After Atalanta

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has elected a new president, Kirsty Coventry. Coventry is the first woman to earn the position. While this appointment has generated celebration among those who see it as progress in an organization with a history of male leadership, it raises important questions about representation, policy direction, and the true meaning of progress. Why do people continue to peddle the idea that women in leadership equals progress. That gender essentialism--especially regarding women's "nature"--is still so prevalent despite soooo many examples to the contrary astounds me. But this is about Coventry so let's go there.  She is a former Olympian (not unlike past presidents). She swam in five Olympic Games and won seven medals. This makes her the most decorated African athlete. Coventry is from Zimbabwe and has served on various IOC committees and on the Zimbabwean Olympic Committee. She is the youngest person to serve as IOC president as well...

The writing has been on the wall for a long time now in terms of the geopolitical direction Russia is headed in. I mean, they were not exactly a model of cooperation at the most recent G8 when it came to Syria. But what is on everyone's radar screen right now, of course, is whether Vladimir Putin will let American leaker Edward Snowden stay in his country. (Apparently residence in an aiport is fine.) I am sure the behind-the-scenes wrangling must be quite charged by now. Is Russia just going to do what Russia wants to do? Or will the United States and its (reluctant?) allies exert enough pressure on Russia to get Snowden back where they would like him? As much as I probably should, I don't really care about the Snowden thing. I do care, however, about all the political capital the US and other nations might be using in negotiating Snowden's extradition. Why? Because I think more attention--and more capital--needs to be put toward dealing with the legal institutionalizati...

Truly excellent column in the NYT about the IOC's proposed changes to rules regarding the testosterone levels of female athletes.

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. ...

Several things have conspired to lead to this post--the most recent being that two minutes ago a woman ran by the cafe I am sitting at grading papers wearing a running skirt--just as I was thinking about running skirts and the reasons women give for wearing. I was thinking about this because of this article about the growth of female distance runners . This piece focuses on Portland, Oregon. It was a smidge of history. I did learn that Joan Benoit Samuelson would walk when a car drove by her as she was running. The piece overall is an important reminder of how women's participation in distance running does not have a long and rich history. It has a controversial history, however, as noted by the article sent to me by a friend. If you study sport and sport history, you likely know about the one time the IOC decided to let the women run a little bit longer and then they all collapsed from the exertion of running 800 meters and it was too much for people to bear and so they banned ...

Two weekends ago I headed north to Burlington, Vermont for a quick, last-minute getaway that happened to coincide with the IIHF Women's Hockey World Championships. (Timing is everything!) Here is what I observed: Nothing indicated as we drove into Burlington that this event was taking place. I did however learn about when the farmers' market was starting and an upcoming parade. So that was a bummer. The store on the pedestrian mall that sells UVM merchandise did have a window display of USA Hockey gear and a poster of Jenny Potter and Angela Ruggiero (who actually "retired" this year and so wasn't playing--oops!). Also good--the day we arrived was the day of the US versus Canada first-round game. Tickets were sold out--good sign generally. Not so much for us. But thank goodness for iPhones and craigslist and some good bargaining skills. Tickets were scored a few hour before game time. And the game was amazing--if you were an American fan. I actually was more in...

How did the end of the week come so quickly? And how did all these things build up? It's not so much that I missed the following news/events, it's more that I haven't found a good moment to mention them. On Tuesday night the Texas A&M Aggies beat Notre Dame in the championships of the Women's Final Four Tournament. Thankfully the score and the quality of play was indeed better than the men's game the night before. Or else I would still be blushing sheepishly and hanging my head. Erin Whiteside at the Sports, Media, and Society blog (out of Penn State's Curley Center) notes the problematic way Twitter users were comparing the men's game (as it was ongoing and immediately afterwards) to the women's game. As in, even the women can do better than this kind of sentiments. I tried, in my own post about this issue, to note that the complaints about women's basketball never ever being able to be as interesting as men's basketball are false generaliza...

Thank you, Doug Speirs, for this .

I complained yesterday about the crap I had to "deal" with in the form of the criticism levied against women's hockey by the powers-that-be, namely Monsier Rogge who wants the women to improve the depth of their game or else face elimination from the Olympics. But it's not nearly as much crap as the members of the gold-winning Canadian women's team found themselves in the morning after. Because long after the crowd had dispersed the women went back on the ice with champagne and beer and cigars. There were, however, members of the press still in the arena. And thus there are now pictures . And the IOC is investigating. Given that they kicked Scotty Lago out of the games for behavior that occurred outside an Olympic venue, one would think things do not look good for the team. But it's also a tad more difficult to kick out a whole team, that happens to have a gold medal, and also is from the host country. Not that they should be kicked be out. (Lago's ousting...

Apologies to NBC Sports for lifting their headline " Rogge: Women's hockey must improve to stay ." But seriously. Last night's game was good. Yes, it's unfortunate that earlier games were lopsided. And I have to think that Melody Davis might be singing a different tune if she doesn't have a job because Rogge kicks women's hockey out of the games. But I am not blaming her for refusing to play down to save women's hockey. Because it is after all pretty counter intuitive. But I don't think he can do that. It flies in the face of any gender equity commitment--no matter which side of Rogge's mouth it's coming out of. And obviously I don't think he should do that. [I'm being deeply analytical this morning!] In the same breath Rogge is encouraging the NHL commissioner, in the battle of the white men who control sports, to allow the pros to compete in 2014. Are we seeing part of the problem here? The men's tournament is comprised of te...

Initially when I read this column at the Huffington Post by Michele Morris about the story of the missing female ski jumpers in Vancouver, I had another one of those where have you been moments. It's a good column that outlines the whole contentious history of the women's exclusion from the Olympic games. It offers those late to the issue, a quick and thoughtful catch-up. But I was still annoyed at the media coverage this late in the game. But then as I was watching jumping events this past weekend and heard nary a word about the lack of women, I kind of softened my stance. If they are not going to talk about it during the actual Olympics on the many stations of NBC maybe we do still need writers like Morris to be bringing up this issue. Then today I got irked again as I read about people so outraged they are boycotting the Olympics because of it. Really? I have been pleased to see a lot of controversy and protesting of these games, but you're picking this issue--NOW--to bo...

It's a little late, of course and one has to wonder where all the sympathy from the mainstream, American-based media was when these women were in the midst of their battle with the IOC and, by default, VANOC. The righteous indignation is nice but just two weeks before the start of the games, it's a little less righteous and indignatious. But the SI column does do a good job noting the male-dominated make up of the IOC, the lip service Rogge has played to gender equity, how softball was cut on his watch and continually and problematically compared to baseball, and the admittance of other sports ahead of women's ski jumping. It also makes a good point about the limited growth of a sport that is not in the Olympics (one of the reasons behind the decision was that there was not enough depth) and, I would argue, not an intercollegiate sport. With very limited funding for a national team that is not an Olympic sport, many women have or will quit jumping.

...the female ski jumpers who will not be there, of course, because the IOC's decision to keep ski jumping the only male-only winter sport kept being upheld by varying governing and judicial bodies. I was thinking yesterday when skiing in Vermont about watching my first (and only admittedly) ski jumping competition in Brattleboro last winter. So I was pleased to come across this article out of Rutland, VT about a local female jumper (who was actually at the competition last year). It chronicle's the 16-year old's history in the sport. She was US junior Olympian and, of course, hoping for the inclusion of her sport in the games in Vancouver. But unlike jumpers like Lindsay Van, Vermont native Tara Geraghty-Moats is likely young enough to compete in four years at the next Olympics on Sochi. (This is assuming of course that the IOC has had enough of the negative press and actually includes the sport in 2014.) Geraghty-Moats actually won't be in Brattleboro next month becau...

On December 22 the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the case of female ski jumpers trying to get into the 2010 Olympics. This was the last ditch effort of the group which has pursued legal means and made appeals to the IOC, including a letter to President Jacques Rogge--who refused to grant the group's request for a meeting. I was pleased to see that South African runner Caster Semenya has not faded away after speculations about her gender and intense invasions of privacy. Instead she is fighting back-- with a lawsuit against IAAF and Athletic South Africa (ASA) for leaking information about the gender testing. The bungling of her case has also resulted in the president and board of the ASA to step down. It appears that testing began before Semenya went to Berlin for the World Championships and that ASA president Leonard Cheune decided to send her anyway because results were not yet in. But, as we know, questions were raised and information that should have stayed private was...

It's so lovely to find someone who agrees with you--especially on a cold, windy Friday morning as you feel a cold (but hopefully not the flu) coming on. The IOC has been making some changes to the summer games program, allegedly in the name of gender equity, that has a few puzzled. LA Times writer and blogger Philip Hersh is one of those and I agree with him--for the most part. The addition of mixed doubles to the roster seems a little silly. While I enjoy mixed doubles and seek it out when I am lucky enough to get to a tournament that actually has it (mostly the Grand Slams), it's another thing to include it in the Olympics where tennis should not be in the first place. Track cycling, with a much smaller international presence, has seen its events reduced--well the men's events anyway. The IOC, upon recommendations from the International Cycling Union (so it's difficult to know where exactly to lay blame), has dropped several events for men and added more for women. S...

The IOC has stated that , in the wake of the Canadian appeal's court decision to uphold the lower court decision, it is pleased that it can now move on and focus on the forthcoming games. Yes, it must be nice when a legal entity says it cannot hold you responsible for discrimination. The IOC sure knows how to spin things. I was a little surprised by this statement from the organization: "As the lower court noted, the IOC has continued to demonstrate by its actions its support for women athletes and their participation in the Olympic Games." Hmmm....I didn't read the lower court decision, but the message I got out of it from all the coverage was not that the IOC was a great supporter of women's sports, but that it was a great discriminator and the judge regretted that it was beyond her power to hold them accountable.

If you have not gotten over Chicago's early-round loss on the Olympic site voting, well, in the words of Nike (who will certainly be a presence in Brazil) just do it. I, personally, was glad the US did not get another games so early on. And that South America (as in the whole continent!) has never had a hosting opportunity seemed wrong. I have to admit, though, that I was a little concerned about potential human rights issues, primarily the ousting of poor people from their homes to make way for various Olympic venues. But it's not as if every country has and has had in the past it's issues with human rights. This is why Human Rights Watch has asked the IOC to find a way to monitor the potential abuses of host nations. These issues arose, of course, in Beijing. They are anticipated on Sochi and, well, as I said--no country is acting angelic these days. (Perhaps ever, but that's a discussion for another time.)

...you're black. The pot in the title is Jacques Rogge who, along with other IOC members, are engaging in "quiet diplomacy" with three countries who the IOC does not feel is doing a suitable job supporting Olympic female athletes. Part of the quiet is the refusal to name the countries in question but it is not that difficult to figure out given that the IOC names the barriers as religious, cultural, and political. Two apparently are working with the IOC but the third, most likely Saudi Arabia which has never sent a female athlete to the Olympics, is refusing to engage. This country will face Olympic sanctions if there is no progress in the near future. Anyway the hypocrisy I see, of course, is Rogge standing up for gender equity for some women, and then denying other women the opportunity to participate a la female ski jumpers. Makes it seem like he is reifying the whole backwards Muslim stereotype that is so prevalent in the western world. He is definitely supporting th...

Well they put it much more politely, of course. But here is the letter by female ski jumpers basically asking for explicit answers as to why they have been excluded from the forthcoming winter Olympics. In addition to citing the human rights laws of Canada--the ground they attempted to stand on in a recent lawsuit--they also cite the IOC's statement that the sport had not met the technical merit criteria. They are asking what constitutes technical merit, citing a journalist's earlier assessment of the lack of technical merit--under IOC standards--of women's pole vaulting as compared to ski jumping. Given the clearly subjective nature of technical merit, I am not guessing the women, and the rest of us who support their cause, are going to be getting any satisfactory answers any time soon.

The group of female ski jumpers that sued the VANOC earlier this year because women are not allowed to participate in the sport at the Olympic level have filed an appeal of the decision that did not go their way. Despite acknowleding that the omission of the female jumpers from the Olympics is indeed lousy and wrong, the judge in the case ruled that there was nothing she nor VANOC could do about it because it was an IOC decision and the IOC is not subject to Canadian law, specifically the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and thus they could not be forced to add the sport. But lawyers for the women are saying that they are not asking the court to mandate the sport be added, rather it is asking that VANOC, as Canadians, be forced to abide by Canadian law. It's not quite a splitting of the hairs situation but almost. After all the possible consequences of VANOC doing so would result in either the elimination of the men's contest or even possibly a cancellation of the games...