Michelle Wie West NY Times Article

[Phreddy]

Karen Crouse of the NY Times (and one of the better sports/golf reporters around) wrote an interesting article on Michelle Wie West, her decision to return to competitive play and the economics of women's golf/sports.  Whether you are a fan of her or not it is a great read and for those of us old enough to remember the playing days of her father-in-law, Jerry West, an interesting reminder of how far all professional sports have come.

 

 https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/03/sports/golf/lpga-michelle-wie-us-open.html

[MelloYello]

Can you just sum up the article? 

 

 

Personally, I'm kind of anti-MWW these days. I don't really consider her a "serious" threat to win tourneys. If she shows up, she hogs the airtime and usually ends up way out of contention so her presence just detracts from the coverage a lot of times.

 

When she was young and had such prodigious length and such a wonderful swing I guess I could understand the draw but these days she's little more than another over-hyped has-been Nike brand ambassador. She's not a full-time competitor. I'd rather watch Sophia Popov try and get her career off the ground grinding through than watch someone I know is a millionaire (now married to another millionaire) who only wants to play a few random tourneys and will inevitably putt her way into missed cuts. 

 

Whatever she's doing off the course...do we really care? If the USGA wants to promote women's golf by holding more events at historic courses that seems awesome, but that's altogether separate from MWW, who from my perspective is kind of a sideshow at this point.

Edited June 4, 2021 by MelloYello

[tomba51]

Michelle Wie West Was Ready to Retire. Then She Got Mad.

A golf phenom since she was 10, Michelle Wie West was ready to focus on motherhood. Rudy Giuliani’s vulgar remarks convinced her that she should keep fighting and playing.

Published June 3, 2021Updated June 4, 2021, 10:24 a.m. ET

 

From a distance approximating one of her prodigious drives, Michelle Wie West caught a glimpse of her infant daughter in the arms of her mother, who was standing on a hotel balcony. It was Wie West’s first competitive tournament as a working mom, and at the sight of her child, whom she felt guilty about leaving, she burst into tears.

“And then I hit in the water,” Wie West said with a laugh, recalling her “meltdown,” as she described it, during her opening nine-over-par 81 at the Kia Classic near San Diego in March.

Wie West, 31, who is competing in the United States Women’s Open, which begins Thursday at the Olympic Club, has missed the cut in all three of her starts this season. The impenetrable focus that carried her to five L.P.G.A. titles, including the 2014 U.S. Open, has been diffused by marriage, motherhood and a motivation to deepen the conversation about, and commitment to, women in sports.

Reams of copy have been written about Wie West since she became, at 10, the youngest player to qualify for the U.S. Women’s Public Links and announced her intentions to grow up to play on the L.P.G.A. and PGA Tours. She turned pro before her 16th birthday and contended deep into the final rounds of her first three L.P.G.A. major tournaments that first year, establishing a bar that proved hard to clear. She won her first tournament in 2009 at the age of 20, then three more before she won the U.S. Open at Pinehurst. But she has only won once since, the HSBC Women’s World Championship in 2018.

And so, in 2019, Wie West could not have imagined herself here. Chronic wrist injuries precipitated a two-year layoff that she presumed would become permanent when she became pregnant a few months after her 2019 wedding to Jonnie West, the director of basketball operations for the N.B.A.’s Golden State Warriors. She told her husband that she was done playing.

“I thought there was no chance of coming back,” said Wie West. She had opportunities to move into the broadcasting booth, and motherhood seemed like a natural pivot point.

“But my husband was like, ‘No, no, just think it through,’” she said.

When Wie West learned that she was having a daughter, her feelings about a comeback shifted for reasons she struggled to articulate. And then in February, a month before her official return, Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City, appeared on Steve Bannon’s “War Room” podcast and asked if he could share a “funny story” about Rush Limbaugh, who had recently died.

Giuliani recalled how Limbaugh had been perturbed by the photographers trailing them in a 2014 pro-am in which they were grouped with Wie West. Giuliani said that the “gorgeous” Wie West’s putting stance was attracting the photographers, who, he said, “were trying to take pictures of her panties.”

Giuliani’s comments crystallized Wie West’s reasons for a comeback, irking her into action. After 25 years of speaking into a microphone as a matter of duty, Wie West realized that she actually had a lot to say, and a return to competition would give her the platform to address inequities and ignorance that she hadn’t been aware of as a teenage phenom.

More affirmation came this week as she watched Naomi Osaka, another young nonwhite woman who is a star in a white-majority sport, quit the French Open rather than participate in news conferences she said were damaging to her mental health.

“I thought what Naomi did this past week was incredibly brave,” said Wie West, who described her own experience with anxiety:

“It’s tough, especially when you’re not doing well or there’s a lot more to life than your game. There could be other stuff happening. It is sometimes crippling at times, but I’m really proud of athletes taking charge of their mental health and making it a priority. More conversations need to be had about that.”

Wie West is willing to wade into difficult conversations because she wants her daughter, Makenna Kamalei Yoona West, who will celebrate her first birthday on June 19, to grow up in a world where women athletes are seen and heard, and enjoy equal billing with men.

In the past year she has revealed a different side of herself — as a leader in the drive for equity and change. With his words, Giuliani triggered Wie West’s election to the L.P.G.A. board of directors and her commitment to speak up more.

“She texts me and calls me all the time,” said Heather Daly-Donofrio, a two-time tour winner who is now the L.P.G.A. chief communications and tour operations officer. “It’s great. I’ve had more conversations with her in the last two years than in her whole time on tour.”

Wie West has sought out other athletes who fought for change, including Renee Powell, one of the first African American members of the L.P.G.A., and the tennis icon Billie Jean King, who described how her threat to boycott the U.S. Open in 1973 as the defending women’s champion spurred the tournament to become the first of the Grand Slam events to pay men and women equally for their victories. Wie West has compared notes with W.N.B.A. standout and players’ association president, Nneka Ogwumike, whose undergraduate years at Stanford overlapped with hers.

 

The conversations inspired Wie West to float the idea of forming an inter-sport council that could address the pay disparity and unequal resources between men’s and women’s sports.

In 2019, the last full season before the coronavirus pandemic disrupted the playing calendar, 73 women’s players exceeded $50,000 in on-course earnings. That same season on the PGA Tour, the 73rd-highest earner made $1,553,149.

The golfer who wins this Sunday will take home $1 million, from $5.5 million, the largest purse on the tour. The winner of the men’s U.S. Open at Torrey Pines this month will earn $2.25 million from a $12.5 million purse.

Recently Wie West was reminded by her father-in-law, Jerry West, who works for the Los Angeles Clippers as a consultant, that the big money in men’s sports didn’t materialize overnight.

West, the second overall pick in the 1960 draft, told her that he didn’t have an agent when he turned pro and for the duration of his first contract he held an off-season job in community relations for Great Western Savings to supplement his N.B.A. income. 

“He told me the N.B.A. was not something that they considered a full-time profession,” said Wie West. Like king tides, the wave that will lift all paychecks requires a perfect storm of leadership, talent, exposure, performances, marketing — to be aligned.

With her 300-yard drives and fearless forays into men’s tournaments, a teenage Wie West was positioned as the game changer, the charismatic player who could take the L.P.G.A. Tour that Nancy Lopez popularized and deliver it, Tiger Woods-like, to a mainstream sports audience.

Wie West was driving coverage of the women’s game before she was old enough to get behind the wheel of a car. So she was surprised when she stumbled onto the statistic recently that women are afforded roughly four percent of sports media coverage.

Looking back, Wie West said, “I definitely can remember thinking, ‘Ugh, another interview. Stop talking about me.’”

As a teenager, she was criticized by other golfers for hogging the spotlight, when in reality, she was attracting eyeballs that otherwise would have ignored women’s golf. Her visibility gained women’s golf new fans — and Wie West more critics. Dottie Pepper, a two-time major winner, described her in a 2007 essay published in Sports Illustrated as “overexposed, miserable and manipulated.”

“I’m pretty honored that people chose to care about me,” Wie West said, “but it definitely was tough at times because I went through a lot of lows, really never a moment where I could just go under the radar.”

Giuliani’s comments yanked Wie West out of her maternity leave and back into the spotlight. When she learned of his vulgar remarks, what she had lived and what she had learned recently about women’s place in the sports firmament coalesced into unadulterated outrage.

Wie West said she started to tap out a social media response, “but I was so riled up, everything I was saying wasn’t really coming out right.”

Her husband gently suggested that she carefully consider her message. “You have a chance to say something really important here,” Jonnie said he told her.

In the response she drafted with input from her husband and posted to Twitter, Wie West said, in part, “What this person should have remembered from that day was the fact that I shot 64 and beat every male golfer in the field leading our team to victory.”

When the writer Eric Adelson saw Giuliani’s comments, he recalled the men’s U.S. Open sectional in 2006, and following a 16-year-old Wie, who was the youngest competitor and only woman trying to earn a spot in the men’s field at Winged Foot.

As he wrote three years later in the book, “The Sure Thing: The Making and Unmaking of Golf Phenom Michelle Wie,” he overheard an exchange between two college-aged men. One said, “Pretty swing,” to which the other responded with a crude comment about her physique.

Speaking recently by telephone, Adelson said, “I remember cringing when I first heard that. I thought it was gross, and then when I heard what Giuliani said, I thought it was extremely gross.”

He applauded Wie West’s response. “It just shows that she grew up,” Adelson said, “but a lot of other people didn’t.”

A grown-up Wie West knows how to turn her anger into agency. She pitched a cotton candy blue-and-pink tie-dye hoodie with the L.P.G.A. logo to tour executive Roberta Bowman, who loved the idea. The limited-edition sweatshirts sold out after they were worn by Warriors players, and to Wie West’s surprised delight, the large and extra large sizes were snatched up first.

Men clothed as billboards for the women’s game instead of ogling the women athletes. For Wie West, the victories don’t come much bigger than that.

[GLF4EVR]

Vast majority of us on this site are men, so we have no clue of the female perspective on this.  Myself, I am glad that she is back playing.  Helps bring more attention to the LPGA which in turn should be nothing but good.  No matter what some pinheaded male might think. And yes, used to love her putting stance...but I'm a male...nuf said.  However, the putting stance did work for her & I quickly got over the natural response to it.

[PNW]

Those criticizing Michelle Wie West need to reconsider why they are criticizing. Pay attention to what she's saying and where she has been. She's doing exactly what she's setting out to do. Support her fellow female athletes and (hopefully) win some tourneys. 

 

 

[tiderider]

3 hours ago, tomba51 said:

Speaking recently by telephone, Adelson said, “I remember cringing when I first heard that. I thought it was gross, and then when I heard what Giuliani said, I thought it was extremely gross.”

He applauded Wie West’s response. “It just shows that she grew up,” Adelson said, “but a lot of other people didn’t.”

nuff said ... 

[ThinkingPlus]

Tilting at windmills...

[Soloman1]

The reference to Naomi Osaka is based on falsehoods.

 

1. Osaka tweeted an apology to the press after her withdrawal from the French Open, noting the the press had always treated her kindly.

 

2. Osaka has allowed the idea that she is an American citizen to falsely continue and the press is incompetent, not fact checking, but simply assuming she is an America. Osaka is Haitian and Japanese, living in the US as an immigrant with a green card.

 

At age 19, she was required to either forsake any other citizenship, or give up her Japanese citizenship. She stated that she was going to maintain her Japanese citizenship by "taking steps to give up her other citizenship," so she could compete in the Olympics as Japanese. The press assumed she was a US citizen, but she is not.

 

If she had given up USA citizenship (if she was American to start with), she would not be allowed to live in the US in her $7 million L.A. house.

 

Osaka claims she and tennis stars have unique pressures.

 

Imagine the unique pressures of a single mother needing to work at a low wage job, barely able to afford childcare, rent, utilities, car expenses, insurance with almost nothing left for food?

 

Or how about the pressures of the physically handicapped, unable to work, barely alive from some form of government assistance program?

 

Or how about the pressures faced by 2 billion poor people in the world who have to live on less than $2 per day?

 

Or how about the unique pressures of 230 million people sick from parasites from being without safe, drinkable water?

 

Or how about pressures and stress of 357 million children living in war zones in the world?

 

Maybe Osaka and the tennis kings and queens are not in as much unique pressure as they like to think they are?

 

 

[mudge]

57 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

The reference to Naomi Osaka is based on falsehoods.

 

1. Osaka tweeted an apology to the press after her withdrawal from the French Open, noting the the press had always treated her kindly.

 

2. Osaka has allowed the idea that she is an American citizen to falsely continue and the press is incompetent, not fact checking, but simply assuming she is an America. Osaka is Haitian and Japanese, living in the US as an immigrant with a green card.

 

At age 19, she was required to either forsake any other citizenship, or give up her Japanese citizenship. She stated that she was going to maintain her Japanese citizenship by "taking steps to give up her other citizenship," so she could compete in the Olympics as Japanese. The press assumed she was a US citizen, but she is not.

 

If she had given up USA citizenship (if she was American to start with), she would not be allowed to live in the US in her $7 million L.A. house.

 

Osaka claims she and tennis stars have unique pressures.

 

Imagine the unique pressures of a single mother needing to work at a low wage job, barely able to afford childcare, rent, utilities, car expenses, insurance with almost nothing left for food?

 

Or how about the pressures of the physically handicapped, unable to work, barely alive from some form of government assistance program?

 

Or how about the pressures faced by 2 billion poor people in the world who have to live on less than $2 per day?

 

Or how about the unique pressures of 230 million people sick from parasites from being without safe, drinkable water?

 

Or how about pressures and stress of 357 million children living in war zones in the world?

 

Maybe Osaka and the tennis kings and queens are not in as much unique pressure as they like to think they are?

 

 

This Osaka drama is a bunch of BS.

 

She didn’t want to face any difficult questions about her poor record on clay surfaces, so she withdrew while doing people with legitimate mental health issues a disservice.

[Titleist_PT23]

Wie's position in the current situation is unique because she was the direct reference of some comments.

 

Practically speaking, I think golf dollars for the LPGA are likely to go up in the coming years (faster than other sports/comparable figures).  Publicly, there is a large push for diversity, equality, etc and it is only going to take a few deep pockets (USGA, etc) to change where purses are at and the sheep will follow.

 

That being said, I do not think "equal dollars" for athletes (by gender) is the same as equal pay within the general workforce (by gender). The lines get blurry but the revenue generation or value created is a lot different for male/female athletes compared to a male/female university graduate taking some entry level job (or even people that have worked 5, 10, 15 years).  For the later, many of these workers are entirely replaceable/interchangeable/expendable.  I'd bet my last dollar that many people who like the LPGA and think the players "deserve more" will answer differently if they think the WNBA (or some sport that they don't like) players should earn the same as the NBA players.

 

At the end of the day you get what you earn or negotiate.  I'm guessing Wie has never really considered whether someone more talented but of the opposite gender has failed to receive the benefits of a Nike contract like hers (Nike made a bet and she reaped the benefits -- good for her).  Or if she has considered donating the value of the Nike contract to players that are struggling to be in the black at the end of the year.

[Wolfhammer]

10 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

The reference to Naomi Osaka is based on falsehoods.

 

1. Osaka tweeted an apology to the press after her withdrawal from the French Open, noting the the press had always treated her kindly.

 

2. Osaka has allowed the idea that she is an American citizen to falsely continue and the press is incompetent, not fact checking, but simply assuming she is an America. Osaka is Haitian and Japanese, living in the US as an immigrant with a green card.

 

At age 19, she was required to either forsake any other citizenship, or give up her Japanese citizenship. She stated that she was going to maintain her Japanese citizenship by "taking steps to give up her other citizenship," so she could compete in the Olympics as Japanese. The press assumed she was a US citizen, but she is not.

 

If she had given up USA citizenship (if she was American to start with), she would not be allowed to live in the US in her $7 million L.A. house.

 

Osaka claims she and tennis stars have unique pressures.

 

Imagine the unique pressures of a single mother needing to work at a low wage job, barely able to afford childcare, rent, utilities, car expenses, insurance with almost nothing left for food?

 

Or how about the pressures of the physically handicapped, unable to work, barely alive from some form of government assistance program?

 

Or how about the pressures faced by 2 billion poor people in the world who have to live on less than $2 per day?

 

Or how about the unique pressures of 230 million people sick from parasites from being without safe, drinkable water?

 

Or how about pressures and stress of 357 million children living in war zones in the world?

 

Maybe Osaka and the tennis kings and queens are not in as much unique pressure as they like to think they are?

 

 

 

So her struggles somehow less real because of her profession and how much money she makes? This is some dangerous logic.

[Titleist_PT23]

13 minutes ago, Wolfhammer said:

 

So her struggles somehow less real because of her profession and how much money she makes? This is some dangerous logic.

Try reading the last sentence again.  Are her pressures real and faced by others in the same situation?  Absolutely and I hope they are all doing well.  But why should I care any more than I care about the challenges faced by 50%+ of the people on this planet?  Luckily for Osaka, she can quit tomorrow if it's really too much to deal with and never have to worry about the electricity being shut off.  Many people don't have that luxury.

[tomba51]

A fear of public speaking is a very common phobia. If you also have a fear of crowded spaces, a press conference could be problematic. If I remember correctly, when Annika Sorenstam was at the beginning of her career, she purposely 3 putted the final holes of tournaments so that she would not win, and therefore would not have to give a victory speech.

[Ironman_32]

On 6/4/2021 at 10:51 PM, Soloman1 said:

 

 

Osaka claims she and tennis stars have unique pressures.

 

 

 

Yea...and unique pay/privilege. Always makes me think of when Eminem complained too many people came up to him when he got famous or when Jennifer Lawrence complained that people judged her body...you can always go work for minimum wage and no one will bother or judge you. 

[Ironman_32]

I feel the LPGA is kind of like spinach...somewhat difficult to find people who truly like, have some people consume because they feel they should, but most skip right over it. 

 

I'm an avid golf watcher, I'll watch a decent amount of LPGA cover, but its just hard to follow everything/keep an interest. What the LPGA is to me right now is like a alternative version of the PGA tour, where the #1 golfer is Martin Kaymer, Rickie Fowler is the same guy but his score is 10 strokes higher every tournament, and John Daly is your main draw (basically a side show). I just feel in a way there is not enough story lines, and thats what people want I feel. 

 

In response to the article, I get what Wie's saying, and what the article is trying to say, I just think its a lot of things that need to get fixed. I mean, look at Nike, they're really smart when it comes to putting their dollars on advertising, think there's a reason Nike's top golfer's are Wie and Cheyenne Woods, and not anyone in the top 25. Is there a reason Cheyenne Woods has commercials, and she's the 479 ranked player in the World? Is golf speaking for itself at that point?

 

I mean, the LPGA is product that's literally there, you can go watch it, its not a concept. To me it would be like if I started a high heel shoe company for men and had really low sales. Should I think, it seems people don't want this product, or start a council to address the disparity between high heeled shoes for men vs women?

[HackDaddy360]

On 6/5/2021 at 6:43 AM, Wolfhammer said:

 

So her struggles somehow less real because of her profession and how much money she makes? This is some dangerous logic.

It’s perspective.  
 

Osaka signed up for what she’s dealing with.  For those sacrifices and stresses, she gets paid more money annually than the overwhelming majority of humanity will ever have or earn in their lifetime - and she gets to make that money playing a game she appears to love or used to.    
 

So I read the point in the post you reference to mean the “problems” she’s dealing with by virtue of her “contractual obligations” are in fact real to her, but aren’t really comparable to the materially more significant problems many humans in the world deal with on a daily basis.  
 

It’s all relative and on a relative basis she doesn’t really have “problems” compared to at least 1/4 of all of humanity.

 

At least that’s how I read the point.  And I agree with it. 

[PNW]

I disagree with the premise that the public should be allowed to pimp out public figures, including pro athletes, simply because they make a lot of money and do so in the public sphere. We can watch and appreciate their professional work while respecting their private lives. 

 

12 hours ago, HackDaddy360 said:

It’s all relative and on a relative basis she doesn’t really have “problems” compared to at least 1/4 of all of humanity.

 

And minimizing one person's struggles simply because they have money is disgustingly disrespectful, and reinforces systemic bias. The world needs a bit more empathy, especially after this last year. 

[MelloYello]

13 hours ago, Ironman_32 said:

I feel the LPGA is kind of like spinach...somewhat difficult to find people who truly like, have some people consume because they feel they should, but most skip right over it. 

 

I'm an avid golf watcher, I'll watch a decent amount of LPGA cover, but its just hard to follow everything/keep an interest. What the LPGA is to me right now is like a alternative version of the PGA tour, where the #1 golfer is Martin Kaymer, Rickie Fowler is the same guy but his score is 10 strokes higher every tournament, and John Daly is your main draw (basically a side show). I just feel in a way there is not enough story lines, and thats what people want I feel. 

 

In response to the article, I get what Wie's saying, and what the article is trying to say, I just think its a lot of things that need to get fixed. I mean, look at Nike, they're really smart when it comes to putting their dollars on advertising, think there's a reason Nike's top golfer's are Wie and Cheyenne Woods, and not anyone in the top 25. Is there a reason Cheyenne Woods has commercials, and she's the 479 ranked player in the World? Is golf speaking for itself at that point?

 

I mean, the LPGA is product that's literally there, you can go watch it, its not a concept. To me it would be like if I started a high heel shoe company for men and had really low sales. Should I think, it seems people don't want this product, or start a council to address the disparity between high heeled shoes for men vs women?

 

Fair points, but please know you're reacting more to the "grow the game" propaganda that profiteers push than to how the actual fans see it.

 

Those of us who watch do so because we already enjoy the product. We don't want to see it change. I don't want more publicity or more coverage. I don't want more fame, celebrity or storylines aimed at drawing people in who don't have a genuine appreciation for what's going on. I don't want to change the product so more shmucks feel obliged to comment about "narratives" or attend events so they can yell "get in the hole!"

 

Golf isn't for everybody. The LPGA is not for everybody. Living in my neighborhood isn't for everybody. The only folks who push those agendas are folks who profit from the growth. 

 

Personally, I gave up on the PGA Tour back when it turned weird. The announcers turned into fan-boys talking over each other. They wouldn't shut up with the same tired tropes: Tiger has muscles, Phil is polite, Bubba is a hillbilly, Rickie is a cutie, Rory is humble, Bryson takes a measured approach, etc. It's just dumb. I hate when guys fawn over other guys like they're superheroes. I throw up in my mouth just thinking about it. 

[nostatic]

I'm way more likely to watch LPGA over PGA except for PGA majors. While broadcasting is great for giving us access. the drive for advertising dollars leads to "value-added narratives" being generated once a sport reaches a certain level of commercial success. At this point LPGA hasn't succumbed (much) to that phenomenon. And kudos btw to Rolex for bankrolling continuous coverage.

 

I gave up watching MLB after one of the strikes and when Tony Gwynn retired. I gave up watching NFL and NBA when guys started celebrating every play they made. If I want to watch grown men behave like children I'll watch CSPAN.

[MelloYello]

On 6/7/2021 at 11:53 AM, PNW said:

I disagree with the premise that the public should be allowed to pimp out public figures, including pro athletes, simply because they make a lot of money and do so in the public sphere. We can watch and appreciate their professional work while respecting their private lives. 

 

 

And minimizing one person's struggles simply because they have money is disgustingly disrespectful, and reinforces systemic bias. The world needs a bit more empathy, especially after this last year. 

 

I think common people would find it disgustingly ignorant to hear educated individuals casually equating the complaints of a $55M/yr capitalist to the physical sufferings of poor people around the world. 

 

The question is not "do you wish to be a professional athlete?" 

 

The question is "do you consent to be made a public spectacle for the sake of fortune?" 

 

That's the question every actor, athlete, politician, etc. answers in the affirmative when they pursue the job. You give away your privacy for that money, prestige and power. Few individuals get to have both and nobody should think it's their privilege to have one without losing the other. 

 

I'm sorry, but that $55M doesn't come from nowhere. It comes from the man-made structure that manufactures that fame, fortune and celebrity. If no one cares about your personal business there wouldn't be $55M to make. And what's the fuel that we burn to create that? 

 

The fuel is our privacy and innocence. We've been burning our souls in the West for how long now? To think we are so naive and out-of-touch that the newest generation doesn't even grasp how the mechanism works is a comment on our depravity.

 

We're so depraved we don't even realize there's something here we ought to feel shameful about. Guilt doesn't even exist anymore. You talk about empathy but fail to realize empathy is what would make a capitalist like Naomi aware that she's not unique. Millions could do what she does had they lived her existence. Yet they weren't afforded that reality. Empathy is understanding you aren't a hero or unique.

Edited June 9, 2021 by MelloYello

[PNW]

1 minute ago, MelloYello said:

The question is "do you consent to be made a public spectacle for the sake of fortune?" 

 

My question is, why must ask athletes to be a public spectacle? It's degrading like a zoo. I'm fine with admiring the accomplishments of athletes (which their brand sponsors are actually paying for and receiving) and not turn it into devolved reality TV show. But it sounds like you and I disagree, which is ok. I just hope you see my point. 

[MelloYello]

10 minutes ago, PNW said:

 

My question is, why must ask athletes to be a public spectacle? It's degrading like a zoo. I'm fine with admiring the accomplishments of athletes (which their brand sponsors are actually paying for and receiving) and not turn it into devolved reality TV show. But it sounds like you and I disagree, which is ok. I just hope you see my point. 

 

Capitalists like Naomi can always go play outside the confines of the capitalist system. It's called being an Amateur. There are actually rankings for it. Some people do it. 

 

If you don't want to play a part in the capitalist system, then don't. Or just give away some large portion of the winnings at which point everyone will treat you like Jesus and you'll feel amazing. 

 

If you're asking why playing a part in the capitalist system feels dirty, evil, slimy, etc. then you just don't understand how it works. I'm not suggesting capitalism is bad. I like it. But I live my life knowing I'm unfairly privileged. That's depressing. It saddens me. But I suppress it like a normal person who feels guilty about having a good life while others suffer. That's the cost. The emotional turmoil offsets the physical improvements in your life. 

 

Congrats, you're realizing what people in the 1980s and 1990s realized about our culture. It's what the big books of that time discussed. Go read David Foster Wallace or something. 

 

There's a moral contradiction in leveraging yourself to make money. It doesn't feel good to sell yourself. That's reality. The last 20 years suggests we don't ultimately care enough about that internal suffering to change though. If we all realized this stuff 30-40 years ago and it's only gotten worse, what does that tell you? 

Edited June 7, 2021 by MelloYello

[PNW]

@MelloYello I don't disagree with you about a lot of this, but I do think it's often conflated between what fans would like to see (unreasonable reality TV in a lot of cases) and what brand sponsors (like Nike) are actually asking their athletes to contractually perform. My point is that a lot of the criticism in this thread of MWW falls more into the former than the latter, and she is not obligated to perform to that degree. 

[MelloYello]

9 minutes ago, PNW said:

@MelloYello I don't disagree with you about a lot of this, but I do think it's often conflated between what fans would like to see (unreasonable reality TV in a lot of cases) and what brand sponsors (like Nike) are actually asking their athletes to contractually perform. My point is that a lot of the criticism in this thread of MWW falls more into the former than the latter, and she is not obligated to perform to that degree. 

 

I'm sorry. I don't follow. You're seeing criticism from fans about what Nike is pressuring MWW to do that she shouldn't have to? 

 

My apologies but thus far, MWW has only been brought up a few times and I don't directly see what you're getting at:

 

I mentioned how I see her as a largely irrelevant player. I don't think that's unfair criticism. 

 

If we're talking about some feud between MWW and Rudy G I have to plead ignorance. I really don't follow the tabloids and his comments seemed pervy. Still, no Nike in that. 

 

One or two other posters mentioned something about her putting posture being provocative. I don't care to comment on that but again no Nike. 

 

What's MWW being pressured to do by her sponsors and why wouldn't that be her personal business decision? She has the freedom to reject those requests, no? 

[KBong]

On 6/5/2021 at 4:45 PM, tomba51 said:

A fear of public speaking is a very common phobia. If you also have a fear of crowded spaces, a press conference could be problematic. If I remember correctly, when Annika Sorenstam was at the beginning of her career, she purposely 3 putted the final holes of tournaments so that she would not win, and therefore would not have to give a victory speech.

I believe this only occurred when Annika was an Am back in Sweden where she said she threw away some events to avoid a victory speech....I doubt she did it as a pro or even when she was at U. of Arizona.

[tomba51]

11 minutes ago, KBong said:

I believe this only occurred when Annika was an Am back in Sweden where she said she threw away some events to avoid a victory speech....I doubt she did it as a pro or even when she was at U. of Arizona.

Yes, I believe that you are correct. I did not mean to imply that she did it as a pro. My point was to show how pervasive a fear of public speaking is. Annika has obviously overcome the fear that she had as a young lady.

[Golf Dino]

8 minutes ago, tomba51 said:

Yes, I believe that you are correct. I did not mean to imply that she did it as a pro. My point was to show how pervasive a fear of public speaking is. Annika has obviously overcome the fear that she had as a young lady.

 

 

The thing is, I have never met anyone in my life who was *not* afraid, fearful or nervous about public speaking ... and yet there are many areas in life where one must overcome those fears or nervousness in pursuit of a personal goal

 

[Frankensteins Monster]

On 6/6/2021 at 10:48 PM, Ironman_32 said:

you can always go work for minimum wage and no one will bother or judge you. 

Are you kidding me? Maniacs don't scream and yell at fast food workers? People don't scream and belittle wait staff? How about daily laborers? 

[Wolfhammer]

On 6/7/2021 at 10:53 AM, PNW said:

And minimizing one person's struggles simply because they have money is disgustingly disrespectful, and reinforces systemic bias. The world needs a bit more empathy, especially after this last year. 

 

THIS

[MelloYello]

32 minutes ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

Are you kidding me? Maniacs don't scream and yell at fast food workers? People don't scream and belittle wait staff? How about daily laborers? 

 

He means no one external to your circumstances will judge you as a walking moral contradiction. 

 

No one here thinks the service industry provides awesome jobs. That's the point.