Review of Unmatched: Martina and Chris

Here is an excellent review of Unmatched, an ESPN 30 for 30 documentary about the friendship and tennis rivalry between Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert. I don’t know if ESPN will be airing this again, but it is worth checking your local listings if you missed it last week. It was a unique documentary in that it was as much about their relationship off the court as it was about their on-court rivalry. Of course, the two are intertwined so it is difficult to separate them. I loved that the documentary was actually a conversation between the two of them. It was two old friends taking a weekend in a beach house together to talk about old times (on camera, of course). They chatted over tea on comfortable couches, in the kitchen, while jogging together, walking on the beach. They hit a few tennis balls. They drove around in a cool Mercedes convertible. All the while sharing memories, sometimes their separate takes on the same event, sometimes observations on themselves and each other. These chats were interspersed with footage of their matches and still photos of each of them growing up.

They talked briefly about Martina’s coming out in 1981. Chris already knew and said she admired Martina’s honesty. Chris met her former husband, Andy Mill, through Martina. Andy and Chris even slept for the first time in Martina’s bed in Aspen. Chris shared that she and Martina had a double date once. I thought it was going to be a lesbian/straight date, but alas, it was Martina and Dino Martin with Chris and Desi Arnez. Martina shared that this was before she was sure what her sexuality was. It seems that Dino was quite attracted by Martina’s muscles, much to Chris’ chagrin since she was the one who though Dino was cute. Funny story.

It was also interesting to hear Chris talk about how hurt she was during the time that basketball player/analyst, Nancy Liebermann, was Martina’s coach (and lover). While Nancy did spur Martina to train on a level that took Martina’s game to a higher level, Nancy’s philosophy was that you needed to hate your opponent in order to beat them. Her insistence that Martina view Chris as an enemy broke up their doubles partnership. Her poisonous perspective threatened what would become a sports friendship for the ages. Let’s all be thankful that Chris and Martina’s friendship survived Nancy’s attempt to ruin it.

It was touching to hear them each say that the other is one of the first friends they contact when in crisis or when something important happens in their lives. Such an enduring friendship between two women who are so different from each other, yet so bonded and connected by their athletic careers reminds us what sports can be in addition to competition. It can be about relationships and how competition doesn’t need to be about winning at all costs, especially the cost of a friendship. Relationships among competitors, even at the top of their careers can spur each one to greater accomplishments and deeper understanding and appreciation for a rival.

Chris and Martina share experiences only the two of them can truly understand. Watching Unmatched, I felt privileged to be invited to share a glimpse of their apparent affection and respect for each other. Nancy Lieberman was wrong and I for one am thankful. I hope you get a chance to see this documentary.

Unmatched: Martina and Chris Rivalry

Tuesday night, September 14 at 8 pm EDT, ESPN will air a documentary entitled, Unmatched. The film follows the tennis rivalry and friendship between Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert. Martina and Chris discussed their relationship on and off the court for the first time. You can also read about their rivalry and friendship in an excellent book by Johnette Howard called The Rivals.

Martina and Chris represented two opposites both on and off the court. Martina was a serve and volley specialist with powerful strokes and a beautiful athleticism that was a joy to watch. She tended to be emotional and wore her heart on her tennis dress sleeve during matches. Chris was the cool baseline machine. She was steady, relentless, keeping her emotions below the surface. Martina is a lesbian who came out in 1981. Let me repeat that, 1981, when the only other woman who had come out was Billie Jean King and she did not come out voluntarily. In fact she denied that she was gay for years after.

Martina came out not long afterwards and they both paid the price in loss of commercial endorsements and popularity for a long time until the world caught up. Chris’ image was “the girl next door.” She had highly publicized relationships with Jimmy Connors and other well known male celebrities and athletes. Because her image was more sellable and more conventional, the feminine, heterosexual girl next door, she raked in the commercial endorsements. The truth was that the private Chris was a lot more x-rated than her public image, but the fans loved “Chrissy” as the tennis commentators insisted on calling her. Some media pundits called their rivalry, “Beauty and the Beast:” Martina, the gay muscular, powerhouse coached by the transgender former player Renee Richards vs. the demure self-contained, feminine Chrissy. It often seemed like the only ones rooting for Martina when they played were the lesbians scattered throughout the stadium. Martina was honored at the U.S. Open last week. It was a long time coming.

Off the court they were and remain close friends crossing sexuality, cultural and competitive boundaries. I have immense respect for both of them. I’m looking forward to hearing them talk about their relationship over the years. Check it out – Tuesday 8pm EDT ESPN.

When Coaches Teach Bigotry in the Name of Christianity

Excuse me, but I thought the primary goal of coaching girls' or women’s basketball teams was, well, coaching basketball . That would not be the case for Jaye Collins, however. He is the coach of the Louisville Legends. The Legends are part of a network of independent girls basketball teams affiliated with Elite Basketball Family. EBF’s goal according to their web site is as follows: The EBF is a 501©3 non-profit organization designed to ensure the future success of hundreds of young ladies each year by giving them chances to earn college scholarships to play basketball.

But if you go to the Legends web site and click on the coaches tab, here is what Coach Collins has to say about his goal:

I started the Lady Legends program with the support of my wife, Kari, in hopes of encouraging young girls to be proud and secure in not being part of the lesbian and homosexual lifestyle which is so prevalent in woman's/girl's athletics. Many girls, as early as middle school, are being influenced or "tested", or converted and convinced that if they play sports, specifically basketball, they must be, should be, or need to be gay.


I believe that we should encourage girls to glorify God and please Jesus Christ in their decision making processes. I know this is not the socially accepted or politically correct perspective, but our goal is H.O.O.P.S.....Helping Others Obtain Personal Salvation.

If you go to the Legends home page, you find that it starts off with a Biblical quote in huge letters and then, secondarily, if you scroll down, features photos of team members and where they will be playing college ball.

I don’t know if independent teams like the Legends are governed by any rules or policies about either Christian proselytizing or anti-gay discrimination under the guise of coaching a girls’ basketball team so maybe what Coach Collins is doing is perfectly legal, but it isn’t right. Maybe it is a good thing that he is so completely transparent about his beliefs and his goals. Let the buyer beware, so to speak.

It just makes me sick and sad and angry that such ignorant propaganda can be so blatant and, apparently acceptable. And that young girls who play with the Legends are subjected to the coach’s religious and anti-gay rhetoric. Collins is teaching prejudice and fear under the guise of making girls basketball “safe” for straight, Christian girls. What about Legend players who are questioning their sexuality or who know they are gay? He is teaching them to hate and fear themselves. He is teaching them shame and denial. What happens to Legends players when they are recruited to play college ball and find that they have lesbian teammates or coaches whom they are expected to treat with respect? Will the example set by Coach Collins’ anti-gay and pro-Christian beliefs make it more difficult for Legends players to adjust to a team where player and coach diversity is valued and respected? Where lesbians are not assumed to be drooling child molesters or out to convert all their teammates to their “homosexual lifestyle?”

Coach Collins claims to be providing some kind of Christian refuge for basketball players from the “tests” they need to endure presumably from evil lesbian teammates and coaches who try to “convince or convert them” that they need to be gay to play women’s basketball. Clearly Coach Collins has a personal problem with lesbians in sport. This hysterical and bigoted perspective is an important reminder that homophobia is alive and well in girls and women’s sports, particularly basketball.

Far from being a principled or courageous stance, I believe what Coach Collins does is a kind of abuse of power wrapped up in self-righteous bigotry masked as Christian concern. Providing girls with opportunities to play basketball and get college scholarships is a terrific goal and volunteer coaches who are committed to working for young women in this way are to be applauded. However, coaches owe it to their team members to check their personal prejudices at the gym door and do the best they can to create a climate of respect and safety for every team member – gay, straight, Christian, Jew, atheist, black, white.

Many Christian coaches live their religious values without pushing them on their teams. Most lesbian coaches live their life without any thought of “converting” players. It is wrong for Christian and lesbian coaches to impose either their religion or their sexuality on their athletes. Both Christians and lesbians can be great coaches. Neither religious belief nor sexual orientation has much to do with being a good coach though (or a good basketball player either). Great coaching is about Xs and Os, but it is also so much more. It is about living your life with integrity and confronting prejudice and bigotry in any guise. It is about modeling and teaching athletes about self-respect and respect for people who are different from you. It is about confronting one’s own stereotypes to avoid passing them on to young women. It is not about conjuring up a lesbian bogeywoman and then claiming to protect your team from her. That’s working your own personal agenda and calling it coaching.

Reflections on Caster Semenya’s Return to Competition

The IAAF has declared that South African runner Caster Semenya can resume competing in international women’s events. After an 11 month wait for this clearance Semenya has competed in three track meets in the past several days. She won two of her 800m races and finished third this past weekend.

The problem is that some of her competitors in the 800 meter race are complaining publicly to the press about her participation. Clearly this grumbling is not likely to go away soon and I am sure other competitors who are not speaking publicly share the perspectives shared by two particularly vocal athletes, British runner Jemma Simpson and Canadian Diane Cummins.

Two themes run through their comments. Their comments reflect the belief that Semenya, despite her clearance to participate, is not a “normal” woman. As Diane Cummins opined, "Even if she is a female, she's on the very fringe of the normal athlete female biological composition from what I understand of hormone testing. So, from that perspective, most of us just feel that we are literally running against a man."

Commenting on the perception that their comments are just sour grapes because they were beaten by Semenya, Cummins adds, “Jemma and I have been beaten tons of times by athletes who we feel are doing it in the realm of what is considered female.” Cummins also said, "There are guys who can challenge Usain Bolt but nobody can challenge Caster Semenya. She is four or five seconds better than any of us and that's incredible.” They do not consider Semenya in the “realm of what is considered female” even though Semenya was beaten by two other women last weekend.

The second theme in their comments is that they feel that their rights and voices are being ignored and that Semenya’s participation threatens the “level playing field.” It’s just not fair from their perspective. Jemma Simpson commented, "It's obviously a human rights issue but human rights affect everyone in the race, not just one person. The rest of the field just gets ignored." Cummins added, "As athletes we feel frustrated because everyone is allowed to give their opinion except us. If we give an honest opinion, we're either seen as bad sports or we're not happy because we're being beaten.”

Simpson notes a PC element to the conversation that she obviously feels silences the voices of the “normal” women, "No way is it a personal issue but it's a debate about what is right and fair for everyone. It's a really tough subject and a lot of people are very careful about what they say. You have to be.”

Simpson again, reflecting some conflict in her perspective, “She's just been allowed to come back on the scene and we're expected just to get on with it. It's fair to an extent but I think we all just want a fair level playing field out there. It would be nice to just – I know it's really none of our business – but it would just be nice to be reassured more than anything."

To be fair to these women, this is a challenging issue. Gender is way more complicated than the nice neat little separate boxes we are invited to check off on forms. Nonetheless most of us operate as if it were just that simple. Certainly the sports world does. You have your men’s sports and your women’s sports. Unfortunately, it isn’t so simple and never has been. It is not surprising that some of Semenya’s competitors are confused and feel that they are being asked to accept a competitive situation that puts them at a disadvantage. They train hard and rely on having a “level playing field” on which to compete and apparently no one has provided them with any information to challenge the prejudices they have about Semenya.

It is interesting to note that outstanding performances by women athletes throughout history have opened these athletes to gender criticism that, as in Semenya’s case, focused on whether or not they were ”normal” women. Babe Didrikson was vilified as an “unfeminine muscle moll.” Sports writers commented on her “masculine” appearance all the time. She intimidated her competitors too and won most of the golf tournaments she entered. In her prime, some of her opponents characterized the experience of facing Martina Navratilova’s powerful game as “like playing a man.” The legendary rivalry between Navratilova and Chris Evert was called “Beauty and the Beast.” Guess who was the beast. Amelie Mauresmo was called “half a man” by rival Martina Hingis. Though Serena Williams was not compared to a man, racist perceptions of her muscular black body created similar reactions that she was somehow not a “normal” woman and had a physical advantage over her less muscular white opponents.

Of course, it wasn’t just about femininity, it was about sexuality too. Babe, Martina and Amelie played their sports too well. They did not conform to feminine and heterosexual expectations. What does it say about women’s sports that we vilify our outstanding performers who do not easily fit in the gender and sexuality box they were assigned at birth?

The problem is that Semenya’s competitors’ comments reflect belief in a gender/sex binary that doesn’t exist. The two separate boxes most of us check off to describe who we are do not reflect the realities of gender as it is lived by many people or the bodies that some of us inhabit. Determining who is eligible to compete in either men’s or women’s sports is a matter of drawing a line somewhere along a spectrum of gender. Where that line is drawn must be based on the best information we have about gender and athletic performance. That is the only way to maintain the integrity of a sports model that is based on separating most sport competitions by sex. The alternative is to eliminate sex as a sports participation category altogether: A step I am not ready to take. I believe more girls and women have opportunities to participate in sport when sports competition are divided by sex, at least starting in high school, than would so if we eliminated sex as a participation category in sport.

The level playing field these athletes refer to in their comments about Semenya is a relative thing. Some would say it is a myth. Athletic competition is about gaining a competitive advantage. It’s what all athletes do to win. It’s just that we have deemed some advantages to be within the realm of fairness and “normalcy” and others not. We recognize and accept as part of the game some genetic advantages that make a few athletes exceptional, but not others, perhaps especially when those characteristics are related to gender.

Just as Babe, Martina, Amelie and Serena challenge normative gender expectations about athletic performance and how we define “woman”, Caster Semenya’s participation in women’s sport is challenging us to acknowledge the reality of a gender spectrum that contradicts the myth of a gender binary. How we respond to Caster Semenya’s self-affirmed identity as a woman and how we make room for her in women’s sports says a lot about how far we have to go in challenging sexism, homophobia and racism in sport. My sense is, judging by the reactions of some of Semenya’s competitors, that we have a long way to go (baby).

Diana Nyad: Force of Nature at 60

When I was a few months from turning 60 (five years ago), I decided to train for and swim the Provincetown Harbor Swim for Life: A mile and a half distance from Long Point at the tip of Cape Cod to the beach at the Boat Slip. I got myself a new wet suit and dove into the water. I swam every day increasing my distance, doing some intervals, swimming in pools and open water. This swim is a fund raiser for human service organizations in PTown so I enlisted the financial support of friends to help me raise some money by sponsoring my swim. I had completed the swim before several years ago during the triathlon phase of my life, but hadn’t done any real swim training since 1994 for the Gay Games triathlon in NYC. My PTown swim seemed like a great way to welcome myself to the big 60. And it was just that.

On the day of the swim in early September, the sky was overcast. I and 300 other swimmers waded into the waters off Long Point and looked to the roof of the Boat Slip off in the distance. The water was cold and choppy enough that I gave up bilateral breathing to avoid taking in sea water every time I took a breath on my right, but other than that, it was a great swim. I completed the swim in a satisfying 60 minutes and celebrated with friends on the beach.

Fast forward five years. Diana Nyad, a world class distance swimmer; media commentator; motivational speaker; fitness guru and one of the Out 100 of 2009 named by Out Magazine, is 60 and to mark her milestone birthday she is swimming from Cuba to Key West, a distance of 103 miles. Yes, that is no typo…103 miles. The swim will take her 40-60 hours to complete. She will be in shark infested waters and swimming without a shark cage. She hopes to be the first person to accomplish this feat. She tried to complete this swim in 1979 (with a cage), but had to stop as weather and sea currents made reaching her goal impossible. Now at 60 she wants to attend to this unfinished business, this gap in her impressive athletic resume.

Therein lies the difference between Diana Nyad and most other human beings, certainly between little old me and Diana. Me: A mile and a half in Provincetown harbor and beer waiting at the Boat Slip. Diana: 103 miles without a cage in shark infested water. She is a force of nature. Anyone who has ever heard her give one of her motivational talks, drawing on her own experiences as a world record setting distance swimmer knows that she can raise the hair on your neck and inspire you. She can make you laugh and make you cry.

I have spent time with Diana many times over the last 30 years. We’ve been on panels together talking about LGBT issues in sport, I’ve been part of her audience numerous times to hear her speak. I’ve been to Women’s Sports Foundation galas where she was the emcee, I’ve been a guest on her nationally syndicated radio show. On an Olivia cruise, a few years ago, she asked permission to and then rubbed her hand over my spiky short hair and proclaimed that it felt like a “bear’s belly.” I have no doubt that she would know. Sharks, bears, 103 miles – she is fearless.

I will be following Diana’s swim which she is planning to complete sometime this month. I invite you to also. She is a women’s sports pioneer who is setting an example for all of us 60 and over (and those under 60 for that matter). If she can swim from Cuba to Key West, what kind of goals can we set for ourselves?

I just started swim training again last month. I dug my favorite goggles out of an old gym bag and got myself back in the water. I did not make the connection between Diana’s swim and my return to the water until I started writing this post, but I am sure Diana’s audacity inspired me. You go, girl! I’m rooting for you.

Eliminating Homophobia in Men’s Professional Sports: Whose Responsibility Is It?

I have come across several articles lately focused on the issue of gay professional male athletes coming out. This one and this one are examples of the kind of articles I’ve seen. Both articles speculate about why it is that no male professional team sport athletes in the United States have come out while they are still actively competing. Some articles cite the distraction that would undoubtedly be part of the sports media frenzy accompanying this announcement and how gay athletes might not want to become the GAY athlete. Other writers speculate that the loss of corporate sponsorship opportunities and negative reactions from teammates or fans are the factors that keep gay professional athletes in the closet.

Lebron James and other pro athletes have opined about the lack of acceptance or downright hostility that they predict would await any teammate who comes out publicly. To be fair a few other pros have, in contrast, expressed the belief that any teammate’s sexual orientation is irrelevant and what counts is the player’s contribution to the team’s success on the field ( Johnny Damon, Detroit Tigers and former Yankee, Mike Mussina, for example). When players talk about their discomfort with having a gay teammate, it usually comes down to the locker room, the sanctity of the locker room. LeBron described the necessity of teammates being “trustworthy” and his belief that having a gay man in the locker room would break this bond among teammates. Other players have expressed the more naked (so to speak) discomfort with the possibility that a gay teammate might look at their penis in the showers. I don’t know about you, but I find it a little strange that these big strong guys, the culturally designated epitome of masculinity are afraid that a gay man might sneak a peek at their wee wees.

I wonder if the whole thing isn’t more that this though. I wonder if the resistance to accepting a gay man in the locker room and on the team doesn’t have more to do with the fragility of masculinity and the illusion of superiority that being a heterosexual male athlete confers on the chosen ones who get to be part of that “band of brothers” sharing that locker room. I wonder if some guys worry that if a gay man is tough and talented enough to make the team and earns his right to be in that locker room, then the whole experience of being a pro team sport athlete is cheapened in their eyes. The whole bonding thing among male teammates becomes suspect.

Perhaps this is all academic clap trap, but it is worth thinking about. It makes sense to me if you take a broader view of the function of homophobia and the role it plays in sustaining heterosexual male privilege. I think homophobia plays a similar role in the resistance to the acceptance of women’s sports. The presence of seriously talented women athletes and equal opportunities in sport for all women in sport also is seen as an invasion on the sacred heterosexual male turf of sport.

But I am digressing. The point I wanted to make is that focusing on when an individual gay male professional team sport athlete comes out is interesting, but places the emphasis in the wrong place. It really isn’t about the brave and pioneering gay man who will come out sooner or later while he is still playing.

Though I will be thrilled to greet his announcement, it alone will not change the homophobic culture of men’s sports. Buried in Scott Gyurina’s Bleacher Report article is the following quote, “The responsibility cannot be laid on the shoulders of the gay athletes, it is not their responsibility to make the culture open and accepting for them. It is the duty of all of us to let go of our prejudice and preconceived notions in order to make it acceptable for people to feel free to open and honest, unafraid of repercussions for being true to who they are.”

John Amaechi took some heat from the gay press a few months ago for cautioning gay male athletes about coming out and tamping down expectations for any who do in the near future. He was accused of contradicting the common wisdom among many gay rights activists that coming out is always a good thing for all LGBT people, the sooner the better. I think many people missed John’s point though. He was trying to put the focus where it belongs – on the culture of men’s sports, on heterosexual male pro athletes and coaches, on athletic leaders. He was trying to point out how unreasonable it is to expect an individual athlete to change a social institution, especially if the individual is unprepared for being a social change advocate.

I am not discounting the power of individuals in social change. I have witnessed some pretty transformative experiences as a result of individual LGBT people coming out. Research also tells us that knowing individual LGBT people as friends, colleagues, family members or teammates does affect heterosexual people’s attitudes about LGBT people in general. However, we cannot place the responsibility of changing men’s sports culture on the backs of individual gay male athletes who come out.

We need more heterosexual men in sport to step up, to be team leaders, to have the courage to speak out publicly against homophobia in men’s sports and in support of gay rights in general. Fortunately we are beginning to see some role models who are doing just that in professional and college sports. Scott Fujita, a Cleveland Browns player; Hudson Taylor, University of Maryland wrestler; Jim Tressel, Ohio State Football coach; and Brian Burke, Toronto Maple Leafs General Manager are a few of these outspoken men. We need more heterosexual athletes, coaches, team owners and general managers who are willing to be public allies to their closeted colleagues and help their gay-challenged brethren to at least show a little more maturity, respect and class when someone sticks a microphone in front of their mouth.

We need to make it cool to speak out against homophobia and uncool and cowardly to speak out against the inclusion of LGBT people in sport and other social institutions. Outsports posted this web site where ordinary, everyday people of all sexual orientations are speaking out against homophobia. We need more role models and opportunities for heterosexual men to speak up for respect and fairness and against fear and prejudice in and out of sport.

That is how we will create the space for individual gay male professional athletes to come out without the risk of sacrificing all they have worked for to reach the professional ranks in order to simply live openly. I’d love to see the next bunch of articles on gay male professional athletes coming out focus on changing heterosexual male athletes’ attitudes and the homophobic culture of men’s sports rather than focusing on how an individual gay man needs to come out into it.

Allegations of Anti-Lesbian Bias in IUPUI Women’s Basketball Program

Here we go again. An article in the Indianapolis Star reports that allegations of NCAA rule violations and allegations of abuse have been lodged against the head coach and associate head coach of women’s basketball at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI).

The abuse allegations against coaches Shann Hart and Chanel Spriggs come from 11 former players. The Star article reports that 28 players and assistant coaches have left the program in the last four seasons. This number includes 19 scholarship athletes. Wow. Wouldn’t you think that these numbers might raise some kind of red flag for administrators that something is terribly wrong in the women’s basketball program? These numbers are higher than the 23 people who left the Oregon State women’s program where the head coach was fired amid allegations of abusive and, frankly, a little unhinged behavior. I wrote about the situation at Oregon State in my June 2 post.

The IUPUI players claim that the coaches created an “atmosphere of fear, favoritism, humiliation and inappropriate interest in their personal lives.” One player told the Star that she was asked “explicitly” about her sexual orientation and others described a “reckless” postgame “rant” by the coach about players who “break team rules by becoming involved in intimate relationships with each other.”

IUPUI has named a three member panel to investigate the charges. Coaches Hart and Spriggs have declined to comment on the allegations. No timeline for the investigative panel’s report has been made public, but I will definitely follow-up on this.

A state-wide LGBT rights organization, Indiana Equality, has taken note of the anti-lesbian allegations and sent a letter to the university president and athletic director citing the university’s non-discrimination policy and demanding that they take action if the allegations are confirmed.

If these allegations of abuse are substantiated, it is not only the coaches who should be held accountable. It is also the school athletic administrators and any other athletic staff who ignored or supported the alleged abusive behavior and anti-lesbian interrogations and relationship rules. How many times do we have to hear this story or variations of it for coaches and administrators to begin to take seriously their responsibilities to abide by school policies and state non-discrimination laws?

And, please, to people who say homophobia is no longer an issue in women’s sports: These allegations are exactly the kind of abuse of power and unethical coach behavior that ruins sport for all women athletes, not just lesbians, but any woman athlete who must live in fear of accusation or innuendo.

*Thanks to Helen Carroll for calling this situation to my attention.