 | |||||||||||||
 | |||||||||||||
 |  |  |  |  |  | ||||||||
 | |||||||||||||
 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
 | ||
| | |
 |  |  | ||||
| | | | | | |
 | ||
| | |
Brian Troutman
"Sport in Society: An Inspiration or an Opiate?" As is the case with many issues that face the world, the role of sports and its effect on society can be viewed in more than one way. Essayist Jay J. Coakley illustrates the two major schools of thought in his piece "Sport in Society: An Inspiration or an Opiate?" Coakley provides compelling evidence to establish the position of both perspectives, and with a reasonable degree of fairness and impartiality, he supports the strengths and attacks the weakness of the two opposing viewpoints. Moreover, because most of the public sees sport in a positive light, the net effect of Coakley's article is to challenge the inherent views of the majority. Functionalism, one of the two major approaches to the issue of sport in society (or any other issue, for that matter), is based on the underlying belief that the various interpersonal, economic, and societal systems in the world work together in a natural manner to achieve balance. In general, functionalists believe that people largely share basic values, and major parts of the system work cooperatively for the benefit of all. Sport, being a major force in culture, is naturally viewed as being constructive to the needs of the society. Four main pieces of evidence are called upon by functionalists to support their position, and these items which are offered by sports are tied to a major need within the society. First, sport calls upon people to understand, follow, and accept rules; it also allows people to have a venue in which to release built up tension and stress. This satisfies society's need for pattern maintenance and tension management. Also, sport builds teams and teaches the lesson that people must overlook differences to work together and build a common bond, addressing society's need for integration. In addition, sport gives players goals and acceptable methods of reaching those goals. This stresses the universal importance of goal attainment. Finally, sport establishes that the ability to adjust to a changing environment is vital, instilling the need for adaptation. Pattern maintenance and tension management in sports is applied to participants as well as spectators. Both the players and their fans quickly learn the necessity of hard work, efficiency, and authority. Sport motivates performance and generally rewards those who heed direction and play by the rules. Some sociologists claim that sport also has the cathartic effect of relieving stress and pressure, both in physical participation and in the more psychological participation of spectatorship. The ability of people come together, or integrate, is also emphasized in sports. Sport unites players and spectators alike, soliciting them to identify with a group and giving them a sense of belonging to their team. The connection between sports and unification has also been identified by numerous researchers around the world. Many of them point out sports teams whose members cross racial, economic, and geographic boundaries to form a single, united collective. Goal attainment is also a heavily stressed element of sports. In many sports organizations, winning outcomes are emphasized for their importance, and success is generally defined as the sum of numerical win/loss records. The values of goal attainment in the society are often reflected in their attitude towards sports. In socialist regimes, the effort and collectivity of the team are more likely to be stressed, while in capitalist nations, the actual results—win or lose—are the overall focus and the measurement of a team's success and value. Sport’s use as a tool to teach the importance of adaptation in the modern industrialized world is a matter of some question. Harsh conditions in preindustrial societies called upon the public to adjust to the physical environment in order to survive. Sports naturally served as a system of developing the body’s strength and endurance. With the advent of the industrial age, living conditions of the general public improved dramatically, and physical adaptation to the environment became much less necessary. Despite this, many sociologists still see sport as method of developing an individual’s motor skills, and fulfilling the need for physical activity in an increasingly sedentary world. Considering that the functionalist philosophy of sport is commonly held by a large segment of the population, the decisions which define the official role, organization, and funding of sports in modern culture are accordingly favorable. People generally look for a connection between society and sport and a purpose behind the activity. They often conclude that sports are valuable for teaching basic life lessons and developing the body physically. The functionalist approach has its basic weakness in that it assumes that sport has a positive and beneficial role in society. Functionalists tend to overlook the possible negative effects of sports by presupposing that any deconstructive force in the society would have been eliminated naturally. The ability of sport to disenfranchise minorities, distort values, disrupt integration, and distract the public are ignored by functionalists. Conflict theory is the other major world view philosophy which is applied to sports. The central tenets of conflict theory hold that society is comprised of different, conflicting, and competing interests which are constantly working to undermine and suppress one another. Conflict theorists’ views tend to coincide with those of Marxist philosophers, and they often negatively compare sport with capitalism. The conflict theory uses four points to support the idea of sport being a negative influence in society. Players hold different positions and are trained to excel at specific tasks, generating and intensifying alienation between players. Sports are also used to physically and mentally condition individuals to an ordered and scheduled world. This is a tool of coercion and social control employed by the state and the economically powerful over the people. Sports also promote commercialism and materialism among players and spectators alike. Sport often divides along national and gender boundaries, and also instills a sort of “fighting ethic,” encouraging nationalism, sexism, and militarism. Alienation is created by sport in that it shifts the role of the human body to that of a machine. Athletes are trained to perform, and output is heavily emphasized, quite comparatively to the attitude held toward a factory—the focus is production. Conflict theorists also point to the use of drugs and technology to alter the natural state of the body in the interests of increased performance yields. Sport is also seen as a method of social control, employed by those in power to subdue the public in their otherwise intolerable and exploited lives. Sports give the discouraged peon a temporary high, either by participation or by spectatorship, and a skewed set of values and identification. The idea that hard work is the key to success is inherent in sports, and this is a benefit to those in power as they constantly seek to increase the production and work ethic of their employees. This “work to get ahead” reasoning also places blame for failure squarely on the individual, exonerating those in positions of power. Materialism is also promoted in sport to both the participant and the spectator. The participants are encouraged to pay for lessons and other training, and they are met with a deluge of balls, sticks, nets, uniforms, and safety equipment that they “can’t play the game without.” Spectators also have a variety of consumer goods to purchase in the form of trading cards, fan jerseys, baseball caps, and other related merchandising. Nationalism and militarism are instilled in the public through sports in that most countries use sport as a showcase for their strength and might. The excitement and allegiance that sport engenders in the public can be used as a tool to dedicate people to a national or military cause. Sexism is present in sport because the genders are divided, and the traditional roles of masculinity and femininity are perpetuated. Females are reduced to the role of a supporter, and masculinity is defined by physical strength and emotional insensitivity. The conflict theory approach is limited in that it largely ignores that sport existed in preindustrial times. In addition, sports have been popular in noncapitalist countries, undermining the idea that sport is a capitalist enterprise. Also, the claim that sport is part of a large industrial complex does not account for the popularity of sport on a small-scale, local, or noncommercial level. Furthermore, while sports supporters may be satisfied with the status quo, evidence to indicate that sport causes this attitude has not been effectively established. In conclusion, Coakley decides sport can be assumed as having a positive effect in some situations while having a negative effect in others. He also states that further research is necessary in order to determine the connection between the structure of sport and the experiences of the participants, however Coakley indicates that no research will indicate what this connection should be in a perfect world.
Also in this section:
| ||
| | |
