I didn't play soccer, but even I can see that this kind of play is straight up wrong and shouldn't be tolerated by refs, coaches, or teammates. It's one thing to get tough on the field. It's another to punch someone in the back or drag them to the ground by their hair. That's not sport, it's violence.
But second, of course, I'm pissed that the media coverage is trying to take what amounts to an athlete crossing the line and turn it into some big gendered controversy.
Salon's Broadsheet pointed out a lot of bad behavior by men in sport, including the Zidane headbutt, and then had this to say:
Without disputing the basic fact that men and women are physically, hormonally and socially conditioned to be different, maybe it’s time to put aside the facile explanation of aggressive behavior as strictly maculine. Because along with it is the gentle hint that if sports are aggressive and men are all foot stampy and tough, then women’s actions aren’t quite real. And tangled up in the "Don't be like us big bad animals, ladies!" message is a boastful subtext of athletic machismo.
Of course I'd be remiss to not mention the Professor, who had not one but two posts on the topic. First she did a rundown of the event with some videos of tough female soccer players. Then she commented on the ESPN video I was unimpressed with:
A lot of women and men players reading this know this - and the sports journalists covering this story ought to also know this - that a) women play dirty just like men do and b) the real story is about the refereeing and coaching. As bad as Lambert's play was, I just hate seeing her scapegoated this way as if responsibility for what happened in that match falls on her alone.
The scapegoating and shaming of Lambert is really appalling. If I had to do it again, I would have called out ESPN for that even more in my original post. It's like a variation on slut-shaming.
5 comments:
Elaine: What is so appealing to men about a cat fight?
Kramer: Yeah, yeah, cat fight!
Jerry: Because men think if women are grabbing and clawing at each other there's a chance they might somehow kiss.
I'm amazed that nobody is discussing this aspect of the match and resulting video.
Fact: For many people, there is inherently a sexual element to same-gender physical altercations, and particularly when these altercations occur between two women. (But not only between women. I am female and will admit to recognizing the same thing in the Zidane-Materazzi headbutt.)
Most men understand this element, at least subconsciously, and yet nobody is talking about it. Instead the debate is all about the refereeing, (which is admittedly awful) or about whether women can be as violent and rough as men, which is stupid. Of course we can, under the right circumstances.
If that was all there was to the incident, though, the publicity would have died down in five minutes. Maybe the bigger debate is, why do we let the media get so worked up about this type of thing without dealing with what's really behind the fascination?
Well, I at least touched on it in my original post.
http://www.fakesigi.com/2009/11/on-elizabeth-lambert-of-new-mexico.html
And I think you'll see others did as well. But I'd agree that maybe it wasn't explored as deeply as it could have been.
Ah, yes. You did. I'd forgotten. I stand corrected.
Still think this would have gone nowhere without the psychosexual, homoerotic element.
Fake Sigi, you may be interested in this article by Ms. Magazine. I think it goes a lot more in depth than some of the other feminist blogs you've mentioned. http://www.msmagazine.com/Fall2009/womenplayrough.asp
That's a great article. I might have one more post coming on the topic, and that would be good foil to the NYT article.
Much to consider. Thanks for the comment.
Post a Comment