BlogHer - Sports - Comments

Last Laugh

Deenation — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 17:23:24 -0500

Those girls just keep on showing those crusty old dinosaurs.

I love it. It has been such a fight but these brilliant beautiful girls are more than up to it.

Screw the bastards.

CEOmum

"Unattractive" Williams Sisters

Sarah — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 17:02:24 -0500

And honestly, if those ladies are unattractive, I don't know what pretty means.

BlogHer Contributing Editor, Sports and Fitness
Sarah and the Goon Squad
Draft Day Suit

And Those "Unattractive" Williams Girls Keep Winning

Megan Smith — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 14:45:37 -0500

It does my heart good when I see those terribly "unattractive" Williams girls keep winning in spite of not getting the respect they deserve. Congratulations to 3 time champion, Serena Williams!

Megan
BlogHer Contributing Editor, TV/Online Video

Megan's Minute

Twists and turns on the tennis court

rebellious thinker — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 09:55:24 -0500

I don't watch tennis much anymore, since I escaped my parent's house and their obsession with watching tennis. What I find so interesting about this is that the Williams sisters were derided for their sexy outfits and their jewelry, and even their muscularity. How could you not want ot look at them? Now, it doesn't seem to matter since they will never fit the stereotype that too many men hold of what is beautiful. I guess "tennis whites" is still what people are looking for. For shame.

Laura, www.RebelliousThoughtsofaWoman.com

Stereotypes, Why bother

andreaj003 — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 23:09:57 -0500

I have been pretty athlete till now and I never get bother by those stupid sterotypes.

Love it!

ewillse — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 23:44:36 -0500

What a fun read! Admittedly, I'm a novice football fan, though I do love watching football and dithering about my fantasy lineup.

I'd never heard of a women's football league, but you can bet I'm going to read up.

Gives me something to do before the draft...

- E

elizabethwillse.wordpress.com

Freelance Book Reviewer

Nice!

PTPInc — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 08:15:24 -0500

When I moved out to San Francisco I didn't realize how many nude type of events they had. There would be the World Naked Bike Ride like you mentioned as well as other marathon and parade events. Every one of them sporting a different cause or spirit of enthusiastic celebration of sorts. I must say I didn't know the exact cause of the naked bike ride till I read your blog. It definitely does catch your attention and thanks for the info behind it all.

-Friends From Sunshine/PTP

http://friendsfromsunshine.blogspot.com/

Walking is a great solution for those with little time

expectingmommy — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 10:47:36 -0500

I appreciate you writing this article. I have found that my schedule is flexible with a little planning. I try to walk everyday for at least an hour. I get even more bang for my time with an new fitness tool called MBT. If you haven't hear of them, it is a shoe that helps burn more calories and work the legs more due to its sole construction. They've worked great for me and give a nice boost to my workout. I wear them when shopping or out and about. Expensive, but a good investment. Just my two cents.

Sympathy

kandela — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 05:16:12 -0500

If I may add an additional point:

I have some sympathy for the defeated boys. Why, you ask? Well, because of the patriarchy.

“It’s a lose-lose situation,” he said. “If he wins, he’s supposed to win. If he loses, he lost to a girl.”

This is actually the situation that the boy deals with from his peers. Nobody likes losing. The only time an athlete feels good about a loss is when they gave it their best, played to their potential and pushed their opponent all the way. The patriarchy has taught boys that they are better than girls at sport. Thus if they lose, especially at their chosen sport, then they aren't allowed to feel they have played to their potential. In fact they are subject to ostricism – treated as lesser examples of thier gender. Of course they aren't in any way less male for losing to a female but this is the affect the patriarchy has.

If they win, then because of the patriarchial view that they should win, the achievement is mocked by their peers. Showing pride in the victory is met with dripping sarcasm, 'Big deal, you beat a girl.'

The boy in the final behaved immaturely. Smashing his racquet is actually a technical fault (racquet abuse) in tennis, and he'd have lost a point for it. However, his reaction is perhaps understandable (though not excusable) because his coach is pushing the patriarchial line at him. His coach, by telling him he should beat a girl, and pouring scorn on him when he doesn't is treating his own player badly. You could even argue he is treating him in a sexist way. It's not the type of sexism we're used to talking about on feminist blogs but I think it is sexism. If the coach's player was a girl he wouldn't have had this attitude toward her. The beaten finalist has no power, being a child, so the usual arguments about men not being able to be the victims of sexism are less valid than usual.

By contrast the semi-final coach did an excellent job, saying treat her like any other player. It would appear his players acted in a sporting fashion. The semi-final coach did not reinforce patriarchial stereotypes and I'm sure his players feel much better about how they competed as a result. They may still have received some stick from their peers, but the effect would be muted thanks to the attitude of the coach.

Tennis

kandela — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 18:50:28 -0500

Firstly, this is totally great. Sometimes I think separate women's competitions encourage the belief that women can't compete with men at sports. Of course, it depends on the sport.

If anyone can explain to me why there are separate men's and women's Lawn Bowls competitions I'd be most interested.

As regards our heroine's comment that she plays like a boy, I believe she means stylisticly. If you watch men's and women's tennis the style of play is quite different. Most men will be baseline players, or serve-volley players. Basically, they take into account that their opponents are likely to be very strong – able to hit the ball hard and fast. They rely also on their own power to get the ball back competitively from the back court or in the serve to force their opponent back. The strongest female players also play like this, players like Emile Maresmo, and the Williams sisters. Martina Hingis at an Australian Open, famously said playing Maresmo was like playing a man. Many people took that in a way other than how it was intended, I believe she meant the style of play. The majority of female players however rely more on placement of the ball. You will see many more lobs in women's tennis, since women are generally shorter. Also the rallys are longer as the players try to out think each other rather than out muscle them. Depending on the type of player you are and your own style of play, one type of opponent may suit you better than another.

Also, the lower level of competition comment: if there is so little interest in women's tennis in the area that her school couldn't even field a team then obviously there will be a higher level of competition in the boys comp. Fewer women play sport competitvely than men do, by the law of averages then a player of equal ability placed in each competion will do better in the women's comp. This is something feminists can help address I think. Encouraging women's participation in sport is a feminist issue.

I believe women should be encouraged to participate more in sport, they deserve to feel good about their bodies for something other than their ornamental value. But there are complex issues involved here. At the highest level, men are stronger, taller and faster. Few women can compete with men at elite level in sports where those things really matter. (Yet, more than do now would be capable I think, it seems that the very best women are rarely encouraged to test themselves against the very best men.) Men and women have equal potential to be skillful and crafty in sport, so added strength is a big deal when less than 1% is the difference between winning and losing. So what do we do? Giving men's and women's comps equal status and prize money flies in the face of merit based achievement; as does handicapping based on gender. How do we encourage women's participation in sport to the same degree as men's under these conditions?

Edit: fixed grammar.

Go Mets!

Suzanne Reisman — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 10:26:14 -0500

OK, I know that this is off topic, and also that the Mets are just embarrassing right now, but I could not help myself.

Suzanne Reisman, Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants

That comment from Nancy at Yes I'm a Yankees fan

Kia — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 10:22:13 -0500

makes me sad.

As a rabid Mets fan with a full reading list, I haven't read the A-Rod book. So I can't comment on its literary merit. But this use of "feminist" and double GASP "liberal feminist" as the ultimate in pejoratives is so tired and stale. No matter who utters it.

I guess I'll be avoiding her in the future as well...

Kia

http://theseagreenhouse.blogspot.com

I am not really athletic

Kellie Holmes — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:13:23 -0500

Admitted because of stereotypes I have always shyed away

Right on!

Suzanne Reisman — Sun, 31 May 2009 22:06:44 -0500

I couldn't agree with both of you more. :)

Suzanne Reisman, Contributing Editor - Feminism & Gender
Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants

shameless opportunist DNE feminist

originaloflaura — Sat, 30 May 2009 17:06:00 -0500

As a former New Yorker who is neither a Yankees nor a Mets fan, I must say that I find it troubling that people are suggesting that a woman who dared write a book about a fallen sports hero is somehow worse than a woman--or man--who wrote a book about any other disgraced celebrity. What does gender have to do with it? Maybe this woman is being opportunistic in writing a book about A-Rod, but it's not like she's the first to write this type of trashy biography, and I don't see how her gender makes her better or worse for it. She's cashing in on someone else's misery, which is something I'd personally rather not do, but that doesn't make her a dirty "feminist"; it just makes her a shameless opportunist like anyone else who'd do the same.

Laura Roberts, Button Tapper