sports

Supporting Movement Friday

La Macha — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 17:30:35 -0500

This Friday, in an effort to promote thought about how to support women and movement (and/or sports/exercise) in a meaningful, fully inclusive, liberatory manner, I want to point to Maria Tallchief.

Tallchief is the first Native American woman who 'made it' as an internationally recognized ballerina. This clip gives a short background:

Maria was a part of a group of tribal women that found huge success through the ballet world. Her sister, Marjorie, became the first Native American to become "première danseuse étoile" of the Paris Opera Theater, and Yvonne Chouteau, Rosella Hightower, and Moscelyne Larkin along with Maria and Marjorie were all honored in 1997 by the state of Oklahoma for being the first Native American ballerinas. But even as they found success through dance, the women lives were rooted in the violence of colonization:

Although distinctive as ballerinas, the five women share similar roots. All were born at a time when government edicts banned traditional tribal rituals. To keep ancestral cultures alive, powwows and other ceremonies were then held in secret. The five women still recall the excitement and respect they felt when they attended these covert dance gatherings as children (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1083/is_n2_v72/ai_20187601).

Which comes back to the question of the day. How do women interested in supporting women's empowerment through movement (and/or sports/exercise) support women who are living through the active colonization of their homelands?

Is movement (and/or sports/exercise) a human right? And if it is, how do we, as U.S. citizens justify supporting nation/states that deny, curtail, or otherwise severely monitor women's right to move (i.e. Israel with Palestine, U.S. at the Mexican border, etc)?

Now, before you say that the right to exercise and 'border monitoring' are not intimately connected, consider this: If Maria Tallchief were living in Palestine, she would not have the right to travel abroad freely for performances without possibly losing her right of return (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_return#Palestinian). She may also lose chances of performing because of closed borders (as many other Palestinian acts have (see the Palestinian hip/hop group DAM http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/hip-hop-palestine).

Are the only people who have a right to make a living off of "movement" non-colonized people? Or people who are willing to give up access to their homeland? How does the right to travel interconnect with the right to individual body movement?

How can women interested in protecting and improving women's access to movement support and respect women living in colonized states?

Supporting Movement Friday

La Macha — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:41:30 -0500

Because it's Friday and I'm so sure none of us want to get all deep and "think-y" on a Friday--I'm gonna declare today "Support Movement Friday," which basically boils down to, I'm going to scour the internets for the coolest video/pics of women 'doing movement' and post it here. You are then going to ooh and ahh over the amazing fantastic beauty that is women moving--and then we will talk together to find ways to support ALL women in "movement."

For this first Friday, we have the ALWAYS amazing super heroine wheelchair racing diva: Diane Roy. I first heard about Diane at the 2004 International Paralympics and followed her through to the Paralympics that just took place again this year. She almost finished her career with a stunning gold medal race.

Unfortunately, the crash at the end of the race caused a protest which resulted in a race 'redo.' The second time around, Roy still managed a silver--but it was a tough blow for her to deal with.

"I talk with a lot of athletes, coaches and people with experience and [they say] it’s the first time it’s happened like this. There was a crash in Athens … and they didn’t rerun the race. It happens when we race long distances. It’s an accident. It’s ridiculous.

“What will happen when we have other races with a big pack and there’s a crash. Every time they will rerun the race?” (via: http://www.sportmedbc.com/community/blog/?p=232)

Roy started racing shortly after she became disabled:

"I like to do a lot of races. I feel good with that," she said. "I like the competition and I like the sport. I did sport when I was young. So after the accident, I decided to try wheelchair racing. I love it." (via: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/paralympics/2008-09/09/content_7010868.htm)

Clearly, having access and community support to racing has been very important for Roy. If she were somebody who lived in a country without universal health care (cough cough, pick up the pace U.S.!), she may not even have access to a wheelchair, much less all the different tools that are required for her to compete and get to competitions (I currently have two friends who are using donated wheelchairs because their health care package does not cover wheelchairs and they couldn't afford them).

So, my Friday "supporting movement" questions: For those of us who do not have access to universal health care how do we embrace movement when movement may literally cost an arm or a leg? And in general, how do we make movement accessible to women who are poor, or up against some other access issues? Is there something *you* do that could help other women (whether it's constructing your own tools to move or that you belong to an awesome organization)?

Sex Positive and Hyper Sexualization in Sports: Is there a way to negotiate?

La Macha — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 13:29:29 -0500

One of the biggest issues for women athletes these days is the extreme hyper-sexualization many sports require women to participate in while competing at a highly advanced level. For example, car racer Danica Patrick has been very straightforward (and quite successful) about embracing her more 'feminine' side while letting her racing skills speak for themselves.

But even as many women are successfully and willingly embracing the sexualization of their sport, I've also sat in a classroom at an elite university with women athletes as young as 18 and 19 talking about how male sports web sites have gotten a hold of their pictures and had 'rate them' competitions where visitors to the site rated the girls according to 'fuckability.' A few girls in that classroom even mentioned coaches who encouraged them to wear makeup and 'sex it up' while playing to increase visibility and chances of funding.

To add another layer to this sexual mix, far too often the 'embracing the feminine' female athletes participate in are not-so-subtle attempts to distance themselves from the 'all women athletes are lesbo dykes' stereotype. And to be clear, these athletes don't want to distance themselves from the stereotype because they hate the stereotype--but because they hate lesbians and find it an insult to be so intimately linked to them.

And this doesn't even get into the discussion about how white sexuality is perceived as an asset to draw on for white female athletes, but a constant negative for women of color athletes. Would anybody think of calling Ms. Danica a monkey (http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_26-1-2003_pg2_11)? Or a nappy headed ho (http://mediamatters.org/items/200704040011)?

So, when you bring all these different layers under the 'sports' umbrella--the question has to be asked--given all the negatives of the sexualization of female atheletes/competition--is there a way to embrace this sexualization in a sex positive way? Is there a way to admit all the complications of hyper-sexualization of female athletes and still embrace that sexualization? Or challenge it, bend it, and/or otherwise reclaim it in a way that is political and centers the needs of female athletes around the world?

Or is that simply too big of a dream for something as small as the sports world to accomplish?

What do you think?

Adventures in Feministory: Balls Out Edition

Jonanna Widner — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:47:12 -0500

Let's saddle up the wayback machine, kids, and travel to the year 1866. It was this very year, when baseball was deemed too difficult and violent a sport for ladies to play, when the Vassar Resolutes hiked up their giant, heavy skirts to run the base paths anyway. I found this photo of the Resolutes (and, OMG—can you believe they were called the Resolutes?) in an advance copy of Jennifer Ring's Stolen Bases: Why American Girls Don't Play Baseball, which will be available from the University of Illinois Press in March 2009...

I love this picture. I love the ladies' caps, totally incongruous with those insane dresses, and the sashes that say "Resolutes" around their waists (it's kind of hard to see with this version of the photo, which we grabbed from the Baseball Hall of Fame site). I love the ladies' totally fierce faces and seriousness; they're like, "Uh, can we hurry up and take the picture so we can get back to doing what we love, which is playing baseball?!"

I haven't read the whole book yet (it just came in the mail—expect more coverage soon), but the parts I've read seem expertly researched, interesting, and super-informative about the exclusionary legacy of our country's favorite sport: "At the same time that Albert Spalding was working to mythologize baseball as a manly American game," Ring writes, "both softball and basketball were invented, designed to be easy enough for girls to play without being overly competitive or physical." Both softball and basketball, Ring goes on to say, were meant to be played indoors, "away from inappropriate gazes of passersby and men."

But the women at many all-female schools like Vassar, Smith College, and others managed to keep playing baseball—outdoors, even. Ring's coverage of the college teams is inspiring and often really sweet, like when she quotes former Resolute Sophia Richardson reminiscing about her intramural league (about 100 years before Title IX, by the way):

...[W]hen I was a freshman, seven or eight baseball clubs suddenly came into being, spontaneously as it seemed, but I think they owed their existence to a few quiet suggestions from a resident physician, wise beyond her generation. The public so far as it knew of our playing was shocked, but in our retired grounds...we continued to play in spite of a censorious public. One day a student, while running between bases, fell with an injured leg. We attended her to the infirmary, with the foreboding that this accident would end our play of baseball. Not so. Dr. Webster said that the public doubtless would condemn the game as too violent, but that if the student had hurt herself while dancing the public would not condemn dancing to extinction.

Damn straight, Dr. Webster—maybe if there had been more folks like you, there'd be more ladies in the dugouts today.

Rethinking "sports"

La Macha — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 17:38:22 -0500

One of the big reasons so many women make the choice to not participate in sports is because "sports" is defined as a thing that very specifically and consciously denies women a place in. For example, I was discussing Sean Avery with my partner earlier in the week and he expressed the belief that on the whole, hockey is one of the least sexist sports out there.

It took a might amount of restraint for me to point out to him that, well, women aren't allowed to play in the NHL, they've NEVER been allowed to play and the possibility of them being allowed to play isn't even remotely on the horizon. He got the point--but the fact that even 'liberated' or 'pro-feminist' men need to be reminded that when a structure is built on the process of exclusion it is, indeed, sexism--well, there's a lot of work to be done in the act of unfolding all the hurt, pain, silence, marginalization and distaste women deal with on a daily basis when it comes to moving their bodies and the embracing concept of 'sports.'

So in that vein, I urge you to watch the following video:

Although dance competitions may get an occasional shout out on ESPN, I think all you really need to do is look at where the funding is to see how seriously dancing is taken by the 'sports' world, and as such, how accessible that 'sport' is to those who would like to participate.

This dance competition is in Europe, where universal health care is normal, so it makes sense that there are enough people to put on a huge competition--economic support to buy the right tools for a sport is essential to being able to participate in that sport. But something I noticed was how ethnically undiverse the population of dancers are. In other words, where are all the people of color? All the women of color? Are they too busy trying to survive? And I have to believe that if there is a lack of ethnic diversity in Europe due to economic hardships, in the U.S., where women of color consistently sit at the bottom of the economic ladder (even more so if they are disabled women of color), dance competitions are beyond the realm of imagination for probably most.

So, what do we do about this? It's a question that must be thrown out into the atmosphere, but one I think that must be answered first and foremost by the women who are already negotiating exclusion and marginalization.

If you are a disabled woman of color, what are you doing to indulge in your love of moving? What support would you most appreciate from those who are not a part of your 'team'?

Sean Avery and Jon Favreau: Comparing the NHL and the Obama Administration

Lisa Factora-Borchers — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 11:42:08 -0500

Two recent public incidents have caught my eye and I'm stuck on one question someone asked me, "What do you think is appropriate punishment?"

Last week, NHL player, Sean Avery, came under fire after commenting to the press and making a disparaging comment about former girlfriends who are now in relationships with other NHL players:

"I just want to comment on how it's become like a common thing in the
NHL for guys to fall in love with my sloppy seconds. I don't know what
that's about, but enjoy the game tonight."

He is referring to ex-girlfriend actress Elisha Cuthbert is reportedly now dating Dion Phaneuf of the Calgary Flames. Another former girlfriend of Avery, model Rachel Hunter is reportedly now seeing another NHL player, Jarret Stole of the Los Angeles Kings.

Avery, with a history of making inappropriate remarks to stir controversy was suspended for six games and has been described as a "disturber, an agitator" by Barry Melrose, ESPN NHL analyst.

Even more recently, the chief speechwriter of our President-elect, 27 year old Jon Favreau, has made his own headlines when a picture of him was displayed on Facebook that showed the newly minted talent groping the right breast of a life-size cutout of the new Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton. In the picture, there is a friend tilting a beer to her lips, offering a kiss, and grasping the top of the cutout's hair, all together disturbing and disasterous.

These two separate incidents are, in one sense, hardly newsworthy when you consider the severity of the actions: offensive statements and thoughtless sexist actions caught on camera. But what makes these kinds of incidents so compelling is the reaction of the public and the organizations they represent. To date, Avery was suspended for six games and Favreau, according to the Washington post apologized to the former First Lady, but received no punishment for his boorish pose. Even more maddening is that Clinton camp simply called it good-natured fun and Clinton "is pleased to learn of Jon's obvious interest in the State Department, and is currently reviewing his application," despite her reign on the sexist parade the past two years.

So, let me make this clear in my head: the NHL suspends Avery for his disruptive behaviors which include sexist comments and (thanks to La Macha's work on this) un-sportsmanlike behavior but the Obama administration has nothing to say. Clinton herself, who rightfully pointed out the sexism spewed on her during her campaign trail, has now gone cold on calling out sexism and sings pleasure of his application to the State Department. Favreau, the leading mind behind Obama's public vernacular merely hangs his head as he is carded the newest "Facebook victim" and nothing more.

The lack of any kind of response about the incident is off-putting. Which brings me to the question: What is the appropriate response for offensive behavior done off working hours but contradict the image what you work for? Does the punishment fit the crime? In Avery's case, yes. He reportedly had been warned in the past and to carefully watch his mouthy steps. Favreau though, with all of this verbal sophistication, looks like he will not even receive a tap on his once roaming right hand. If firing him is not the correct measure, then what? Suspending him for six speeches? I don't think so, but his thoughtlessness warrants something in between losing his job and Clinton's spokesperson sweeping it under the rug. Is sexism called out only when it is beneficial to strengthening presidential campaigns and now when it is post-election, an offensive photo is now just a toss into the wagon of "fun?"

Momentarily putting aside the commendable and rare response of the NHL, the sad reality of these two incidents is not the six-game suspension or public shaming of "Favs." The maddening component is how commonplace these behaviors are and how easy it is to dismiss sexism, however public or lewd. Any weekend in any bar - glorified city or unknown small town - on any given Saturday night gathering, you can find an Avery or Favreau disrespecting women either in word or gesture. The most common character though is the person who makes light of it all; you can always find a Philippe Reines nonchalantly waving it off as funny or a trivial matter.

I just never thought I'd ever have to compare the NHL to the Democratic party for their reactions and then applaud the former for taking some form of action. At the very least, they recognized it as unacceptable and sent a stiff penalty to Avery with a kindergarten lesson attached, "That's not right and you can't say something like that."

And since the Dems seem to be suddenly ignoring the impact of a sexist action gone internet crazy, I take it upon myself to give a kindergarten message made especially for Jon Favreau, "Stay in line and keep your hands to yourself."

Pucked Up

Jonanna Widner — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:16:56 -0500

Hear ye, hear ye!
It is hereby declared that:

1) If you have been known to refer to yourself as "A-dog";

2) If you are such a jerk that even hockey players are embarrassed by your behavior;

3) If you spent the off-season interning at Vogue;
4) And, most importantly, if you publicly refer to your ex-girlfriend as "sloppy seconds"...

You are considered, in the eyes of the laws of all that is right in the world, and under the jurisdiction of humanity, a real douchebag.

Sean Avery, this one's for you. You're not so much an A-dog as an A-hole.

Introductions!

La Macha — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 21:50:05 -0500

Hello! My name is La Macha, and I'll be guest blogging at Bitch for the next bit! Usually I post at Vivir Latino with the unrivaled mami blogger; Maegan "la Mamita Mala" Ortiz. I thank the amazing Debbie for allowing me this opportunity to post here!

While I'm at Bitch, I'll be blogging about sports related 'stuff.' Now, before you roll your eyes and skip over my posts, let me just say--there's a reason that my 'column' will be posted under Team Queer: Movement and Sports Through A Bent Lens. I know that there's a reason so many women don't like sports because on many levels, I am those women myself. So I will be spending a lot of time uncovering (and encouraging YOU to uncover for yourself) reasons that 'sports' in general are a major turn off to women.

Specifically--I am a queer, fat, mother of color that is uncoordinated, can't run worth a shit, has spent a lot of time temporarily disabled by a bad back, has only rarely been able to hit any type of moving ball and is pretty much beyond irritated by people (namely my partner) who insist that watching sports requires total silence, no questions and complete and utter focus on each play as it happens. Oh, and I also have little use for male showboating that makes up 99% of ESPN.

And yet, for some reason, I am inherently attracted to sports culture--even suffering through 3 years of bench warming on my high school soccer team just so I could be around the culture of sports. I love sports, and I am passionate about creating a space where women and girls like me have a respected and honored place in sporting culture--a olace that only marginally involves bench warming. I want the love of movement and sports to be respected above and over the need to win, and I think for that to happen, we have to really examine what makes the sporting community so inherently unpleasant for so many of us.

So--that's what I'll be doing here. Examining the sports community through an intersectional lens--how does racism, queerphobia, sexism, ableism, nationalism, sizeism, ageism etc all intersect with each other to create a culture that is inherently unfriendly and outright violent for so many of us? Is there a way to rework that framework? Is there a way to open a new space? What's working for women who love sports and are in sports? What's not working? Why?

I'm already excited just typing these questions out--there's so much potential just in asking questions! I look forward to attempting to answer those questions along side you!

La Macha

Also, I have a very loose definition of what "sports" are--while football, baseball etc are all covered for me, I also consider less traditional things like biking, dance, spelling bees, and even eating competitions to be 'sports' (or at least sports related) as well!

Read It and Weep: Special pro sports edition!

Andi Zeisler — Tue, 06 May 2008 23:21:23 -0400

Not a good week for the ladies, sports-wise. First up, in order of horrifying: The Chicago White Sox haven't been doing so hot, so they initiated a little "slumpbuster" that involved taking two female blow-up dolls and arranging them in the team clubhouse with baseball bats jammed into various orifices. Surrounding the dolls with players' bats, the team also stuck a sign on one encouraging players and clubhouse visitors to "push."

The stunt was vigorously defended by team manager Ozzie Guillen, whose version of the old I'm-sorry-if-anyone-was-offended copout was a masterpiece of douchebaggery. Some highlights, via the Chicago Sun-Times:

"I'm sure it wasn't done to disrespect anyone," Guillen said Monday. "Everyone in the clubhouse, 100 percent of the people in the clubhouse, they are 18 years old and that's a private thing. If the players do it in the dugout so everyone in the public could see it, or did it in the hotel lobby . . . we did it in the clubhouse. A lot of worse things happen in the clubhouse. I don't really know why people are making it a big deal. If people got their feelings hurt because of that . . . they don't really know much about baseball."

Exactly! Of course! Really, what's the harm here, ladies? It's not like the blow-up dolls were in the lobby! And, as the always-sensitive Deadspin reminds us, there was a time when a true slumpbuster was defined as the ugliest woman a player could sleep with. So, you know, let's listen to Guillen and count our blessings, shall we?

Next up, we've got the WNBA, whose players, though clearly wearing their game faces, are now being trained in putting on an entirely different kind of face. League president Donna Orender has encouraged this year's rookies to attend courses on fashion and makeup as part of their orientation.

The Chicago Tribune article on the league's new preoccupation with making its athletes more "professional" (Orender's word) and feminine points out that female athletes are regularly marketed with at least as much of an emphasis on their appearance and sex appeal as on their prowess, name-checking Anna Kournikova as one notable who managed to become the face of her sport while never winning a significant title. It also notes that with salaries that, in the world of professional basketball, are incredibly paltry—number-one draft pick Candace Parker will only pull in about $44K for the season—WNBA rookies must depend on lucrative endorsements to help make both their names and their bankbooks grow.

Veronica at Viva la Feminista, for one, is pissed:

After cooling off from my initial shock and anger, I realized that this is just one more step in the craptastic direction of making some of the strongest and best athletes in the world into cheesecake pin-ups.... I've been musing in my head the idea and fact that girls today can jump from their pink dresses into cleats without much thought, so why am I so pissed? I'm pissed because I fear that the focus on these athletes’ outer appearance reduces the positive influence of sports and is downplaying their achievements on the court.

Read the rest of her post, and revel in the conflictedness. We want to see the WNBA succeed and flourish, and we want female athletes to inspire other women and girls to join their ranks. But it's undeniable that the easiest route to WNBA success is increased broadcast time and copious product endorsements, and equally undeniable that women's sports become most visible because of their most visible players—soccer's Mia Hamm, softball's Jennie Finch—and those visible players are hyped because of their conventionally attractive, feminine attributes and the fact that they appeal as much to male sportswriters as to preteen girl fans and their parents. Susan Ziegler, a professor of sports psychology quoted in the Tribune piece, points out further that the homophobia endemic to women's sports makes appearing to be straight a challenge that leagues like the WBNA are trying to face head-on, saying "No. 1 is, of course, the need for the image of WNBA players to be seen as real women." (Oof, Susan—couldn't you have at least air-quoted that?)

We'll see whether WUSA—the Women's United Soccer Association, which folded several years back due to an inability to drum up broadcast deals and game attendance (despite the fame of such girl-power icons as Hamm and Brandi Chastain) and which is scheduled for a 2009 comeback—follows suit in the glossing-and-primping plan. Until then, I'm with Ziegler, who when asked by the Tribune how the WNBA should be marketing rookie star Parker, said, "As the top athlete in the country. Leave it at that."

Divertissements for performing bears

Debbie Rasmussen — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 22:27:00 -0400

The title of this post is the song title of another provocatively-titled entity (or problematically-titled entity, depending on whom you ask), 3 Leg Torso, a band I saw perform tonight. I've never been good at describing genres, but I'll call it a mashup of Klezmer/Chamber/Gypsy/Circus/Carnival/(see, this is why I don't write music reviews). The point is, it was one of the best shows I've seen in years. My mouth hurt afterwards because I had a perpetual smile through almost the whole show. Equally impressive was the opener, Fish Tank Ensemble. Please check them both out.

Earlier in the day, I let my friend Ben convince me to accompany him to a professional basketball game between the Portland Trailblazers and the San Antonio Spurs.

Allow me to set the stage (even though really, you had to be there to understand)...

Beer slingers selling Budweisers for $8 a bottle. Canons pelting crappy Hanes t-shirts into the crowd of screaming and eager fans! People jumping up and down in genuine excitement because they'd just won a burger from Burger King! A jumbotron (I think that's what those ginormous TVs are called?) with endlessly flashing graphics and a digital neon ring that encircled the stadium simultaneously displaying moving, rotating ads. Women with tiny bodies in tiny outfits passing out inflatable plastic "thunder sticks" to everyone in the crowd, so that San Antonio Spurs players shooting free throws might be distracted by the sight of hundreds of people banging them together.

I'm sorry, what?

I was willing to consider that my dorky Minnesota Nice ways were getting in the way of things, but no, I'm sorry, my conclusion remains that the thunder stick distraction thing is mean-spirited, whether it works or not. I'm still a little hung up on it. My own thunder sticks are sitting on my chair at home (yes, I admit I took them home with me; somehow I thought I'd find a subversive use for them; still thinking...), and my cat walks around them suspiciously.

Anyway. My personal two favorite moments of horror:

The hundreds of people who whipped out their Wells Fargo bank cards when the Wells Fargo corporate sponsorship logo flashed across the Jumbotron so that they could be captured on camera with their bank cards.

And the little kid who nearly knocked us over on his beeline to the man with a giant video camera, clearly so excited at the possibility of being on TV—as Ben put it, "somewhere, anywhere"—that the rest of the world clearly disappeared from his consciousness.

Anyway, were it not for the brilliance and incisiveness of political/sports writer Dave Zirin, I wouldn't be able to stomach things like this. If you'e not familiar with Dave Zirin, please please please read his books—What's My Name Fool: Sports and resistance in the US, and Welcome to the Terrordome: The pain, promise, and politics of sports.

Regardless of your interest (or lack thereof) in sports, he gives hope to the idea of meaningful social change through an analysis of the politics of sports. Brilliant.