Wisconsin Women: Packers Halftime Showcase A Missed Opportunity

[devonarmstrong]

I appreciate your honesty and genuine engagement here. I am going to give you some feedback about it and I hope you are open to it. I am open to hearing yours in a continuing conversation.

there are a lot of good things in ultimate that go beyond chasing plastic … These will likely not be showcased and elaborated on in this event.

Then we should be asking ourselves if this is the version of ultimate we want to present to a massive audience.

I personally find single gender to be more exciting than mixed, and men’s to be the most exciting.

That’s okay to have that opinion, but you should do some serious soul searching to see you have any unconscious biases that you have unknowingly learned from our male dominated society explaining your preference.

1. The Radicals are a professional organization with ticket sales in Wisconsin. They play in a single gender league, and this would be the closest representation

No, the closest thing would be if they scrimmaged another professional team not the Hodags (while still excluding women). Since we are mixing leagues and ability levels, how hard would it have been to invite women, too, and have a mixed scrimmage?

As an AUDL player, I do a number of community outreach events, including one where I and others ran an activity for a group of girl scouts introducing them about the sport, the rules, and the spirit of the game.

Sorry, volunteering with girl scouts does not make up for men having TWO professional leagues, while women have none. I appreciate the outreach you do and I understand that it is more than most may do, but it is far from enough to balance the gender disparity in Ultimate.

I wonder if they have reached out to the Radicals organization before or after the opportunity to play at halftime here arose.

From the original announcement

An organizer for the Packers’ entertainment arm contacted the University of Wisconsin and eventually reached Hodag captain Avery Johnson to gauge the team’s interest in playing during halftime, according to Radicals owner and head coach Tim DeByl. “Avery, to his credit, said, ‘Wouldn’t it be better if we did something with the Radicals?’” said DeByl.

The problem is that women were not invited to the table in the first place. Even if they got into the game as the details are sorted out, they were still an after thought not given an equal consideration.

this is not the only time ultimate has been showcased in front of a football crowd: the Stanford men’s team has played at halftime several times. I thought I remembered the women’s team doing the same

Let’s assume that Standford included the women’s team in this instance. The issue is that this would be an exception and not the norm. The principles of equality in Ultimate means women’s ultimate is equally important, interesting, receives equal media exposure.

Even if women’s ultimate is played differently than men’s ultimate, that does not make it inherently less than men’s ultimate.

[devonarmstrong]

And I feel that excluding women, especially in a scrimmage, is not following the spirit of the game.

[jjs]

So lets go back and look at how this situation developed for a minute. The captain of the Hodags got an opportunity dropped in his lap to do a scrimmage vs another Wisconsin college team at halftime of a game. He replied that the other college teams in Wisconsin may not make for a competitive show (no offense other Wisconsin schools), so thought of the Radicals. Why the Radicals? The Radicals hosted a pro vs college all stars scrimmage very recently, provided uniforms, a venue, etc and the experience was very well received from both audience and player alike.

So I am totally on board that Bella should have been considered, but do we honestly think that the Hodag captain considered it thoroughly form all angles and was like “Nah, women don’t give the best show,” or is it more likely that he drew on a recent, positive experience from a similar situation?

Bottom line, we can excoriate a twenty year old for his off the cuff decision making, then go down the predictable comment thread lines we have seen over and over, but really? Why. If we want everyone to be included in solutions, than decisions should be made with more input. With Ultimate still being a rather small insular community, it should be easy for communities to put together a group–reps from womens college and club, mens college and club and pro where applicable either meet occasionally or have some sort of forum so if something like this comes up, all parties can be involved.

Should a college kid be tuned in to the global consequences of all their actions? Yes, but does that actually happen as a rule? The creation of local, mixed decision making bodies should be easy to do, and result in less post decision rending of garments.

[amath]

Nope, don’t think the Hodag captain considered it. He should have. Yes, we are right to expect him to. I hope this is a learning moment. I genuinely hope he’s reading all of this and not making excuses for himself. And I’m OK with giving a 20 year-old a hard time for for not thinking about it if it means a 20 year-old next year will.

The halftime scrimmage is going to happen. And we’re having this discussion because it’s the right thing to do.

And yup, we’ll continue to go down this predictable comment thread over and over because decisions that “should be made with more input” AREN’T. So we have to keep having this conversation because college captains, young as they are, still don’t think about women when they have the opportunity to showcase ultimate locally or nationally in the media.

You’re proposing “some sort of forum” and another commenter wrote, “it seems like the others want to hop aboard a train that someone else has built without contributing themselves.” Do you guys seriously not understand that you’re telling women, “figure it out yourself and get involved or nothing will ever happen for you!” while simultaneously failing to recognize that women aren’t even included in first place? How the hell are we supposed to get ourselves a seat at the table when we don’t even know the table is there?

[jjs]

I am proposing a solution. I am not saying just figure it out. I proposed a committee of involved persons from both genders across 3 levels of play. If such a committee existed in the above situation, we may have seen a different result. I agree that such safeguards should not be necessary in an ideal world, but my point was that I believe that they would be more successful at solving the problem than the outcry. I am sure he HAS learned a lesson from this. Great. Has the next problem been prevented? How can we do so BEFORE it happens? My point was not to simply put this on women for not being involved, on the contrary, I am trying to say everyone SHOULD be included and trying to propose a means to do so.

[devonarmstrong]

do we honestly think that the Hodag captain considered it thoroughly form all angles and was like “Nah, women don’t give the best show,” or is it more likely that he drew on a recent, positive experience from a similar situation?

That’s the point. Women are routinely excluded. Their inclusion is the exception. That a 20 year old man attending college would HAVE to consider this from ALL ANGLES to even THINK of including women is a BIG part of the problem. It does not take a rocket scientist (or engineer, more likely) to say, hey, let’s include the women’s team. As a sport that says it values gender equity, we all can advocate for women to have a greater exposure.

we can excoriate a twenty year old

In reading the comments and the article, I have seen no one blame the captain until you bring him up. No name calling or anything. The conversation has been about the bigger picture and how and why women are in the background or not in it at all.

go down the predictable comment thread lines we have seen over and over, but really? Why.

Because the same discussion continues happening with men still giving the same answers of “women’s ultimate is not as good as mens.” If men continue having these thoughts, feelings, and contributions to conversations, then we must continue having them to explain that mens and womens ultimate may be different but that does not mean one is less than the other.

With Ultimate still being a rather small insular community, it should be easy for communities to put together a group–reps from womens college and club, mens college and club and pro where applicable either meet occasionally or have some sort of forum so if something like this comes up, all parties can be involved.

Yes. Please make this happen. And give women a more than equal voice; follow their lead.

----------

----------

In response to your second post…

I believe that they would be more successful at solving the problem than the outcry.

Please, tell us how you want women to protest the decisions men make without including women in the first place.

I am sure he HAS learned a lesson from this. Great. Has the next problem been prevented? How can we do so BEFORE it happens?

This conversation is part of preventing the next missed opportunity. By engaging with men about their superiority complex and how we have excluded women in the past and present is how we try to learn from our mistakes. Brushing this off as a one time thing minimizes the systemic issue we are talking about. Read the early comments. The idea that men’s ultimate is better is not solely the idea of the three dudes who posted here. Go to pick-up, go to a mixed city league, watch high level mixed club play, there are men everywhere who do not throw to women because men assume women are inherently worse than men.

I am trying to say everyone SHOULD be included and trying to propose a means to do so.

Yes but men are already automatically included. Because we, as men automatically exclude women, we must advocate for them.

This conversation is not just about this one missed opportunity to play in Green Bay.

[W11 (W)]

You’re absolutely right I missed on the part about how the invite came about. I was very careful to read this current article several times before replying, but turns out I had only skimmed the original article announcing the event.

Some of my first reactions surprised me - I do feel like it would be a different goal if the issue started with professional ultimate than college ultimate (perhaps this is why the idea of separate pro ultimate leagues worries some people).

As for 2) I think that twitter quote helps me understand better the difference. With the gender equity forum and other recent events, I think the balance between promoting the ultimate as a gender equitable sport and promoting the sport in general is a topic of conversation influencing things at the highest level, and I am interested in following that discussion as it goes on.

3. What I am going to say here may sound defensive - I am not intending it that way, merely to flesh out the part I was originally making. If it sounds the same, please let me know, I don’t want to talk past you or vice versa. There are certainly male players who have taken on more of a role in promoting women’s ultimate than I have, whether it be at a coaching level to improve play or at an organizational level to improve opportunity. This does not excuse me any more than contributing to my contributions already have, as the gap in equity still exists and that remains on everyone. There are also men’s club players now trying to use their influence to change that at organizational level of USAU. However, if I was asked which organization did more to encourage me personally to help women’s ultimate (and I assume this would apply to many players who participate in both organizations), I would say the AUDL (girls clinics) over men’s club teams (nothing directly). This seems a little contradictory to what I said above about how my perception of the right goals for the packers halftime opportunity changed when I realized it started with the college team and not the AUDL team. I think neither are perfect, and both have merit in discussion.

Thanks again for the conversation, this is exactly what I was looking for.

[W11 (W)]

Thank you for your replies. I try to frame thoughts and opinions opposite mine, and it is always important to hear directly from other people.

As mentioned in an above post, there are a lot of tough questions around the merits between promoting ultimate as a gender equitable sport and simply promoting ultimate as a sport. We are currently not at an equitably position as a sport and I think we both agree with that this is worth working towards. Part of the difficulty with this is that we exist in a general sports culture that is not gender equitable, and our power to change this is proportional to the strength of our numbers and our visibility.

I believe this introduces a range of possibilities in how to direct our efforts going forwards. Some conversations have considered options that reduce participation (at least temporarily) for the benefit of equity, such as requiring youth cities to field the same amount of boys and girls teams in competition (effectively a reduction in boys participation to motivate more focus on girls). Others have argued that the pro leagues have increased publicity and visibility of the sport, and with USAU continuing (for now) to own the competition at the highest level, more people have been introduced to a sport where the majority of the organization is working towards gender equity than they would have otherwise. I am interested in the stance that USAU takes with this new leadership, with pressure coming from a number of high level club players, and if/how USAU and the pro leagues will cooperate more directly in the future in order to further these goals.

I know this more philosophical and more general than the scope of the original article. I am not really directly addressing any of your comments either, but more trying to frame the overall discussion as I see it. Again, I appreciate your original reply and the thoughts/conversation it generated.

[mwiegs27]

So something that I haven’t see much consideration of is the audience watching. It’s not that it’s just 80k random people, but 80k people who are coming to watch a football game, a sport with arguably the most athletic people in America competing. The halftime show is really not that important to them and they will likely use that time to go buy drinks and socialize. Whatever we show, whether it is male or female ultimate players, I guarantee there will be much ridicule for people “throwing around frisbees” or “playing some picnic game.” Most will even challenge the legitimacy of ultimate as a sport, especially as compared to the football game they came to watch. However, most still will not care, as it is only a halftime show and not what they paid for.

I think that with the understanding of the audience, we can then objectively figure out how to display the best product possible. One way that we can gauge this is by looking at views of mens games vs. womens games vs. mixed games that have been on espn3 or streamed through other means. We could also use Youtube videos such as callahan videos or games. This tells us which form of ultimate people watch the most, and which could be used as evidence to support it as the most enjoyed form. Another option would be to ask people who do not watch or play ultimate how interested they are in a mens game vs. mixed vs. womens, and then poll the results. That would be the best option, as the responses would directly correlate to which form of ultimate people from the most likely demographic that will be represented want to see.

Finally, I am curious as to what the equality movement within ultimate actually says equality is. Women do not equal men, and men do not equal women, thus they are not equal. That’s okay, as they each have different strengths and weaknesses. They are different, not better/worse than one or the other. If we objectively analyze this situation, we should look at the differences of men’s, mixed, and women’s ultimate to find tangible differences and decide which is best suited for this situation. We can speculate and say that men are more athletic or women are just as athletic, that the best ultimate we have to offer is defined by physicality or by philosophical values, but I don’t see a lot of objectivity in many of the arguments here.

Lastly, I do want to say that I appreciate that this article is not trying to blast the men that will be competing and removing support from them, but rather is an honest expression of the values these people hold. That’s classy.

[Trent_Simmons]

Setting aside all of the discussion about fairness to women and the worthiness of the NFL as a partner:

1. What single aspect of a showcase game is most likely to make the biggest impact on first time fans?
   Are they going to go home talking/thinking about a great layout or sky catch?
   Are they going to notice that there are no refs? No refs in an exhibition match, who is going to notice or care?
   Or would they notice that this is the first competitive field sport they’ve ever seen where men and women share the field?
   Playing mixed, in my opinion, would have made the biggest impact, and sparked the most interest in Ultimate as a sport. What they are going to see instead is a sport like most others, and I’m sure it will help promote the Radicals, and some people will go home and watch a youtube video where they might see mixed play, but most likely they’ll see a semi-pro match, and that first impression will be reinforced, for good.
   How many parents will go home from this game thinking “We should get our daughters involved in this sport”

The best product we have is not another sport that looks just like the rest. The best product we have is one that highlights the difference. But that’s the exact same mistake that the semi-pro leagues have made, so if you support them, it makes total sense to support this. Anything for legitimacy and external recognition.

2. You could argue that some fans would be less impressed, or even turned off and would dismiss Ultimate as not a real sport if their first exposure was Mixed. As you put it, a lesser product.

Perhaps, but who cares about those people, they are not the fans we should be going after anyway. Let those knuckleheads stick to their mainstream sports.
The semi-pro leagues should be doing everything they can to market to parents and families, and this is not the “best product” to do that.

[devonarmstrong]

there are a lot of tough questions around the merits between promoting ultimate as a gender equitable sport and simply promoting ultimate as a sport.

I’d like you to to consider re-framing your question. Instead of your comparison, what if your two options were promoting ultimate as a gender equitable sport or promoting ultimate as a men’s sport. Because that’s what it is. If things are not specifically geared toward inclusion, the default and unspoken assumption is that it’s for men. As men, we don’t notice, but everyone else does.

Part of the difficulty with this is that we exist in a general sports culture that is not gender equitable

Definitely. Men dominate sports culture.

our power to change this is proportional to the strength of our numbers and our visibility.

Yes. But what would we be showing by exhibiting more men playing men’s style Ultimate. How does this use our power for change. Wouldn’t exposing 80,000 people to a gender equitable sport be far more valuable than trying to stoke our male ego’s by attempting to awe the audience with our physical prowess?

The NFL is probably the height of physical prowess and whatever even our “best athletes” (as commenters here would have you believe) can do on the field will pale in comparison. Trying to beat the NFL at it’s own multibillion dollar game is silly. Why not take the opportunity to completely change the game. Include women in a highly competitive space and show off the parts of ultimate frisbee that truly make the game different from football.

[AichAich]

Sorry, volunteering with girl scouts does not make up for men having TWO professional leagues, while women have none. I appreciate the outreach you do and I understand that it is more than most may do, but it is far from enough to balance the gender disparity in Ultimate.

When someone says they’re doing good sport outreach with girl scouts and your response is to dismiss them and hang the entirety of the gender inequity on their neck and tell them they’re not doing enough, it’s probably time for you to get off the internet and go do actual real-life substantive work. If you did some serious soul searching, you might find your unconscious bias is thinking you’re way more woke than you really are.

[devonarmstrong]

My second sentence you quoted is far from dismissing his efforts. And we all have a role to play in balancing the gender inequity in our sport, as men it is our responsibility because we are at the tables, in the meetings, and having the discussions that currently exclude women. We must do more and we must ask each other to do more. Thank you for checking me, if you want to talk about the activism I may or may not do, I’m happy to share, but I don’t think this is the place.

I believe we must be consciously and deliberately promote women and women’s ultimate in all aspects of the sport.

[devonarmstrong]

One way that we can gauge this is by looking at views of mens games vs. womens games vs. mixed games that have been on espn3 or streamed through other means.

While providing concrete data, the approach you suggest will be heavily skewed by the inequity of media coverage between men and women. It will further be skewed by the greater number of men than women who play Ultimate and available to watch said media.

Even if there were an objective way to gauge interest between open, mixed, and womens, we are still missing the point. The point the Bella Donna captains are making is that excluding women from the picture hurts women’s ultimate. Instead of discussing their point (and I’m late to the game in realizing this), we are sitting here trying to justify why we should hurt womens ultimate.

Finally, I am curious as to what the equality movement within ultimate actually says equality is

It’s been all over the comments here. Equality is men including women when considering the success of ultimate. Equality is men automatically thinking to ask the Bella Donnas to participate in the scrimmage. Equality is men supporting the growth and exposure of women’s ultimate as they do men’s ultimate. Equality is having even media coverage. Equality is having a professional league. Equality is not having women’s games deemed “too boring to watch,” equality is appreciating women’s games equally as much as mens including all the similarities and differences. Equality is defining Ultimate’s “best product” in ways women have access to (decision making, consistency, patience, strategy, camaraderie, inclusion, spirit games, fairness, integrity, fun, ingenuity, determination, grit, skill, unrelenting hustle, discipline, upwind hammers et cet) and not the three ways that men automatically “win” (size, strength, and speed).

Lastly, men deserve to be blasted because we all partake in and continue the system that relegates women’s ultimate to a second class sport. It does not make us bad people. We all grew up in a culture that automatically assumes women are less. However, we can change that. We can learn new definitions of greatness, inclusion, and equality.