Steadfast II: DOUBLE STANDARDS

DOUBLE STANDARDS

“Who Gets to Be Glorious?”

As a former Olympian, I’m not buying the “level playing field” arguments against trans athletes.

(This article first appeared with my fierce colleagues at The Meteor)

Last week, when asked about the University of Pennsylvania’s phenom trans swimmer Lia Thomas, the equally legendary swimmer Michael Phelps inputted, very unhelpfully, that in an effort to strive to make sports “a level playing field” the NCAA should intervene—and it did. The organization announced a major change to its transgender participation policy, which effectively forces trans athletes to prove they don’t have an unfair advantage, and makes it increasingly prohibitive for them to compete.

If the consequences weren’t so immediate and dire, I’d still be laughing at the irony of this statement coming from the mouth of the most decorated Olympian of all time—a comment displaying an extraordinary lack of insight into his own career. There was absolutely nothing “level” about the playing field when Phelps first began medaling on the Olympic pool deck in 2008, and that is exactly what made him fun to watch: he dominated. His extraordinary physicality and accomplishments were a gift to swimming. But how we talk about athletes, and who is “allowed” to be exceptional and who isn’t, is a real problem in sports—with real-life consequences on the ground.

The challenges to women and girl athletes who defy “normative” protocol—which is to say, hetero, cis, and white—are endless. In 1998, when ice figure skater Surya Bonaly became the first and only Olympian to perform a backflip landing on one blade, the judges penalized her for an illegal jump. While Shaquille O’Neal was celebrated for being a domineering player on the basketball court, Brittney Griner, as a young 22-year-old in the WNBA, was scrutinized, bullied, and genuinely asked to explain herself for exhibiting a similar physical playing style. In my own experience as an Olympic swimmer in the 1990s, my fellow showy sprinter Gary Hall Jr. was labeled an intuitive and intelligent competitor, albeit eccentric—whereas I was marked as irreverent, difficult, and unpredictable.

Phelps himself has benefited from an “unfair advantage” over his competitors: a naturally occurring ability to generate half the lactic acid normally produced at effort. Lactic acid is the chemical that impedes recovery, and Phelps’s lower levels have enabled his awesome ability to swim multiple races in one day and break records in all of them. He wasn’t questioned for that genetic anomaly; he was celebrated for it. But South African gold medalist Caster Semenya met a different reception to her own naturally occurring genetic advantages, including literal policing from the IOC about which races she could and could not run and a requirement that she take medication to lower her testosterone to, you guessed it, even the playing field.

These double standards have devastating consequences—not just for athletes like Semenya or Thomas, but for the kid down the street who just wants to play sports. These rules at the elite level inform club-level rules, or school policies; when we’re legislating against an individual like Lia Thomas, we’re also legislating who’s allowed to play on the Tiny Tots baseball team. That’s the antithesis of what sport has to offer.

And if you’re wondering how exactly these double standards persist—well, look at who runs our top teams. The head coaches of the current U.S. swim team are two women and seven men—and that leads to a general acceptance of inequities. When this is the make-up of the coaching staff, after all, it’s no surprise that procedures like skinfold tests (an athletically irrelevant test to measure fat, mostly on the bodies of women and girls) have been allowed to continue for decades. Other countries have moved to make their governing bodies more representative: In fact, this year, after an inquiry initiated by complaints from female athletes, Swim Australia mandated a required quota for female coaches;  USA Swimming has no such equivalent. (It took until 2015 for the organization to mandate 20% representation of athletes on its board of directors—so much for “Nothing about us without us.”)

That regulation without representation means that in general, the heavy burden of advocating for their physical and mental health falls on the shoulders of athletes themselves—especially women, girls, trans and nonbinary competitors. But that’s in keeping with the general trend in sports, in which the adults leave the room, and change tends to come only through outside pressure, often by athletes who are young adults or children. It took Oregon basketball star Sedona Prince’s viral video of the measly weight rack at the 2021 NCAA Division I Women’s Basketball Tournament to extract a promise to rectify the disparity. And in a more extreme example, it took Rachael Denhollander, a former gymnast who was abused by Larry Nassar, to become a lawyer, and then bring a case against him, for that prolific abuser to finally meet his deserved demise.

The red herring of “controversies” around athletes like Lia Thomas distract us from the real problems the sports world needs to fix.

The solutions, if you ask me and other former athletes, are clear: Governing bodies should mandate equity between coaches across genders, in addition to installing an athlete on each team whose sole responsibility is to oversee the advocacy of the athletes (many of whom are still minors). And we shouldn’t let the red herring of “controversies” around athletes like Lia Thomas distract us from these very real problems the sports world needs to fix.

As for those athletes? Let them be special. Most of us will just never be part of the 0.01% of athletes who make up professional sports, and the reason we enjoy watching them is because they allow us to be transported, inspired, and entertained by their anomalous talent and rigor.

Talking about a “level playing field” when you’re talking about elite athletes misses the point. Elite competitors have always dazzled us with their exceptionalism and their wild feats of physicality, and we shouldn’t get to pick and choose who’s allowed to be that glorious.

Steadfast NEWSLETTER I: Saying Goodbye to Instagr*m

I have always found it weird - always. The last girl who broke my heart, Jenny O (man she was hot) was an Instagr*m early adopter and I vaguely remember googling her name and trying to find IG pictures of her and the girl she dumped me for (on my birthday - happens to the best of us), coming up disappointed to see, not photos of her mugging the girl with whom she broke my heart, but photos of the dog they had apparently adopted together. Heartbroken there was nothing quite like the taste of searching for her over and over on the internet - coming up empty handed every time - and doing it over again the next day. It was like being possessed with the desire for repeated blows of emotional pain.

Before I go on, I have to admit here that I am a child of the 90’s - that means the requisite Pearl Jam and Nirvana soundtrack (yes I wore plaid but I did before it was a thing and still do, for what that’s worth) and my claim to grunge fame is maybe the opening chapter to my book GODSPEED that I wrote twenty years later that describes what is was like hearing those eerie four notes of Nevermind over and over again for the first time and watching the music video on MTv on a training trip in Stockholm.

The nineties were not only the first time I used a computer - I still remember going down to the computer lab my first year in college to write papers and the smell of wet socks almost every computer lab those early years seemed to have - and the advent of the internet, but also a time of a conscious awakening. By 1998, I was not alone in being majorly concerned at what I saw as an extraordinary aptitude for younger Americans to multi-task: on their cell phones, while on-line “surfing” (that’s what we called it – little did we know how those seemingly innocuous words of friendly “surfing” would become the bane of our existence and the subject of many a how-to quit op-ed in the NYT) and playing video games. It was like the attention span of America’s youth was the hottest commodity and everyone was vying to get it hooked. Underneath all of that was a growing (and very unpopular) social justice movement concerned at the centralization of knowledge and a growing alarm at the environment and the social injustice brought on by what a lot of us understood as rampant capitalism. Fast forward, by the time I’m arrested at a protest for the first time in 2001, I looked to the Battle of Seattle with awe, respect, and a good example of a how-to use the internet to fuck shit up. And so with it, a commitment to not letting the world go down in digital flames with the poorest bearing the blow of the pointiest end of the proverbial stick.

In 2004 I went back to college and got my bachelors (after dropping out three times as a young drug addict), got my first jobs - grocery bagger at what was then known as Fresh Fields and would eventually become Whole Foods Market and is now Am*zon - I fell in love, I fell out of love, moved to NYC, got my heart hammered and then proceeded to enact what probably seemed to any sane bystander nothing short of revenge on any woman who came within a few city blocks of me. I broke hearts, I exploded onto the fashion scene, had to go back to waiting tables, had my first solo NYC art show, published my first book… basically life happened and shit got really, really shiny-sparkly.  

And then maybe I got lazy, maybe I got scared (anyone hogtied by the local PD for over 48 hours can attest that its a pretty unpleasant/terrifying experience), maybe I just didn’t have the fight in me anymore. Its hard to fight.

I was never on faceb**k having mentored way too many young girls in its early days who would come to me in tears saying: I have no “friends” - which to me, even way back then, felt like a complete misuse of the word “friend” or “like” as it was being used and relegated to a simple click. Friendship is harder than that – harder than a click, I mean. But despite that I finally “joined” instagr*m in 2013 – first with a private account and then public, navigating between both, and conveniently ignored my discomfort when it was bought by faceb**k (by then the nefarious content, misuse of information, and use of disinformation – even before DT – was a known known) and I’ve used it since.

Maybe it’s the pandemic that gave me courage again, or at least a sense of perspective, or maybe its just having had the chance to read books again, but two weeks ago shit got weird. Too weird for me. Anyone who has read 1984 as many times as I have understands and recent developments alarmed my younger self in a familiar way and I realized I just couldn’t ignore it anymore. Its okay that I got a little lazy and wanted some regular pick me ups (everyone likes a good dopamine hit every once in a while) and jumped on the social media platforms – its for work I would say – but its also okay for me to say that I was wrong.

So, I’m going to take a cue from my younger self and slip into obscurity from this space. It freaks me out, it always has, and for me, I just can’t be on the platforms anymore in good conscience. So, if you want to, you can find me on my blog STEADFAST where I talk about things that interest me, you can expect letters like these, photos and ephemera. If you want to, you can sign up to get STEADFAST in your inbox here, and you can also get me in your MAILBOX old school like via US Mail, by signing up to be a Patreon member. Otherwise, you can almost always find me, in real life, somewhere between Housten and Avenue A in New York City.

I’m gonna go be like Jenny O and be a little harder to find.