Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
It’s Not Heroic to Choke and Quit
I don’t want to be overly critical of Simone Biles’ decision to withdraw from the Olympic team’s competitions. I haven’t followed gymnastics for years, but my impression is that Biles is widely considered to be the greatest female gymnast of all time. Her ability and achievements are extraordinary.
During the first rotation in the team all-around competition, Biles had a disappointing vault. She then pulled out of the competition, with varied explanations that seem unconvincing. It looks, to me, like she briefly lost her mojo. This would be, here’s that word again, disappointing, but understandable. Nobody’s perfect.
Biles set herself up for this, to some extent. She’s sometimes called the GOAT, meaning “greatest of all time.” She apparently leaned into this hype, like Muhammad Ali, by wearing leotards bearing an image of a goat. Humility is a wiser course, I think. But again, I don’t want to dump on Biles, who is quite young and the young rarely display notable wisdom.
The thing that is strange, to me, has been the reaction in much of the media. The narrative seems to be that Biles quitting was heroic, in order to take care of her “mental health.” Here’s a sample of this reaction:
- “The Radical Courage of Simone Biles’s Exit from the Team USA Olympic Finals.” The New Yorker.
- “Simone Biles’ Olympic withdrawal could be her greatest act of heroism.” SBNation.
- “The world was clamouring for the American to outdo her competitors as well as herself. It took exceptional bravery for her to step back.” The Guardian.
- “As athletes, we’re told to tough it out. It’s toxic masculinity at work, this idea that we should ignore our emotions and what our body needs. We call what she did heroic.” Time.
I dissent, not respectfully (yet). I do not find it heroic to choke, and I do not find it heroic to quit after choking.
It is understandable, a bit disappointing, fine. Maybe she was having a bad day, though all that we know is that she had a single bad vault. Biles might or might not have done well on the remaining events. We’ll never know, because she gave up.
We do expect more of our heroes.
But it’s the media reaction that is so bizarre, to me. What in the world is going on here? Is it just an attack on competence? Is it the typical resentful, sour-grapes attitude of the ordinary?
Is it the victim narrative? The silly Time article linked above says that gymnasts “are taught that their bodies are not their own.” In sport that “sacrifices bodies, minds and lives for perfection.” What?
Is it because Biles is female? Is it because she is black? Is it because the media had hyped a black woman as the greatest athlete ever, just unbelievable, wait ’til you see her, she’ll blow your socks off . . . well, not so much. Not that day.
So, apparently, the media has to lie about it. To pretend that failure and worse, quitting, is heroic. I do not see any justification for this narrative, and I do not see any reason to dissent “respectfully.” I am open to a counter-argument, as perhaps I’m missing something.
Again, I don’t want to beat up on Simone Biles. She’s had an amazing career. She appears to have cracked under the pressure, at these particular Olympic Games. That is sad, but not the end of the world.
You know, even Mighty Casey struck out. There was no joy in Mudville that day, but that’s OK. Casey was still a hero, just not a perfect one.
But I don’t recall anything about Casey walking away from the plate after his first strike, or making excuses. That’s not what heroes do.
Published in Sports
Yup.
Not the point. Men can’t have babies, women can, and indeed women MUST, as indicated earlier. Much of what is pursued these days is essentially leisure activities, which are possible because agriculture and other technologies have made it possible for most people to exist without having to work all day just to have enough to not starve, or die of exposure, etc. But there are some lower limits, including the average of 2 children per woman, to keep the species going. People – men and women – can skip out of farming etc because efficiencies elsewhere make it possible, but there is no more efficient way to make people just to replace the ones that eventually die. Less than 2 per woman on average, and you end up with zero eventually. Western countries already have a problem in that area, with most of Europe being much worse off.
I don’t really fully agree with Jerry on this, but your sarcasm is actually true. Competitive female sports at the high end DO have negative effects on female physiognomy as a stress/preservation action.
If a woman’s body is shutting down healthy functions, the woman isn’t healthy.
Twisties sounds like a form of spatial disorientation – it can have any number of causes, physical through mental.
So the difference would be that “not having your head in the game” is a subset of the causes of “the twisties”.
I think female interest in sports is driven by cultural and social motivations, not biological.
That’s pretty much tangential to what we’ve been discussing. Are you saying that women shouldn’t be involved in competitive sports because they should be having babies?
They wouldn’t do it if they didn’t want to.
Sort of “Guys like sports, so if I like sports, guys will like me”?
It’s not a simple either/or, but as Stina also pointed out, such activities can make it difficult or impossible for women to have children, and in any event it’s definitely not “fair” since, in essence, for one woman to not have her 2 children requires those 2 children to be had by someone(s) else, unless you’re content for humanity to fade away and disappear. That seems a pretty steep price to pay for women’s athletics.
I think the high end of any female competition pushes women to unhealthy limits.
The best in female dance, gymnastics, and skating must be in possession of intensely low body fat ratios that shut down important female functions. That’s not healthy. And to achieve those levels puts women through such extreme training and pressure that their bodies are physically abused to achieve the perfection sought at the high ends of competition.
Men’s biological functions don’t shut down on tiny body fat ratios. They can achieve those ratios without the kind of abuse women go through.
Two sports I would leave as exceptions to that – wrestling and jockey.
I’d rather have humanity fade away (or be dominated by more fecund societies) than tell women they have to have children.
Indeed. There are all sorts of vestibular (inner ear) disorders that can cause spatial disorientation and which have nothing to do with “having your head in the game.” I don’t know, and I don’t expect any of the rest of us will ever know, exactly what went on with Simone Biles, but as a person who–when she’s working her way down to her seat in a large sports stadium–sometimes has to hang on to the shoulder of the person in front, and lower her eyes so she’s not looking out at the vast expanse so she doesn’t pitch head first down the steps, I can testify to that fact. (The opening scenes of Bladerunner made me vomit, and I don’t do so well in scenic mountain and canyon expanses, either.) It comes and goes. And it’s extremely inconvenient, and sometimes embarrassing.
Ummm… I don’t think that’s it. Girls who WATCH sports are like that. But competitive sports are, I think, more driven by female pride to best men (anything you can do, I can do better). But also, women are competitive against eachother, biologically built to compete for the best men. I think the independent woman culture channels that competitive energy into sports.
I’d say it’s pretty on brand for Jerry. Gotta say he makes solid arguments for Victorian era morals and traditions. Dig how you keep it real Jerry.
I like his boldness, on it. It’s what he thinks, he has logic for it, but it’s so against our ingrained modern worldview… and he says it anyway!
Might as well get started learning to speak Chinese then, or Arabic, or Farsi… By the way, your “equality” for women ends up being meaningless because the decline means there would eventually be no women, either. Or only Chinese etc women, who would not have the “equality” you value.
Not that it would happen quickly, but it’s still very short-sighted.
I won’t go down steps that don’t have handrails.
How about inviting and welcoming a worldview that is different from the current one without forcing anyone?
No one is forcing people to have babies. But we are living in a culture that absolutely favors female athletes over the chubby mom with 4-5 kids.
I mean… Charlotte’s comments alone. For real! Leave space for females to go after athleticism. But the culture shouldn’t be elevating them so far over the people ensuring the continuation of your retirement account.
Exactly.
Jerry said somewhere in one of his two threads on the topic that dancing was an acceptably womanly activity. I’d like to know what the distinction is.
Not to mention the continuation of humanity itself. (Which includes women: women don’t have only male babies.)
True. But the culture shouldn’t be elevating those women who go into the workforce over those who stay home to raise their children, either.
I think the distinction is in does the competitiveness push women out of the realm of healthy?
And, especially in ballet, it does.
Contemporary/jazz and hip hop are far and away more forgiving on pushing the female body to a certain look, so I don’t think those have the same issues. They work for women with a variety of body types.
If you are trying to get him to cave on competitions that lead to unhealthy outcomes, then you won’t win it here.
What, don’t you think women should be encouraged to work instead of having children, even if it means the chicoms or the taliban take over the US?
That’s not very consistent.
Are you in favor of nihilism?
I’m actually just interested in getting any response at all from him about it. I expect no caving.
If I had to choose between these two options, I’d say all biological women should have babies.
One way Mark Steyn puts it in that best-ever-interview-of-anyone-on-any-subject (mostly involving his then-new book, “America Alone”) is, more or less, “If you think you have a good society, it doesn’t really matter if there aren’t people like you around to BE that society/make that case.” Randy’s idea of a good society seems to amount to a kind of suicide pact. Color me unimpressed.
https://www.adrive.com/public/DS9Nut/NARN%2012-02-06%20NARN%201%20Hour%202%20Mark%20Steyn.mp3
I interpreted “interest” as something broader than participation. I don’t think there’s any doubt that there’ a social motive behind many women who watch sports.
He may have meant Astaire/Rogers.