As we discussed in Peter Lee's blog posting last week, the Olympics is a celebration of the best athletes of different nations of the world coming together on an international platform and the cooperation of our diverse world.Key word- diverse. Johnny Weir is a male figure skater for the United States Olympic team. He placed 6th in these Olympic games, whilst performing in black and pink attire. He has been referred to as 'flamboyant' in numerous news publications and has been perpetuated as presenting a less-than-manly representation of male figure skating.
Two Canadian commentators came under fire for their comments on Weir's performance. He was deemed a bad example of 'male' figure skaters. They criticized his costume and his 'body language' and suggested that he should take a 'gender test' in order to ensure that he truly should be competing against other males. A fellow Olympican (a female runner from South Africa) actually underwent these tests after speculation that she wasn't a woman. Surprise- she was!
I think this brings up an interesting point when we look at the construction of gender. Is it right that we have male events and female events and that the rules and regulations vary based on the assumptions regarding the strength and abilities of those in each gender? What does it mean when commentators favor a certain athlete for his masculinity if he's a male but the opposite for a female? And how does this bring tension to the 'authentic' representation of a nation when more than just national identity comes into play?
I don't think that there should be an issue regarding the expectations for males versus females in the Olympics. As much as people like to say that men and women can do the same things, the reality of these situations is simply that we can't. There will be moments when men and women will be different, are different and they occur because we are biologically engineered simply differently (sorry about the constant use of "different", but the point needs to be made).
ReplyDeleteI think that many of the things that they commentators said were truly rude and disappointing not even from an ethnic or cultural view, but from a moral one. There are just some things that people shouldn't say about or toward other people, it's not nice. Regardless of whether or not Weir wanted to wear black and pink, this shouldn't be some foundational marker to his gender relativity, belonging or confirmation, it's silly.
Lastly, in the case of the female runner from South Africa, I felt that that was truly rude, embarrassing and disrespectful. As equivalent to our analysis of Venus Williams, the goal in that testing was not to determine whether or not she was female, but for her image to be tarnished and questions raised about who she was. People simply don't desire to see others succeed and if it mens taking cheap shots as biological gender verification and socially accepted versions of masculinity or femininity, they're all for it.
It is sad to see that in such an esteemed event have commentators who criticize a man and his masculinity just because of the color he wears or the way he might act. To answer your first question I think it is wrong to create rules and regulations that surround the list of things that men and woman can't do. To answer your second question, when commentators favor a certain athlete based on their masculinity it is clear that they have issues and pre conditions of how a man should be and how a woman should be. And lastly, the tension of masculinity issues affect the representations of nation because it is hard to believe and hard to see now a days a country or nation that can fully accept a man who is more feminine than an actual female.
ReplyDeleteComing from the home state of Johnny Weir, Delaware that is, I Johnny Weir's "antics" are nothing new to someone who used to read about him in the local newspaper. He was the local hero many a time. But, what is surprising to say, is that, Johnny Weir's gender identity never came into into contention in Delaware, rather, I don't believe anyone would have mentioned anything about his gender identity, he was a hometown hero after all, and an olympian for one, then again, Delaware is semi famous for producing olympians in the figure skating world, so I guess we're kind of used to what a figure skater is, simply that, a figure skater.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, to answer the question of should there be separate events, I would say absolutely. Statistically speaking, look at the times for the different events in the olympics. If the olympics were competitions based purely who is the best person in the world at this specific sport and all the genders were placed into one bracket, there would be very very few women ever placed on the podium for gold, silver, or bronze. For exam, let's take a mostly gender neutral sport, speed skating (which I have been watching closely, being Korean-American and all), which has a very objective scoring system, how fast you go around a circle so many times. In all the events, the top three in the men's events had faster times, than the top three in the women's events. Now, I don't know how much more objective you can get than that. Basing everything on numbers. So I can see why you have a women's category for that.
Now, the question of nationhood. I don't really see how nationhood comes into play here. Rather, I see the question of gender definition on an international level. How have we come to define gender on an international level. Weren't we supposed to be all different, depending on our own cultures? So, what does this make this now. Is there an international recognized consensus of what gender is? Or can we still there are distinctions. Maybe, we can say that this comment on nationhood if wee how many women a nation sends, and what sports they send them in. Does a nation send women in exclusively "feminine" sports, whatever that means, or are they being sent in all sports.
These are pretty much my thoughts on this.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/26/is-johnny-weir-too-gay-fo_n_478522.html
Gender tests are tricky here. Watching how the incident with the death of the athlete on the sled thing... forgive me if my details are hazy, led my girlfriend and I to wonder: why is a "safer track" the women's track? I don't understand why men and women compete in different leagues and if they do, why distances, jump heights, course lengths, etc. are altered? It doesn't make sense to me why there are two different standards.
ReplyDeleteFurther, when that one athlete was accused of being a man and supposedly could have had zir gold medal stripped and was called on for being tested, then could that have led to further testing of other people? Here's a situation: If I played football for say Manchester United and I could not keep up with my team, would I be tested for not being masculine enough or would others be tested for being too masculine and further if I was somehow not masculine enough to play with the men, could I join a women's football team instead?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePeople say that gender are treated the same. But, are we really? No, America is a patriarchal society men are seen as a strong, aggressive, and breedwinners in society. So when they are acting emotional, passive, and dependent they are criticized by their masculinity. I think gender role stereotype shouldn't happenin Olympics because people come from different cultures that value different things. If wearing pink and white makes a person dehumanized in their gender identity, it can question the word authentic. Who is to judge? Of course our society! Is it right? No, but the different theories people think have a person to think too.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Tichina in regards to her comment about it being necessary for male and female events to have different rules and regulations due to the fact that men and women have different genetic make-ups. Men and women are not biologically the same thus they can not be subjected to the same standards, there is no one-size fits all because we are not all the same. In my opinion, when a commentator favors an athlete for his masculinity if he is a male and not for a female just goes to show that everyone analyzes things from different lenses. People preference is contingent upon how they view society and what is normal and abnormal. This athlete who is picture may not represent the “American image” but what is the correct national image? America is comprised of a diverse population of people which this individual is a representation of. He may not be the ideal representation but he does represent the nation. I don’t believe that “authentic” representation is something that can be truly obtained because everyone’s perception of what is authentic varies.
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone who has posted so I will keep it short, no matter how much we try or how much we want to pretend that men and woman are viewed as equals it's never 100%. and I agree that it is biological but society hasn't helped wither and it will always be like this, at least in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI think that to question the gender of Johnny Weir is ridiculous, especially when he is competing in a sport that is judged on grace and beauty. I think that it was also wrong to question the gender of Caster Semanya, the olympic runner, but I could see a little bit more where the concern came from. They did find that she had testosterone levels that were off the chart, but nevertheless I don't necessarily think that this means she is a man in any way. Stuart Hall talks about how representation is very complicated in the media, and how it arouses subconcious anxieties in the viewer in "The Representation of the Other." I think that the anxiety over Johnny Weir is the same sort of anxiety that leads to homophobia. As gender and sexuality are complicated concepts, the viewers, or in this case the announcers, exposed the fact that they might not be completely comfortable with these types of representations in the media right now.
ReplyDeleteoh jeez, this reminds of a NYT article I read recently about female athletes being "gender tested" for the olympics. It was an article that brought up the "need" for such a test. This is an interesting inverse of that case, where a man is being questioned about his gender identity. The question of biology and a biological basis for gender is extremely relevant in this context - how does this athlete's "biology" affect how he is perceived as an athlete? And how does his maybe "performative gender" affect this perception?
ReplyDeleteWait a minute, are you guys talking about "chromosome test"/"sex test" or "gender test"? I think you are concerning about the former one as I don't think there's any "scientific" measurement for genders. I think it is ridiculous that the normative binary of male/female is too strong in this kind of international sports event. Why are the top athletes expected to conform to the essentialized gender stereotypes? Why a biological male athlete needs to behave like a man? Why there is no space for any gender ambiguity on a biological male athlete, esp one is famous? I knew someone in another class who was going to write about the transgender athletes in sports. Although I don't know much about her study, it did inspire me to think how transgender or people with gender ambiguity are treated in the society. Should they take part in the sports event according to their biological sex or gender?
ReplyDeleteI really do not believe or understand the point of gender tests, if that is what it is called. I think people still do not understand the difference between gender and sex. Sex is biological and gender is social...so why are gender tests given if gender is completely up to the individual to decide? This is so crazy to me that this male figure skater is being questioned about his masculinity. From my understanding aren't figure skaters supposed to be graceful and poised, as if they are ballet dancers on ice? Who cares if his moves are feminine...he's a professional ice-skating, not hockey.
ReplyDeleteAntoinette, your comment really stood out to me because it was pretty much what I was going to say. It's amazing how people tend to attach stereotypes and all of these things to a person's character or representation. To answer your question I think to associate particular attributes or characteristics that are said to define a man or female creates fixed categories and gives births to oppression and discrimination. Also, it was a point in time in which figure skating was considered a athletic thing for women. Now, critics seek to question the masculinity of a man within this same field just because he wore tights? What is going on America!!? That is the question that is at hand. This nation and the dominant forces that control and exploit the marginalized, are in denial of the fact that homosexuals do exists. If his personal representation of himself is indeed a guy in pink tights, then so be it. Our nation is a hegemonic one indeed where difference is not honored or valued. This nation's authenticity is not even a factor because who determines what a good and visible representation of the authenticity of a nation, especially if it is that of a democratic one, is only for the people or the inhabitants to determine. No one person could simply devalue or give value to one particular individual according to personal identity. Basically, our nation must learn that difference is what makes us.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to your question is right to have separate events for male and female athletes…I would have to say it’s not fair but its life. I agree the reality is that men and women are very different when it comes to physical strength and science has proved that no matter how much reject it. However it is not fair to criticize woman or male for having certain qualities of the other sex. If it is applauded for one it should be applauded for both.
ReplyDelete