Smiles all around at Oakmont

Saw just a little bit of the US Women's Open yesterday and had seen the headlines about Paula Creamer making a strong run toward her first major title. But she has, um, choked in the past. And I am not a huge fan of Creamer anyway (way too much pink!) so I opted to get to my softball game on time and miss her winning putt on 18.
I do admire her comeback from injury and playing with a thumb that is only at 60 percent (how do people figure these things out anyway?) and the way she kept her cool in the last round. Still--she wears all that pink and seems a little too sickly sweet.
But I imagine the LPGA must just be nearly orgasmic with Creamer's win. A white woman wins a major and it's the US Open. (That's two majors in a row; Cristie Kerr won the LPGA Championships last month.) She speaks fluent English, looks very heterosexual, and has that pretty and winning thing going for her (versus someone like Natalie Gulbis). I mean just look at the head shots of her from the Open yesterday. I was struck as I saw the cameras focus on her as she walked or waited to tee off by the very pink (yes, I have said that already) polo shirt, the US flag pin on the color, and the jeweled cross hanging around her neck. How very all-American girl.

Comments

Diane said…
I have a hard time with Creamer, too, for the same reasons (actually, it's the LPGA that really makes me sick), but yesterday, I felt really great for her. She'd had to limit her practice swings, and she was in obvious pain at the 12th hole. Having been told, only four months ago, that her career might be over, her performance at the Open was amazing. Choi was chasing her most of the way, and instead of choking, Creamer just brought it on. It's a great sports story, regardless of how we might feel about the LPGA's glee.

This watching golf thing has sneaked up on during the past year or so, and I don't know where it came from!
July 12, 2010 3:58 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why trans athletes?

In a continuation of my last post in which I crib from GLAD lawyer Jennifer Levi's thoughtful social media posts, I offer here an explanation of why and how trans athletes became the target of the right. First, I keep seeing left of center posts/headlines/discourse that highlight how few trans girls/women are competing in sports. I don't love this framing. The underlying premise of inclusion and access does not have a tipping point.  Perhaps what it is meant to show is how the right is weaponizing this issue. This is both reasonable and true but not really very profound in its assessment. Look at some of the groups and people doing the work of banning trans athletes and you will also see agendas which are racist, and anti-Semitic, and Islamophobic, and anti-LGB as well.  If I have not already recommended Judith Butler's Who's Afraid of Gender? (though I am pretty sure I have), go read it. Some of what Butler says is what Levi echoed in a recent posting contemplating the...
Read more

The trans athlete ban: Part 3a: NCAA hypocrisy

 [this is cross-posted with Title IX Blog where I will also post something about the announcement that NIL is not subject to Title IX] The NCAA's new policy banning transwomen from competing in women's sports arrived (seemingly) minutes after the administration issued its executive order banning transwomen and girls from participating in school-sponsored sports teams.  The NCAA did include verbiage though which is worth looking at.  This is the synopsis at the top of the press release:  Men's category open to all eligible student-athletes, women's category restricted to student-athletes assigned female at birth, schools directed to foster welcoming environments on all campuses. But it is not accurate.  The women's category--for competition purposes--is open to people students assigned female at birth who are not taking testosterone. What we see here is a different standard. Testosterone levels matter only for some people. Taking it knocks you out of the women's...
Read more

The trans athlete ban, Part II: Capitulation

 The same day as the president signed the executive order banning transwomen in school-sponsored sports (which WILL have more widespread effects--i.e., recreational sports for youth and adults), the NCAA issued its own change on transwomen in collegiate sports which, for the purpose of "consistency" will also prohibit transwomen from competing in women's NCAA sports.  [I wrote about the effects the EO will have on Title IX compliance which is something that NCAA purports to care about, at Title IX Blog .] I would have been surprised (in a good way), if they had not. They give in to outside pressure regularly (with positive and negatives effects). But this policy is another example of their failure to protect athletes. [Lack of penalties for schools that shield predatory coaches and doctors as well as athletes who commit sexual assault; their exploitation of Black men who help them make their billions every March; their laughable adherence to an ahistorical definition of ...
Read more