I think that the situation that Jennifer Harris had to go through was just ridiculous. Going through a college program with an unethical policy that Rene Portland had just seems unrealistic any more. “No drinking, no drugs, and no lesbians.” I cannot believe that the university would not find out about the policy and do something in order to stop it. It is not right and should have been stopped before this situation came. Not drinking and not doing drugs to be on a team is perfectly fine, but to think that you cannot have a sexual preference and be part of the team seems wrong.
Not only did Portland not allow lesbians, but she also did not allow the girls to look like they are lesbians. I simply cannot believe that this was not an issue prior to when it finally came up in the case of Harris. Forcing players to wear their hair in a feminine style, wear jewelry, make up, and acquire a tan is simply unreal. This sounds to me like something that may have occurred in the 1970’s or 1980’s when these issues seemed relevant, but not in 2007 when all these issues seemed to have already come up in the public eye.
In this situation for Harris, all she wanted to do was wear her hair in corn rows. Harris was kicked off the team during her sophomore year for alleged poor work ethic and attitude. This all occurred after the coach told Harris that she did not want her to wear her hair in corn rows because it is not a feminine type of hair style.
According to Newhall & Buzuvis, this was not the first situation of this occurring, but Harris was the first to file a lawsuit against Portland and the University of Penn State. I personally believe this is incredible that Harris was the first one to file a lawsuit. If something along these lines happened at any university I would believe that a person would want to file a claim almost instantly.
I thought that it was very ironic that Portland stepped down as coach and also settled for an agreement with Harris in 2007 because that is basically showing that Portland knew she was wrong. This really makes me wonder because why would Portland even have this policy if she knew it was wrong? I cannot comprehend the reason for it and I wish there was a little clarification. If Portland was willing to step down and settle on an agreement after a lawsuit was filed, why would she have had that policy in the first place? Wouldn’t she have already known that could happen? It is just really confusing as a whole.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Sheryl Swoops
Sheryl Swoopes made a very courageous statement when she came out to the public in 2005 that she was a lesbian. This statement was very shocking to many people all over the country, but is it really that big of a deal and should she actually be praised for her efforts?
Prior to Swoopes, there have not been very many people who have come out and confessed to being gay or lesbian while still playing within their sport. I think that this really speaks for what Swoopes did because she is a rarity. She is comfortable with her life choices to tell the world and still be able to participate in her sport. There have been multiple males that have come out after they have left the sport that they love, but it really is not the same. The males that have done this simply appear to be afraid of what others will think of them and think that the view of them within the locker room will not be acceptable. Swoopes however, did not care at all what others would think because she wanted everyone to know. She was able to continue her playing career.
Swoopes also made the statement that she thinks it is harder for males to come out and admit to being gay, but why should this be? It really does not make much sense because women often are just as bad as men when it comes to things that happen in the locker room. Straight men are often teased even when they are straight. This makes it appear as if it would be harder for men to come out, but to my knowledge, girls are teased just as often as what men are, which would make it hard for them as well.
I personally believe that it would be very hard to be the person to come out to the public while in a nationally recognized position and tell the world that you are gay or lesbian. To think of how that would ruin your reputation and relationships with people that you have known your whole life would make it hard to have any interest in telling the world. I believe that is why males do not come out because of the way they will be treated or talked about in the media.
Which would you think would be harder?
Prior to Swoopes, there have not been very many people who have come out and confessed to being gay or lesbian while still playing within their sport. I think that this really speaks for what Swoopes did because she is a rarity. She is comfortable with her life choices to tell the world and still be able to participate in her sport. There have been multiple males that have come out after they have left the sport that they love, but it really is not the same. The males that have done this simply appear to be afraid of what others will think of them and think that the view of them within the locker room will not be acceptable. Swoopes however, did not care at all what others would think because she wanted everyone to know. She was able to continue her playing career.
Swoopes also made the statement that she thinks it is harder for males to come out and admit to being gay, but why should this be? It really does not make much sense because women often are just as bad as men when it comes to things that happen in the locker room. Straight men are often teased even when they are straight. This makes it appear as if it would be harder for men to come out, but to my knowledge, girls are teased just as often as what men are, which would make it hard for them as well.
I personally believe that it would be very hard to be the person to come out to the public while in a nationally recognized position and tell the world that you are gay or lesbian. To think of how that would ruin your reputation and relationships with people that you have known your whole life would make it hard to have any interest in telling the world. I believe that is why males do not come out because of the way they will be treated or talked about in the media.
Which would you think would be harder?
Friday, November 13, 2009
Themes of Kian Study
When we talked about the study by Kian about the Themes that deal with women’s sports, I found it really interesting because it was something that I had not really noticed before. However, now I notice it very often within women’s sports.
The first theme was that “he is always on my mind.” This one was very clear cut as the commentators of many women’s games very often referred to the men’s side of sport. They always made references that talked about how great of a play that woman made and then talked about the comparison to the men’s game. Also, often times if women win a game or a championship, they will talk about the men’s team in comparison to the women’s team. When the Connecticut men’s and women’s teams won the basketball national championships in the same year, there was always a reference to both teams when talking about the women’s team, but not always when just talking about the men’s team.
The second theme about “she must have played with boys to get that good,” seems ridiculous to me. Women often times are just naturally talented. They do not necessarily had to of played with boys when they were growing up to get their talent level.
The next theme that struck me was the one about how “fathers are the role models and not many mothers are.” I found this interesting because I would believe that this is actually true in sports. Most fathers are the ones that push their kids to work hard in order to be great at sports. They are often the ones that had played when they were younger and want their children to do the same.
What themes from the study stuck out to you? I thought the study was interesting, but did not think that every theme applied in every situation.
The first theme was that “he is always on my mind.” This one was very clear cut as the commentators of many women’s games very often referred to the men’s side of sport. They always made references that talked about how great of a play that woman made and then talked about the comparison to the men’s game. Also, often times if women win a game or a championship, they will talk about the men’s team in comparison to the women’s team. When the Connecticut men’s and women’s teams won the basketball national championships in the same year, there was always a reference to both teams when talking about the women’s team, but not always when just talking about the men’s team.
The second theme about “she must have played with boys to get that good,” seems ridiculous to me. Women often times are just naturally talented. They do not necessarily had to of played with boys when they were growing up to get their talent level.
The next theme that struck me was the one about how “fathers are the role models and not many mothers are.” I found this interesting because I would believe that this is actually true in sports. Most fathers are the ones that push their kids to work hard in order to be great at sports. They are often the ones that had played when they were younger and want their children to do the same.
What themes from the study stuck out to you? I thought the study was interesting, but did not think that every theme applied in every situation.
Indian Wells Reaction
When we were watching the situation that happened at Indian Wells between the fans and the Williams Sisters, I was really shocked. I did not think that anything like that would actually happen at a tennis match of all places. I could understand if fans were upset about a call at a football, basketball, baseball, or even soccer match, but to be that unsportsmanlike and cheer against Serena when she did poorly is just not right.
I believe that out of my knowledge that Venus told a doctor or trainer that she would not be playing within plenty of time so that the director could tell the fans that there would be no match. The match however was not cancelled and went on and that created a huge controversy that made it look like Venus was a terrible person and just taking a fall so that the tournament could still get the money that they raised from fans wanting to come watch Serena play Venus and instead show them a match that consisted of Serena and a player that was obviously not as well known as Serena.
In the end, the fans were terrible to Serena, Venus, and their father. They booed them as they came down to the court and cheered every time Serena messed up. They were unlike what would be expected of tennis fans at a match like this. Although Serena ended up winning the match, I think that I would agree that the Williams’s should not ever go back to that tournament no matter what the penalty is. They went there when it was not required within the tour and were treated extremely poorly, so why would you want to go back. I would not want to go back to any place where I was treated poorly, let alone booed and had racial slurs said to me.
It is not fair to be angry at the Williams family. They did what they needed to do and it was very obvious that Venus was not feeling very well with her ankle. She has competed consistently well throughout her career and never had such a situation occur since, so why would anyone still believe that this situation was just Venus taking a fall so that Serena could win. It does not seem right to me at all.
I believe that out of my knowledge that Venus told a doctor or trainer that she would not be playing within plenty of time so that the director could tell the fans that there would be no match. The match however was not cancelled and went on and that created a huge controversy that made it look like Venus was a terrible person and just taking a fall so that the tournament could still get the money that they raised from fans wanting to come watch Serena play Venus and instead show them a match that consisted of Serena and a player that was obviously not as well known as Serena.
In the end, the fans were terrible to Serena, Venus, and their father. They booed them as they came down to the court and cheered every time Serena messed up. They were unlike what would be expected of tennis fans at a match like this. Although Serena ended up winning the match, I think that I would agree that the Williams’s should not ever go back to that tournament no matter what the penalty is. They went there when it was not required within the tour and were treated extremely poorly, so why would you want to go back. I would not want to go back to any place where I was treated poorly, let alone booed and had racial slurs said to me.
It is not fair to be angry at the Williams family. They did what they needed to do and it was very obvious that Venus was not feeling very well with her ankle. She has competed consistently well throughout her career and never had such a situation occur since, so why would anyone still believe that this situation was just Venus taking a fall so that Serena could win. It does not seem right to me at all.
NCAA Basketball History
On November 3rd, we talked about the history of Men’s College Basketball. While talking about it a few major events were mentioned. Those events were when Texas Western won the National Championship and was the first team to start five African American athletes in that game. Another was when Larry Bird for Indiana State and Magic Johnson for Michigan State played in one of the most memorable National Championship Games of all time.
These events along with many others are what have made March Madness what it is today. The perfect setup of sixty five teams in a playoff, single eliminations tournament has evolved over the past thirty years. The idea that each game means the entire season for every team in the tournament creates for an excitement that is unmatchable. Due to the events that have occurred in the past, the NCAA has been able to create something that creates such an enormous amount of attention. Each night is a big night on ESPN as they have Big Monday, all the way through Throw Down Thursday. They have the nation’s attention for every conference tournament; even the smallest of conferences and then Selection Sunday creates a large amount of controversy on who will make it in the tournament.
Some of the games that have made the NCAA tournament so memorable for me have been both recent and multiple years ago. One of my favorite games of the tournament was in 1998 when Valparaiso’s Bryce Drew hit a give and go three point shot to knock off the fourth seeded Ole Miss. The shot was amazing to me because at the time I was only ten and all I wanted to see was upsets. I loved seeing the Cinderella stories make it deep into the tournament. Granted I am still like that today, but at that point I would sit there and root for the lower seed in nearly every matchup.
Probably my favorite tournament of all time would have to be the 2007 NCAA Tournament when Ohio State was a number one seed and had so many close and exciting games. I enjoyed when Ohio State was down by three against Xavier and Justin Cage still had one more free throw attempt to seal the game with nine seconds to go. Cage missed the shot and Ohio State took the ball down the court and drained a three point shot from deep behind the line to send the game into overtime and eventually win the game. I also love the Tennessee game in the next round when Ohio State was down by 17 at the half. They came back with a huge second half to pull off a one point win. They also beat two great teams in Memphis and Georgetown before unfortunately losing to Florida in the National Championship, but it was such an incredible run.
Those were some of my favorite moments, but what are some of your favorite moments that have made the NCAA Tournament what it is today?
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/recap?gid=200703220443
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/17663487//
These events along with many others are what have made March Madness what it is today. The perfect setup of sixty five teams in a playoff, single eliminations tournament has evolved over the past thirty years. The idea that each game means the entire season for every team in the tournament creates for an excitement that is unmatchable. Due to the events that have occurred in the past, the NCAA has been able to create something that creates such an enormous amount of attention. Each night is a big night on ESPN as they have Big Monday, all the way through Throw Down Thursday. They have the nation’s attention for every conference tournament; even the smallest of conferences and then Selection Sunday creates a large amount of controversy on who will make it in the tournament.
Some of the games that have made the NCAA tournament so memorable for me have been both recent and multiple years ago. One of my favorite games of the tournament was in 1998 when Valparaiso’s Bryce Drew hit a give and go three point shot to knock off the fourth seeded Ole Miss. The shot was amazing to me because at the time I was only ten and all I wanted to see was upsets. I loved seeing the Cinderella stories make it deep into the tournament. Granted I am still like that today, but at that point I would sit there and root for the lower seed in nearly every matchup.
Probably my favorite tournament of all time would have to be the 2007 NCAA Tournament when Ohio State was a number one seed and had so many close and exciting games. I enjoyed when Ohio State was down by three against Xavier and Justin Cage still had one more free throw attempt to seal the game with nine seconds to go. Cage missed the shot and Ohio State took the ball down the court and drained a three point shot from deep behind the line to send the game into overtime and eventually win the game. I also love the Tennessee game in the next round when Ohio State was down by 17 at the half. They came back with a huge second half to pull off a one point win. They also beat two great teams in Memphis and Georgetown before unfortunately losing to Florida in the National Championship, but it was such an incredible run.
Those were some of my favorite moments, but what are some of your favorite moments that have made the NCAA Tournament what it is today?
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/recap?gid=200703220443
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/17663487//
Required to Speak English
Yesterday in class, we talked about how the LPGA imposed a rule stating that every player has to speak English. This rule was imposed to diminish the boundaries between the players. LPGA commissioner Carolyn Bivens received a large amount of criticism for this rule that was imposed on the players. This past summer after having to deal with many different complaints and objections to Bivens’s new rule, she stepped down as the commissioner. However, I wonder if the complaints that she was receiving were really that fair.
Carolyn Bivens was trying to reduce the boundaries between the players so that there were not nearly the troubles that there are with communication while playing. The trouble is that there must be a translator for the players that cannot speak the English language and that creates an issue when an English speaking woman is paired with a woman that does not speak English.
I think that what Carolyn was doing was the right thing to do. Most athletes that come to the United State at least put forth an effort to be able to speak English and communicate with others. Although the English may not be that great, they still are trying to make it easier. If I were to go out and be paired with a person that could not speak the same language as me, I would be frustrated because I would not be able to talk to them at all. Any communication I would want to have with them would take longer due to the translation and would probably get fairly annoying.
I am not saying that Carolyn’s rule was completely fair, but I do think that the amount of criticism that she received for this was wrong. She was trying to make it fair for everyone on tour and the majority of players are English speaking. It is only fair to try to make the most dominant language the primary one.
http://sports.outsidethebeltway.com/2009/07/is-lpga-commissioner-carolyn-bivens-about-to-be-ousted/
Carolyn Bivens was trying to reduce the boundaries between the players so that there were not nearly the troubles that there are with communication while playing. The trouble is that there must be a translator for the players that cannot speak the English language and that creates an issue when an English speaking woman is paired with a woman that does not speak English.
I think that what Carolyn was doing was the right thing to do. Most athletes that come to the United State at least put forth an effort to be able to speak English and communicate with others. Although the English may not be that great, they still are trying to make it easier. If I were to go out and be paired with a person that could not speak the same language as me, I would be frustrated because I would not be able to talk to them at all. Any communication I would want to have with them would take longer due to the translation and would probably get fairly annoying.
I am not saying that Carolyn’s rule was completely fair, but I do think that the amount of criticism that she received for this was wrong. She was trying to make it fair for everyone on tour and the majority of players are English speaking. It is only fair to try to make the most dominant language the primary one.
http://sports.outsidethebeltway.com/2009/07/is-lpga-commissioner-carolyn-bivens-about-to-be-ousted/
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Shaq vs. Yao
We talked recently about the impact of Asian's in sports within the United States. One topic that came up was about Yao Ming and how he was portrayed when he came to the United States. Many viewed him as slow and non-aggressive and that he would not perform very well in the league going up against bigger, aggressive players.
We then talked about how Shaq made comments about Yao and how Yao basically had no chance against him and then made what some called racial remarks. Some people in class thought that those remarks were racist and I think that is completely wrong.
I hate how it is so hard for people to just talk within sports without being criticized. The media makes every athlete that speaks out look to be a bad person, when sometimes they are just expressing how they feel or just trying to have fun. Then these players are hit with fines and suspensions. This is why I think that I have such a problem with the fact that people call Shaq’s comments racial. He is a funny guy. He is always making jokes and there are probably not more than two or three instances that I can remember him publically being upset. Most of the issues were dealing with either Kobe or a coach not getting him the ball.
I believe that there is a fine line between what is racism and what is just a person having fun and joking around. Everyone is going to have an opinion and try to make a story out of the smallest of comments, but why even bother with it. In the video, Shaq is very clearly just having fun. It is not like Shaq or Yao retaliated against each other in their games against each other. Shaq loves the competition and wants to play against the best. Some people considered and still consider Yao to be one of the best from China and even in the NBA and so Shaq just wants that upper hand. He wants to be able to get a dig in and just try to get under the other person’s skin.
What I really wonder, is if Shaq said something about an African American or a Caucasian if he would have got the same criticism? I would doubt it.
We then talked about how Shaq made comments about Yao and how Yao basically had no chance against him and then made what some called racial remarks. Some people in class thought that those remarks were racist and I think that is completely wrong.
I hate how it is so hard for people to just talk within sports without being criticized. The media makes every athlete that speaks out look to be a bad person, when sometimes they are just expressing how they feel or just trying to have fun. Then these players are hit with fines and suspensions. This is why I think that I have such a problem with the fact that people call Shaq’s comments racial. He is a funny guy. He is always making jokes and there are probably not more than two or three instances that I can remember him publically being upset. Most of the issues were dealing with either Kobe or a coach not getting him the ball.
I believe that there is a fine line between what is racism and what is just a person having fun and joking around. Everyone is going to have an opinion and try to make a story out of the smallest of comments, but why even bother with it. In the video, Shaq is very clearly just having fun. It is not like Shaq or Yao retaliated against each other in their games against each other. Shaq loves the competition and wants to play against the best. Some people considered and still consider Yao to be one of the best from China and even in the NBA and so Shaq just wants that upper hand. He wants to be able to get a dig in and just try to get under the other person’s skin.
What I really wonder, is if Shaq said something about an African American or a Caucasian if he would have got the same criticism? I would doubt it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)