Recently in Sports Category

I find this to be fairly interesting.

Junior Elizabeth Lambert has been suspended from her soccer team and become an internet celebrity due to her hyper-aggressive on the field conduct when New Mexico played BYU this past week.

Yes, she was being a bad sport. But this is common in men's sporting events, from football to soccer to baseball to hockey to basketball... the list goes on.

Why is it sensationalized when women like Elizabeth or Serena Williams show aggression or behave inappropriately on the field? Almost immediately after both instances, the women were painted as being masculine, men in disguise, having male genitalia, etc in an attempt to degrade them and illegitmize their accomplishments and athletic prowess.

Male athletes can rape a woman or run fight dogs or commit crimes and do drugs and keep on going. But heavens forbid a woman even shows aggression, physical prowess, skill, or a body type that doesn't work for a Maxim centre fold.

When the WNBA’s Detroit Shock relocated to Tulsa last week as a result of economic challenges, sports columnist Rob Parker commented on the lack of support from women in the Detroit area .

Still, the saddest thing is that the Shock did get the support it needed from women. If enough women took their daughters to the game, the team would not have had to rely on men showing up. For whatever reason, it just didn’t happen in the type of numbers needed to make the Shock a successful organization at the gate.

Regardless of whether he could support his claim with facts, it’s a discussion that multiple women’s sports journalists have pondered – both why women don’t support women’s sports in larger numbers and how to be more proactive about reaching out to potential female fans .

However, in an email conversation with another women’s basketball blogger this past week, the relationship between women’s sports and feminism came up, which prompted me to return to a question posed by Feministing’s Courtney in late March (during March Madness):

What is our responsibility as feminist consumers when it comes to women's sports?

Up until one week ago, I paid little attention to the High School sport of Girl's Field Hockey. But browsing around the web I came across a discussion regarding a boy who had recently moved from the UK where he played field hockey in school to the US. He wanted to continue playing but discovered that as far as HS sports are concerned in the US, field hockey is exclusively for the girls. Under Title IX he could make a case for playing on the girl's team since there was no equivalent option available to him, the same argument that girl's have used in the past to play sports not available to them on boys teams. Fair enough perhaps, but his coach then told him there was one requirement he would need to fulfil - he had to wear the same uniform as the rest of the team to play. Unlike most sports where women now more commonly wear shorts, field hockey at the High School level at least is still a game played by girls wearing kilts or skirts. The uniform regulations for High School field hockey are very clear in that all the team have to be dressed in the same manner.

When I first read this, my immediate reaction was that this surely must either be an obvious deterrent to put up to put the boy off from joining or a joke. Surely no school would actually make a boy wear a skirt I thought to myself, and surely no boy would wear one either to play. But I was wrong on both accounts.

Hello all -- long time reader, first time poster and a big fan of the community going here...

I'm a strong proponent of women's (professional) sports for a number of reasons, but most importantly because I think mainstream representations of female athletes -- that are not over-sexualitized, objectified, or stuck in some narrow gender box -- has the potential to help shift the rigid gender norms that our society has come to abide by.

WNBA star Lisa Leslie recently retired and made some controversial comments about women, sports, and femininity at her final post-game press conference that have sparked some interesting discussions among WNBA fans and warrant discussion beyond the WNBA because they certainly have consequences for gender and sexuality norms across society.

Leslie's cultural significance as a female athlete, a positive black female image in society, and a visible beneficiary of Title IX make her public statements about women's sports and womanhood significant. And most of the comments during her press conference about the media's treatment of women's sports have been widely applauded. However, people have been focusing on one segment of her comments as particularly problematic.

Leslie: "Also another important message is how we represent ourselves as women. We need to look like women; it's important how we carry ourselves, how we dress on and off the court. A lot of these things have to be addressed and continue to be addressed because we are the product, and it's important.

People want to see a good product. They do. That's just the bottom line. And you need to be marketable and I think that more women need to understand that here in our league."

The full audio of the press conference is here .

For people who have followed the WNBA for any extended period of time, these comments should not come as a surprise.

I recently moved to go to school in a different city where I don't have a car and public transit is too expensive for me to use all the time. I've always loved bikes and biking but I've never used my bike as transportation as much as I do now. I really love riding my bike to get around, I feel incredibly empowered using my body to power my vehicle and being able to transport myself for free. I want to learn more about my bike it and how it works so I can fix it if anything goes wrong. I also want to build stamina, and get stronger so I can go on longer rides. 

When I started looking for women-friendly/feminist resources for grrls like me who find empowerment in biking I didn't come up with much. No books. No zines. No blogs. Maybe a few co-ops and shops here and there. 

How can this be so!? I figure I must not be looking hard enough - or looking in the right places. 

Sooo, I was wondering if any of you out there in the feministing universe had some resources you could share?

After a satisfying lunch filled with good food and intergenerational discussion, we were back for a packed afternoon of panels and workshops at Omega. Since the Feministing editors were prepping for their much-anticipated workshop Blogging Demystified, I covered the next panel with three insanely successful female athletes.

Donna Lopiano, the former chief executive officer of the Women’s Sports Foundation opened up the panel. A nine-time All-American softball player, Donna played in 26 national championships in four different sports and coached volleyball, basketball, and softball at the college level. She notes that early in the feminist movement, sport was rejected because it was seen as a male construct. But now that women are in the game, they are challenging some of the “male” values that have traditionally governed the sports world. She invites us to think about women’s sports as a subversive activity in which men are actively supporting the seeds of their own demise.

Donna talked about the history of Title IX, which opened up the sports world for women as well as “the continuum of what an ideal woman can be.” When Title IX passed in the 1970s, there was an uproar as male athletic departments claimed that women’s athletics would be the “death of American football.” But women won the media battle over Title IX—in large part thanks to their fathers. Fathers who didn’t have sons invested in their daughters and put their life-blood into their sports careers. Indeed, the first Title IX lawsuits were brought by fathers defending their daughters’ right to play. As a life-long soccer player with an obsessed soccer Dad, I have no trouble imagining the power of that father-led movement.

Next, Donna spoke with two amazing current athletes. Angela Hucles, a midfielder for the Boston Breakers, led the U.S. national women’s soccer team in goals scored when they won the Gold Medal in the 2008 Olympics. Jessica Mendoza led the U.S. Softball team to a Silver Medal in the 2008 Olympics.

I'm from Pittsburgh and while I've never been that into sports, it's hard to ignore Steeler-mania in my hometown.  I want to be able to hang out with my friends, but many of them are watching the game, and I don't feel right about cheering on the team that still has Ben Roethlisberger after news over the summer that he raped a woman in Nevada.

I had seen someone on here before comment that we shouldn't have to choose between condemning misogyny and enjoying pro sports, and I really wish I could sit back and enjoy the Steeler game as I have so many times before, but it just feels.. wrong.  Like I'm supporting a rapist in getting away with it.

Anybody else feel this way about pro sports?  Any other Steeler fans have mixed feelings about the team this year?

    My jaw is literally dropped as I look at this picture of Caster Semenya. It doesn't shock me that a magazine is trying to primp a female athlete in order to sell magazines (nothing sells like the word makeover in the Western world, but it seems like the magazine that gave her the makeover must be completely blind to any of the criticism of Semenya -- that some of the gender testing of Semenya was intrusive, that, hey, we shouldn't be making such a big deal about a female athlete's looks, because it's sexist. Where has You magazine of South Africa been? Perhaps because the magazine represents the country that Semenya is from, they feel the need to bolster the image of the country (See, our women are not tomboys!) I find it utterly ridiculous, and as Chris Chase of Yahoo Sports said, forced:

Let's hope this is what she wants though.

Nothing Semenya has done in the past month has suggested that she likes to wear dresses, get manicures and let down her hair. After the controversy broke, she kept her cornrows, wore baggy clothes and pounded her chest in victory like a college football cornerback. When she returned to her hometown, she was dressed the same way. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. That seemed to be Semenya's natural inclination. This feels forced.

Yes. If Semenya wanted to present herself this way, I think she would have no problem dressing like this on her own. No makeover necessary. I could be totally wrong. She does say in the article that "I'd like to dress up more often and wear dresses" but something tells me that this is all the idea of a magazine and country... and world... that feels anxious when it confronts a human it can't easily categorize. I hope that Semenya might embrace her true identity and presentation, whatever that might be, so that young female athletes find a little less pressure to conform to their society's definition of femininity and beauty.

The comments about Caster Semenya here at Feministing and elsewhere have prompted me to reflect a little bit on my own experience in competitive athletics. I was a competitive rower for six years. Two of those years I spent rowing at a NCAA Division I school. To be able to compete in the NCAA you do sign away some privacy and independence.  Urine testing is a commonly cited example of this. For the sample to be considered “good” an official has to see the stream hit the cup. Yeah, that means someone has to watch you pee. Is it humiliating? I didn’t think so. A little awkward maybe but not really an invasion.

There were plenty of other invasions though. Like the fact that my coach was constantly commenting on my weight.  One season I would be too heavy. The next, too light. In many ways your body simply ceases to be your own. When you sleep and for how long is largely determined by practice schedules. Some coaches insist that their athletes follow certain diets. There’s an endless list of compromises that athletes make in their personal lives to be better competitors. I don’t think any of these compromises are comparable to the one that Caster Semenya is being asked to make but that isn’t really what I want to focus on in this post. My moment of clarity on Caster Semenya came when I began to consider how height affects athletes.

I am 5’4”. That’s pretty close to the average for women worldwide. Yes, it varies from country to country but 5’4” is definitely within the “average” range. Except when you’re talking about female athletes. The average height on my team was 5’11” and we had one athlete who was 6’2”. To be able to compete with them, I had to keep up with them. That wasn’t easy. I’m not going to make an argument for height to muscle mass because although there is a correlation between the two there’s no exact formula to determine it. I will say that having longer limbs is generally an advantage for rowers and sprinters alike.

There are weight divisions in rowing that are meant to level the playing field for shorter athletes but not many colleges have lightweight teams and there are less lightweight events in the Olympics as well. This obviously means, less opportunities for shorter athletes. This is a problem because it creates a pyramid effect in competitive athletics. Meaning that the further you travel up the pyramid, the more anatomical restrictions there are to competing. Other factors help to form they pyramid as well such as access to facilities, nutrition, time, socio-economic status, etc, etc. The system we have built for competitive sport is largely designed to exclude and that is a problem in and of itself.

My question is this: if Caster Semenya should not be allowed to compete with women because gender differences may give her an advantage does that mean that taller athletes should not be allowed to compete with shorter athletes because their height gives them an advantage?

Horrified by what the International Association of Athletics Federation has put Caster Semenya through? The National Sexuality Resource Center has a petition demanding that the IAAF stay out of Caster's pants.

Stand with Caster , and with everyone who’s borne the brunt of fear and discrimination because they don't fit a rigid definition of what is male and female. You can add your name here .

Here's the petition:

To: The International Association of Athletics Federation

We, the undersigned, demand that the IAAF stay out of Caster Semenya's pants.

Your efforts to make champion Caster Semenya 'prove' she is a woman are shameful and unnecessary, and undermine the integrity and dignity of women athletes. Requiring select athletes--based purely on looks--to undergo 'scientific' testing that others do not is unfair and humiliating.

Gender is not a science, and biology does not make--or unmake--a woman. Oppression based on looks, however, is real, and forces women athletes to adhere to a sexist standard that does not foster true competition or personal excellence. We applaud Caster Semenya's skill as an athlete, and the way she creates more space for women--of all shapes, sizes and looks--to succeed.

We demand that you stop selective gender testing now, and put in place new policies that support all athletes, regardless of gender expression or identity.

Another "wow" moment from the world of professional track-and-field.

The article's not long, but here's the short-short version:  The favorite in the women's 800-meter race at the world championships has displayed such extraordinary form that she is being gender-tested.

Here's the best part- according to officials, the test is not being done because she's smoking the rest of the field so badly, but because her time has improved so dramatically over last year's.

Chris Chase, one of Yahoo's bloggers, has a post up about this.

He makes the eminently logical suggestion that if someone's race time improves to such an astounding degree and unfairness is involved, it's because they're on the juice, not because a woman is in fact a man.  How they came to the conclusion that this is an issue worth investigating is beyond my ability for logical leaps.

The best part, though, is the end of the article on the first link.

“This is a medical condition. It is nothing that she has done. There is a need to make sure rules are followed,” Davies said, adding discretion and the protection of the athlete was paramount.

“We are more concerned for the person and not to make this as something that is humiliating ,” he said.

They haven't even done the test and this is already epic fail.

Google Erin Andrews and the first image that appears at the top of your page is a picture of her derriere, followed by one of her in a bikini. Google John Madden, and images don't appear at the top of the page at all, and those included in the search display Madden in a booth with headphones on, presumably announcing games. While Andrews' pictures depict a sex symbol, his portray a professional. Sadly, sexualizing women in sports is a popular trend, and Erin Andrews is a leading example.

What happened to Erin Andrews was heinous, and most of the articles written over the past few weeks agree. However, while reading many of these articles, I found an unfortunate tendency that I felt compelled to write about. Most members of the media offer the obligatory statement admonishing what happened to Andrews, but many of them undermine their reproach with the sexist remarks that immediately follow. One article refers to Andrews as "America's favorite sideline Barbie doll" while another calls the incident "the best thing that could have ever happened to Erin Andrews' career."

Know those kiss cams they have at sporting events, which provide cute, sappy, sometimes even funny moments?

Apparently the WNBA's Mystics don't do that at their games. The reason? Lesbians are a major fan base and the Mystics don't want to offend others should two women kiss on the cam.

"We got a lot of kids here," Sheila Johnson, the Mystics' managing partner, said when asked last week at a game. "We just don't find it appropriate."

The team's point guard says:

"We wouldn't broadcast on our Jumbotron about abortion issues because of the religious and political conflicts it would cause," said Lindsey Harding, the team's point guard. "It's a similar, sensitive subject. We don't want to put anything out there to turn down certain fans."

But of course the NBA team doesn't do that:

"We wouldn't broadcast on our Jumbotron about abortion issues because of the religious and political conflicts it would cause," said Lindsey Harding, the team's point guard. "It's a similar, sensitive subject. We don't want to put anything out there to turn down certain fans."

Women and girls should reclaim baseball. As far ago as the mid 1800’s it was fine for women to play baseball. But by 1900 sexism shoved them aside. Baseball expert Jennifer Ring, explained in a July 19, 2009 article in the L.A. Times:

"This was the thinking: Girls needed exercise," Ring said. "But not too much because it could make them like men. And besides, by the '30s, baseball was being sold as the national sport. Back then, you don't want a national sport that is for girls. . . . Hasn't changed all that much" (“A national pastime for only half the nation,” by Kurt Streeter). Link.

Women and girls were told their alternative should be softball which had a lower rank, smaller field and used a softy ball which sexist people felt was more appropriate for delicate ladies. They were basically telling women we shouldn’t play “hardball.” Author of "Stolen Bases: Why American Girls Don't Play Baseball," Jennifer Ringer said “It's just a sham that our national game basically excludes half the population. Women are pretty much shut out of this game." How can a national game exclude half the nation’s population.? That’s wrong.

Seventies lawsuits finally allowed girls to play Little League baseball with boys. But even now almost every girl baseball player is forced to give up her dreams of baseball triumph by age 12 or 13.

Other countries such as Japan respect female baseball players. Japan’s Osaka Silver Sisters is made up of women who played professional baseball half a century ago! A July 15, 2009 Reuters article reported:

...the players meet every Friday for an hour of practice followed by a game with a much younger, all-boys team -- which they often win.

"I'm really surprised by the level of their baseball," said Hajime Morioka, captain of the Nakayoshi Genki Club which plays against the Osaka Silver Sisters.Link.

So if women in their 70’s can win games against young males, clearly women and girls can be excellent baseball players and deserve an equal place in our national Furthermore, women’s baseball should be an Olympic sport. Officials are currently working to add women to the baseball roster for the 2016 Olympics. The sexism should end. No more broken dreams. The future is bright and I see women’s and girls’ baseball glowing on the horizon.

At an unknown time in the last year, ESPN sports reporter Erin Andrews was secretly and illegally filmed nude in her hotel room on hidden camera by a voyeur and the resulting video was posted on the internet. Without linking to or naming any publications disseminating this horrible breach of her rights, let's take a long view of Andrews's struggle with sexism in a male-dominated sports and media culture. While this voyeurism may or may not be an isolated incident, sadly, it is simply an escalation of the barrage of sexism and objectification that constantly surrounds her as she attempts to construct a career in a "man's sphere."

Erin Andrews is a sideline reporter for ESPN, a job that has always been linked to sexism. It is one of the few positions available to women in major sports broadcasts, but the women who fill the role are selected as much for their physical appearance as their broadcast skills. They are, in short, exploited for their sex appeal to straight male audiences and rarely, if ever, asked to provide opinions or analysis (presumably because the networks are not interested in the sports opinions of women, and certainly not these women). Female sideline reporters generally do not graduate to the broadcast booth or other high level on-camera positions. More often, they are phased out as they age and replaced by younger women.

Andrews, a former University of Florida basketball dance team member, has worked at ESPN since 2004, and while her popularity has always been unbelievably high among the majority-male audience, it has never been separated from her constant objectification. Her popularity has spawned dozens of devoted blogs, which often reduce her to her body, her breasts and the novelty of a woman with such a body talking about sports. She routinely is a top Google search, a popularity that sports and gossip blogs quickly learned to exploit to generate traffic. Sports blogs, from the reputable to the disgusting, have devoted columns to such non-newsworthy topics as analyzing her wardrobe and documenting her eating habits among all kinds of more appalling innuendo not worth mentioning here. Otherwise innocent camera angles and photographs that emphasize her breasts or show her eating are accompanied by innuendo and make up the bulk of her fan-created online presence. Meanwhile, Playboy.com voted her "America's Sexist Sportscaster" twice. To boot, last year, an internet hoax was created, alleging a sex-tape between her and a famous athlete she interviewed, and though the credibility of this hoax was easily disproved, it was largely embraced in gossip-media as news, or still exploited for traffic as news about fake news.

Inside the sports world, male athletes have been recorded treating her terribly unprofessionally--from ogling and hooting to a USC football player slapping her rear end at this January's Rose Bowl. ESPN, for its part, has "accidentally" included close-up clips of her behind during broadcasts, included segments devoted entirely to fan responses to her physical appearance, and even had male commentators talk about her sex appeal on air. This is hardly a professional way to treat a journalist, and does not even resemble the treatment of her male coworkers.

So, although this may be the first time many outside the sports world have heard of Andrews, this is not at all the first time she has been the victim of notable, appalling and unambiguous sexism. The whole of sports media--not to mention the gazing male audience--bears some responsibility for creating an atmosphere of demand for this kind of exploitation and subsequently feeding it. While many of these media outlets--including FOX News--feign outrage, they continue to cash in by posting partial clips or photographs of the video.

So don't hold your breath waiting for sports media outlets to apologize for the ghosts of sexist Erin Andrews coverage-past that made this terrifying, dehumanizing breach of her rights and privacy sadly inevitable.

So, this is a topic that got raised in a few comments on the post Government Diet for Young Girls that I thought was worth spinning off.

The commenters were remarking on how for many school-age kids gym class is their main source of exercise, and yet the focus in many schools is on competitive games that often favor male participants. This leaves many less athletic kids bored, disengaged, and likely to hang on the sidelines...getting even less exercise time than their peers.

One might rightly ask "so where is the feminist issue here?" Well, in every gym class I have ever observed--most especially those from middle school on up--the majority of the sideliners were girls. Not all, certainly, and certainly there were girls in the athletic, competitive group that dominated the games played. However, the gender gap in participation was certainly noticeable.

This struck very close to home for me as I myself was one of those sideliners all through school, disinterested in sports, turned off by the male-dominated competitiveness and meanspiritedness that gym class seemed to draw out of my fellow students. At the same time, I have been a feminist from a very early age; I celebrate as strongly as anyone the progress women have made in gaining access to athletics, I also celebrate women who demonstrate that competition in all walks of life is not just for men.

So, now as much as then, I had some serious values-dissonance about valuing female competition and athletic participation...and yet wanting absolutely nothing to do with them in gym class. When I got to high school, I found that non-competitive, low-impact yoga classes made me feel much better exercise and about myself than gym class, but I also felt that the gender and class perceptions around yoga marred my enjoyment of it. (It is perhaps also relevant that I suffered from chronic insomnia in high school worsened by the insane decision to start the school day at 7:45AM. This sapped my energy to the point that climbing the stairs to homeroom would make me lightheaded...not the best incentive to be an active participant in gym class.)

The question I want to bring to the community, then, is what other feminists perceive to be the root causes behind low female participation in gym class. Is it ingrained attitudes about proper feminine behavior or the general toxicity of high school sociality? Is it unfeminist to think that gym class would be improved by segregating genders or by including more non-competitive activities? Where is the feminist balance between personal interests and preferences and the larger interests in encouraging girls to be active and compete?

I don't know how many people are aware, but the upcoming 2010 Olympic Games in Vancouver currently does NOT have any Women's Ski Jumping events (there are 3 for men), even though there are many professional women who compete in this sport.  A group of women with international backing tried to sue the Vancouver olympics to have the sport added due to the sexism of this but the court rejected their lawsuit.  See here.

Even though I understand the judge's ruling (basically that the International Olympic Committee, the IOC, is not bound the Canadian Charter and thus the court has no jurisdiction to order them to alter the line-up of events), I'm terribly disappointed by this.  I still think the suit was worthwhile because it drew so much attention to the issue.  I'm really hoping the IOC will take notice and add the events, if not to Vancouver then to the next Olympics. 

I am glad however that the judge acknowledged the sexism and agreed that the events should be added, she just doesn't have the authority to order the change.

I personally don't think there should be ANY event for which only one sex competes in (unless perhaps there was simply no competitors for a specific event from a specific gender, but I'm not aware of any such event).

What do you guys think?  Is there anything we can do?

Btw this is my first post so I hope I did ok...

An article appeared in The Nation today regarding sexism in sports.  Now, of course this isn't a new concept, however, the statements made by Wimbledon officials that prompted this article are still pretty disheartening.  Apprently, being extremely talented isn't enough justification for Wimbledon to give the top-ranked women prime court assignments.  Being "easy-on-the-eyes," however...well what more justification do you need?!?!!?

I don't have a whole lot more to say on the subject at the moment other than "UGH!!", but thought that this warranted a post.  When will society be over the fear of "woman athlete + not stereotypically feminine = unmarketable lesbian."  One more reason that I am thankful for Feministing every day...

I am already so tired of people saying that Roger Federer has won more Grand Slam tennis titles than anyone else. That he is, statistically, undoubtably the greatest tennis player of all time, with 15 major titles, and one of only six players to complete a career 'Grand Slam' by winning all four Grand Slam titles - Wimbledon, the US Open, the Australian Open and the French Open.

Roger Federer has NOT won more Grand Slam titles than any other player, just any other MALE player. Martina Navratilova won 18, plus another 31 major doubles titles. Margaret Court won 24 Grand Slam singles titles, 19 women's doubles titles and 19 mixed doubles titles, for a total of 62 Grand Slam titles!

Why is women's tennis so readily forgotten? There is no doubt that Federer is one of the greats, but in my eyes, Court and Navratilova should be considered on the same level, if not even greater because they both so successfully played doubles at the same time. Navratilova even won the women's singles, women's doubles AND mixed doubles titles at the 1987 US open, all at the same time.

And many women have not only equalled Federer's Career Grand Slam (winning all four titles), but have done one better. Steffi Graf won all four plus an Olympic gold medal. Navratilova won all four in singles, doubles AND mixed doubles. And several female players have won all four in the same year in the past.

There has been progress in Tennis - at least women's champions now earn the same prize money as men's champions at a Grand Slam - but clearly many people still see men's tennis as superior to women's tennis. And I'm tired of female athletes not having their dues.

This week is the Wimbledon tennis tournament and the coverage spans three channels and numerous hours. There are a few courts at Wimbledon, including a center court. Recently charges have been levied against the tennis tournament of putting a majority of the most attractive female tennis players on center court, while more competitive matches and better skilled players are relegated to lesser courts. Now misogyny and women's sports are not new, but women's tennis is different. Women's tennis is not like the LPGA or the WNBA, it is popular and sometimes more popular then men's tennis. However, there is an active push within the tennis community to tone down the masculinity of women's tennis. Showcasing the best looking players is only the beginning; there are also attempts to eliminating grunting. They are attempting to turn these women from athletes to ladies.

The problem within tennis is not isolated to tennis, but it is the problem of women's sports in general. The line between sexuality and athleticism must be walked very delicately. The use of sexuality is solely to attract men to the audience, but at the same time it distracts men from their athletic merits. As soon as WNBA players appear in evening gowns in commercials, a short lived and ineffectual commercial, the game lost its credibility. LeBron James does not appear in his underwear for the NBA. This is not to say that female athletes needs to hide their bodies and be ashamed, but overt sexuality will never allow for women's sports to be equal to men's in the public. (Ironically the same reasons used to support men's college sports, are the same reasons to bash women's sports).

Saturday, at Pimlico Downs in Baltimore, the 3 year old filly (female horse) Rachel Alexandra won the Preakness Stakes , the second leg of the Triple Crown. She is the first filly to do so in 85 years. She was also, notably, the overwhelming favorite, running at 9-5 odds (even better than 2-1) and as the most popular pick of horsepicking journalists.

While it bears mentioning that many in this community are divided, or personally conflicted about the ethics of horse racing (including this writer), Saturday's events brought up a number of interesting gender issues within the horse sports industry, even beyond the feel-good, "Girl Power!" story embraced by the media .

First, because Rachel Alexandra's original owner did not believe in racing fillies against colts, his decision not to enter her in the Kentucky Derby robbed horse racing of its best chance to have a Triple Crown winner in the last 31 years, a title no filly has ever claimed.

Meanwhile, because Rachel Alexandra's jockey, Calvin Borel, had ridden Rachel Alexandra and Kentucky Derby winner Mine That Bird to recent victory, he was tasked with the decision of choosing which horse to ride in the Preakness. He rode Rachel Alexandra (he said that she is the best race horse in the world), and in doing so, he passed up the rare opportunity to try to win the Triple Crown. Borel became the first jockey in Triple Crown history to win the Kentucky Derby and then ride a different horse in the Preakness, and he did it out of his belief that his filly was the superior horse, regardless of gender.

To compound matters, there were also a number of deliberate attempts by the other favorites to prevent Rachel Alexandra from being entered into the race. Similarly, many in the horse racing establishment echoed the "It's dangerous for girls to run with the boys" reasoning (which has no rational basis because horse racing is equally dangerous for all competitors, another worthy topic), using the very serious issue of horse safety to conceal a gender bias, and demeaning both issues in the process.

I am usually weary of the celebratory lauding of fillies's success, because I feel these stories distract from more substantive gender bias among the humans of horse racing--namely, how the sport is dominated by male jockeys and trainers, despite the fact that women are actually better suited to the physical requirements of the former, and equally qualified for the latter, although in this case, this bias overlaps:

With Borel vacating the mount, Hall of Fame jockey Mike Smith (who had never ridden Mine That Bird) was selected to ride the Derby winner in the Preakness, over his girlfriend, Chantal Sutherland , a very successful jockey that had ridden Mine That Bird to four straight victories in 2008. Smith's Triple Crown experience made the difference for the owners, but the narrative of a woman with superior qualifications being passed over for promotion in favor of a man with top level experience, thereby preventing her from gaining that top level experience, sounds sadly familiar...

So, sexism, girl power, a loose regard for animal well-being, all rolled into one in the 2009 Preakness Stakes. Thoughts?

So I was just watching The Rachel Maddow Show, and one of the things they were reporting on caught my attention. Unfortunately, I could not find this clip on the show's website (may be it will be up there later, and if so, I'll add it). The story is, there is this really amazing racehorse, Rachel Alexandra, who just won the Kentucky Oaks race by 20 and a quarter lengths. For those who have trouble visualizing what that is, here's the YouTube video of her win. Skip to the end of it - the horse that's all the way ahead is Rachel Alexandra.

This isnt the first of her victories, apparently. Everyone says she has a great built, and the jockeys who have ridden the horse call her a "freak," "the best filly in the country."

The owner, however, says he will not put Rachel Alexandra into the upcoming Kentucky Derby, which is, of course, a much more prestigious race, because he is reluctant to have his horse run against 'the boys.' When asked whether she can do well in a race against males, he says "we'll probably never know."

While the owner gives various reasons, like his not wanting the horse to run in a large race, and fears of having her injured, it seems so strange that an owner of a racehorse would not want her to try to win such a prestigious race. I guess no matter how many records this horse will break, the glass cieling will remain intact. Here's the full article on it. 

Girls can't match up to boys right?

This just in.......:

In New Jersey, twelve year old Mackenzie Brown pitched a no-hitter last night in baseball. It was the first time in the city of Bayonne's baseball league history that a girl has done that.

The New York Mets have invited her to throw out the ceremonial first pitch for her achievement. ESPN even showed highlights of her.

Definitely a wondeful achievement by her.

First of all, I can't find the link to the video of this PSA, so if anyone locates it, please post it in a comment.

I am watching NCAA basketball tonight (and being the queen of sniffling, nasty chest cold) and I saw one of those PSAs about how of all the NCAA student athletes, most of them are going pro in something other than sports.

It's always interesting to see which genders, sports, and majors are combined in these PSAs. Admittedly, I am a little loopy from my Nyquil, so I don't remember all of the students featured in the ad.  But there were three that stuck out.

First, there was a woman, playing basketball (which is COOL, because women's b-ball gets way less coverage than mens) and she was doing some really complicated math equations.  Also cool, because of the whole, woman and math don't go together myth.

The second woman student was playing tennis, which is iffy to me.  On the one hand, some female tennis players are bad-ass.  I wish I had muscles like Serena Williams, I mean, holy crap!  But on the other hand, female tennis players are extremely sexualized in some ways.  I'm thinking, Maria Sharapova, Anna Kournikova, etc.  But, she was wearing this really hi-tech glove thing and using it to manipulate an engineering project on an LCD monitor.  That is awesome, because it shows women using technology (a nono) and math and science (also a nono).

So with those two, I was impressed.  And there were some others that were ok, but the last one was disappointing.  It was an Asian man, and he was playing a violin, which is a major stereotype of Asian people.  Not cool, NCAA, not cool.

So the NCAA is down with feminism, at least somewhat, but they missed the boat with that racist stereotype.

OK, I don't know many of the details behind this story, but I heard on NPR tonight that the NCAA has adopted a new marketing strategy for the women's basketball tournament.  Whereas the men's tournament will still be referred to as "March Madness," the women's will now be called "Hoops Hysteria."  Seriously. 

I would think it was a hoax if I hadn't heard it on NPR. I don't know if the marketing team that came up with this is aware of the history behind hysteria or not, or if they somehow mean it ironically (which I really, really doubt).  I'm sure that some will argue that hysteria as a female malady caused by the uterus is a thing of the ancient past, and that I'm making a bid deal out of nothing.  But even if you believed that the term hysteria has entirely lost it's negative historical connotations, it's still used as a pejorative term, primarily to describe women and portray them as overemotional and irrational.  And the use of this term to differentiate a female athletic event from the male event, which retains the original name, being the norm, serves to other the female competition even further. 

Has anyone else heard about this?  Your thoughts?

Sweden's Therese Alshammar has had her World Record stripped by the International Swimming Federation (FINA). Per The Local website, FINA said that swimmers can not wear anything under their swimsuit to protect their modesty.

"Alshammar slammed the decision, declaring the rules sexist and saying she thought she was allowed to wear a "modesty suit" under her skin-tight racing gear."

"That means that nothing must be worn underneath," he said. "One suit only. That's it."

From the article apparently Australia (where the World Record was broken) allows bikinis (bottoms only) for modesty purposes under their suits. However, they will amend their rules to match FINA.

While this isn't anywhere near the level of beach volleyball in the Olympics, where participants are required to wear bikinis, still (per the bottom of the article) there's a maximum thickness rule in place. I haven't seen swimming in a while, so I don't know just how much is shown in a typical one-piece for them.

Thoughts?

On the heels of National Girls and Women in Sports day last Wednesday comes two pieces of news that emphasize the disparity of gender equality.

The first story comes from Saudi Arabia. The Saudi Arabian Motor Federation refused a request from an unidentified Russian woman to compete in the upcoming Hail Baja Rally in Riyadh because of Saudi Arabia's ban on female drivers. The Federation defended its actions by claiming they don't question the laws of the land. Strangely enough, the fact that the refusal to let a woman race is costing the event official status in a year long points race doesn't seem to be provoking much outrage from the participating drivers. Whatever keeps the women in their place, I guess. At least we can give kudos Federation Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) for stripping the event of points, and to the unidentified woman for doing all she could to register as a driver.

By Donna Orender
President, Women's National Basketball Association

Tension and passion hung in the air in the final electrifying seconds of Game 2 of the WNBA Western Conference Finals on Sept. 27. In front of a packed home crowd at the AT&T Center, the San Antonio Silver Stars’ Sophia Young hit a 14-foot turnaround jumper at the buzzer to fend off her team's elimination by the Los Angeles Sparks. At this moment, someone leaned over to me and whispered, “You must be so proud of all this.”

It was one of many incredible moments that define our league. At these times, I am grateful for the messages the league delivers to young women that sweat and grit are permissible and to young males that strong and athletic women will populate their future.

The WNBA formed just 12 years ago, and it continues to blaze trails. The markers of success are familiar in the American sports landscape – corporate partnerships, network television broadcasts, the rhythm of a season from training camp to All-Star to playoffs. It’s the trailblazers who are different. This WNBA is defining what an investment in our female youth can yield.

To keep reading Donna's post, go to Women's Voices For Change.

I'm not sure if this is a gender issue, but I can't help but wonder if it would be this much of an issue if this were a boys basketball team.

A coach of a private Texas high school basketball team refuses to apologize for his team's win of 100-0. He says "My girls played with honor and dignity". The school disagrees and has made a public apology, claiming it is embarrassed and ashamed of this apparently "un-christ-like" behavior.

I watch football, not so much basketball, and I've seen lopsided scores before, actually quite often, even in college teams; so I simply can't help but wonder if this is a Christian issue, or if these girls "just weren't as compassionate as they ought to be". Your thoughts?

I don't normally read sports news but the headline for this story, "Texas girls hoops team seeks forfeit of 100-0 win" caught my eye.

The long and short is that one of these teams was far superior to the other - hence the score. The winning school is a fairly large Christian academy while the losing team's school is very small focusing on supporting students with learning disabilities. Now the winning team's school says it wants the forfeit because the game "does not reflect a Christ-like and honorable approach to competition." I'm guessing an "honorable approach to competition" might also be called unsportsmanlike.

At any rate the story bugs me. Would this be happening with boys teams? Would it have happened if the losing team wasn't somehow being viewed as "disabled" even though their issues are cognitive rather than physical. Apparently the losing team didn't even take it that hard. Am I seeing something that isn't there?

It obviously makes for good news coverage as well.

I just don't know what to say. I guess we all know that the football world is filled with these types. I wouldn't read the comments. What further incenses me are the people looking on and laughing as if he's just won something.

They said there were children present.

This is my first post on Feministing, so I would like to say hello to everyone. I've been lurking around for a while, made a few comments, but nothing much due to my shy nature, even online, if you could believe that.

I just found this interesting, since my boyfriend watches a lot of football, and I constantly see women and cheerleaders very lightly clad all the time in the stadiums. So what was so special about this situation, that this woman was humiliated and embarrassed for her outfit, I really have to wonder. What are your thoughts?

Oh, and my apologies if this has already been posted.

I've watched hockey a loong time. I was one of those people who'd get excigted hearing the 'Hockey Night in Canada' theme song start up, in anticipation of a good game. I grew up in a town with a 'dynasty' team, who had a good run of Stanley Cup winning years. But as I grew into my feminism, I also became increasingly aware of just how fucked up the professional world of sports is - including hockey. Media would report on the 'dark' side of junior hockey (the road to the NHL, for many North American players), particularly the sensational, but undeniably sexually-themed hazing rituals, the sexual abuse of players by trusted members of coaching staff, and - recently - a court case involving allegations of forced 'group sex' between players and their girlfriends at the hands of a coach. In professional hockey, we know that the funding and optics of women's versus men's leagues are seriously skewed, with the greatest salaries, the rampant advertising, and professional respect reserved for the NHL. As in many other sports, a few 'exceptional' women have broken through the wall of testosterone to garner some acclaim, like Hayley Wickenheiser. As a younger woman, I was pretty excited to see Manon Rheaume was signed as a free agent to the Tampa Bay Lightening, and got the go-ahead to play goal them. Then I realized how it was: she would start in goal for an exhibition game, which had no competitive value, and was pulled early for no apparent reason. The coach later acknowledged it was pretty much a publicity stunt for the expansion team, and reports focused on that angle, as much as for her good looks.

Last night, though, something interesting happened that absolutely stunned me. Dallas Star player, the widely disliked "bad boy" Sean Avery, was suspended by the league for uttering "disparaging remarks" about former girlfriends, Rachel Hunter and Elisha Cuthbert (who are now dating other NHL hockey players). Long story short, he ensured all media cameras were on, then called the women his "sloppy seconds."  Which is a jaw-droppingly bonehead manouvre to begin with. But what really stunned me was the league's willingness to indefinitely suspend Avery for these comments, and THEN for the coach of his team to publicly support the censure, stating that, if the NHL hadn't of done it, he would have.

Clearly, there are other incidents that have led up to this moment - Avery has been known as a pot-stirrer in many ways, engaging in a lot of 'unsportsmanlike' behaviour on ice, on the bench and, obviously, away from the rink. As I said to my partner last night, this was just the last straw in a series of ill-will engendering actions. Now, he may have provided team management with a reason to get rid of a controversial, yet increasingly unpopular player. But, what the hell, NHL?  You surprised me.

Heard about this? Apparently she's known for her somewhat rare sidearm knuckleball. Don't just break that glass ceiling, break it with style!

I am a footie fan - a soccer fan, for my fellow Americans.  One of the things that I love so much about international football that we don't get for any sport here in the States is the off-field drama (and unabashed eye candy ).

So I was very excited to stumble across a news release for a new free soccer video game that lets you not just play the game itself but also engage in off-the-pitch shenanigans. 

The best part, the one that convinced me that I needed to find and download this - work and school be damned - is at the very end of that news release:

The player avatars can be female. So we could be seeing some top-flight co-ed teams. And best of all, the women don’t seem to be enhanced for male viewers. 

(I wonder how Natasha Kai would function on a co-ed team?)

Considering the relative dearth of non-sexualized women available in most video games, and the sexualization of even the male players in most countries, this is quite a step.

Now, all they need to add is the ability to live the life of a footballer's wife/girlfriend or an obsessed fan, and the video game would carry all of the complexities of the real thing.

(Cross-posted at What If )

This entry may end up being a rant more than anything.

Early this evening, UFC fights on prime time television featured the fights of female MMA fighter Gina Carano. I spent 8 years of my adolescent playing baseball and holding my own with a large number of very unwelcoming boys, so I applaud any woman trying to make her way into an male dominated arena. Gina Carano is a powerful talented fighter.

Yet, the assholes I live with thought it would be appropriate to sexualize everything she did in the fight. 30 seconds into the fight I was so fed up with their "yeah baby"s and "take your shirt off" I called them idiots and left the room.

Venting aside my point is this: even though female boxers are a powerful example of strong women, men still managed to reduce their training and preparation and work down to a cat fight between girls. One of the announcers said, the girl Gina was fighting pulled her hair and laughed.

I am crazy to think that most men's reaction to female boxing is similar to this, just some fucking sex scene in a bad porn for their entertainment. Why can't female athletes bodies be respected for their talent and not just their sexual capacity. Why are so many men so afraid of talented female athletes?

I found this article from Shredbetties. Apparently, Burton snowboards teamed up with Playboy. Great, there are people who will be riding these playboy models. I posted the link and some of the comments are downright misogynistic, no surprise. Of course, a lot of people are outraged and they should be. Another way for a corporate entity to make money off of women's bodies. I don't care what other people say, its degrading to women. Period.

If you've spent any time within the feminist movement, you know that misogyny and professional sports go together - almost like traffic and weather - I am sure you all rememer the Jets game last year in which women attendees were encouraged to "Show Us Your Tits."

Although I've heard of such before - I never really experienced it first hand up until last night when, with some free time, I decided to go to a local bar to catch the Cowboys-Eagles game on Monday Night Football.

I am not so sure the people who engage in misogyny and homophobic tendencies even realize they are engaging in such.

I've been watching the Olympics religiously for the past week and a half. I've been reading various posts on Feministing about women and the Olympics. But the subject I haven't seen is the women who are not on center stage, the women who seem to act as living props (Chinese women, I think it's important to note). These are the women who carried the country signs in the opening ceremony. The women (though, to be fair, there were also men) who acted as cheerleaders, stomping and clapping and smiling for the entire opening ceremony while acting as a human fence. The women who carried the signs around on the gymnastics floor. The women who carried the medals and flowers for the medal ceremonies, handing them to a man to give to the athletes. I'm sure there are plenty of other women in such positions who I haven't even noticed but who still deserve to have their position as scenery questioned.

I was a heavy kid. I hated running, but I loved soccer. To this day, though the sport has one of the smallest television audiences in American sports, youth enrollment, especially among young girls, is at its highest. We can give credit for that to two things. One is the inherent accessibility of the game. Soccer is a sport that nurtures all body types. The heavier girls muscled people off the ball, the smaller ones worked to speed past them, and everybody had to run. In a world where girls are told that they are too thin or too fat, too tall or too short, the only thing that matters on the soccer field is who runs and who gets the ball.

The second cause for the general excitement about the sport is the success of the US Womens Soccer team. What's ironic and very exciting is that the international superpowers in women's soccer often come from countries where cultural attitudes still nurture sexism  and laws condone it (Brazil, China, maybe even the United States). In the 1999 Women's World Cup Final, the United States and China fought hard for 2 hours and ended the game with penalty kicks. When Brandi Chastain, scored on the fifth kick, she ripped off her shirt to reveal her black sports bra and dropped to her knees. In that moment, millions of little girls cheered and took the field. The American women had acheived what the men had not. They had won a World Cup and would go on to medal at every subsequent Olympics.

Now we know it was not a fluke. Those young girls have played in their own Olympics. A very young American team, containing none of the members of the 1999 World Cup team has just defeated Brazil to win a Gold medal in Beijing. 

I no longer play soccer, but every time the United States wins a soccer game I remember the fourteen odd years I spent playing soccer and the strength, both physical and mental, that it brought me. It taught me that I could run with the boys and even outrun them. So I would like to say a public thank you to the American women who inspired my generation to run hard, no matter what the context.

Olympians...world class athletes or fuck toys? Depends on if the athlete in question is male or female.  High-acheiving men are revered for their accomplishments, but the women athletes are still judged on their attractiveness and fuckability.  The Facebook group linked below states that Alicia Sacramone "sucks at gymnastics" (yeah, so why did she make the Olympic team then?!?) but, hey, a whole lot of assholes say they'd still fuck her anyways.  Great statement of values there.

If you are a member of Facebook, please sign in, go to this group, and report it.  It's just offensive and Facebook needs some input from people who do not accept that it's okay to publicly talk about women this way.&

If you knew me at all, you'd know that I'm not an avid sports fan. At best, I'll sit through a football game for my partner's benefit, but I'm usually asleep by half time. So it probably comes as no surprise that I'm not following the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing. However, its not because I'm not interested or because I have better things to do, or any of this guy's reasons .

Let me first say this: the idea of global brother- and sisterhood is beautiful. The notion that we can put aside our differences for "a few shining weeks" and all hold hands and unite under the banner of anything is noble (thanks a lot, Morgan Freeman and Visa ). But there are some things that I don't think can, or should, be tolerated or ignored in the name of athletic tradition. I think that we should use this global forum to call attention to the betterment of mankind instead of turning a blind eye to the obvious human rights abuses that are being committed, not only by China, but by a multitude of nations competing in the Olympics.

Today I was talking to a friend of mine about Olympic women’s soccer and I asked if she remembered the 1999 Women’s World Cup

When she told me she didn’t, I actually didn’t believe her. I kept asking was she sure? Was she completely sure? Was she really truly 100% positive? She really didn’t remember at all? Not even the part where one player ripped her shirt off in an impromptu victory celebration? Really?

I opened my inbox this morning to get this article staring right back at me:

Table tennis is desperate to attract more viewers and some in the sport believe a simple enough solution exists: get the women to wear skirts and shirts with “curves”.</i> ... <i>We are trying to push the players to use skirts and also nicer shirts, not the shirts that are made for men, but ones with more curves,” International Table Tennis Federation (ITTF) vice president Claude Bergeret said.

First off, what exactly are 'curves'?  Is it against decorum to just come out and say 'tits and ass'?

So anyone who actually looks at the Internet has seen the coverage on how women's teams have been competing in far more revealing utfits than the men's, though at least there they try to come up with some sort of bullshit excuse about 'freedom of movement' of 'improved performance'.  None of those excuses from the ITTF!  Just plain, unadulterated, 'people will only watch that sport you ladies excel in if you show a little more skin'.

What are the men's teams to do, anyway?  Is there really that huge of a gap in ratings between men's and women's ping pong.  Maybe we can get a little flash of six-pack from the guys between serves!

Sigh.

I was checking my email on yahoo and I saw the big headline, "Almost America's sweetheart " with Shawn Johnson's picture next to it.  I haven't been following the olympics much but I immediately wanted to hear what kind of shit someone had to say now, so I clicked on the link.

The first sentence made me angry already; "Shawn Johnson came here to win four gold medals, a half-pint, half-Phelps."  Oh no, she was only competing for FOUR gold medals?  Because if I went to the olympics I would be shooting for about twenty.  And of course, you have to compare everyone to Michael Phelps even though it's a completely different event.

Throughout the article, the author, Dan Wetzel, repeatedly says that the gold medals were "stolen" from her and that she "lost to" someone else.  Apparently, the U.S. teams owned all of the gold medals to begin with and they had to be stolen away.  He doesn't say at any point in the article that she WON three silver medals.

He also quoted her several times.  It's clear that she had a positive attitude about her whole experience.  Wetzel, however, makes it sound like she is such an innocent, naive little girl, calling her "America's sweetheart".

And finally, "She came to win gold, and while that hasn't changed, she's learned to savor silver, too."

I'm so sick of the media trying to find drama in everything.  I think Shawn Johnson's accomplishments are awesome and she should be proud of herself, as she obviously is.  Most people couldn't come close to competing in the olympics, let alone winning three silver medals.

(Cross-posted from our home at Evil Slutopia - it's kinda long but has a whole mess of links for anyone who is interested in this topic.)

We wrote the other day about our confusion over the very slight discrepancy between the men's and women's beach volleyball uniforms. Today we're thinking that at least those women were able to come and compete in the Olympics, because here in the year 2008 there are still a few countries who do not allow women to participate.

So the Olympics have begun, and the games are a great way to observe various gender issues and sport. For one, we see very clearly the hard-to-explain gender difference in beach volleyball attire , men in basketball-like uniforms and women in bathing suits. But in the majority of sports, event attire is similar for women and men, and according to what's suitable for the athletic activity.

It's also so nice to be able to watch women's games reported in a more professional manner (although later this week I'll try to discuss the gender difference in editorializing the athletes), focusing on their athletic and academic achievements.

But Friday's "Creep Show" article in the NY Times , while making some valid points, was author Buzz Bissinger's paternalistic take on young women's athletics and seemed to reflect more his own discomfort with developing young women in the spotlight. As such, I think it speaks to some of the unease with female sexuality in-progress as well as normative ideas about what makes female bodies female.

Some great sports news.  Hopefully this winter story doesn't get lost in the midst of the exciting summer olympics!

Every time the Olympics are aired- summer or winter- I doubt I’ll watch. And, every time, I find myself in front of the television captivated by the nationalistic drama presented in cheering for the best-of-the-best athletes in the world. This evening, I happened to catch one of the women’s beach volleyball matches. The US team consisting of Misty May-Treanor and Kerry Walsh were taking on the Cuban team of Fernandez and Larrea (whose first names were never made evident). During the match, the commentary provided by two male sportscasters was particularly appalling. Interspersing shots of “live” volleyball action with a constantly running barrage of gossip about the American team members, the chatter turned quickly from volleyball to courting and marriage decisions to future speculation that neither “almost 30″ year old woman would compete in the next Olympics because of her perceived “sense of urgency at needing to start a family”.

Check out this cringe-inducing photo gallery .  Supposedly the photos demonstrate the "hand signals that beach volleyball players use to communicate to their partners."  Considering the lack of dudely beach volleyball posteriors - ahem, I mean HAND SIGNALS- I'd say the point is to check out the international array of players' ass cleaveage.  Thanks a lot NBC!

Why, oh why, are the male beach volley ball teams clad in sports jerseys and shorts down to their knees while the women are jumping around in sports bras and teensy, tight bikini bottoms? Why is the "uniform" for this sport so different for the two genders? Why do the female athletes have to play most of the game with their butts hanging out? This pisses me off more than I can say.

The row of half naked women that stand by the court (seemingly to usher in the game - for both men's and women's volley ball) is a mystery to me too.

When the summer Olympics come around, we always think about one important question.

What the fuck is up with men's and women's beach volleyball uniforms?

We put up a little photographic evidence over at our blog, but many of you have probably seen this in action already.  The women have to wear the tiny little ill-fitting up the butt bikinis instead of the baggy comfy shorts and t-shirts that the men wear because...?  Maybe constant wedgies help them focus. Or something. We're sure there's a logical explanation.

I guess we should just be glad that women are allowed to compete at all - yeah, looking at you, Saudi Arabia.  They still don't allow women to participate in the Olympics at all.  Hopefully this BBC article is correct about the IOC putting pressure on them to change so that we can see Saudi women in London in 2012.  "If not, it is conceivable the Kingdom may not be allowed to enter an all-male team."  We'd be fine with that.

Despite some lingering uncomfortable feelings about the Olympics and human rights violations by China, I sat down to watch the opening ceremonies last night.  I must say that for the most part, I was extremely impressed by the performance aspect of the evening, and enjoyed the Parade of Nations, where I was hit with the incredible scope of our international world, as multiple countries I had never heard of crossed the screen.

Less impressive though, were the woman leading each country in - made-up to the point of looking doll-like, parading stiffly, serving as decorative, moving sign-holders.  Men can't carry signs while dressed in festive costumes?

According to my local community webmagazine , this article has created an uproar in the sports blogosphere.  In it, Nadel criticizes ESPN reporter for being too hawt and sexy at a recent Brewers vs. Cubs game. 

Screenshot of article after the jump...

I'm new to Feministing and what better way to start off then with a story of local youngin feminism! Here goes:

I live in the small town of Brookfield, Illinois.(Yes, home of the Brookfield Zoo). This week in our local newspaper, there was a sports feature on the only girl in the Minors Little League division.

Instead of switching to softball, as most girls on Brookfield Little League do when they reach a certain age, Tannah, age 12, stuck with her passion in baseball.

"I like everything about baseball," Tannah said. "I like playing first base because no matter how hard [my teammates] throw the ball, I can catch it. We have some really good players on our team."

How kick ass!

My younger brother is in the same division, and he has played her team many times this summer. I'm not much of a baseball fan, she is indeed amazing at first base.

So here's to a budding feminist and an awesome baseball player, hooooraaayy for Tannah!

Michelle Wie, the 18-year-old golfer has been catching a lot of heat lately for her decision to skip major LPGA tournaments in order to play in PGA tournaments.

Wie was listed in qualifying for the Women's British Open at Sunningdale, but she pulled out and instead has decided to play in her eighth PGA tournament. Wie, who has yet to make the cut on the PGA Tour, has also yet to win on the women's tour.

Yet LPGA golfers seem to have taken a hard line response to Wie's decision. "I really don't know why Michelle continues to do this," said Annika Sorenstam, who is playing in her final major tournament in this week's Women's British Open.

Fellow LPGA golfer Helen Alfredsson added: "I think, if she wants to be a golfer, she should really concentrate on being on the women's tour and dealing with them and learning to win. Winning is what we are out here for, but I just don't see the interest really on being on the men's tour."

Wie, on the other hand, said she is trying to focus on having "fun" and isn't worried about whether she makes the 36-hole cut for the first time. At a July 25 news conference Wie stated:

I'm just doing what I feel like I want to do. I can't control, and I don't want to control, what other people think about me. People are going to write hateful stuff, and that's fine. All I can control is how I play. If I shoot some low scores and win some tournaments, you know, it's going to be hard to write bad stuff.

It just seems weird to me that it's even an issue for LPGA golfers that Wie decides to play with the men. If she's good enough to qualify, I don't see why the fact that there's no "L" in front of the organization sponsoring the event should matter. It's a sport, and if people are playing golf, it seems like a perfectly adequate venue for Wie to showcase her talents, regardless who she's playing against.

Does anyone else know about this? At the Beijing Olympic Games, if officials cannot determine that a female athlete is not a male, she must undergo 'sex determination.' This has apparently been going on for quite some time. Today, the New York Times reports that the lab is ready for sex testing in China.

Experts at the lab, located at the Peking Union Medical College Hospital, will evaluate cases based on their external appearance and take blood samples to test hormones, genes and chromosomes, said Prof. Tian Qinjie of the college hospital, according to the Xinhua news agency.

Gender verification tests emerged in the 1960s when Communist countries in Eastern Europe were thought to be using male athletes in women's competitions. The tests were used at the Olympics for the first time at the 1968 Mexico City Games.

The test aims to maintain fairness of the Games, and to rule out inaccurate test results.

Continue reading Sex Determination at Olympics.

Posted by UofM Feminist - July 29, 2008, at 03:52PM | in Sports

I love scuba diving. As a marine biology nerd, my greatest passion in life is exploring the fascinating and complex underwater world. Scuba diving taught me how to focus and carefully observe my surroundings. Scuba diving taught me how to calm myself down and solve problems in situations where I would normally panic. Scuba diving allowed me to use these skills to witness a Giant Pacific Octopus swim inside an abandoned Volkswagen Beetle.

However, I do have one major problem with Scuba diving as it is today.

I have a problem with the fact that even in the enlightened year of 2008, it is still a male-dominated sport.

Ad: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3044/2630928091_2664e45f96.jpg?v=0

Article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080726/ap_on_bi_ge/nike_advertisement

The ad shows a basketball player jumping up for a slam dunk while his crotch simultaneously slams into the opponents face, followed by the tagline "That Ain't Right."

From the article:
"Earlier, Nike had said the ads were 'based purely upon a common insight from within the game of basketball -- the athletic feat of dunking on the opposition, and is not intended to be offensive.'"

*Cough bullshit cough.* There is no way they are gonna try and tell me that it was just so obvious that they were refering to the dunk. I'm not buying it. I do believe, however, that they were trying to create a double meaning so they could use the "oh we didn't mean it like that, you're just misinterpreting" excuse.

While I'm glad Nike had the brains to pull the ad, what bothers me is that many people are still defending it. When I first heard about it on the radio this morning, the DJ's were saying that it was really obvious that the ad was refering to how high he jumped. That's funny because Nike claimed it was obviously about the fact that he was dunking. I guess it's not so clear afterall, is it?

Having said all this, I do appreciate the fact that Nike took the ad down, even though it should have never been there in the first place.

The female teams at the University of Arkansas used to be called the "Lady Razorbacks," until recently. As of July 21, female athletes joined the male athletes in being known simply as "Razorbacks."

And some people just can't handle the change. Enter Wally Hall, assistant managing sports editor of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette.

The ever-illogical Hall decided to write this.

In it, he shares his opinion as to why the change is a bad idea.

The first time I can clearly remember being on the receiving end of gender discrimination was grade school gym class.

The girls never got passed to. Ever. We dilengently ran around the field or gymnasium trying to be "open," but no dice. The boys would consistantly pass the ball only to other boys, even if it meant losing play to the other team or getting a penalty. The one girl who ever got passes was the tomboy of the class. Even then, an open male was preferred.

By about grade three we had all given up. The girls always insisted on playing defence so we could just hang around the goal and chat. What was the point in running around the field after a ball that would never come to you?

Normally a straight A student, I always got Bs in gym. I received my first C in grade five gym class. Apparantly I wasn't participating enough. That was the first year I had a male gym teacher, if you care to read into that.

I believe it was in grade six or seven that a Must-Touch-A-Girl rule was implemented as a solution to our complaints. Goals would only count if a girl had touched the ball before it went in the net. While it did help, is it not ridiculous that this rule was needed at all?

In grade nine I had my first all-girl gym class, and you know what, I got an A. Go figure.

Anyone else have crappy grade school gym class experiences?