I know I’ve been negligent in my posting for a few days. I was grading and busy watching old Michael Jackson videos and performances on YouTube and feeling unexpectedly sad about everything his life represented, and also the realization that people I idolized as a kid are now in their 50s.
Anyway, Sarah N. sent in a link to a story at the Mail Online about how women’s perceived attractiveness plays a part in deciding which matches will be played on the main court at Wimbledon. The organizers of Wimbledon don’t try to hide the fact that the appearance of the competitors is taken into account when scheduling matches:
…the All England Club admitted that physical attractiveness is taken into consideration. Spokesman Johnny Perkins said: ‘Good looks are a factor.’
Some women who were scheduled to play on Center Court, the main area, and their world rankings:
World No. 45 (unseeded) Gisela Dulko
World No. 59 (unseeded) Maria Kirilenko
No. 28 seed Sorana Cirstea
Women who played on the other courts, with their rankings:
No. 5 seed Svetlana Kuznetsova
No. 2 seed Serena Williams:
Attractiveness doesn’t seem to play such a factor in scheduling the men’s matches:
In the men’s tournament, five-times winner Roger Federer and British hope Andy Murray invariably play on Centre.
The scheduling of women by perceived attractiveness may have something to do with attracting television viewers. A comment from a BBC television employee:
But obviously it’s advantageous to us if there are good-looking women players on Centre Court…Our preference would always be a Brit or a babe as this always delivers high viewing figures.
Of course, it’s nothing new that female athletes are judged on their appearances as well as their athletic abilities. Female athletes have often felt pressure to meet conventional standards of beauty. This isn’t just about looks; it’s also about doing heterosexual femininity. Female athletes have long been suspected of being lesbians, particularly if they did not seem to actively seek male sexual approval. In fact, WNBA players have been encouraged to wear make-up and jewelry, have their hair long, and bring up their boyfriends, husbands, and/or children to prove their heterosexuality. Thus, in the end women’s appearances, and willingness to play up their gender in an approved way, often trumps their athletic accomplishments in a way that male athletes don’t usually face.
Other posts about female athletes and attractiveness are here, here, here, here (watch the second video), here, and here.
Comments 24
mordicai — June 29, 2009
Serena Williams didn't? What?! She's like, famous. Weird. Also-- lets not forget to discuss the photo spread-- pout versus growl?
Trabb's Boy — June 29, 2009
Oh my fucking god! I hope Serena Williams sues their asses off! She has a financial interest in being on centre stage as well as it being the obviously right thing to do. Seriously, this should not be tolerated in 2009, and I hope to hell she brings every imaginable discrimination suit against them. Oh, please, Serena, for women athletes everywhere.
memes — June 29, 2009
The organizers are damned by the quote already, I don't see the need to cherry-pick the pictures like this. Then I look closer and see that it's an article by the Daily Mail.
Maggie — June 29, 2009
In addition to our outrage that Serena Williams wasn't placed on centre court, let's also be outraged for Svetlana Kuznetsova.
Judging a woman's appearance based on the conventional beauty measuring stick is outrageous, sexist, racist, dehumanizing, and so fucking wrong.
mzbitca — June 29, 2009
Actually,
Venus and Serena have both played on centre court already this tournament as well as sharapova who was unseated unexpectedly. Today the number 1 seed played on Centre Court
The schedule is here
http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/scores/schedule/schedule13.html
Gwen — June 29, 2009
I think the issue is that you would expect that the top players at any given time would be on the center court--that whichever game is considered "higher" or more competitive would be up front and center. And that's not what we see, as the Wimbledon people themselves admit.
Amy — June 29, 2009
I can always count on Sociological Images to point out the appalling sexism that plagues our society. Well done on this post. Thank you.
thelephant — June 29, 2009
I've been watching wimbledon because I love seeing strong, fierce, unapologetically competitive women showcase their athleticism and technical skill. ...Silly me! This is just one more stupid stunt in a culture of sexualisation and objectification that makes me feel less like a complete and valued human being and more like a pair of tits attached to a pair of legs.
"Sex sells" only ever seems to be a defense when it comes to women's sport because if fans were demanding sex in sport some male players would never see centre court. The problem isn't with boorish spectators, it's with the boy's club of managers and administrators that still dominates professional sport.
Lisa — June 29, 2009
Dear God. What a bunch of shit. Thank you for this.
NancyP — June 29, 2009
I notice that the most comprehensive telecasts pay pretty strict attention to rank - you only see unseeded players if they are scheduled to play stars. At least that's what happens on the Tennis Channel (yes, there is a cable channel just for current and rerun World Cup and pro tennis). Who knows what happens at the just-a-glance channels? I would imagine that all courts have feeds 100% of the playing time, just in case some newbie has spectacular play.
TR — June 29, 2009
Wait, Serena is beautiful. I understand what is being said, but Serena is attratcive...maybe not the growl, but she's considered attractive...her booty, her face, her body....so I'm confused.....maybe the attractiveness is codeword for thin, white, and young....which ISNT the same thing.
Sandra — June 30, 2009
Notice also that the organizers assume (correctly or not) that most viewers are male, or at least interested into women, while those who fancy men have to 'settle' for all types of bodies and faces.
Once again supporting the idea that sport is played and watched by men, while women get to hang around for show.
Tom — June 30, 2009
I'd also like to agree about the photo choice being somewhat biased, and point out that number 1 court is big (it's in the top 30 tennis stadia in the world by capacity) holding 11,429 as opposed to 15,000 (recently up from 14,000) and there is very little difference in ticket prices between the two until finals day. No. 2 court is significantly smaller but has a good reputation for exciting matches, the nickname "Graveyard of Champions" and tickets are still more expensive than ground passes, which allow access to the remaining 16 (yes, 16) courts.
It should also be noted that there are two players on the court on each of these occasions. The first lady pictured was playing against former No. 1 Sharapova, whilst the other two were playing against seeds 8 and 9, respectively. Low seeded and unseeded players play against high seeds in the early rounds to ensure an exciting final.
Having said all that, well, yeah, the comments are pretty damning.
Dmitriy — June 30, 2009
and now the Huffington Post has chimed in as well
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charlotte-hilton-andersen/wimbeldon-officials-call_b_222809.html
Jeff — June 30, 2009
I have to disregard the article for a moment (although it makes a good point) and point out that being (albeit unexpectedly) sad about Michael Jackson's death is really, really stupid, especially for a writer on this site. I mean really, another disposable pop star decades past his time dies and you people are crying rivers? Give me a fucking break, why don't you get sad about the crackdown over Iranian protests or any one of dozens of real problems that are plaguing people all across the world.
You know, problems that authors on this site usually write about.
Gwen Sharp, PhD — June 30, 2009
I don't think sadness is the appropriate response to the Iranian situation. I feel anger about it, and disappointment that my attempt to set up my computer to serve as a proxy for Iranian protesters to post to Twitter failed because of my lack of technological savvy.
Tom — June 30, 2009
Sadness that the first black person to achieve mainstream recognition, success and following has died is stupid? Really? As an artist he may have petered out years ago, and as a person he was pretty unsettled. But disposable he was not, past his time he was not (as his lasting influence proves). He was inspirational and reflecting on his career seems a pretty sound idea, IMHO.
Mikhail — July 1, 2009
Just FYI, but it surely seems easy to condemn something, without checking hmm... the facts. Like who they played AGAINST.
Here's what REALLY happened (not in the head of somebody "digging" for sexism):
World No. 45 (unseeded) Gisela Dulko:
Round 1: Court 9 (vs Stephanie Foretz)
Round 2: Centre Court (vs Maria Sharapova - even you should know her)
Round 3: Court 3 (vs Nadia Petrova, seed 10)
World No. 59 (unseeded) Maria Kirilenko:
Round 1: Court 15 (vs Petra Kvitova)
Round 2: Centre Court (vs. Caroline Wozniacki, seed 9)
No. 28 seed Sorana Cirstea:
Round 1: Court 15 (vs Edina Gallovits)
Round 2: Court 12 (vs Sania Mirza)
Round 3: Centre Court (vs Victoria Azarenka, seed 8)
I don't see anything unusual up to now, but let's check the other examples:
No. 5 seed Svetlana Kuznetsova:
Round 1: Court 14 (vs. Akiko Morigami)
on that day on centre court played only Venus Williams (seed 3)
on that day on court 1 played only Dinara Safina (world number 1) and Elena Baltacha (home player with home support)
Round 2: Court 3 (vs. Pauline Parmentier)
on that day on centre court played only Wozniacki (seed 9)
on that day on court 1 played only Venus Williams (seed 3) even Safina (world number 1 was on court 2)
Round 3: Court 1 (vs.Sabine Lisicki)
No. 2 seed Serena Williams:
Round 1: Centre Court (vs. Neuza Silva)
Round 2: Court 1 (vs Jarmila Groth)
Round 3: Court 2 (vs the unknown Roberta Vinci)
on that day on centre court played only Azarenka-Cirstea (seed 8 against 28)
on that day on court 1 played only Dinara Safina (world number 1) and Elena Baltacha (home player with huge support)
Round 4: Court 2, the showcourts were used ONLY by Venus and Safina.
And just few more things - Wimbledon has TWO showcourts - Centre and Number 1, it seems you don't know this.
And Wozniacki-Kirilenko (former top 20 player) is far better TENNIS, than Kuznetsova-Parmentier. Also Azarenka-Cirstea is better than Williams-Vinci. So props for the organizers.
And the courts are scarce in the opening rounds - fifth seed may play outside
In the end this is just another example how on internet everyone can accuse you of being a dog.
RE: Mikhail — July 3, 2009
"In the end this is just another example how on internet everyone can accuse you of being a dog."
Their pinpointed example may come across biased. but that doesn't take away the truth to the point they are trying to make.
'female athletes ARE judged on their appearances as well as their athletic abilities. Female athletes have often felt pressure to meet conventional standards of beauty.'
female body builders are the best example. in a 'sport' where one's muscular buil is most important these women go get implants wear make up, long hair, and bikinis.
ALSO as a lesbian myself i don't mind the athletes appearing gay. =}
Ragnar — July 8, 2009
I totally agree that women should not be placed at centre court because of their looks, but I just want to point out a fairly scewed view. All three "pretty woment" ended up playing top 10 seeds in the tournament, and some of them are not ranked as high because of their really young age. Also Williams played at the centre court, and therefore should be presented as a "pretty girl". It should also be said that Kuznetsova was beaten by a "babe" (Sabine Katharina Lisicki ) in her final game in Wimbeldon, showing that looks is not the only factor in where you play.
The “Why are you so angry????” edition | The Angry Black Woman — July 11, 2009
[...] Which Women play center court at Wimbledon, the sexy or the talented?? I’ll give you three guesses and the first two don’t count. [...]
C. Ray — July 27, 2009
It's tennis not Playboy. Sports are judged on athleticism. Harboring & endorsing sexist ideals makes the objectified but less talented players feel exploited & embarassed, it makes the more talented but less sexy (by whose standards btw?) players feel insulted. Casual fans that didn't like the sport before aren't drawn to it more-they might buy playboy, but they're not buying tix to Wimbledon (as evidenced by the emply seats during one of the "battles of the babes"). Serious fans will be serious fans no matter who's playing. Contrary to Wimbledon's belief, independent sports research finds that sexism in sports has been shown to "alienate the core of the fan base that's already there. Women, age 18 to 55, are offended by these images. And older males, fathers with daughters, taking their daughters to sporting events to see their favorite female athletes, are deeply offended by these images." These groups are a chunk of the core of fans. Tennis fans aren't majority male. And in almost all sports the FASTEST growing demographic of sports fans is young women.
American Women Athletes Part One: In which women athletes need to be sexy and heterosexual (preferably with child/ren and husband/boyfriend) | The Angry Black Woman — August 23, 2009
[...] as I linked before in Which Women Play on the Center Court at Wimbledon? the best athletes in the world aren’t judged solely on their ability. Oh no. Anyway, Sarah N. [...]
Anders Rasmussen — January 7, 2010
"when Ellen Degeneres attended a WNBA game, the camera crews were instructed not to show her"
... this is really interesting, do you have any kind of documentation/references on this?