I know it’s been a hot minute, but we are back from winter break refreshed and ready to explore all sorts of new feminist territory!
That being said –despite the risk of adhering to stereotypical gender norms by stating my truth—I don’t “do” sports. And when I say I don’t “do” sports, I mean I don’t watch, participate, or even think about them. It’s just not something that I’ve ever been interested in. That’s not to suggest I consciously reject all things athletic—in fact, some of my closest friends, both male and female, are athletes who live for their respective sports—it’s just not a part of my lifestyle. Well, not unless you count watching Basketball Wives as sporty, because I’d get the gold medal in that event.
Being an academic and a fashionist, I’ve managed to float through life relatively oblivious to what’s going on in athletics. However, SPORTS is all anyone can seem to talk about lately and this time it’s hitting close to home. Sarah Lawrence College—our predominately female, gender-integrated academic home base—has recently generated all sorts of controversy for its decision to enter the NCAA. It was a surprising move for a school that has built its tremendous academic caliber on, well, not being competitive outside of the admissions process. The school’s diminishing endowment and its notoriously high tuition have left the student body contemplating whether the $150,000 NCAA entrance fee is really money well spent for an institution that prides itself on scholastics. Or more confusingly, what does this imply about the type of prospective student the college is hoping to attract?
The logic seems simple to me: NCAA accreditation draws a more specific type of applicant, which in turn increases the college’s famously-low male population, and ends with the desired co-educational experience the school has been seeking since the late-1960s—when it began admitting men.
Because all of the student-athletes were admitted to the school on their scholarly merit, it was hard to imagine the effects of such a transition. One such athlete eloquently echoed the scholarly sentiment of the student body: “I understand that Sarah Lawrence is feeling the pressure to join from most of our academic competition. Bard, Vassar, and NYU all offer NCAA competition as a product of student demand . . . but none of those schools [entered] under the motivations that SLC has made clear to the public: money and applications.” In actuality, only time will truly tell the outcome of the school’s decision, and it’s way too soon in the game to be making foul calls, right?
The Super Bowl is this month (thanks for letting me know, Beth K.) and despite knowing very little about what that really means (except that Velveeta cheese will be on sale everywhere) I feel it’s due time for the SPORTS ISSUE of Re/Visionist! This month we tackle (pun intended) everything from female marathon runners to the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre, with a whole lot of healthy athletic debate in between. So let’s warm up those extraocular muscles and on your mark, get set . . . you know the drill.
Oh, and speaking of drills, CHEERLEADING IS A SPORT, asshole. Obviously.
THE RE/VISIONIST SPORTS ISSUE:
The Women Who Endure x Emma Staffaroni
I Love That You Hate Me for Being a Cheerleader x Brianna Leone
Screw You, Tim Tebow x Katy Gehred
Ten Question with Carolyn Miles
Intercontinental Musings x Kelly Banbury
The Only Thing Chuck Bass Has to Say About Sports x Jamie Agnello
LEMME TELL YA /BOUT SPORTS x John Walker