Pioneering Women in Sports Media: Voices of Career Trajectories, and Gender Performance

Student Submission ICA Conference 2018 Conference Theme Paper/ Feminist Division

Keywords: women, sports media, narrative, career trajectory, feminism, and gender performance

1 Introduction

Over 40 years ago, schoolgirls were given equal opportunities to play sports on account of the passing of Title IX, a federal law prohibiting discrimination based on sex in any federally funded education program or activity.

On the 40-year anniversary of Title IX, in 2012, estimated that

3,373,000 girls and women in American were playing high school and college sports, an increase of over 3 million females then prior to the mandate. This recent generation of female athletes has parlayed their love of sport into occupations within sports media. Women’s role in sports media is continuously evolving. While men still largely outnumber women in this profession, women are hosting national sports broadcasts, serving as national game broadcast analysts and occupying sports media roles in a majority of the television markets in the . A generation ago, females who coveted a position in sports media had few role models. Though they are small in numbers, the groundbreaking women who set the stage for today’s sports media opportunities for other women offer important narratives when analyzing how gender affected their careers in this masculine hegemonic profession.

Two female sports media pioneers, and , were interviewed for this study. Both of them performed various duties as sports reporters covering football in the 1960s and 1970s that had previously been held exclusively by men. In this article, through grounded theory, I will seek to achieve two objectives. First and foremost, to provide a critical examination of how the subjects narrate their career trajectories. And secondly, to explore how they establish the relationship between gender and expertise in sports. Hence, how

2 they perform gender roles in authenticating themselves as capable and proficient in their field.

Football is a violent, extremely physical sport that until recently (girls now are being allowed to play football, most often as kickers) did not allow girls to participate. Therefore, women who initially covered football were criticized for opinions and interpretations of the sport, having never played it in an organized manner. These women’s resistance to social norms can be a learning tool and give historical perspective to women’s insurgence in any masculine hegemonic field.

History of Women in Sports Media

Interestingly, female journalists were covering sports decades before they won the right to vote in the late 19th century. Midy (Maria) Morgan was reportedly the first female media member to report on a “male topic,” working as a livestock reporter for the New York Times in 1869. (Creedon 1994). Following

Morgan, there were female reporters known as “stunt girls,” who performed and chronicled athletic activities (p. 71). In the western United States, women reported on sporting events for newspapers in California and Nevada from the later 1800’s

(p. 70). Mary Bostwick started her career as a reporter in Denver in 1903. She spent 25 years as the only women at The Star. She covered football, boxing, baseball, hunting, and basketball, though her specialty was aviation and racecar reporting (p. 72). The Great Depression forced many women out of the labor force in order for men to occupy what few jobs were offered (p. 78). However, at least three women were reportedly still active as sports reporters in the 1930’s (p. 79).

During World War II there was a shortage of male reporters, subsequently women rejoined the work force in various positions, including sports reporters.

3 Even though women were given this opportunity, they still faced arduous working conditions. Women were demoralized and denigrated, kicked out of the press box while endeavoring to complete their assignments (p. 81). The Press Box was considered a “good old boys club” and women weren’t invited or welcome. Mary

Garber, considered the “Dean of Women Sportswriters,” did not sit by quietly when she was removed from a press box. In 1946, Garber challenged the rule at

Duke University prohibiting women in the press box. She was finally admitted into the press box only after the managing editor of her newspaper, the Winston-

Salem Sentinel, threatened to withdraw its coverage of the team (p. 80). A Federal

Equal Opportunity Employment mandate passed in the 1970’s opened more doors for women in sports reporting. In addition, magazine filed a lawsuit in order for their female reporters to be allowed into Major League

Baseball clubhouses (p. 84).

Jane Chastain was reportedly the first female sportscaster in local television when she worked for a Miami television station in 1967. She was also the first woman to serve as a television football sideline reporter. Chastain reported from the sidelines and also worked as a color analyst for CBS Sports during NFL broadcasts including the in 1975.

Lesley Visser has had a long storied career in sports media. She was the first female television sideline reporter to work a Super Bowl and in 1998 she was the first woman to join the highly coveted broadcast crew. She also remains the only woman to be inducted into the Football Hall of Fame. Her career began in 1974, when she worked as a sports writer for the Boston. She was the first newspaper beat writer to cover an NFL team. Both Chastain and Visser are widely and historically revered as being pioneers in the sports media 4 profession, particularly as groundbreaking female reporters in the National

Football League. Their narratives have historical significance, thus it is vital to document and examine their experiences through an academic lens.

Narrative and Career Trajectory Delineations

We utilize narratives in our everyday conversations. Storytelling is a social activity that is created in our interactions with others (Tracy & Robles 2013).

Narratives come in boundless forms; they can be spoken or written about the past, present or future, real or imagined, long or short, with or without detail and for any purpose. What typically separates a narrative from an everyday story is generally the occurrence of relating an account to a particular time, when the teller of the narrative experienced an event or problem. The event discussed is then deemed “newsworthy – out of the ordinary and/or interesting in some way”

(Tracy & Robles, p. 222). Additionally, an assessment of the event is expressed

(Tracy & Robles).

Gerald Prince (2001) referred to William Labov’s analysis of oral narratives of personal experience and tellability by writing, “compared not only pointed and pointless stories, but more specifically, narratives that ‘are complete in the sense that they have a beginning, a middle, and an end’ and ‘more fully developed types’ that include their own evaluation and indicate their point: whey they are told and

‘what the narrator is getting at’” (p. 28). A career trajectory begins at the point of entry into a particular field. The term trajectory has several definitions, however, for the purposes of this discussion it will be considered as the path or process of development.

5

Women and Language

Feminist researchers have constructed language as an important topic early in their scholarship (Lakoff 1975; Miller & Swift 1977; McNay 1999). “Women’s speech generally has been devalued for a very long time” (Minister 1991). Tracy &

Robles referred to studies showing that in women’s stories, “often people have names and do a lot of talking.” While men’s stories “tend to be more details about place, time and objects; people more frequently are nameless and silent” (p. 242).

Chanfrault-Duchet offered this assessment from the perspective of feminist methodology:

“In women’s life stories, the social self does not merely occupy a place within the

social order; rather its place is over determined by the status of women. This

means that, women’s life stories unlike men’s, deal not only with the relation

between the self, and the social sphere, but also, and above all, with woman’s

condition and with the collective representations of woman as they have been

shaped by the society with which the woman being interviewed must deal” (p.

78).

Therefore, women’s narrative within a masculine hegemonic field will have been molded by masculine influences. When considering women in media, Byerly

& Ross (2006) point out “the consequences for women who choose to work in the male-ordered domain, which is the newsroom, are to develop strategies that involve either beating the boys at their own game or else developing alternative ways of practicing journalism” (p. 79).

Predictably, women and men’s narrative discourse vis-a’-vis are as divergent as gender differences would indicate. In this premise, Abrams (2010)

6 pointed out Mary Gergen’s analysis of a series of autobiographies written by well- known men and women.

“She concluded that the ‘manstories’ adopt linear, progressive narratives leading to goal achievement, they are individualist and in Gergen’s words, ‘seem to celebrate the song of self’. By contrast, even amongst her sample of self-motivated and very successful women she found their ‘womanstories’ deviated from the unilinear narrative. Often in order to focus on aspects of personal life, they stressed their emotional interdependence and indeed crafted more complex and fuller stories than their male counterparts“ (p. 44).

Chanfrault-Duchet (1991) also affirmed the importance of women’s narratives when addressing narrative structures, social models, and symbolic representation in the life story:

“Women’s words collected by the way of the life story are neither mere gossip nor words that can be treated as a set of information providing direct access to women’s mentality. Women’s words are viewed as imbedded in a narrative – that is, in a specific scheme that makes sense”.

Not only do women’s narratives differ from men’s and while also being influenced by them, there are additional dynamics involved when women speak to women. Consequently, there are distinct advantages to being a woman, as I am, interviewing a woman. As Minister (1991) acknowledged in her essay, “A

Feminist Frame for the Oral History Interview”:

“Women talking with women use a unique dialectical choice of words

coordinated with a unique non-verbal system for the purpose of exploring and

naming issues unique to women. Women engage in the process of self and

gender construction, and they do so protected and sustained within their own

socio communication system” (p. 34).

7 Furthermore, Abrams (2010) echoed this sentiment, utilizing feminist history to shape her argument.

“Socialist feminist historian Sheila Rowbotham argues that women can overcome

their silencing by the dominant male individualist narrative mode and come to

express their sense of self by recognizing that women as a group have a common

historical experience. On the foundation, women as a group and as individuals can

develop alternative ways of seeing themselves. In Woman’s Consciousness, Man’s

World, she writes that in order for an oppressed group to ‘discover its own

identity as distinct from that of the oppressor, it has to become visible to itself.’

The result, argues Rowbotham, is a shared and unique identity” (p. 44).

This “shared and unique identity” was, in fact, formed between the researcher and the researched during the research process, which will be discussed shortly.

Methods and Research Questions

This qualitative paper draws upon in-person, in-depth interviews with two women, Jane Chastain and Lesley Visser. These two women were chosen through purposeful sampling in respect to their historical impact on the field of sports media. When employing grounded theory it is essential to choose participates who are experts in the experience or phenomena being investigated (Bryant & Charmaz 2010). The formal interview sessions with each subject lasted between 90 minutes and two hours, though additional time was spent speaking before and after the formal interview session as well as correspondence back and forth in the process of setting up the interviews.

8 Grounded theory was utilized for coding these interviews in order to establish what the data was disclosing and in turn allowed development of a theoretical construct to address the research queries. The interviews moved from general to specific as better data quality is achieved through more targeted interview content (Bryant & Charmaz). “The strength of grounded theory coding derives from a concentrated, active involvement in the process”

(Charmaz 2006, p. 59). Auerbach & Silverstein (2003) equate the steps for coding as a “staircase, moving from a lower to higher level of understanding.

The central idea of coding is to move from raw text to research concerns in small steps, each step building on the previous one” (p. 35). Therefore, the entire interview transcripts or raw text were evaluated. Subsequently, the text, which was relevant to the research questions, was extracted for further analysis. Next, repeating ideas and themes were identified. “A theme is an implicit topic that organizes a group of repeating ideas” (Auerback &

Silverstein, p. 37). Theoretical constructs and narratives were then produced into more abstract concepts consistent with the framework in order to offer analytical insights.

Narration and explanation of their personal experiences are powerful discursive forces with historiographical significance. Through narration, voices are “interpreted in a site of inquiry and bring to mind history’s discursive production” (Hunter 2012, p. 88). This analysis is both a “study of the past as lived experience, and as socially constituted narrative representation and interpretation” (Hunter, p. 90). The historical context of this examination means that we “participate in history both as actors and as narrators” (Trouillot 1995,

9 p. 2). A “co-constituted account”, or researcher-researched relationship is a fundamental nexus within an interpretive hermeneutic study.

Prior to the interviews, a noteworthy level of camaraderie was attained with each subject through a mutual expertise with the topic, given that I worked as a sportscaster for 20 years prior to entering academia. Having spent two decades in this masculine hegemonic profession, I shared a sports journalist identity with the subjects. Therefore, my proficiency in “sports talk” enabled me to knowingly delve into more profound aspects of their experience and be entrusted with details that they may not have shared with an ingenuous interviewer. In her book, Coding in Grounded Theory Practice, Charmaz (2006) spoke to the importance of obtaining an awareness of the researched topic:

“Achieving intimate familiarity with the studied phenomena is a prerequisite. Such familiarity not only includes an in-depth knowledge of people who contend with the phenomena, but also a level of understanding that pierces their experience. This level moves you beyond taking the same things for granted that respondents assume” (p. 68).

There are extremely limited numbers of women who can be considered pioneers in sports media. Therefore, the data collected from the narratives of just two of these women can offer important exploratory groundwork for examining narratives of any women who have paved the way for future opportunities for women in masculine hegemonic vocations. When attempting to analyze emerging data within the participant’s lengthy narratives, I chose to focus on the following areas for my research question and sub-question.

Research Question: How do female pioneers in sports media narrate their career trajectories?

10 Sub-Question: How do they establish the relationship between gender and expertise in sports?

Analysis of the Narratives

Following a thorough examination of the complete transcript of both subjects, the relevant text, pertinent to the research question and sub-question, was extracted from the raw text. The remaining text was analyzed for themes and repeating ideas. These themes emerged when evaluating both of the subject’s career trajectory narratives. The first theme involved receiving permission, the second revolved around infiltrating a glass ceiling and the third entailed their encounters with patriarchy.

Jane Chastain and Lesley Visser’s childhood narratives include a love of sports at an early age and its conflict with societal norms. Both make references to their mothers as being their primary advocates for challenging these norms by inspiring them to believe that all things are possible.

Career Trajectory Analysis of Narrative

Jane Chastain – Excerpt 1.0: (Childhood Narrative)

“My dad loved sports. And I’m not sure if her really knew how to interact with a girl, and so I found that the quickest way to get his attention was to sit and watch baseball or football with him, that kind of thing… My mother was the greatest. In fact my Dad was very conservative. And uh, his whole thing was um, he wanted me to do something safe. Uh, he wanted me to be a schoolteacher because that was a respected profession for women. And he felt that would give me security and that would be the way to go. And my mother was the kind of person that you can do anything you want to do if you want to do it bad enough… Well, it was just, I think that I got from my mother and that was “you can do anything you want to do if you want it badly enough”.

Chastain professed a childhood interest in sports due to her father’s lack of ability to “interact with a girl”. She revealed, “so I found out that the quickest way to get his attention was to sit and watch baseball or football with him.” Since her 11 father was “very conservative,” it was her mother who gave her permission to step outside of cultural and societal norms. She mentioned twice in different parts of the complete interview, that her mother’s attitude was “you can do anything you want to do if you want to do it bad enough.”

Lesley Visser – Excerpt 2.0: (Childhood narrative)

“My mother had the legendary change of my life. Where I told, we were living outside of Cincinnati I guess I was 10, and I said, “You know what, I want to be a sports writer” and at that time women were only teachers, nurses or secretaries. And you know I said to her, “I want to be a sportswriter. “ It was in 1963, no maybe a little later, 65, 5 maybe. And I said to her, “I want to be a sports writer” and she said, “Great, sometimes you have to cross when it says don't walk.”

In both Chastain’s and Visser’s childhood narratives, they praise their mother for her support, while acknowledging the patriarchal (father) influence in their life, or lack of, did not foster their career trajectory in sports media. Earlier in

Visser’s transcript she mentioned her parents got divorced when she was a child and that her father “wasn’t around”, therefore, he wasn’t involved in her life. Both subjects also refer to the cultural norm of that era. “Uh, he wanted me to be a schoolteacher because that was a respected profession for women,” said Chastain.

“At that time women were only teachers, nurses, or secretaries,” said Visser. Each woman had identifying moments, when their mothers essentially gave them permission to dream of a career outside of the societal, cultural norms expected of women during that era. For instance, Visser said, “and she said ‘Great, sometimes you have to cross when it says don’t walk’”. The theoretical constructs emerging from these themes are analyzed as being: maternal support, resistance to societal norms, gender role resistance and pivotal moments.

12 Another theme or parallel in their career trajectory narratives is their

diffidence and disbelief when discussing their entrance into sports television

media, due to the fact that female roles models for those positions in sports media

did not exist during the 1960s and 1970s. Thus, they were able to infiltrate a glass

ceiling that women had previously been excluded from.

Chastain - Excerpt 1.2: (Surprise of television career)

“And I think that, um, ( . ) I never envisioned, I never dreamed of even being on a news set because back in those days women weren’t on the news, ( . ) period. I mean even the weather girls hadn’t made the scene at that point when I started trying to break into television. So my goal was to have a kid’s show.”

Visser – Excerpt 2.1: (Surprise of television career)

“Well, I, I, I really wanted to be a writer, a sports writer. I never thought

about t.v. You know, when I grew up it was just kind of, um, you know, Walter Cronkite or Huntley and Brinkley. You didn’t really think about

television ever, EVER! And I, I worked with the great Bud Collins. I think he was the first sportswriter to go to television, and then the Boston Globe had the next two, one was McDonough and then myself.

These excerpts (1.2 and 2.1), both include Chastain and Visser referencing

societal norms. Chastain expressed disbelief that a woman would be able to break

into the television news business, “I never dreamed of even being on a news set

because back in those days women weren’t on the new, period.” She again referred

to societal norms and limited gender roles, “I mean even the weather girls hadn’t

made the scene at that point.” While Visser said, “You know when I grew up it was

just kind of, um, you know, Walter Cronkite or Huntley and Brinkley. You didn’t

really think about television ever, ever.” They also expressed alternate goals other

than being a television sports reporter. Chastain’s goal was to “have a kids show,”

while Visser only envisioned herself as being a “sports writer”. The theoretical 13 constructs emerging from these themes are analyzed as being: realistic career aspirations, perceived gender barriers and unexpected opportunities.

Patriarchal influences played significant roles in the sports media careers of both Chastain and Visser. The support from their supervisors, or lack of, created dichotomies in their career trajectories. Chastain career was cut short just as she reached national recognition, whereas Visser had an extremely successful 40 plus year career in sports media. The narratives in Excerpts 1.3 and 1.4 speak of the end of Chastain’s sports media career.

Chastain – Excerpt 1.3: (Narrative of departure from CBS Sports)

“And it must of happened the day or two before or after I signed my contract with CBS. But, um, after I told them I was pregnant, ah, from that day forward, I’m not saying it had anything to do with it, but from that day forward I never got another good assignment, I was relegated to the back burner, kind of doing the, the lesser, uh, sports or the one’s that were least popular and they hired .”

Chastain- Excerpt 1.4: (Narrative of being fired from KABC job:)

“But unbeknownst to me the news director that hired me was on his way out the door, he was being promoted up the chain at the network level. And the new news director, who was coming in, was already slated to come in a month later, uh really resented the fact that I was hired by him to do sports, because he had been a sportscaster. He was actually a frustrated sportscaster. He never really made it as a sportscaster, he made it as a, um, a newscaster and did a fine job. But I, I think most newscasters wouldn't have even care about who was hired to do sports. But I think his resentment, uh, made it difficult for me, he made it difficult for me that year. And, um, my mom developed lung cancer and I, um, went to my boss, the news director, and he said "oh fine, go back and be with her.” And lung cancer is a very bad, you know, form of cancer and, uh, she died a month later, but I found out that the day after my mother died that I no longer had a job. And um, that really, um, was I guess, my mom had been my inspiration, you know, she had been that person that always said, “Go for it”. And I think I went into a very black period for a while, a very dark period where I kind of had to reassess everything at that point. And it took me a while to recover that that, losing my mom and my job on the same day.”

14 While she was hesitant to outright declare gender discrimination,

Chastain’s narrative insinuated that becoming a mother had a major impact on her career at CBS Sports. “But, um, after I told them I was pregnant, ah, from that day forward, I’m not saying it had anything to do with it, but from that day forward I never got a good assignment, I was relegated to the back burner, kind of doing the, the lesser, uh, sports or the one’s that were least popular and they hired Phyllis

George.” Likewise, in her next position at KABC-TV in , she has the perception that her new boss (who wasn’t involved in hiring her), was a

“frustrated sportscaster” and “his resentment” made it “difficult” for her.

Patriarchal callous indifference to her role as a daughter caring for her terminally ill mother led to her being fired “the day after her mother died”. After these two setbacks in her sports media career from patriarchal forces, she chose to leave the profession.

Just as Chastain reached a measure of national success in television sports media, her career was cut short after callous treatment from her male bosses, due to her roles as a mother and daughter. The theme revealed is that of patriarchal influences. The theoretical constructs arising from these themes are: gender discrimination as well as lack of patriarchal empathy and support.

The career trajectories for Chastain and Visser are nearly polar opposites.

On the other end of the spectrum, Visser’s male superior championed her efforts.

Ted Shaker, an executive at CBS Sports, gave Visser an opportunity that had never been afforded a female before or since that time in 1992, when she was given the chance to conduct the Super Bowl trophy presentation. Her career also included becoming the first and only woman to be inducted into the Pro Football Hall of

Fame. In Excerpt 2.3, she speaks of a career defining, unforeseen opportunity. 15 Visser – Excerpt 2.3: (Career narrative regarding Super Bowl role)

“And we’re all CBS and we’re doing the Super Bowl. And I remember in the production meeting, the great Ted Shaker, who had hired me at CBS said, “And, uh, Lesley will be presenting the Lombardi Trophy” and you can’t believe it there’s , Pat O’Brien, everybody, even me, and I said, “What? Are you kidding? Are you kidding?” Even me, even me, everyone was (She demonstrates shocked look on her face). I’m just sitting in the production meeting minding my own and Ted Shaker announced that and I swear everybody in the meeting went, as I (her mouth drops open with shocked expression). You’ve got to be joking. It was a profound, uh, very, very, you know, the Super Bowl goes to 130 million people around the world. He thought I could handle it and I did.”

Visser professed that one of the biggest highlights of her career was handling the Super Bowl trophy presentation. Visser expressed repetitive profound disbelief and gratitude to be given the opportunity. Hers and everyone else’s disbelief in the room presented an observation of non-verbal resistance to the shift towards gender equal opportunities. “There’s Brent Musburger, Pat

O’Brien, everyone and even me, and I said, ‘what? Are you kidding? Are you kidding?’ Even me, even me, everyone was (shocked look on her face),” she said.

Her shock is indicative of women not expecting equal opportunities within a male dominated profession. She concluded her narrative by justifying her boss’s decision. “He thought I could handle it and I did.” The fact that a woman hasn’t presented the Lombardi Trophy since that Super Bowl in 1992 only reinforced the notion that women don’t deserve the recognition of a high-profile assignment.

Visser is complicit and astonished at a woman being offered this prestigious role.

Therefore, the theoretical constructs derived from this excerpt are: complacency, implicit socialization and gender role acceptance.

When viewed under a feminist lens, this narrative and theoretical construct have complex implications. A collective division of labor by sex has been recorded

16 throughout human history “with men on top and women on the bottom”

(Hartmann 1976, p. 137). While capitalism promotes the sexual division of labor, long before capitalism materialized a patriarchal system allowed women and children’s labor to be controlled by men (Hartmann). The literal, traditional definition of patriarchy is “rule of the father” (Ortner 2014, p. 534). Ortner (2014) refers to patriarchy as a “system of social power, cultural categories and personal identities,” and a “set of relations between relations” (p. 534-535). She organized three sorts of possible interactions within a patriarchal structure; between patriarchal figure and other men, the heterosexual relationships among men themselves and the relationships between men and women, with women being

“either excluded from the group, or included on condition of being subordinated and controlled” (p. 535). It could be argued that men’s acceptance or inclusion of women in sports media can be on this condition of (women) being “subordinated and controlled”.

As a former sports journalist, I can attest to the patriarchal system of power in sports media and the need as a woman to perform sports expertise in order to gain patriarchal acceptance from not only colleagues and superiors, but also television viewers who voice their opinions. Back in the 1970s, viewer’s attitudes were expressed through telephone calls and mail, currently it is done via Twitter,

Facebook and website comments.

When women enter a male dominated profession, they must often perform gender roles in order to authenticate themselves as being capable and proficient in their field. In the 1970s and 1980s sports was an intensely masculine realm. Not surprising, Visser and Chastain both performed sports expertise within their interviews to establish with the interviewer a certain level of sports knowledge 17 and acceptance from their male peers. When asked about her first sports job,

Chastain conveyed sports expertise without being specifically prompted to that regard (see Excerpt 1.4). In Excerpt 1.5, Chastain is responding to a general inquiry about her time at CBS Sports. And in Excerpt 1.6, Chastain is answering a question about whether she was ever put in an embarrassing situation.

Narratives of Performance of Sports Expertise

Chastain - Excerpt 1.4: (When asked about first sports job)

“ In the beginning he (sports director) did the predictions for me. And

one day he, he threw them at me and said, “well, you’re getting so smart, here you do them.” So he expected I would say “oh no,” but I took them and I checked them all off. And he said, “well I see a few that I would change, but, ah, just for the heck of it we’ll let it go this week. I had them all right. He never helped me again.”

Chastain – Excerpt 1.5: (When asked about time at CBS Sports)

“And, uh, I remember one, one particular game, I was in the broadcast booth with, um, Brent Musburger and Pat Summeral, I believe. And I just decided, okay, I’m, I mean, I’m just going to give every statistic I can think of because they wouldn’t let me say anything about the plays that were happening on the field and there really wasn’t anything else for me

to do. I did, I did speak up, I, I, you know, I said quite a bit.

And, um, the way it was reported, it was like, um, in the first 15 minutes

there were like, um, 500 phone calls, And before it was over, complaints, people complaining, and before the game was over there were over 1,000. Well what never got reported was after the people saw me for the first 15 minutes and heard me, the other 500 calls had turned positive. But they didn’t report that.”

Chastain – Excerpt 1.6: (When asked about any embarrassing situations she was put into)

“Um, I remember an interview that I was sent to do with Joe DiMaggio. And it

was in Florida. And he was, uh, when he saw that I was a woman, he thought I

was just coming in disguise to kind of ask him about his time with Marilyn Monroe. I guess he had gotten used to that. And so I start, started the interview. And he gave me short yes and no answers, you know like waiting for the bombshell. And I didn’t know what to do so I kept firing sports questions at him and finally he just relaxed and said, ‘Oh, oh you really do know what you’re talking about don’t you?’ And he gave me a really good interview.” 18 All three of these narratives revolve around themes of patriarchal gender

bias and her performance of sports proficiency. First she was required to prove

her sports knowledge to her male boss at her first sports job by predicting all of

the football scores correctly. Then she is relegated to simply taking about women

in the stands during her stint in CBS Sport’s broadcast booth for an NFL game,

“giving every statistic I can think of.” She believed her performance impressed

male viewers, who called in with “positive” comments once hearing her speak

about the football game after the first 15 minutes of the broadcast. And lastly, she

described winning over sports legend, Joe DiMaggio, with her sports proficiency

by “firing sports questions at him.” She repeatedly narrated her performance of

sports expertise and proficiency to patriarchal figures in order to gain their

approval.

Other the other hand, Visser’s narratives, involving performance of sports,

revolved primarily around her childhood passion for sports as seen in Excerpts 1.6

and 1.7.

Visser – Excerpt 1.6: (When talking about first sports memories)

“But then sort of my life starts with memories of the Red Sox. Ha, ha, huh, ha! So I was, I was blessed to have a passion. A lot of people don’t. A lot of people go into sports either for the fame or for the money, but I

actually had a passion just to watch it and, um, I wanted to report on it.”

Visser – Excerpt 1.7: (When talking about her early interest in sports)

“So I loved, we always had books around, and, uh, sports just came. I had a passionate for it. I really cared how do we move the runner over. It wasn’t that I was trying to get famous.”

Visser repeatedly spoke of her sports media career in terms of her reasons

for wanting to be in the profession. For instance, “I really cared how do we move

19 the runner over. It wasn’t that I was trying to get famous” and “A lot of people go into sports either for the fame or for the money, but I actually had a passion just to watch it and, um, I wanted to report on it.” She is performing sports knowledge by defending her motivation for being a sports journalist as being pure, without desire for money or fame. The themes in these performances of sports expertise narratives emphasized the need to prove themselves to both patriarchal individuals and groups. The theoretical constructs emerging from these narratives are: gender performance, patriarchal acceptance and approval.

Discussion

As a result of the women’s movements victories over the past century, women now have visible and influential roles in countless masculine hegemonic fields. The bold, pioneering women in televised sports media, Jane Chastain and

Lesley Visser have intriguing narratives involving their career trajectories and gender performances of sports expertise. Their life stories entail interactions between the self, gender construction, social sphere and their association within a patriarchal structure. As a former sports broadcaster, my familiarity with the researched topic allowed me an insider’s view of this profession, enabling me to foster a level of trust with the participants. Therefore, I was able to develop a unique, interpretive hermeneutic qualitative analysis. Through grounded theory, the queries probed for this study were: (1) how these female pioneers in sports media narrate their career trajectories and (2) how they established the relationship between gender and expertise in sports. These groundbreaking women set the stage for today’s sports media opportunities for all of the women who followed them in the profession. They offered important narratives when

20 analyzing how gender affected their careers in this masculine hegemonic profession.

By extracting relevant text, analyzing themes and repeating ideas, theoretical constructs were developed from these narratives, allowing for the formation of analytical insights. Parallel and repeated accountings were distinguished between Jane Chastain and Lesley Visser’s acknowledgements of maternal support they received as well as their resistance to gender roles and societal norms. They each shared pivotal, life-changing moments when they were given permission to refrain from accepting what was expected of a woman during the mid-20th century. Each participant’s career trajectories were ultimately determined by their patriarchal encounters within the masculine hegemony of sports media. Even as they defied cultural norms in their groundbreaking roles, there was a level of implicit socialization and complacency from each woman as they balanced their tenuous position of inclusion within a patriarchal system. They were both initially astounded repeatedly to have even been accepted into the profession. Chastain complied with a demotion and eventual dismissal from CBS

Sports once she announced her pregnancy to her male bosses. Also, at KABC-TV she was fired after being a caregiver for her terminally ill mother for one month.

She did not fight the patriarchal system, instead choosing to leave the industry.

Moreover, Visser expressed repetitive shock at being offered a significant role in the 1992 Super Bowl broadcast, thus implying that she did not warrant this opportunity. Implicit socialization and gender role acceptance with her inclusion in the patriarchal structure arguably could be the explanation for her complacency. Finally, each women performed sports expertise. Chastain gave several examples proving her sports knowledge to the patriarchal figures around 21 her; her boss, her interview subjects and the television viewing audience. Visser performed her sports expertise by repeatedly defending her motivation for wanting to be a sports journalist as being absolute, without any aspirations for money or fame.

Women must develop strategies in order to subsist and succeed in patriarchal systems where women’s inclusion has been limited. These strategies can arguably include complacency and gratitude at being accepted, as a result of implicit socialization. Women’s narratives within a masculine hegemonic field undoubtedly are shaped by masculine influences. The career trajectory and sports expertise narratives of the pioneering women in televised sports media are filled with references to their resistance to gender roles and societal norms as well as patriarchal control. To date, no research has been done on the narratives of the female pioneers in televised sports media. A limitation of this report is the low number of participants. However, since there are limited numbers of true pioneers, two is actually a sizable quantity. Additional interviews with other pioneering women in this industry are planned for the near future. Nevertheless, the findings from this study are significant because they can conceivably be applied to other women who have entered and succeeded in masculine hegemonic professions. Future research could contrast and compare women’s involvement in sports media to other male-dominated fields like law, medicine and the military.

Women are demonstrating aptitudes and expertise everyday in every vocation.

Hopefully in the near future gender will not be a central topic of discussion for empirical research on professional proficiency and achievement.

22 References:

Abrams, Lynn (2010). Oral History Theory. New York: Routledge. Ashe-Edmunds S: What is a career trajectory? In: The Houston Chronicle. Houston, TX: The Houston Chronicle. Auerback, Carl F. & Silverstein, Louise B. (2003). Qualitative Data: An Introduction to Coding and Analysis. New York: New York University Press.

Barthes, Roland (1982). ‘Introduction to the structural analysis of narrative’, in S. Sontag (Ed.), Barthes: Selected Writings, Oxford: Fontana, pp. 251-252.

Broom, Alex, Hand, Kelly. & Tovey, Philip. (2009). The role of gender, environment and individual biography in shaping qualitative interview data. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 12, No.1, February 2009, pp. 51-65.

Bryant, Antony and Charmaz, Kathy (2010). Sage Handbook of Grounded Theory. London, Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Byerly, Carolyn & Ross, Karen (2006). Women and Media: A Critical Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Chanfrault-Duchet, Marie-Francoise (1991). Narrative Structures, Social Models, and Symbolic Representation in the Life Story. Gluck, Sherna B. & Patai, Daphne. (1991). Women’s Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History. Routledge: New York and London.

Charmaz, Kathy. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A practical guide. London, Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.

Creedon, Pam (1994). Women, Media and Sport – Challenging Gender Values. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Dangerfield, Whitney (2012). Before and After Title IX: Women in Sports. New York Times, June 16, 2012.

Devault, Marjorie L. (1990). Talking and Listening from Women’s Standpoint: Feminist Strategies for Interviewing and Analysis. Social Problems, Vol. 37, No. 1, February 1990, pp. 96- 116.

Gluck, Sherna B. & Patai, Daphne. (1991). Women’s Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History. Routledge: New York and London.

Hardin, Marie & Whiteside, Erin E. (2009). The Power of “Small Stories:” Narrative and Notions of Gender Equality in Conversations about Sport. Sociology of Sport Journal, 2009, 26, pp. 255-276.

Hartmann, Heidi (1976). Capitalism, Patriarchy, and Job Segregation by Sex, Signs, Vol. 1, No. 3, Spring 1976, pp. 137.169. 23

Lakoff, Robin (1975). Language and Women’s Place. New York: Harper and Row.

McNay, Lois (1999). Gender and narrative identity. Journal of Political Ideologies (1999), 4(3), pp. 315-336.

Miller, Casey & Swift, Kate. Words and Women. Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Doubleday.

Minister, Kristina (1991). A Feminist Frame for the Oral History Interview. Gluck, Sherna B. & Patai, Daphne. (1991). Women’s Words: The Feminist Practice of Oral History. Routledge: New York and London.

Ortner, Sherry B. (2014). Too soon for Post-Feminism: The Ongoing Life of Patriarchy in Neoliberal America. History and Anthropology, Vol. 25, Issue 4, pp. 530-549.

Pini, Barbara (2005). Interviewing Men: Gender and the collection and interpretation of qualitative data. Journal of Sociology, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 201-216.

Prince, Gerald (2001). Revisiting Narratives. Nelson, Brian, et al. Telling Performances: Essays on Gender, Narrative and Performance. Newark: University of Delaware.

Thorne, Barrie & Henley, Nancy (1975). Language and Sex: Difference and Dominance. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House

Tracy, Karen & Robles, Jessica S. (2013). Everyday Talk: Building and Reflecting Identities. Guilford Press.

Williams, Christine. (1989). Gender Differences at Work: Women and Men in Nontraditional Occupations. University of California Press: Berkeley

Williams, Christine & Heikes, Joel. (1993). The Importance of Researcher’s Gender in the In-Depth Interview: Evidence from Two Case Studies of Male Nurses. Gender and Society, Vol. 7, No. 2 (June 1993), pp. 280-291.

24