoidances of elitisms. It is a bit elitist to remain aloof from the spectating crowds . On the other hand, there is a sort of liberal's permissive indifference to not at least thinking critically for a moment about this important area of culture for so many people.
"We", well I, don't want to get rid of sports. We want to do it better. We want to do it as a model for the workers who watch.I like the baseball players' strikes. They win them. The football players on the other hand got beat by scabs. The Hockey players won their strike too.
^^^^^^^
Yet a third category, greatly but by no means wholly overlapping the first two) consists of those who seldom if ever watch sports, either on tv or in the flesh, but who regularly read the sports pages. A sub-category extending across all three of these categories are those who make themselves extensively familiar with various statistical information in reference to one or more of these sports at one or more levels. And of course the sports-page readers do so with varying levels of intensity or interest. Among the watchers of tv sportscasts are those whose visiting daughter or son must watch the Cubs. So before we start asking questions or passing judgments (though I am bewildered as to why we think we need to pass judgment) quite a bit of empirical information has to be gathered before we have the slightest idea what is that we are asking questions about. "Watching sports" is clearly too vague a concept to say anything about.
Now in reference to the _individuals_ (taken as individuals) in these various categories, one would probably have to say its noone's fucking business why they are there. It's their own private affair. Moreover, I don't know of any method by which such information could be determined, in part because there are probably innumerable different motives involved, and no one is going to spend the money to do exhaustive surveys in depth to find out much about it. (Clearly posts in this thread have been grounded either on the poster's explaining his/her own reason for caring or not caring, or to making wild and utterly unconfirmable guesses as to why others might be there, said guess reflecting mostly what the poster wants to believe for one or another reason (also probably unspecifiable).
^^^^^^^
CB: Yes, I can tell you how I think about teams. I don't root for home teams hopelessly, anymore as I did when I was a child. The Detroit Lions are too sure a losers, and I'm not going to get upset about that again and again every year. I have zero Chicago Cub fan style in me. I mostly watch playoffs, and I watch for skill. So, it does become something like watching ice skating. I do root for particular teams from time to time, but not based on a rigid home team rah , rah loyalty. I would like to see studies on patterns of how fans root for what teams. I mean when you are watching the World Series, most of the tv spectators have no home team in it.
Sports spectating is the basis for a lot of partying , of course,tailgating, Super Bowl parties. Whatever.
Rah, rah bis boom bah !