association-based loyalty
Dec. 2nd, 2003 10:01 pmHe seemed to assume in all seriousness that I would have some loyalty to this team or that I would care. My only connection to it is having graduated from that school more than 20 years ago. I don't know the players or coach, nor do I have any past association with high-school sports.
It's not just my father and high-school sports, of course. It's kind of expected that sports fans will root for the home team -- and that voters will vote for the local candidate, and that people will generally show some pride when someone who shares ethnicity, an alma mater, or the like does something noteworthy.
I don't care about such factors, however. For me, it's all about relevant factors, quality chief among them. Now I might end up knowing more about the similar person/team/company/whatever, and that may lead to favor, but the favor does not derive directly from the connection.
I don't root for the US teams at the Olympics or the Steelers/Pirates here. (Bad example, I know, because I don't follow football or baseball anyway, but if I did, I wouldn't necessarily favor those teams. I would favor the teams that showed the best balance of skill and sportsmanship, whoever they are.) I don't vote for politicians just because they're from my neighborhood/county/state, or women, or Jewish, or Carnegie-Mellon alums, or (speaking theoretically) SCA members or coworkers.
Now there are some areas where having something in common can affect a decision. In an election for city council, the guy who actually lives here and participates in the community has an edge over the guy with a local post-office box who's never seen on the streets. Or, if all other factors are equal (which they rarely are), I'd probably vote for the candidate who shares my religious views, because those views can affect how one governs (or judges, since we elect judges here). But that's not at all the same thing as favoring the secular Jew just because he's named Rosenblum.
I've seen a lot of campaigns that amounted to "vote to put a woman in office" or "vote for the home-town candidate". (And, of course, the "vote party line" appeals.) That sort of thing is actually less likely to get my vote, because they should have been talking about issues instead of appealing to my presumed "nationalism" ("statism"? "townism"?).
Now voting is important and sports are not, but I suspect that a lot of people base loyalties on the same kinds of factors in both. But I just don't feel that connection -- that someone went to the same school or lives in the same town is casually interesting, in a small-talk sort of way, but not really relevant.
(no subject)
Date: 2003-12-03 07:54 am (UTC)Yes, and that's why I said "balance" (with sportsmanship). Bsically, I would care about a team that (1) plays extremely cleanly and (2) is competent before I would care about a team that's good but uses questionable practices.
You have no idea how much my life is better this fall now that the Steelers stink. I can stop involuntarily caring about the whole stupid thing.
Congratulations. :-)
(no subject)
Date: 2003-12-05 09:53 am (UTC)While I agree that sportsmanship is important (there are teams I will always root against, simply because I think their players and/or coaches are assholes), quality actually makes very little difference to me. Indeed,
As has been mentioned before, though, the key thing in sports watching is that they are far more interesting if you're rooting for somebody, and the local team makes a good default. It gives me someone to follow over the season, and generally makes the activity more enjoyable...