Friday, June 4, 2021

The Morning: Massages for men, doubleheaders for women

Gender differences in college sports.

Good morning. With a popular softball tournament underway, we look at the differences between men's and women's college sports.

James Madison celebrating a win over Oklahoma yesterday.Sarah Phipps/The Oklahoman, via Associated Press

Massages vs. doubleheaders

The Women's College World Series, which began yesterday, is one of the most popular events in college sports.

It is an eight-team softball tournament held every year in Oklahoma City, and the games frequently sell out. The television audience on ESPN is substantial, too. In the most recent previous tournament, 1.8 million people watched the final game, substantially more than have watched recent championship games of college soccer, hockey or lacrosse — men's or women's.

The popularity of softball makes it a telling study in the different ways that the N.C.A.A. treats female and male athletes. In terms of fan interest, softball ranks near the top of college sports. It is well behind football and basketball, but ahead of almost every other sport.

Yet the N.C.A.A. treats softball as a second-class sport, many athletes and coaches say.

The stadium that hosts the championship tournament has no showers; players and coaches must instead shower at their hotels. Off days between games are rare, and some teams have to play twice on the same day, increasing injury risk. The N.C.A.A. prefers the condensed schedule to hold down hotel and meal costs, coaches have told Jenni Carlson of The Oklahoman.

The men's version of the College World Series — an eight-team baseball tournament held each year in Omaha — treats the players better. They have off days, as well as a golf outing, a free massage day and a celebratory dinner for coaches, players and dozens of guests, Molly Hensley-Clancy of The Washington Post reported.

The Oklahoma City softball stadium is also too small to hold all the fans who would like to attend, and many games sell out quickly. It has a capacity of about 13,000 (recently expanded from 9,000), compared with 24,000 for the baseball stadium in Omaha. "I think we could easily get 20,000, just like the men," one longtime coach told The Post. "But we won't get that chance."

Similar ratings, different treatment

Gender equality in sports has been the subject of growing debate in recent years, partly because of protests from the U.S. women's soccer team over its treatment. The new attention on college sports was prompted by a video that Sedona Prince, a University of Oregon basketball star, posted on social media in March. In it, she contrasted the sprawling weight room for the men's tournament with a single small rack of weights for the women's tournament.

"If you're aren't upset about this problem, then you are a part of it," she said. (Gillian Brassil has profiled Prince in The Times, focusing on her recovery from a life-threatening leg injury.)

The video received tens of millions of views and led athletes, coaches and parents in other sports to scrutinize other college tournaments, Alan Blinder, a Times sports reporter, told me. "It's an issue that has wide resonance on social media, where student-athletes can make their views and experiences known without as much interference from a university gatekeeper," Alan said. Women's volleyball players, for example, documented that their practice court consisted of a mat atop a cement floor.

Equity in sports can be a complicated topic, because men's sports often draw larger crowds and television audiences. Officials who defend the differential treatment of female and male athletes — as executives at U.S. Soccer have — cite the revenue differences.

But the softball situation shows how incomplete those explanations are. The average television audience for the most recent softball World Series (1.05 million) was similar to that of the most recent college baseball World Series (1.13 million). And yet one sport's players get showers, off days, massages and a festive dinner, while the others get doubleheaders and sweaty bus rides back to a hotel.

Jacquie Joseph, the longtime softball coach at Michigan State, has said that softball players are treated worse than women's basketball players, who are in turn treated worse than men's basketball players. "They're the chosen ones," Joseph said, referring to women's basketball teams, "and they're treated like afterthoughts. What's lower than an afterthought? That's us."

I asked N.C.A.A. officials for a response, and they did not address any of the specific differences between the baseball and softball tournaments. In an emailed statement, Joni Comstock, the senior vice president of championships, said the N.C.A.A. was looking forward to "another exciting championship series."

In yesterday's opening game, James Madison — appearing in its first World Series — upset top-seeded Oklahoma, 4-3. Today, James Madison plays Oklahoma State, and Alabama plays U.C.L.A.

For more:

  • The N.C.A.A. forbids women's basketball from using the term "March Madness," The Wall Street Journal has explained. But that may soon change.
  • In the Division One N.C.A.A. lacrosse tournaments, all men's games are televised and staggered so fans can watch every one. Most women's games are available only online, and many overlap. "What a joke," Taylor Cummings, a former University of Maryland player, tweeted.
  • On the latest "Sway" podcast, Cathy Engelbert, the commissioner of the W.N.B.A., says the success of women's tennis should be a model for team sports. "We still have an enormous amount of work to do," Engelbert told Kara Swisher.

Help our journalists uncover the facts.

Your support makes a difference. Subscribe today with a special offer.

SUBSCRIBE

THE LATEST NEWS

The Virus
A mobile vaccination site in Kolkata, India, yesterday.Dibyangshu Sarkar/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
Politics
Other Big Stories
Opinions

Movies and television have too often left out stories about the history of Black people, Tom Hanks writes. "That includes projects of mine."

Michelle Goldberg laments senators' pursuit of "the false idol of bipartisanship."

Scientific breakthroughs could soon start slowing the aging process, David Brooks argues.

Morning Reads

Fine art: The Michelangelos need cleaning. Send in the bugs.

Second chance: Covid forced a surgeon to face death — as a patient.

Modern Love: Wrestling with the tendency to classify books and people.

Lives Lived: F. Lee Bailey was the stuff of courtroom legend: an audacious defender of O.J. Simpson, Patty Hearst and others, who produced legal entertainment long before Court TV. He died at 87.

ARTS AND IDEAS

A key to van Gogh's last days

You probably haven't heard of the 19th-century painter Edmund Walpole Brooke. But he is a part of art history — not for his own work, but for his proximity to the Dutch painter Vincent van Gogh. Brooke was friendly with van Gogh in the weeks before his suicide in 1890. And so for historians, he may offer insight into van Gogh's final days, for which there is little documentation aside from letters to his family.

"He might have received letters from van Gogh, he might have received drawings or paintings as a gift — they might have exchanged works," Tsukasa Kodera, an art historian at Osaka University, told The Times.

Kodera has spent several years researching Brooke, and uncovered evidence that his work was exhibited in Britain, France and Japan. But, like other scholars, he had failed to find a painting by Brooke — until perhaps now.

In April, Katherine Matthews spotted a watercolor of a Japanese woman and her child with the signature E.W. Brooke in an antique shop in Maine. She paid $45 for the painting, and after looking up the artist's name online, reached out to Kodera. The Brooke painting is not fully authenticated, and there is no other work of his to compare it to, but Kodera is hopeful. "This CAN be a breakthrough," the professor said in an email, "to shed new light on the painter, and on van Gogh's last months." — Sanam Yar, a Morning writer

PLAY, WATCH, EAT

What to Cook

Make tofu makhani, a vegetarian riff on butter chicken.

What to Listen to

Five classical albums to hear right now.

What to Watch

With a lead role in the upcoming film version of "In the Heights," Anthony Ramos finds stardom on his own terms.

What to Read

Tom Lin makes his debut with "The Thousand Crimes of Ming Tsu," a surreal Western that has drawn comparisons to Cormac McCarthy and "True Grit."

Take the News Quiz

This week's News Quiz is here. See how you do compared with other Times readers.

Now Time to Play

The pangram from yesterday's Spelling Bee was telekinetic. Here is today's puzzle — or you can play online.

Here's today's Mini Crossword, and a clue: Martini garnish (five letters).

If you're in the mood to play more, find all our games here.

Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you Monday. — David

P.S. A hidden haiku from a Times interview with Stephen King: "They say the minute / you show the monster, you take / away its power."

There's no new episode of "The Daily." Instead, listen to Episode 2 of "Day X," about far-right extremism in Germany. On "The Ezra Klein Show," what A.I. teaches us about being human.

Claire Moses, Ian Prasad Philbrick, Tom Wright-Piersanti and Sanam Yar contributed to The Morning. You can reach the team at themorning@nytimes.com.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

The Morning Briefing newsletter is now The Morning newsletter. You received this email because you signed up for the newsletter from The New York Times, or as part of your New York Times account.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

Thursday, June 3, 2021

The Morning: The Trump explanation of Israeli politics

Why did the right turn on Netanyahu?

Good morning. Why the Israeli right and left are teaming up to unseat Benjamin Netanyahu.

From left, Yair Lapid, Naftali Bennett and Mansour Abbas signing a coalition agreement.United Arab List Raam, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Strange political bedfellows

On ideological grounds, the Israeli coalition that's on the verge of ending Benjamin Netanyahu's long tenure as prime minister does not make a lot of sense.

It includes eight parties, drawn from the hard right, the left and the center — and one Arab party. A more intuitive governing coalition would have comprised only of parties on the right, which together hold a slim majority of Israel's Parliament.

The largest of the conservative parties, by far, is Likud, which Netanyahu leads. As the prime minister for the past 12 years, he has accomplished much of what the Israeli right has long wanted. He has supported Jewish settlements in heavily Palestinian areas, stepped back from the peace process and reduced the chances of a two-state solution.

Yet many of his allies, led by Naftali Bennett, who once worked as Netanyahu's chief of staff, are dumping him to work with a coalition that includes social democrats and greens (and an Islamic party). It would be akin to Mitch McConnell abandoning Donald Trump to work with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Chuck Schumer — and Ocasio-Cortez and Schumer saying yes.

What is going on? Today's newsletter sets out to answer that question, with help from our Times colleagues in Israel.

Like Mitch and A.O.C.

The McConnell-Trump analogy turns out to be quite useful for understanding Israeli politics.

Netanyahu — like Trump, his ally in global affairs — is the subject of serious allegations of abuse of government. Prosecutors indicted Netanyahu on corruption charges in 2019, and the trial has been delayed partly because of Covid-19 restrictions. The indictment accuses him of altering policies to benefit businessmen, in exchange for a combination of favorable media coverage and nearly $300,000 in gifts. He has denied the charges and called them an attempt by unelected bureaucrats to force him from office.

His attempts to fend off the charges and remain in power have left many Israelis worried about a collapse in judicial independence and the rule of law, much as Democrats were anxious about Trump's norm-breaking, as David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy explained to me. But there is also a big difference: While Republicans have overwhelmingly stood by Trump, a meaningful number of Netanyahu's ideological allies have chosen to break with him.

Yifat Shasha-Biton, whose conservative New Hope party is in the coalition that is set to take power, recently said that Netanyahu told "lies without blinking" and was "setting Israel on the path to one-man rule." Isabel Kershner, a Times correspondent who has been covering Israel since 1990, said many right-wing politicians see Netanyahu "as no longer fit to rule."

Another factor is that many on the political right feel more secure about Israel's approach to Palestinian issues than in the past. They no longer fear that major compromises to achieve a two-state solution are imminent. "They can afford to step back," Makovsky said.

In that way, Netanyahu has helped make his own demise possible.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday.Pool photo by Ronen Zvulun

Will Netanyahu return?

The parliamentary math means that the right-wing parties have to make the hard choice between sticking with Netanyahu and finding partners from the center and the left. There is no conservative majority without Netanyahu's Likud party — and there are large ideological differences between the right and the center-left, especially on Palestinian issues.

Those differences help explain why it took so long to arrive at last night's outcome. Israel has held four elections since 2019, with the first three ending in failed attempts to form a lasting government.

"The political crisis in Israel is unprecedented on a global level," Bennett said in a speech on Sunday. "We could end up with fifth, sixth, even 10th elections, dismantling the walls of the country, brick by brick, until our house falls in on us. Or we can stop the madness and take responsibility."

Over the last few days, factions from the right, center and left decided that they wanted to be done with Netanyahu. They agreed to a power-sharing agreement in which Bennett and his nationalist Yamina party would hold the prime minister's position for the first half of the four-year term, to be followed by Yair Lapid, of the centrist Yesh Atid party, who would hold it for the second half.

To keep the coalition together, they have vowed to avoid new policies on Israeli-Palestinian issues at the beginning and to focus on areas where compromise seems more plausible, like education and infrastructure. "The roads are snarled in traffic, the intensive-care units were overwhelmed even before the pandemic, the schools are among the developed world's worst," David Halbfinger, a former Times Jerusalem bureau chief, says.

Personal ambition also plays a role. Bennett and Lapid each get the chance to become prime minister, even though their parties won only seven and 17 seats, respectively, in the 120-seat Parliament, known as the Knesset.

Still, it is unclear how long the power-sharing agreement will last. The Knesset must still approve it, and Netanyahu is hoping to derail it by persuading some legislators to defect. Even if he fails, he has signaled his intention to remain active in politics and potentially reclaim his job one day.

"A coalition so ideologically diverse, and united by little aside from a desire to send Netanyahu into retirement, would seem doomed to collapse once that mission had succeeded," David Halbfinger added. For now, though, it is on the cusp of an unusual victory.

For more:

Help our journalists uncover the facts.

Your support makes a difference. Subscribe today with a special offer.

SUBSCRIBE

THE LATEST NEWS

The Virus
Canvassing to register people for the vaccine in Cleveland.Dustin Franz for The New York Times
Politics
Other Big Stories
Opinions
Morning Reads

Lunch money: Your Hometown Deli sells $8 hoagies in rural New Jersey. How can it be worth $113 million?

Woebot: When your therapist is a bot, you can reach it at 2 a.m. Can it really understand you?

Scary luxury: Swimming in a see-through pool, 10 stories up. It's possible (for some).

A Times classic: Do boys or girls test better in math where you live?

Lives Lived: The Hollywood producer Jerome Hellman made only seven films, but he had a golden touch: His movies, which include "Midnight Cowboy," won six Academy Awards. He died at 92.

ARTS AND IDEAS

John Lennon and Yoko Ono. Lennon's "Imagine" was released in 1971.AppleTV+

A record geek's eternal debate

Was 1971 the year music peaked creatively? That's the argument made by a new documentary on Apple TV+, appropriately titled "1971: The Year That Music Changed Everything."

Debates about which time periods were the most influential for music are certainly subjective — people have made similar claims for the '60s, '80s and '90s. But 1971 has a strong case. A sampling: Marvin Gaye's "What's Going On"; the Rolling Stones's "Exile on Main St."; Aretha Franklin's "Aretha Live at Fillmore West"; John Lennon's "Imagine"; Joni Mitchell's "Blue"; and Sly and the Family Stone's "There's a Riot Going On."

"There was something special going on in that moment with the end of the Beatles and the beginning of other artists, who then create what we can now see was the music of the future," Asif Kapadia, the series' director, said.

"These were times of social upheaval, not just great music. But they were emboldened by the music, by the empowerment of women and African Americans and gender-bending warriors," Chris Vognar writes in a review of the show. "It was absolutely an exit point from the '60s into a hectic new era, hard to define but rich in conflict and possibility."

PLAY, WATCH, EAT

What to Cook
The Superteam

The Times Magazine profiled Kevin Durant and (possibly) the greatest basketball team of all time.

What to Watch

These 26 summer TV shows, no masks required.

Green Thumb

Get into rain gardens, which are beautiful and effective at managing storm water.

Now Time to Play

The pangrams from yesterday's Spelling Bee were bogeying and obeying. Here is today's puzzle — or you can play online.

Here's today's Mini Crossword, and a clue: Tiny bit of food (five letters).

If you're in the mood to play more, find all our games here.

Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow. — David

P.S. We're looking for a writer to join the team that produces this newsletter — somebody with excellent reporting and writing skills and a collaborative spirit.

"The Daily" is about Texas' Legislature. On the Modern Love podcast, a global romance scam. "Sway" features the W.N.B.A.'s Cathy Engelbert.

Claire Moses, Ian Prasad Philbrick, Tom Wright-Piersanti and Sanam Yar contributed to The Morning. You can reach the team at themorning@nytimes.com.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

The Morning Briefing newsletter is now The Morning newsletter. You received this email because you signed up for the newsletter from The New York Times, or as part of your New York Times account.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018