Wednesday, June 3, 2015

On Male Team Sports

I do not like team sports (of both men and women, but for the purpose of this article, I am strictly referring to the big-money male team sports). Sorry, never did, never will. When I was in college I went to a few college-basketball games for social reasons. A few years later I watched one season (1991) of college basketball on ESPN when Duke University defeated Vegas University on TV; I liked watching Christian Laettner, and even I, a sports "disliker,"  would admit there was something mold-breaking about that player. I was impressed. I made a monetary bet that Duke would win and they did. But I'm just trying to convey that I really, really, am not a sports fan at all, because what you just read is all of my personal team-sports history in a nutshell. (I do enjoy watching winter and summer Olympians and so on, but not in team sports) I think athleticism can be beautiful, but I also know it's not the same thing as team sports, and male team sports in particular. When you hear of a "sports fan" it's usually someone who is a fan of an all-male team or teams.

Anyway, I came across this article about inequality of men-women coaches in sports (big-ticket arena sports like basketball, baseball, football, soccer). And I wonder if people could juggle several concepts at once, chew gum and walk at the same time. What is sports? Go back to the ancient Romans and the Greeks. Sports was a dude spectacle, their arenas were oceans of testosterone. Is social equality and biochemical equality the same thing? Of course there are less women coaches. I think of team sports as a residue of caveman tribalism.  Who are the football hooligans? Who riots after a big game? Men and women equally? I would think mostly men. Team sports is not a social equality thing, it's a primitive chemistry thing. Such being the case, it would be no surprise the world of team sports is imbued with hypermasculine politics and there indeed is inequality of men-women coaches. 'Sports' should be defined. What's with the bathing suit issue of "Sports Illustrated" anyway?

What is sports? I got this from Wikipedia: "Sport (or sports) is all forms of usually competitive physical activity which, through casual or organised participation, aim to use, maintain or improve physical ability and skills while providing entertainment to participants, and in some cases, spectators.[2] Hundreds of sports exist, from those requiring only two participants, through to those with hundreds of simultaneous participants, either in teams or competing as individuals."

I'd like to apply the idea of morphogenetic fields to team sports inasmuch as sports has been around for thousands of years (as an evolved simulacrum of tribal warring). Sports teams are tribes, of which case tribalism per se has a creode. The creode is that of survival of the fittest, the very basic modality of biological existence. Testosterone was the chemical fuel of brawn and muscle of our male ancestors that hunted, say, mammoths. It's the same chemical substance of territorial battles and wars, us-against-them aggression since primitive prehistoric times. And it's the same chemical that fuels males today (females have lower levels, not zero, but this isn't a biology paper per se so don't get persnickety). And when there is a teaming of that male energy and male field, there is morphic resonance with primitive morphic fields of hunting, fighting, killing,warring. There is an "apeshit" energy there, and sometimes it runs amok. We see it on the news all the time.

So the matter lies with the chemical substance called testosterone. And of course when it is synthesized into anabolic steroids, it can be very dangerous and volatile. Therefore the world of men's team sports needs to first be understood for what it is, that it is reflective of a primitive creode, that its chemical potion is testosterone. Insofar as testosterone and phallus are connected, it is no wonder why there is a Sports Illustrated "swimsuit issue," because the chemical substance is also what drives the male to satisfy his seed-planting propensity. It is also the substance that makes males blustery and arrogant, makes them do a lot of macho posturing, which also are reflective of atavistic ape-like behavior. Let's say they are not very intelligent, self-reflective, or "mature" (you know those stunted boy-men). Let's say there are many of them gathered together in a single arena, and let's say something stokes their testosterone ablaze. It wouldn't be a place ladies and gentlemen would want to be. There is such a thing as group synergy too, which exponentially enhances.

Anyway, I wrote this tidbit hoping the next time you see a male-sports-team phenomenon, you'd see it from a biochemical social-phenomenon angle with history that reaches beyond recorded homo-sapiens history.