• Ilandar@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s actually the opposite: sport is often the only realistic path out of systemic poverty for young people.

    • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It doesn’t seem that realistic if you need to perform in the top 1% among all your poverty stricken competitors. There’s a finite number of places for successful athletes.

      • T156@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Especially when the people with financial resources will usually have a better chance of making it for one reason or another.

      • Ilandar@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Of course, but it is a career path where a young person’s socioeconomic and cultural background is less likely to affect their chances of earning a wage that can take them and their families out of poverty.

        I think some of you have a very privileged view of life. Go listen to footballers from Brazil talk about their experiences, for example. Or if you want something closer to home, listen to Indigenous AFL players talk about the opportunity sport provided them and their families.

        • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re missing my point I think.

          Sure, a not insignificant number of sports stars have a background that’s considered lower class, but the number of people living below that poverty line that will become sports stars is so low I’m not even sure how many zeros go between 0.[…]1%

          Even if all of those people were top class athletes, there’s only room in the sports world for a few hundred of them at most.

          It’s not a realistic career path, it’s a lottery that requires high level athletic skill.

          • Ilandar@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, I understand your point - it’s not like you are offering a particularly deep insight here.

            The problem is that you are taking my original comment too literally. I am not arguing that it is a realistic career path in terms of overall success rates. I am saying that, relative to many other career paths in which these people face massive systemic and social roadblocks, sport is the only realistic option to escape poverty.

            • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I see, my apologies.

              I thought you were trying to say it was a realistic way for them to escape poverty when you said it was the only realistic way to escape poverty.

        • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          But again - it’s the 1% that made it there. Only ~450 players are in the NRL. Many of them earn the minimum allowed of 100k still, and their careers average like 3 years. That’s the 1%.

    • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      sport is often the only realistic path out of systemic poverty for young people.

      The number of people that can make a living from sport is miniscule. It’s not a realistic path to strive for. You’ve got almost as much chance of winning the lottery.