Are males naturally more interested in sports than females?

Question

Feminists argue that women and men are equally interested in sports, thus Title IX now requires that the majority of student athletes be female.

Yet, after 35 years of Title IX there are still far more males than females watching sports on TV and playing sports in local parks on the weekends.

Why?

Answer 1

I think it's more of a cultural thing.  I know several women who are sports nuts (football, mostly, as well as basketball and baseball and some hockey).  At the same time, I come from a family where nobody is interested in sports - my dad, my husband, my brother in law, none have any interest in sports.  They all find it pretty stupid, to be honest.  My husband's half-sisters, on the other hand, are complete sports freaks, because their mom is (my mother in law isn't).

People who are raised to love sports are interested in sports.  Those who aren't, aren't.

Answer 2

no idea why

but i agree with you

men tend to be more into sports then women

most guys play the 3 basic sports and women to me olay a wider range of sports

but heck i could be way off

Answer 3

it would appear to be so but there are women who love and are devoted to sports

in general we are less able in that area, so that's why

Answer 4

It depends on the sport. I think there is less female interest in activities like basketball, football or baseball but when it comes to other sports like golf, swimming, or gymnastics, I would say there is about as equal interest as it is with men. Most men seem to only be interested in certain types of sports and not at all in the others. That's why you don't see as great attendance in wrestling or volleyball events as you do with football or basketball.

Answer 5

Feminists usually argue with no discernible interest in, or comprehension of, facts.  That doesn't stop them from arguing, or from advancing such palpable absurdities as "women and men are equally interested in sports."  Pity is that their absurd, groundless assertions are written into Law, such as the grotesquely impracticable Title IX.

Answer 6

I have to argue that I know just as many women as I know men who like sports. Do I really like watching football and baseball on tv? Honestly, no. The sports announcers drive me nuts!! But I will get outside and play just about any sport with my brothers and hubby. I played volleyball in high school and LOVED IT! (Proud Stepford Wife was actually one of my teammates)

So anyway, it's just a matter of tastes for both men AND women.

*Edit*

American Transcendentalist , I'm no feminist.

Answer 7

more capable at sport, is the reason

no mystery there

Answer 8

Men are more interested in the competition, establishing dominance (winning), and the physical confrontation of athletics.

I got a soccer scholarship to Eastern Michigan University for soccer.  But that year they had one extra men's varsity team because women didn't want to play any sports.  The soccer team dropped from Varsity to a club team.  I lost my scholarship.

Title IX is a good idea, but the execution isn't going too well.

Answer 9

"Women seem more interested in less aggressive sports ie. Swimming, Skiing, Golf, Tennis..."

I see...

Let's choose from a pool of GWS members 10 men and 10 women and have them off the top of their heads cite all the names they are familiar with belonging to the sports you just mentioned.

Generally the only things (many) women find popular to 'play' are both sides of an issue.http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

Answer 10

Title IX does NOT require that the majority of student athletes be female.  It requires that funding and scholarships be proportionate to male:female ratios.  It corrected a long-standing discriminatory practice rampant at the time of favoring only men in athletics, especially in revenue generating sports.  What feminists fought for was equal opportunity.  When I was in high school, the girl's varsity basketball team wasn't even allowed practice time in the gym because that would "take away practice time" from the revenue producing male varsity basketball team, for example.

With obesity alone costing us in the U.S. over 70 billion dollars a year in healthcare costs and employee absenteeism, the government, the insurance industry, corporations and the U.S. military are questioning the rationality of the entire paradigm of high school athletic programs which obviously, at tax-payer expense, are focused more on revenue producing male-dominated spectator sports than on providing optimal physical fitness conditioning to as many students as possible.  Also, with critical shortages anticipated in math and science based professions such as engineering, many have expressed righteous concern about the rationality of the majority of high schools in the U.S. spending more money annually on football uniforms alone than on science labs.  The U.S. cannot remain strong without an adequate pool of scientists and engineers.  It's more important that we get our math and science scores up to par with the rest of the world than have the most Olympic gold medals, that's for sure.  

As for most sports, they hail from prehistoric male gender roles, running down game, spearing game, wrestling animals to the ground or in defense, endurance as communication runners, accuracy in hitting a moving target like a bird with a rock, etc. Sport competitions have always revolved around celebrating the male body and prowess.  It's not that women in general do not like sports, because we, too, have physical potentials to celebrate.  It's just that what we have been acculturated to think is important are male physical potentials and prehistoric male gender-role based competitions.  The larger public interest in male athletes evolved from times when males only mattered in such matters and when a woman's only chance of survival was to find herself a big strong one to keep her, be her meal-ticket and protector from other males.  And whatever physical activity that women did was not considered "important" by men and not celebrated, except as s*x.  For example, men think chess is important and ignore lace making / tatting, which requires more complex thought than chess but was "woman's work" which meant it was not valuable.  And, in Master /Slave moralities, males have always put down what women do well so to keep them psychologically reduced.

Because women en masse have really only had the legal protections for a few decades now in even the most developed nations to participate fully in athletics from an early age AND because it's only been since the 90's that medical research has been required to examine the female body more closely as different from the male body in matters including nutrition and optimal health practices, which were only based on the male body prior to that, women have only begun to rise in physical conditioning and potentiation.  It's not that women are inferior than men for not showing as much interest in competition as men do, in general, but that men think competition and being top dog is more important than, say, weaving a family together.  Time will tell as to which skill and prowess, in truth, is worth celebrating.

Answer 11

Perhaps contact sports... ie. Hockey, Boxing, Rugby or Football to name a few...

Women seem more interested in less aggressive sports ie. Swimming, Skiing, Golf, Tennis...