Differences between women and men
This passage offers an interesting perspective on gender relations. Dorrance remembers that he did his best to be a good feminist in his early years as coach, treating his female players just like he did his male players, but the strategy did not work. Soon, Dorrance recalls, he realized that men and women are in fact very different. By altering his approach, and treating each of his players sensitively, he was able to cultivate both team chemistry and the "fury" necessary to win.
Citing this Excerpt
Oral History Interview with Anson Dorrance, June 11, 1991. Interview L-0054. Southern Oral History Program Collection (#4007) in the Southern Oral History Program Collection, Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Full Text of the Excerpt
- MARY JO FESTLE:
-
That's interesting. Was this the first time you'd
coached females?
- ANSON DORRANCE:
-
Yes. And it was an absolute nightmare. I think the first couple of years
I was coaching the women's team, it wasn't just a
question of the new players coming in displacing the old ones. It caused
our problems. Or that these girls were very headstrong. I think I was
part of the problem as well, because I was coaching under the early
eighties assumption that women wanted to be treated like men and I
followed all the dictates of the feminist literature and it was an
absolute disaster. I guess in theory, at least, the avant garde theory
of feminism is men and women are the same and they should be treated the
same. But I've learned since that men and women are
completely different and should be treated completely differently.
I'm certainly in favor of equality, but to stand up and say,
"We're different. We should be treated the same as a
result," is absurd. And the nice thing about the athletic arena
is I don't have to justify this with any sort of genetic
review of you know, the brains of men and women or the social review of
you know, how environment dictates behavior. My arena is winning and
losing and I learned how to win with women and it wasn't by
treating them as men. It was by treating them
differently, by being a lot more sensitive to what you say, because they
will personalize everything by developing a personal rapport with each
player because that's what they were interested in in a
coaching relationship. By, I guess, drawing on a very positive
collective chemistry that women can have if we can get them not to
personalize the competition that's occurring which is
something we all bring into athletics. In fact, it's what I
think we all dread about athletics. They've never been, I
think, either trained or exposed to the fact that competing with someone
is okay; that it shouldn't be taken personally. And to beat
the absolute garbage out of someone at practice is completely
acceptable. It shouldn't be taken personally and you know, we
shouldn't have emotional scars as a result. I think teaching
that it's okay to compete and yet still remain friends was
one of the revolutionary aspects of coaching. And as a result,
we've always had a tremendous collective team chemistry. And
the philosophy that we have is if we have a game on Saturday, we spend
Monday through Thursday just beating the crap out of each other and then
on Friday, using that to play for each other. So, I guess we develop our
competitive edge against each other by really trying to beat each other
and develop our collective chemistry and fury by playing for each other
on the last day before the game begins. So we go in there with a double
edged sword. One is a tremendous cohesion to play for each other. By the
same token, forged in a very competitive arena where it's
okay to cut your roommate's heart out and play with that sort
of fury. And I think we've basically
figured out a system of trying to get the best of both worlds.