Oh, just shut up

I wasn’t going to write about this woman, because I didn’t want to give people who say idiotic things in print, any more attention that they already get. (Also, I am finding it hard to get my rage on just now.) Then, I remembered two things.

1. 4 people are reading this
2. It really annoyed me.

So, dear Susie O’Brien. Shut up. Here’s the thing. You don’t know anything about Tiger Woods’ marriage. Are you a member of it? No? Then seriously, shut the hell up.

It would be bad enough that you feel free to comment on the conventionality or otherwise of their marriage, but to blame Elin? To say:

…And if you do know, and remain married to the man, you are just as dumb all the same. Either way, you and your husband are clearly living such separate lives that you really don’t have a marriage worth saving anyway. Or it could be that you have the type of marriage where you don’t look too hard for evidence of spousal failure because perhaps you don’t want to see an end to spousal financing. If that’s the case, that’s what I’d call a gold-digger.

So not only is her marriage not worth saving, or even fighting for, she’s a stupid gold-digger? (Which is interesting, because I’d have thought landing a major star like Tiger, would have taken a fair amount of smarts, if you were only doing it to get at his money.)

You say:

Call me romantic, but to me a marriage is about sharing love and sharing lives. And this means knowing enough about the other person to be aware roughly how they spend their time – day and night.

Well, call me naive, but I also think marriage has something to do with trust. And being married to a professional sportsman must stretch that to its limit, but nonetheless trusting your husband not to cheat on you is not the mark of a stupid woman.

So then, what right have we got to pass judgment on her marriage? Well, whether you like it or not, you become public property when you are married to a famous man such as Woods.

You know, that is actually not true. Tiger has courted the media, sure, and that might give you the right to pass judgement on him. But really only if you yourself are as pure as the driven snow. It doesn’t mean you get to call her stupid, or a gold digger, or assume anything about her and her marriage. We often seem to think that public figures are public property. God knows I’ve done it. But this isn’t a funny story, or someone getting their comeuppance. It’s a sordid little tale, and it’s not entertainment.

And there’s also this:

I am pretty sure my opinion of the situation will have other feminists fuming, but here I go anyway.

1. Paying lip service to the concept of feminism doesn’t excuse the misogyny of what you are saying.
2. Don’t assume you know what ‘the feminists’ are thinking. (We’re a diverse group, for a start, but also, you don’t appear to be one yourself.)

How about this? You don’t know anything about them. You don’t know them as people, and yes, the media has been saturated with images of them for more than a week now. But that doesn’t give you any particular insight into their relationship. So how about you stay out of it? Oh, and shut the hell up.

Once Again, OH FFS.

Dear the Southland Times,

Oh Hai.  Is it 1930 in Southland?  Cos that is about the only excuse I can find for this headline.

Meet Charlotte Harrison, NZ’s latest hockey hottie

Nice alliteration, I’ll give you that.  It’s just a shame you had to be horribly sexist to use it.  Oh, but it doesn’t end there, does it?

“Charlotte Harrison has all the ingredients to be New Zealand hockey’s next Mandy Smith.

She’s a quick, agile, blonde bombshell with a thunderous strike that sends shivers up the spine of opposition goalies.”

What does the colour of her hair have to do with anything? She’s an athlete, she’s fucking talented by the looks of it, she’s generally pretty awesome.  Could we stick to reporting that please? You’re profiling her, and you have that she made the national side at 16 and the fact that she has, at 19, 62 international caps, after the blond bombshell line?  Not to mention the fact she’s been playing in Belgium for the past year?

And then there’s the photo.  I know she’s in the middle of a trap, but your photographer didn’t have one photo of her without her legs spread and her skirt riding up?

How about this?  Here’s this young woman in our national hockey side. She’s a supremely talented athlete. She’s awesome.  People who care about sport will still read that article.  Anyone who is reading it because of the headline is just a perve.

Thanks,

Wegan

(Thanks to @wellyjulz for pointing out the article)

#@$#ing ##$#$er @#$#$$@ing

When I was a kid, I played basketball against the boys.  Big, mean boys who were mean.  Who never passed me the ball, and who would elbow me in the breast every chance they got, cos that was funny.

I also spent my primary and intermediate years playing Bullrush.  (also known as Scrag, and I believe, ‘mush’) Which, really was rugby without the rules.  And I never got particularly injured (My brother did, and still has the egg sized lump of scar tissue on his forehead to prove it). 

Now once a week, I front up to play indoor netball against men.  Men who are bigger, faster and stronger than me.  When I was playing in Christchurch a few years ago, one of them hit me so hard I would have flown out of court had there not been a net.  I’ve had a broken finger, dislocations, a black eye and numerous bruises.  And you know what?  Those boys don’t scare me. Playing against them doesn’t scare me.  Them hurting me doesn’t scare me, because if it did, I would to bastardise a quote, be playing tiddlywinks.

They apparently scare Christchurch high school principals though.  I know indoor netball is not rugby, in that no one is being tackled and thrown to the ground. There’s not a particularly high risk of neck or spine injuries.  But have you seen an international netball match recently? Have you seen a WNBA game?  Do you want to tell Candace Parker (at right)  she can’t play?

Because that’s what they are doing to Chantelle Garbutt.  She wants to play in a inter-house rugby tournament but has been told she’s not allowed because it is too dangerous.

And you know, what?  The school is just covering its own ass, I get that.  There would be a national uproar if she plays, gets crunched in a tackle, and is permanently injured.  But that could happen to any player in any game ever.  If she is capable of playing, and good enough to, and her parents consent, she should have the choice.  That’s what it is about.  Not protecting the little women from themselves, as if they don’t know the risks, and are perfectly capable of judging them. Equality is about people having the same opportunities, even if they use them to make stupid decisions.

But what annoys me more is the commenters on that post:

“Let Chantelle play, and then let the boys do a Jerry Collins on her. And then ask her then if she thinks it’s still sexist.”

Charming.  Yes, because if a player deliberately goes out to hurt another players, that’s the girl’s fault for playing.

“Apart from the fact that girls/women playing rugby is just nonsense, mixed games at schools is irresponsible and potentially dangerous not just because of the obvious strength issues but it’s an opportunity for covert abuse by way of a grope in a ruck or maul etc.”

See above.  That’s the girl’s fault for ending up at the bottom of a ruck, right?  God forbid we expect boys to behave appropriately on the rugby field.

“Let the girls play, they get groped or munted and who’s in the gun? The principal of course for letting it happenn Not the parents or kids for insisting on it going ahead.”

Right, no, not the groper, or the munter. Or the kid who played the game knowing the risks. Who is probably also a munter.

But hey, at least some people support women’s rights to end up at the bottom of the ruck. Or maybe they are just looking forward to watching a New Zealand rugby team win?

Hypocrisy

I’ve been aware, for a while, that I probably appear to be a bit of a hypocrite.

After banging on over and over again about taking women’s sport seriously and not sexualising players like Maria Sharapova, I’ve gotten stuck in a bit of a thing.

Over at Public Address, Emma and I have been discussing Richard Kahui.  And let’s face it, he’s an attractive man.

Credit for this beautiful photo goes to: Photo by Ross Land/Getty Images

But I thought I should explain myself.

I know some people think it is OK to admire sportspeople based on their looks, because at least it is a healthy version of beauty, and I sympathise with that view.

Where my frustration lies is when their beauty (and in some cases, lack of) eclipses their talent as sportspeople.  I know that athletes, to some degree, bring this on themselves with their endorsements and fashion ranges.  But when half the headlines about Maria Sharapova are about the length of her skirt, and sports’ administrations teach women how to apply make up, it’s not about the sport anymore.

I like Kahui (and Captain Tackles Richie McCaw) because they are amazing at what they do. It helps that I like to look at them.  But first and foremost, they are rugby players.  Great rugby players.  Players whose games I like and who can always astound me with what they can do.  Reggie Miller used to be the same.  So did Phill Jones.  So is Julie Seymour, and Hadyn’s new crush, Casey Williams.  Shane Bond, Dan vettori.  That list is as long, and as exhaustive as the sports I like to watch.  And it’s not limited to people whi have really good arms.  (For example, Dwight Howard is on the list, and his arms freak me out.  His shoulders are as big as his head! Although, I suppose, Julie Syemour does have impressive guns.)

I often get in trouble watching sports, especially when I’m at the ground, because I will watch one person, off the ball, for ages, and completely miss what’s going on.  But I think that’s because, in large part, I like sport for the people involved.  I am constantly astounded by what these people can do.  By what they can force their bodies to do, and the talent, skill, and dedication it takes to be really great at a sport.

And that, my friends, is hotter then even Richard Kahui’s chiselled cheekbones.

Wow.

How I love that WordPress thinks this post, is related to this one.

I suppose it is nice I don’t have to go looking for casual sexism.  But then, I’m clearly ugly and have daddy issues, so what would I know?  It’s nice to know boys thing being naive and oblivious is cute. Must work harder on that – although, I guess we’ve found the root of why I’m not married.

Hey Guy? My question is how are girls supposed to win with you?  Because to know anything is apparently offensive, but to not know a team’s nickname is unacceptable.

Oh, and:

“If any guy heckles you for not knowing something, he probably has a sad life where the team is his only source of pride”

I don’t know, but to me, boys “roll[ing] their eyes and nudg[ing] each other” seems a little heckly.

I’m really glad I know boys who aren’t threatened buy girls who know shit about sport, and aren’t going to hide it for the sake of getting and keeping a boyfriend.

But then, maybe they think I’m a lesbian too?

Hmm. Girls = Not competitive.

I grew up playing Friday night basketball in Christchurch, mostly against boys, and Saturday netball.  Given the bitchiness inherent in putting together 7 13 year-old girls from a privileged background, and letting them throw a ball at or near each other, I’ve always been confused when people say girls aren’t competitive.  You know, that old thing about how chicks’ sport isn’t as good to watch, because girls don’t want it as much as boys.  (We’re also not as talented, not as athletic, etc etc etc.  Suck it.)

So, there’s something about this story, which bothers me.

Basically, a girls’ basketball team beat another team 100-0.  Based on reports of the game, it looks like they rode up the score to make 100, playing a full court press (the staunchest defence you can play) and shooting a bunch of three pointers.

So yeah, pretty bad sportsmanship. And worthy of an apology, sure.  But to forfeit the game?  They won, fair and square.  They probably shouldn’t have been in the same competition, and they certainly shouldn’t have been keeping their starting 5 on for the rest of the game, but come on.  They won.  The other team lost.  It is what sport is about.  Not having fun, not participating, not teamwork.  Those things are all very important, but what is important in sport is winning.

I’m all for apologising for the immense lack of sportsmanship, but to forfeit the result and fire the coach?  There’s a part of me wondering if this was a boys team, would this have gone differently*?

—–

* Of course, I’m a girl, so it is important to note that I know nothing about sport at all.

Taking it seriously.

Every once in a while, I get told not to “take things so seriously”. Or, as I usually read it, “get a sense of humour, even though I am saying something offensive, you hairy-legged, frizzy haired harridan”.

So, you can imagine my disgust, when I read this headline about a brawl in the WNBA:

WNBA brawl has an upside
Tuesday’s WNBA rumble upside: It shows that the players are serious, and all the fuss isn’t a bad thing, either

Wait, what? So…a brawl, something that not too long ago had fans and officials crying foul in the NBA is a good thing in the WNBA? In 2004, there was a brawl in a Pistons-Pacers game, which led to five players, and five fans being charged with assault. It was described as one of the worst incidents of sports violence in America, and led to suspensions, trades, and changes to security.

At the time, NBA commissioner David Stern said

“The line is drawn, and my guess is that won’t happen again — certainly not by anybody who wants to be associated with our league”

But wait, when it happens in a girls’ league, it’s ok, because it gets them some publicity and shows that they are serious? Let’s see just how serious:

Ok, so to my reading, what we have is a player pulling another down, some shoving, a coach pushing a player out of the way, some punches being thrown. It’s pretty disgusting. I’m all for bringing back the biff, I really am, but things shouldn’t escalate like this.

10 players and a coach have been suspended and rightly so. And now, articles full of words like “passion” “toughness” “commitment” “seriousness” “desire” abound. Come on, did anyone really question these women’s seriousness and commitment? You did? You wanna tell that to 6ft4in Lauren Jackson’s face? Actually, do you want to say that to 5ft3in my face?

These women are athletes. Serious athletes. Seriously talented athletes. This brawl is not a coming of age. It’s not a celebration. It’s bad. All it demonstrates is that women, as well as men, are capable of being stupid and violent. As Candace Parker (one of the players right in the middle, and frankly, an awesome player ) said “put people together in sports and there is always the possibility that something like that can happen”. People. Not women or men.

Yeah, all the coverage is good. No news is bad news, right? But for how long will women athletes have to fight this perception that they are somehow less serious, less committed, less passionate, less talented than their male counterparts?

Oh really? You want to say that to my face?