After Atalanta

Summer lovin', happened too fast. Christine Brennan has declared the Summer of Women (in sports) over. And, today, she and I are on the same page. Eternal pessimist that I am, I suspected--as it was happening--that the surge of interest in women's sports that was ignited primarily by the Olympics but also by the concurrent news and (mostly) praise of Title IX during its 40th anniversary year, would dissipate. It's a roller coaster ride. Luckily we only have to go down screeching down that big hill of disappointment once every 4 years (and down a smaller hill of disappointment after the winter Olympics end). Brennan was brought back to her reality after hearing UConn women's basketball coach, Geno Auriemma, discuss his stance on lowering the rim in women's basketball to make it a more popular sport that people (i.e. men) want to watch. People who don't like women's sports are not going to watch them. And inferiorizing the sport only provides the haters mo...

This is a brief follow-up--or in-addition-to--to the post about the lack of larger sized apparel for this summer's female Olympians. Apparently--and I had not been aware of this--several female athletes competing in London have been scrutinized and commented on because of their weight leading into the games. I think this is quite interesting in light of all the press about how equal these Olympics are; how the US team is comprised of more female athletes than male athletes; how every nation finally has a female competitor. US-based media call this the " Title IX Olympics"--somewhat problematically . But, of course, things aren't equal--on either concrete numbers (still more events for men) or in treatment. At the opening of the games Christine Brennan of USA Today declared "Finally--It's all about the women." Yep. It's still about how female they are (i.e., Caster Semenya and whomever else was secretly gender tested during these games or leading u...

This article features comments from US Olympic weightlifter Sarah Robles about how athletic gear is not made for larger women. One could argue that clothes in general are not made for larger women. But Robles point is that she, as a heavyweight lifter--an athlete, has to wear the clothes for men because Nike and whomever else is contributing to Team USA's uniform/gear does not make the women's clothes in her size. I know Nike makes "plus size" clothes for women. I just saw a tennis skirt in a 3X yesterday in a store. So they will make up to a certain size. But for the Olympics, one would think they could make whatever for the athletes so women like Robles, who don't want to wear "dude's clothes" as she calls them, don't have to. Because she's right--they don't fit the same. Interestingly, there are limited options for women who either do not want to wear traditionally feminine clothes but on whom menswear is too big and not tailored cor...

The IOC would have looked quite foolish if, after all the negotiating, the Saudi Arabian government did not send any women to London this month. I am soooooo curious as to how the negotiations went down over this issue. What threats were levied? Retorts offered? Etc. Etc. But however it all happened, there will be two women on the Saudi Olympic team : a judo practitioner (judoist? what is the correct term?) and a runner (800 m). This is old news by now, I know--that's all I have time for these days. Old news but seemingly good news.

So will Saudi Arabia be allowed (by the IOC) to get away with not sending any female athletes because they just can't find any? The top choice, equestrian Dalma Rushdi Malhas, cannot attend . Will the IOC allow Saudi officials to say "well, we tried." I hope not. So do others. This is a very strong editorial about why the IOC should ban the entire Saudi Olympic team if it does not contain any women. The author rightly notes that wild cards are available--and surely the IOC will grant them given their stake in this situation--to athletes who do not meet Olympic qualifying standards. But even if that was not the case--would it be ok for the Saudis to say--well, give us some more time? This has been an ongoing issue. It is not about time, it is about culture. On a related note, FIFA has (finally) said it will allow players to wear the hijab.

The Gatorade commercial with Abby Wambach makes me cringe. Even her voiceover "acting" is bad. Part of it is probably the script, too. "She's lost a lot and water won't put it back." Who says that?? "Yes, she is easy to spot. She is also easy to break." Thankfully Gatorade has redeemed itself with this commercial about keeping young girls in sports: I liked the BP commercials featuring athletes who will (likely) be competing in London. Both able-bodied athletes and paralympians. Alas, it is a commercial for BP. And I think about how an oil company is using those differently-abled bodies to sell its product and improve its image. This one I believe is airing on Great Britain. I haven't seen it on US television. Couldn't find the one that is currently airing in the US, tough.

The Saudi female athlete most observers thought would be heading to London next month after Saudi Arabia lifted its ban on female athletes in the Olympics--will not. Equestrian Dalma Rushdi Malhas could not meet the Olympic qualifying standard after losing valuable training time when her horse sustained an injury. A reader pointed me to this article about the situation. There are, apparently, other unnamed female athletes under consideration.

There is a tie for the third spot on the women's 100 meters (running) US Olympic team. No solution yet on how to determine which runner, Allyson Felix or Jeneba Tarmoh, will get the spot. Justin Gatlin, the men's 100 meter champion at the trials, suggested they two women wrestle in out--in either Jello or mud. I am sure they appreciated being given two options. Gatlin got a lot of crap for the comment which many have--not surprisingly--deemed sexist. But he said it was taken out of context. Oh--do you mean the context of patriarchy where you think all kinds of comments are permissible? The thing about dominant ideologies is that they all have a little bit of wiggle room; there's a lot of pushing and pulling; and hegemony has been known to spring a leak.

A lot of the recent chatter about women in the Olympics has been around 1) Saudi Arabia's ban on women's sports and 2) just how much testosterone a woman can have before she crosses the line into "man." But even "normally" hormoned women not from Saudi Arabia are having issues as thy prepare for London. Sania Mirza, who was chosen to by the Indian Tennis Federation to represent India, has been at the center of an odd argument about who shall play with whom. Apparently the men on the Indian team are arguing about who they want to partner with for doubles and for mixed doubles. And they are using Mirza to try to get their way. The father of one of the players wants Mirza to guarentee, in writing, that she will play with his son. Someone has said he will only play with someone else if Mirza plays with him in mixed doubles. It all sounds 1) a little but middle school and 2) a lot bit patriarchal. And Mirza calls them out on all this . It's an amazing ope...

Saudi Arabia announced today that it will allow female athletes to compete in the Olympics under the Saudi flag (i.e. not invited by the IOC and under their "neutral" flag). The press about the decision contains a lot of platitudes from Saudi representatives about the spirit of the games. No word on which women will be there; Saudi officials have said they will allow any woman who qualifies to attend. Unfortunately given the lack of support (to put it mildly) for female athletes in Saudi Arabia, not many women meet Olympic qualifying standards. The IOC is likely to make exceptions just to get Saudi women to London this year. More of a sure thing is equestrian Dalma Rushdi Malhas who is a Saudi citizen who was born in the United States. There were no given reasons for the change of heart by Saudi administrators. The IOC had been working with government officials since the spring and kept reporting "progress," but in April the Saudis announced they would not be se...

No--just kidding. Don't burn anything. Fire is dangerous. But at least female badminton players can ditch their skirts if they would rather play in shorts (or pants I would assume). The Badminton World Federation has nixed its plans to require female athletes to wear skirts in competitions. There was a sizable enough outcry to make it a rule not worth fighting for. But the federation--still concerned with the aesthetic appeal if its female athletes--is urging the women to look as good as possible for the cameras in London. The men, too, though apparently their appeal is not tied to skirts. Still looking for more appealing and camera-friendly outfits, though, the BWT is working directly with apparel companies in an attempt to get them to offer players better outfits. So, technically, they could encourage these companies to offer mostly skirts and dresses to women while providing just a few shorts options. But they wouldn't do that, would they?

Has anyone written about the highly problematic tenure of IOC president Jacques Rogge? I want to fast forward to a few decades from now and read about his legacy. I can't imagine it will be favorable. The inspiration for these frustrations? The IOC, as lead by Rogge, is still trying to work it out with Saudi Arabian officials to get some Saudi women to London in a few months to compete in the Olympics. The only firm thing: Rogge said Saudi women will not be competing under the (neutral) IOC flag. The IOC is getting pressure from human rights groups around the globe to sanction the Saudis if they do not allow women to compete in these games. But Rogge is not ready to talk sanctions. Some of his comments on the situation: I t's not an easy situation. We're working steadily with them to find a good solution. There is a commitment. (to what and by whom?) We are continuing to discuss with them... Wait and see. We do not want to enter into any hypothetical questions. ...

Qatar, like Saudi Arabia, has never sent a female athletes to the Olympics. That will change this summer. Two women had been scheduled to go after receiving wild cards from the IOC. A third has just been added . Bahia al-Hamad, who also received a wild card, will participate in women’s air rifle. She was Qatar's most successful athlete at the 2011 Arab Games.

I have been following this story, but not posting about it. It seems that after some consideration (or not) Saudi Arabian officials, despite some positive encouragement from the IOC, have decided not to send women --or even a woman--to the Olympic Games this summer in London. The king of gender equality himself--Jacques Rogge, IOC president--nicely asked for some more gender equality worldwide, pointing particularly to Qatar, Brunei, and Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is still holding out, sending some kind of enigmatic message about women who live outside the country possibly participating. But this would probably not be as part of the official Saudi delegation and only happen if the IOC invited them--as they did when they asked a female equestrian (the woman who many thought would be going to London as part of the team) to a junior Olympics event. I am not saying that if the IOC and Rogge were better role models, things would have been different; or that the history of gender inequit...

So says the sport's international governing body . * Out of respect for cultures and for women who like more clothing when playing sports, the International Volleyball Federation has said that participants in the Olympics can wear shorts and long-sleeve shirts. Cultures in which female athletes "choose" to reveal more skin while playing competitive sports are welcome to continue to do so in London this summer. Just out of curiosity--what are the collegiate sand volleyball players wearing? Are there uniform regulations for this sport yet? *check out the photo accompanying the article. Kerri Walsh and Misty May Treanor look a little odd--and freezing--next to the other women on the podium who are wearing full body suits.

Pretty interesting interview with Kathryn Bertine over at the Huffington Post the other day. Bertine is a senior editor at espnW and is trying to qualify for the Olympic Games and has written a book about her attempt to qualify in 2008. ESPN sponsored her quest to do so, but she didn't make it for those games. So she's at it again looking to be a cyclist in London in 2012. Here's what impressed me: her clear recognition of the skewed treatment of female athletes with sport itself and, of course, the media coverage. She gives the example of the lack of prize money in women's cycling, but notes that so few cyclists will speak up because of fear of alienating sponsors. Because there's nothing worse, we know, than an athlete who speaks her/his mind. And it's especially bad if that athlete is a woman who is complaining. I mean, she could be a feminist. Horrors! So Bertine, being the only cyclist from Saint Kitts and Nevis (she got dual citizenship as part of her qual...

What equality is remains contextual and questionable. I don't know much about economics. And gender continues to present so many interesting issues with which to contend. Hence all the questions in the title of this post. But what I really want to talk about (though I am actually still a little hesitant about talking about it) is the recent news that the organizers of the 2012 London Olympics have priced the tickets for men's and women's events differently. In many cases, tickets for men's events are more expensive--sometimes significantly so. The IOC (though it does not set the ticket prices--the organizers do) is taking most of the flak for this decision. Critics contend that the pricing undervalues women's sports and sends a message that women's sports are just not as good as men's sports. I agree that that message is being sent and that it is not good. But I do not see the pricing differential as entirely bad. First, the difference reinforces prevailing ...

Wow--I just don't know what to do with this story (kindly sent to me by Sean at Sportsbabel ). Australian track and field star Jana Rawlinson, who specializes in the hurdles, recently had her breast implants removed. Not because she didn't like the way they looked: "I absolutely loved having big boobs" she said. No, it was because she didn't want to "short-change Australia" in the 2012 Olympics. She wanted to be the fittest she could be and I guess that meant ditching the implants. Curious, curious, curious. Why would she add them in the first place? [OK; just found this article about when the news of the implants was publicly revealed.] Olympic-level track athletes usually start running pretty early in their lives. Likely earlier than the decision to have implants would be made. Actually, we can infer that Rawlinson was indeed already an athlete when she chose to have breast augmentation because the reason behind the implants, she says, was that she did...

...Cuba won't come. Cuba, always a contender on the international boxing scene, will not be sending female boxers to the Olympics in 2012. Something about the appropriateness of the sport for women and not getting their pretty faces punched. Not that I am trying to bring people down after the IOC's decision to add boxing: action that attempts to back up their alleged commitment to gender equity. But it's a good time to remember that even though women have access internationally, many countries put varying levels of restrictions on their participation.

I guess I shouldn't have had much faith that the IOC would do the right thing, and I actually don't know what the right thing was in this situation. But I am disappointed that the executive board got all excited about golf and that they are banking on Tiger Woods to play in 2016 (when he will be 40--not especially old in golf years but let's remember that he's already had one knee surgery). That's just kind of ridiculous reasoning, frankly. I still think they are silly to think that professionals will place the Olympics above other (paying) commitments or more prestigious events. So rugby sevens was the other sport nominated. As I have previously admitted, I don't know that much about rugby and a commenter the other day said it wasn't real rugby. I don't know. But I still think it will be interesting to expose more people to some version of the sport. And by some people, I really mean Americans. Both sports are going up for individual votes (as in each s...