WSF awards

Earlier this week the Women's Sports Foundation held their annual awards dinner in NYC. Nastia Liukin won the 2008 Sportswoman of the Year Award (individual) and Jessica Mendoza won it for a female athlete competing in a team sport. Of course, gymnastics could be considered a team sport as well though there is the individual component of it unlike in softball and other team sports.
I was kind of bummed at the choice of recipients. I do like Mendoza and believe she is a good athlete and a good person very much involved in using sport to make change within and outside of sport, but she gets a lot of publicity already. Liukin doesn't really do anything for me and she doesn't appear to have done much outside of gymnastics. The thing most of the articles about the award if touting is Liukin's upcoming guest appearance on Gossip Girl.
I myself voted for Ashley Fiolek, the teenager who races motocross (a very male dominated field). And Patty Cisneros for Team Sportswoman of the year. Cisneros has been a major force on the US wheelchair basketball team for almost ten years.
Also given out was the Billie Jean King Contribution Award which went to the WTA Tour earned for achieving equitable prize money at all the Grand Slams. (This one I found curious because in all the coverage I read of the move to equal prize money I never really heard that the WTA played a huge role in the decision-making process.) And the Wilma Rudolph Courage Award was given to Texas Tech pitcher and All-American Patience Knight, who overcame cancer.

Comments

Diane said…
I think the Liukin choice has to be based, not only on her accomplishments, but on the fact that she was told : 1. she was washed out, 2. too old, 3. could never recover from her injuries, 4. should retire gracefully.

Well, she showed everybody. It was quite an impressive comeback, especially with all the negativity around her.
October 18, 2008 10:43 AM
ken said…
I do see the value in rewarding an athlete in a sport that has very narrow views on who can be successful who has "overcome" those things. But part of me (a large part) thinks that people voted for her because she's the current "it" girl in sports and she's pretty and an immigrant story everyone can get behind.
October 19, 2008 9:37 AM
Diane said…
Perhaps so, and those votes--if they were cast--upset me just as much. But even that doesn't take away from Liukin's accomplishments, or from her determination in the face of rampant criticism and negativity.
October 19, 2008 10:02 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

No NIL for you!

  This much belated post about the administration's reversal of Biden (out-the-door) era g uidance on distribution of NIL  monies is cross-posted at the T itle IX Blo g.  I feel a lot of anger...I feel, and not just anger because of a [military] ban, I feel anger and disappointment at large, just you know trans and non binary people have become public enemy one; and once you start taking away the rights of trans and non binary people, the rest of the chips begin to fall.               Sam Rodriguez, Petty Officer US Navy ( Today, Explained ; Vox Podcasts) This has clearly come to bear already and I would hope most of us are not surprised. Appalled, yes. Surprised, no. The Kennedy Cente r canceling the Gay Men's Chorus  performance is just one example of how public acceptance for violence against trans people. Denying women athletes equitable shares of NIL monies is another chip. This news is old by now. (Though t...
Read more