All the helmets are political

 It is not at all surprising that the IOC disqualified Ukrainian skeleton athlete Vladyslav Heraskevych for refusing to change his helmet. The helmet had pictures of Ukrainian athletes who have died in the conflict with Russia. 

As I noted when Kirsty Coventry was made IOC president, she was not about to change the culture of the organization. And this decision--which did not have to be a decision--was in keeping with how I expect she will govern. (For clarification, the IOC issued the warning about the helmet and engaged in "negotiations" over it, but International Bobsleigh and Skeleton made the decision. Heraskevych appealed to the the Court of Arbitration for Sport which turned down his appeal.)

Coventry did report that she cried over the decision. #whitewomantears

The helmet broke the rules over athlete expression on the playing field, they all said. He was told he could wear a black arm band before and after his runs. But political expressions on the field of play are prohibited. 

The fact that there are rules over athlete expression--which have long been in place--still confounds me. Maybe as more of us have our expressions curtailed by various intuitions, we will pay more attention to this enormous sacrifice that athletes make to compete in the Olympics. 

I am currently re-reading "The Five Rings and the 'Imagined Community'" by Toby Rider and Matthew Llewellyn to use in sport soc class next week. They make the point, one that the IOC fails to understand or at least acknowledge, that the Olympics are magnets for "nationalist politics and propaganda." But it is only nations and their governance bodies that get to play those games. Athletes, who until recently MUST compete under a nation's flag*, just serve as pawns. 

[I think back to when Naomi Osaka wore face masks with the names of Black men and women who had been murdered by the police at the US Open. Pushback from "fans"--likely occurred, with some being violent. And this should not be ignored. But official fines or bans--nope. (I have heard of the recent "warnings" about political statements Coco Gauff has received from people within the establishment and those are troubling.) But tennis allowed this. Tennis.]

The concept of an athlete competing under a national flag, which happens outside of the Olympics as well, is inherently political. The other skeleton helmets that had national flags on them are political. That the powers-that-be pick nits over symbols of national power and pictures of actual humans who are casualties of some of those powers is hypocritical. (Additionally, the IOC has not prohibited the presence of Russian flags at Olympic events as promised.)

Two postscripts:

Heraskevych has received $200,000 from the owner of a Ukrainian football club; the equivalent of what a Ukrainian gold medalist receives from the country. He was told to use it to continue training and doing his advocacy.  

The International Paralympics Committee (IPC) announced that it would allow Russia's National Paralympic Committee six spots at the upcoming games. Ukraine is protesting that decision. 



* exceptions have been made for refugees and some Russians who have applied to compete without their nation's flag, anthem or colors.

Comments

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