There's an assumption--a mythology, to some degree--that Agnieszka Radwanska, tricky as she is, cannot finesse her way past big hitters. That isn't actually true, though the Polish star appears to have come to believe it. Consider how she freezes the moment she sees Serena Williams on the other side of the net. I'm not implying that Radwanska can change her attitude and beat Williams, but she could at least give it a go. Radwanska frequently appears to give up when she faces a big hitter, but when she has some belief and actually plays her game, sometimes good things happen. Just ask Maria Sharapova.
The Australian Open 5th seed faced such a big hitter in yesterday's night match, when she played Spain's Garbine Muguruza for a spot in the quarterfinals. Muguruza did not make it easy for Radwanska; in fact, she imposed herself on the Pole in the very early part of the match. But Muguruza's big hitting was actually bait for Radwanska, whose footwork, shot variety and cunning strategy were way more than the Spaniard could handle. Radwanska won 6-1, 6-3.
I am so weary of the tennis media. Bill Macatee, from whom I expect better, is now 27-year-old Andrea Hlavackova and 28-year-old Lucie Hradecka "young ladies." (He shouldn't be calling any of the players "young ladies," for that matter). Apparently, if you hang out with Tracy Austin long enough, you, too, can develop sexist language. And I winced when Renee Stubbs "humorously" asked Victoria Azarenka a question about her personal life that is none of Stubbs' (or our) business.
Then there was the reporter who asked Simona Halep how her breast reduction surgery had affected her off-court life. Halep laughed it off, but oh, how I wish she had instead asked the reporter a question about his or her (does anyone know who the reporter was?) genitals or sexual habits. And I really wish she would formally complain, but, of course, that particular reporter's question will just float around with Tsonga's lecture on women's hormones in the great "don't make such a big deal over it, it's all good fun" sexist beyond.
Two quarterfinals will be played today. Li Na will play Flavia Pennetta, and that match will be followed by Ana Ivanovic vs. Eugenie Bouchard. Also today, top seeds Sara Errani and Roberta Vinci play Cara Black and Sania Mirza. And surprise quarterfinalists Shahar Peer and Silvia Soler-Espinosa take on Raquel Kops-Jones and Abigail Spears.
Great article! But I don't get how "young ladies" is sexist. Please explain.
ReplyDeleteIn the U.S., the term is very paternalistic--the kind of thing said to/about little girls.
ReplyDeleteI see 'young ladies' as sweet, and even fatherly. Maybe in the South it is as you describe it, but not where I come from.
ReplyDeleteExactly--fatherly. Paternalistic. These are grown women.
ReplyDeleteUgh. Agree with everything. Also particularly disappointed at the media hype this tournament trying to pit female players against one another. Aren't we all better than to believe in the 'cat fight WTA tour' the media has made up to play on our love for gender roles, in order to sell a few stories.
ReplyDeleteAlso to clarify the specific players - Sloane - Serena ( can't believe they filmed her in a private gym session), Sloane - Vika and Azarenka - Radwanska. Can't recall a big deal ever being made about male players relationships (with other players or partners).
ReplyDeleteThe live commentary running on the screen on ESPN's live online coverage quoted Sloane and Vika (out of context, and benign, anyway) and asked "Do women have trouble with friendship?" Oh, please.
ReplyDeleteGrown women have loving fathers, believe it or not. You equate 'fatherly' and 'paternalistic'. The words have different connotations and denotations. To a fifty-year man, 'young ladies' can mean twenty-five, with nothing patronizing about it at all. In my view, 'fatherly' is sweet, empathetic a term. Perhaps it's a regional thing. I am a feminist, by the way, but am tiring of the constant search for anything at all that could be construed as sexism.
ReplyDeleteI'm a big believer in context, too:). IMO, the use of the term by professional commentators is inappropriate--they are not the players' fathers, and their job is not to be fatherly.
ReplyDeleteThat makes sense, but even so, it's not necessarily sexist. It depends on the context and the person saying it. The man's familiarity with the person is one factor. It's not a simple analysis.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't have to be a man, either, e.a., Tracy Austin. What I mean is that on the air, in a professional context, I just like for all players to be treated as professionals, regardless of anyone's relationship with them. And because of public perceptions of women and girls, I especially want female athletes to be treated with professional respect and to be treated as adults (unless they're teenagers, and even they needed to be treated as athletes first), and they generally are on the U.S. tennis broadcast channels, but it took many years for that to happen.
ReplyDeleteNothing is simple :)
Lemme seeee. I'm 72 and there is nothing demeaning whatsoever in the word 'lady', young, middle or old; at least not in my experience. I see it as a sweet acknowledgment of the respect due to all women. The word 'lady' came to us from on high, so to speak, from England, where a lady was to be held in high esteem under a presumption of grace and goodness, if not more.
ReplyDeleteUnderstood. We were discussing the term "young lady," though, which is contextually very different when discussion grown women.
ReplyDeleteAnd FWIW, I'm one of the few people I know (where I live) who still uses the term "gentleman."