latest history news. c-span, where history unfolds ailey. 79 -- 1979, c-span was created as a public service. it is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. >> terumi rafferty-osaki is an adjunct professor at american university in washington. his areas of focus include 20th century u.s. history, in today's class, he talks about the integration of baseball by african-americans, women, and asians. this class is an hour and 45 minutes. ♪ take me out to the ballgame take me out to the crowd buy me some peanuts and crackerjacks i don't care if i ever get back

'cause it's root, root, root for the home team if they don't win it's a shame for it's one, two, three strikes you're out ballgamed ♪ mr. rafferty-osaki: good how is everyone? >> good. >> good. >> we have talked about a lot of things. we have talked about religion, we have talked about gender, we started going into sports. it is no lie, my favorite happens to be baseball. that is probably why i signed this deal. but we are talking about social forces. and baseball happens to be one of the greatest social forces, in my opinion, in american society. the institution of baseball, the

game, what it represents -- for instance, when people see the number 42, what did they think? what do they feel? what do they believe? why was it retired throughout baseball in 1997? no man will wear this number again. what did it mean for jackie robinson, for blacks across the the 1955 world series? this was against the great battery, to future hall of famers. he stole home. to put this in perspective, during the 2000 major-league a base. only 18 times was it home plate. did blacks make an impact in the mlb? theyen 1950 and 1970,

integrated faster won more. you tell me. i have here an image. it is martin luther king. we have spoken about him as being a great civil rights proponent. and everything that he did. the three gentlemen on the bottom were his inspirations. you have a catcher, a pitcher, and jackie robinson. martin luther king says john newcombe, you will never know what you, jackie, and roy did to make it possible for me to do my job. this is great irony in baseball. sport, where generations of fanatics continuously argue about who was the best player

and at what position and how do we compare today's steroid induced players with those from years past, there are a few ways to quantify cultural and social importance to the united states. walt whitman said, i see great things in baseball. it is our game. it is america's game. jackie robinson said, a life is not important except for the impact it has on other lives. al gallagher said there are , three things in my life which i really love, god, my family, and baseball. the only problem, once baseball season starts, i changed the think about this. when world war ii began, the commissioner asked fdr if you -- if he wanted to suspend the baseball season for the duration -- and this was for the duration fdr responded, i honestly feel

it would be better for the country to keep baseball going. there would be fewer people unemployed and everyone would work longer hours. and harder than ever before. that means they ought to have a chance for recreation, and for them taking their minds of their work even more than before. baseball was such a sense of escapism, and it brought people together. it is truly as george wells stated, baseball is only a game, true, and the grand canyon is a hole in arizona. not all holes or games are created equal. the game can evoke such a series for example, the brooklyn dodgers and their owner, walter o'malley, decided it was time to leave. and so they left for los angeles, and it broke the hearts

there are still people to this day who remember walter o'malley, who agreed that october 1957 meeting between the teammates who discussed the article called the 10 worst human beings who ever lived. they agreed -- each writing the three worst down on a napkin, and each man had the same three names. one, adolf hitler. two, joseph stalin. three, walter o'malley. this is the power of baseball. this is what i believe is the social force. baseball, much like american back in the 19th century. we do remember jackie robinson for what he did and the legacy he left the hind, the fact he -- but he left behind,

major-league in the modern era. baseball had the chance to integrate in the 19th century. yes, there was a gentleman's agreement made by the national association of baseball players as early as 1867. but two men in particular broke the color bar. first, we have bud fowler. who played for a team in lynn, massachusetts. we will talk a lot about massachusetts and its conflict with race a lot. he played as a member of the international league, and as a member of the new england association. his career was short-lived. he only pitched three games and one game with new england, but the door had been opened. fleetwood walker, and he became an accidental pioneer. he played for the toledo blue

stockings, and this team was not a member of what we would in 1884, toledo's team was elevated to major-league status as part of the american association, the predecessor of the american league. walker, it is important to understand, was the son of the runaway slave. he grew up in mount pleasant, ohio. a town that serves as a station for the underground railroad. he attended oberlin college, a progressive and integrated institution since 1834. he himself grew up in an integrated society. and when walker played, he did so with love and passion for the game. he played in 42 games. he played at the dangerous position of catcher, which at that point, there were no he hit .263, but by year's end,

he was forced to leave the team. this was the continuous trend for blacks trying to play on these integrated teams. a big problem and a big reason was because of probably the greatest moneymaker and advertiser for the game of baseball, cap hanson. he helped draw the color line in baseball that existed from 1887 to 1947. before a game against newark, he reportedly said get that "n" off the field. he was clearly a racist and one of the most vocal opponents of the inclusion of blacks in the game. but blacks continued to play baseball, and they formed their own teams and later on their own league.

team called the cuban giants. they formed in new york as part of the argyle restaurant. they were waiters. thing is, the giants became a major name. cuban ex-giants, i think you understand. the giants, for some reason, he comes a name associated with african-americans. the reason they chose cuban was to try and hide the fact they were black. they were trying to say, no, we are latinos. but people knew. people knew they were black, and so this was a black team. they would go and play against white pro teams, other black teams. that is what was going on here. the trend continued into the 20th century, especially during

migration when blacks moved to urban centers en masse. 50,000 between -- before 1915. we talked about this in the first wave migration. especially between 1910 and 1930. you have the explosive growth. that is why they became urban centers. centers, blacks in northern, midwestern, and later southern urban areas created black run teams. the negro national league was founded in 1920. they created the eastern colored league in 1923. it is not as though they were trying to help one another. in fact, they hated one another. they were trying to have the best league associated with them, right? and so, for black entrepreneurs,

it became a matter of trying to bring in the most fans possible. we will do whatever it takes to there was a bitter rivalry between those men. their teams met for the negro world series, each one winning once. both of these leagues existed of the great depression. but understand, this was the foundation. and by 1932, you had men like greenlee revitalizing the lake. these two men hated one another. both would raid each other's teams and try to get the best players money would buy. you had some of the best baseball money could buy. gus greenlee put together a team

that featured five hall of famers. this is what we were talking about. charismatic, charming, she is the only woman elected to the national baseball hall of fame. she also organized the new york general manager along with her husband, and took over. she was responsible for putting together the incredible million-dollar infield, featuring ray dandridge and leon day. these are some of the most exceptional players of all-time, and she is chiefly responsible for bringing them there. it is not that she didn't use her charm and sexuality to do

so. it is said when she signed them, she was wearing a bright red dress, and that is how the signing would happen. but understand that the negro leagues were supported for blacks by blacks. owners, but these were men and women who made it possible. what did you gather from the yes, mary? >> i thought they must interesting part of the article was when they were talking about tricky baseball and stealing bases and bunting and how that primarily started in the black baseball leagues, because it is something so ingrained in what

makes baseball interesting. i think it is cool that it started with the negro league. mr. rafferty-osaki: with tricky baseball, we have what is called small ball. this has been associated with the national league, much more so than the american league. >> i also thought that it was the women -- in order to attract crowds to the baseball fields, they had to -- some of the african-american teams adopted crowd baseball where they put on -- evolved into the harlem globetrotters. it is interesting because women also had to do that, how women had to exploit their sexuality

to get people to come to the stands and it worked. it worked for them as well. i think of the clown ethiopian team. i can't remember where they were from, but a lot of the other african-american teams were upset they were doing that. they said, we are baseball players, not clowns. it did work to get people there. mr. rafferty-osaki: and this is true. we have to remember, baseball is supposed to be a form of inner -- form of entertainment as well as sport. it was not just enough for them to play baseball, they had to make it interesting as well. emily? where they talk about doing that. one guy is like, no, i am not doing that. people are against it, and they don't want to keep selling out.

>> i warned you, this one is going to be up. [indiscernible] mr. rafferty-osaki: what did you see in that clip? >> you saw when the well but not doing any entertaining. where all the white folks were booing them. where they had to do something to separate themselves. to make it seem like, we are clowns having a good time, even though they are better baseball players than the white folks, in

order to for -- in order to call me white crowd. they are just these clowns, we will not take them seriously. they had to be -- find a balance between good baseball players and also being clouds so they wouldn't be booed off the field. mr. rafferty-osaki: absolutely. and this creates a problem. what do you think? --i think it is interesting tries to graduate it even more by saying, this is what we black folks do. and then the other character is not wanting to be [indiscernible] there are on completely different sides. i don't know that much about that film, but if most people felt the same way he did. mr. rafferty-osaki: he is buying into it because it is part of

our agency. we know the difference. if these white people are too ignorant to figure that out, then it is their own fault. but yes, we are incredible baseball players. but to support ourselves and make sure we do not get tarred and feathered, they can play a role. emily? >> it doesn't really matter, we know what the truth is when we are playing. we will get more money. and we don't have to worry about that. to him, it is worth it. as the movie progresses, i it is the difference to the -- between the white and the black league, they talk about the negro league because the negro league ended up trying to

shut this team down. mr. rafferty-osaki: yes? >> it is also similar, i keep going back to women in baseball, but it is not enough to just be good athletes. so much of baseball was a class issue. with women in baseball, they had to uphold their femininity and maintain their class. it was a middle-class white baseball league. they had to find this balance between maintaining their and being athletes. it is similar in this case, maintaining their class as a lower class in this time, and trying to balance between that class was by being goofy and everything that they were doing.

upset the white folks very much. mr. rafferty-osaki: we will talk about women in baseball in a few minutes. as for this film, when they are talking about sally, he was the manager and part of the negro league. what he was trying to shut down this team, because this independent organization being formed by players. it is a matter of class as well, because the ownership, they were entrepreneurs and they wanted to make as much money as possible as well. they could only play certain players and a certain amount of money in exchange for their entertainment value. the other side with the owners, they rag on her all the time and say she shouldn't be here. she makes a good point.

she is a great character. it shows how disrespectful people were against her. she puts up with it and does not take their crap, and it is great. mr. rafferty-osaki: there is definitely an element of sexism involved in baseball. it is portrayed in this movie. grief for being a female owner. >> going back to the article, i thought -- something really bad to me, something good in baseball. -- i didn't agree with what they were doing.

really impressed with how he was always trying to prove himself to the white folks. and when they had the -- and let the public know -- [indiscernible] 2/3 of the time, they won those games. mr. rafferty-osaki: from this clip, you saw a barnstorming team. this happened all the time. this happened with organized teams in the legs. they did not play all their league games, because it was more profitable to play against white teams. but sometimes to play against white teams, you had to play the role. and there are those black players who viciously disagreed with the idea of playing a role. but there are those who thought -- and this is the idea of black agency again, remember? we are just playing a role and we understand we can accept that.

back their own heritage and, in a way, they were consciously understanding that they were doing so. and yes, there were situations when there were players against for example, "i found freedom and democracy here. something i never found in the united states. here in mexico, i am a man." he left the new york eagles to play integrated baseball in mexico, not in the united states. equality south of our border. interestingly enough, i like that last statement. "i am a man." so often, we talk about the idea of masculinity, what it means to be a man. he found it outside of the united states. he has made many contributions

to the game, both in the united states, in cuba, as well as and central america, i should say. he was one of the men who went down there. his nickname down there was el diablo. they also make contributions to games in the u.s. in the article, they talk about the kansas city monarchs, and they had the portable lighting system. these were the first night games that were played. we're turning back to bud fowler. back in the 19th century. he played second base as well as pitcher, and he realizes people were sliding into him hard. so he made rudimentary shin guards to protect himself. and they had someone hit one too many times, so he took a coal miner's helmet and wore it at the plate. kind of like a modern day batting helmet?

yeah. inside and outside the game. i ask you again, with the signing of robinson, what does it represent? it was a watershed moment. it defied years of segregation. stated of josh gibson, the legendary catcher who possibly hit over 800 home runs and supposedly the only man to hit a baseball out of yankee stadium, she said gibson was worth $200,000. in 1939, mind you, if he were white. he and so many others never had the opportunity to play in the major leagues. we can sit here and wonder what would've happened if they did. josh gibson is known as the black babe ruth. imagine if he had played. would babe ruth be known as the

white josh gibson? it represented years of playing. and this was brought before, against white teams and /3 of the time. all-star games started up in chicago that outdrew white audiences in the white all-star games. years of tricky baseball that it represented also part of american society. it represented a breakage from the black men and women who were and lynched between 1882 1968. it represented the works of so many men throughout the negro league. >> is our kind of evidence that

the sky was the greatest ever to step on the pitcher's mound. but what didn't stand out is that he brought the attention of cynical but reporters in a the segregated world of negro baseball that eventually led to that world being integrated. mr. rafferty-osaki: 1948, and 42 question whether he was 48. you might have been older. -- he might have been older. he pitched his last game in 1965, when he was 59. three shutout innings against the boston red sox. the guy was an absolute phenomenal athlete. as you heard there, he was a charismatic individual, and he really was one of the main reasons why jackie robinson had the opportunity to play.

but just because integration happens, it doesn't mean it ended racism at all. four years after jackie robinson broke in, here is a death threat. we will kill you if you attempt to enter the ballgame. 1951, jackie robinson received racism wasn't dead. integration mattered. racism was still there. let us not forget that there most important might have been the man who integrated the american league. this was six weeks after jackie robinson made his appearance. the biggest difference was larry doby didn't have the years of training and the minor leaks. he went directly from the newark eagles to the cleveland indians.

in he became the first black to 1948 win the world series. this is a very famous image. what do you think? what do you see? >> smiling. [indiscernible] >> camaraderie. the feeling that there is no difference between the two of them, they are just happy they won. that they don't care about the color. mr. rafferty-osaki: because they just want a world series together. one of the two black newspapers margaret mckenzie of, along with "the chicago defender," wrote that that picture of gromick and doby with unmistakable flesh

cheeks pressed together. equally wide grins. the chief message of this image is acceptance. it is capable of washing away with equal skill long, pent up hatred in the hearts of men, and the beginning of confusion in the minds of young boys. small boys, i should say. that is what that image

a world series title by both a black and white team. integrated baseball. integration, though, was a long, drawn out process in baseball. two of the greatest dynasties, my beloved new york yankees and my hated boston red sox, did not integrate long until the second to break down boston a little more, howard brian examined the story. they both had the inside track to jackie robinson and willie mays, and they did not sign either one of them. in the spring of 1945, the boston red sox held allegedly out for sam jethro, marvin williams, in jackie robinson. they would sign at least one of them. they did not do so.

in 1949, the red sox, one of their scouts down in alabama, said, you need to sign this kid. he is going to be incredible. willie mays. they could have bought his contract for $5,000. and who did they end up integrating with? pumsy green. how much do i know about him? absolutely nothing. that was baseball. these two institutions, the yankees and the red sox, try to go a very long time without integrating, and they too felt its dynasty. so i ask you again, what does 42 represent? integration prior to the desegregation of the military in 1948? sweat v. painter, brown v. board of education, the civil rights act of 1964 and 1968. is it possible that baseball was an integral part of this process desegregation and the fight for equality? is it possible it was an agent of change, or did it just reflect all the changes that were happening and it was at the forefront of it? that is one of the questions we now, you remember the idea of

$40 million he was critical of the idea of integration, and he . the idea of integration, and he said, and it did lead to the death of the negro league. a lot of the owners in major league baseball raided the negro leagues. they became nothing more than barnstormers. that was one of the questions. this is kind of like the new revisionist history, whether or not it would have been better to have segregated baseball because then at least black businesses and ownership wouldn't have died. yes. >> all of the players who never got to play again once the negro league gone because they were integrated to the major leagues, but they kind of lost it was their hole -- really sad. mr. rafferty-osaki: emily, i will agree to disagree with one point. these men were good enough to

play in the game. what happened was there became an almost quota system. integration was a slow process. we saw it in new york and boston. imagine if all these negro league players were put on the same playing field in equal time and given equal opportunity to play? there could have been well more blacks who played in the major league, but integration was a slow process. and so i don't believe they weren't good enough to play. >> no, not that they weren't good enough. they didn't get the opportunity to. mr. rafferty-osaki: that's right. [indiscernible] >> [indiscernible] mr. rafferty-osaki: that leads us to our second topic. yes, there were a lot of women in baseball. in fact, you remember the song we played at the beginning of class? "take me out to the ballgame"?

most people forget the original verse to that song. you only hear the chorus at the ballgame -- the original says, "katie casey was baseball mad, had the fever and had it bad, just to root for the hometown crew -- on a saturday her young beau called to see if she'd like to go to see a show, but miss katie said no, i'll tell you what you can do, take me out to the ballgame." women loved baseball. beginning in you had a college 1866, program in baseball, and by the way, this idea of a seven sisters school, six of them organized baseball teams to 1920 by 1867, you have the first

they were all black. and so begins this rich tradition of baseball. not softball, i want to make this clear, it was baseball that women loved. one scholar states there are several ways for women to participate in the game. let's see if you can figure out some of them. as a fan. as a player. it is true, you can marry into it. part of a front office or an employee of the team.

administration. you have an owner of the club or employee. you can marry into it. mr. rafferty-osaki: you can also be the baseball auntie, and this comes after the idea of sleeping with ballplayers. you can marry into it. you could also be a filmmaker, beat writer or sportscaster. , but you know what i found most interesting? nobody said as a player. oh, you did? sorry, my fault. yes, you can play baseball. while we are approaching this aspect mainly from the idea of playing the game understand that , women pursued each of these avenues. sevenas with most trailblazers, women breaking into the male realm, especially in sports,

they are a novelty themselves, and baseball is a business. games featuring either women's teams like the blondes versus brunettes in 1883, a lot of it people wanted to see women playing baseball. my game, a man's game. also understand that women participated greatly as fanatics. they were crazy about baseball. an episode from the washington senator's first lady's game said, the front office expected a few serious or venture us females to turn out, and were in no way prepared for thousands of enthusiastic women who stormed the ballpark. later in the same game, a board of women poured onto the field

and attacked the umpire with i am guessing you can understand that the home team did not win, and there was a blown call or a controversial call. female fans are particularly passionate about the game, and 1908 in a baseball magazine. by 1929 when the chicago cubs held a ladies day, over 30,000 women arrived at the ballpark. the all-american girls professional baseball league, founded by wrigley in they were 1943, active particularly in the midwest, and their teams can predominately from the rural areas and "lower-class." ining its peak popularity 1948, nearly one million fans

came out to watch these women play. and finally, the national baseball hall of fame dedicated and exhibit two -- dedicated and exhibit two -- dedicated an women in baseball. let's talk about the article you read. what was it? what did peerman have to say? emily. by, but questioning as i was reading it was whether or not , you were to talk to all the women who played, whether or not they found it empowering or patronizing that they had to act feminine. i would think that some of them would be like yes, i am a woman , and can wear a skirt and have this etiquette, and others would say i am an athlete i don't need to wear a skirt to play my athletic game. i was wondering how many of them would feel that way. i was wondering, in "mona lisa

smile," the part where she was yelling at julia roberts, big lie, this is my choice. i know both of my options. it reminded me of that. how they would feel based on that. the article touched on that, but that was something of wanted to -- one thing i wanted to know more about. >> the theme of this article was how they were marketing feminism in the league, and how it was particularly important with women had to be beautiful in order to play. they had to wear the uniforms, there was this concept of charm and beauty, code of conduct. there were different modifications of the rules. she does argue it opened the door for women and changed the perception of the stereotype of women in the united states, however, i thought it opens a really small door because they made all these new modifications. even the contract of the women,

they didn't have a man contract, they had a contract that whenever you were needed, you were traded to make liquidity in the league. i thought it was really interesting to read about that, all these different modifications. the black woman was not accepted in the league, because at the time black was not beautiful. rules and modifications, they do advance, but really, really slowly. toward the end, they said that started dying slowly, and the all-american girls professionals in the league stopped. mr. rafferty-osaki: good. before we continue, let's get a visual image of what we are talking about. this is a film strip from "a league of their own." >> this is what they are going to look like.

>> that's address. -- that's a dress. that is not a baseball uniform. what do you think we are, ballplayers or ballerinas? mr. rafferty-osaki: there was also no drinking or smoking, and had they had chaperones with who would watch over them to them at all times make sure they were continuously seen as being a lady was very important. emily brought up this point. what happens if you really just love playing the game of baseball? you feel disrespected. i assume that some definitely felt that way. i can absolutely understand that same but i also feel like people point. who were maybe slightly more feminine they would be like, they are ok. they clearly had something validity in them so they enjoyed , the fact that they could still

act feminine and be playing a man's sport. >> especially if they were actively trying to recruit women who were beautiful and feminine. >> i don't know. i would not have wanted to wear what they wanted me to wear, but wouldn't have been offended my making sure i still looked feminine while playing a man's sport. mr. rafferty-osaki: it is a major issue. fluidity as well, a masculine realm and a feminine realm. wrigley understood this. if they were seen as too masculine, they would be seen as tomboys. which is one of the reasons why they had to wear dresses and >> it was a huge force in sports in general, and specifically women's baseball. mr. rafferty-osaki: it was part of the idea of entertainment again. natalie.

>> the whole article and that clip we just watched made me wonder, was the whole idea behind the women's league, it seemed simply like an economic venture while the men's game was on pause while they were at war, and just another way to make money. and there was also entertainment, but -- i was confused about how it got started and if the men watched it at home solely because they wanted to watch baseball or because it was entertaining that women were in baseball and it was this new form of entertainment in that era? mr. rafferty-osaki: there are a couple things. started they did , not pitch overhand until 1948. they started out underhand. and it was a form of entertainment, especially during

the war. that is true. these women played and there was this idea, going back to the novelty concept, these are women playing baseball. that was a major portion of it. they had to negotiate their sexuality because they wanted to maintain the idea that they were ladies playing baseball, not androgynous. that is why they wore skirts. there is another part of the film, and this is true, you can see the bruising along their leg because you have to slide in baseball. >> in the background, they show the outfit and she says, i can't mr. rafferty-osaki: there was a woman who stole 200 bases in a season. >> it seems like women's baseball came to represent -- in the article, it says that link between sports and social

mobility. these women came to represent -- they came to represent, you can play baseball, but also maintain your femininity and pursue higher education. it was interesting the statistics in this article about the percentage of women who said that during this time, 8.2% of women in their generation was earning college degrees, 35% of women in the aa dpl went to pursue a college education, even a masters and became physicians. it is interesting what they came to represent in society. were talking about the rules of conduct and they havette, but women now looking back on it, and they were saying it enabled us. we were farm girls, we never had this kind of upbringing. it enabled us to be able to adapt to new social settings, to

in a sense baseball did enable , women to pursue higher education. i don't fully agree that they should have been or had to use their bodies, but on the other hand, conversely to what we are saying here, it helped them move up in society. they were for the first time earning a large sum of money. women were not earning money or going to college at this time. but it is cool because baseball gave them -- [indiscernible] mr. rafferty-osaki: it is true. >> i disagree that baseball gave women agency. yeah, the article says that women persisted and made baseball games their own, but they were overly sexualized. they had to compensate playing a feminine, and like what you said at the beginning of class, the institutionalization of the social roles between men and women.

even looking at the media today like we did last class, women they have to market themselves, and i feel that doesn't give them agency. even though they had degrees and stuff, they were a tiny fraction of women. mr. rafferty-osaki: good. this is controversy. >> i completely agree. it took away all agency. there is a part in the movie where they are showing a little documentary that was made about these women within the film, and it shows them pouring men cups of tea between innings, and knitting while they are in the dugout. it wasn't saying, look at these women, they are empowered, it is saying they're playing baseball their family and do their laundry. i don't think it was giving them agency. i think it was showing that they

could balance being athletes with being housewives and mothers. role was still more important. >> the article said women used baseball to challenge the institution, but i really disagree. what happened to women's sports when men came back from war? mr. rafferty-osaki: ok, on the other hand, the league lasted until 1954. >> i will slightly disagree with what you said, because i don't think it is necessarily a bad thing but they were athletes and could still be a housewife. they might have really enjoyed the fact that i can play this sport but i still have kids and will make dinner for my family if i want to. i don't think we should assume that they felt trapped by it. they might have thoroughly enjoyed what they were doing. >> i don't think that's an empowering message. >> fair enough. the person felt.

i don't think we can say across too overly sexualized. or that it was completely ok and they were empowered by at. i think it changes from person-to-person, and i can see both sides. i totally understand where you're coming from, but i also see the other point. >> women can be baseball players and housewives, but the fact that they had to be both to be women, i think is very -- mr. rafferty-osaki: this is exactly where we are going. negotiating between domesticity. this was the message going back that women -- what it meant to be a woman in america. on one hand, during the war efforts, you had rosie the

riveter. women volunteered for the service en masse. women's reserve. between 1940 and over 4 million 1942, women entered the workforce. they did not do so just in the case of the war effort. realm as jockeys, umpires, and even football coaches. so understand, this is what is going on and it is an negotiated process that is happening. and it is interesting that you bring up all these points about what it means to be feminine in the public sphere. this is the same argument that is going on. for the all-american girls leap -- girls league to survive, they had to market themselves because it is a sport, but it is also economics. it was incredibly important. yes?

>> -- integration from the negro leagues to the professional league would happen. i think it is the same with women. you cannot assume they were would be no backlash or controversy over it, so they had to go little by little and do what they could. at first it was like, we will remain feminine but we will play a man's sport. i think they did the best they could with the time period they mr. rafferty-osaki: this is exactly what was talked about in the idea of gender issues, such as the female apologetic. there was also the idea of marginalization. we discussed this somewhat, because you had negro league players who were women. part of that was the idea of the greater good. they wanted to make sure they were excepted in society as a baseball league, and it was hard

you don't know if that is going to harm the league. that is a lot of the reasons why you have that issue. and finally, you have that idea of eminent reconstructionist sports. the success of the all-american girls professional league recognizing that there is gender fluidity and women moving into the masculine sphere of sport, and baseball in particular.

and there are reasons why. we started speaking about this on tuesday, right? the "l" word. look at these two images. one is supreme court justice kagan. they were both scrutinized for participating in sports. they were both whispers and they came -- became massive as to whether or not they were lesbians, the "l" word. this is why it was important that you had a very feminine looking league. they wanted them to be ladies, not lesbians. and it is true, this is also that was brought up. this was also a product that also part of the homophobic society. what is wrong with a lesbian playing sports? what is wrong with a lesbian being a supreme court justice? sport has often been used with this idea of, are they tomboys, are they lesbians? how should we look at these women? what do you think?