Love All

Wimbledon’s superstar proves that it’s fine for an athlete to come out — as a homophobe.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


When longshot Goran Ivanisevic took the Wimbledon trophy earlier this month,
much was made of his fairy-tale route to the championship.
Reuters called him “Goran Crusoe, the Beatles, and Cinderella all in
one
.” What few in the media acknowledged during the celebration of the
Croatian phoenix were the homophobic comments that followed his triumph over Australian Patrick Rafter.

In the post-match press conference, Ivanisevic vented frustration over
several questionable calls, telling reporters, “Then I hit another second
serve, huge. And that ball was on the line, was not even close. And that
guy, he looks like a faggot little bit, you know. This hair all over him.
He call it. I couldn’t believe he
did it.” A handful of reporters laughed at the comment.

Talk about a news hole: The remark was edited
out of the streaming video of the interview available on the official Wimbledon Web
site
.
Most mainstream media reports of the press conference (except for a column by the Los Angeles Times‘ Diane Pucin) also omitted the
slur — and that has some media-watchers worried.

It’s remarkable that “an athlete can casually
drop a word like ‘faggot’ in a high-profile media interview and not only is
there very little media coverage of his comment, but several reporters in
the room can be heard laughing at it,” says Scott Seomin, spokesman for the
Gay and Lesbian
Alliance Against Defamation
(GLAAD). In fact, Ivanisevic has used the word repeatedly in the past, with even less press coverage
than the modicum his Wimbledon
remarks attracted.

To be fair, Ivanisevic is hardly the only sports figure — or even tennis player — to have made
homophobic remarks in high-profile situations recently. In January 1999, after the 19-year-old French sensation
Amélie
Mauresmo
told reporters that she was in a lesbian relationship (she is
the first active player to speak openly about her orientation since Martina
Navratilova), the top-seeded Martina Hingis called her “half a
man
.” Chances are, if you get your sporting news from mainstream US
sources, you didn’t know that.

What if it were a matter of racism — which Richard Willams, father of
tennis phenoms
Venus and Serena, says is rampant in professional tennis
rather than homophobia? “If Ivanisevic had used the ‘N-word,’ I doubt that
press reaction would have been this muted,” says GLAAD’s Seomin.

True enough. In fact, the only prominent cases of sports heroes publicly
vilified for antigay remarks have been those who also made
racist comments — most notably football star Reggie White and major-league baseball pitching ace John Rocker.

Homophobia in sports has deep roots for obvious reasons. Sports is about
physical strength, a characteristic stereotypically associated with
masculinity. You tear down a male competitor’s
reputation
by suggesting that he is effeminate (“You throw like a girl”) or
berate a female athlete by implying that she is not not
feminine enough. It’s an ugly part of today’s mental gamesmanship.

It has also stunted and ruined careers. Washington Redskin Ray McDonald was arrested and
charged with a misdemeanor for having sex with another man in a public park
in the late 1960s, and lost his job and his career. Billie Jean King was dumped
by her sponsors
, including Nike, when she came out in 1981. When rumors circulated that Olympian Greg Louganis was gay, endorsements dried up; he suspected that sponsors feared being associated with homosexuality.

Fortunately, a few have fared better. Pro golfer Muffin Spencer-Devlin came out amid much controversy about lesbians on the LPGA tour, but
her sponsors — Calloway and MetRX — stood by her until she retired.
Martina Navratilova suffered a dearth of big endorsement deals until
several years into her retirement, when the major corporations realized how
loved she was by the public despite (or because of?) her sexuality; now she is the
public face of Subaru and can boast a host of other lucrative endorsement
contracts.

But if things have gotten better for celebrities, athletes in the trenches still struggle with the fears their peers faced 30 years ago. In a 1994 NCAA study, 49 percent of female athletes
and 51 percent
of female coaches surveyed said they felt homophobia hampered efforts to attract
and retain women in athletic careers. And media coverage isn’t helping: Unsubstantiated rumors about athletes’ sexual
orientation
make tabloid headlines, while evidence of athletes’ bigotry is buried or ignored.

(For more information,
check out the Women’s Sports Foundation’s “Homophobia in Women’s Sports,” and the
Tucker Center for Research on Girls & Women in
Sport
at the University of Minnesota.)

 

Bits and Pieces

FORGET DINKs — HERE COME THE
HNWIs

Get ready for the latest FLA (four-letter acronym): HNWI, or high
net-worth individuals (those with liquid assets worth at least $1 million)
account for one in about 850 people in the world and collectively own $27
trillion in the world’s liquid assets (not including property). And their net worth grew last year by 6 percent,
despite a drop in the value of the world’s markets, according to Merrill
Lynch. There is also such thing as an UHNWI, or “ultra high net-worth
individual,” but to get that tag, you need $30 million just burning a hole
in your pocket. According to the Merrill Lynch report, more than a third of
the world’s HNWIs reside in North America, and their number grew 2.4
percent to 2.54 million individuals over the past year.

PHILLIP MORRIS IN VEGEMITE
TUSSLE

Australian electronics magnate and multimillionaire Dick Smith is one of Oz’s
most unlikely anti-globalists. Smith was disgusted with what he saw as the
imperialism of American and European companies in the quirky Australian
food and beverage markets: Phillip
Morris subsidiary Kraft Foods owns the ultimate Aussie delectable known as
Vegemite. So he started Dick Smith Foods — a not-for-profit
licensing business that sells the Dick Smith name and label to local
franchisees, and donates all profits not reinvested in the company to
Australian charities. One of his flagship products: A yeast extract called Ozemite, a direct
challenge to Vegemite.

THE CHOCOLATE WAR

The Chocolate Manufacturers Association is aggressively opposing legislation aimed at ending
the use of child slave labor in the production of chocolate. A recent Knight Ridder investigation found that boys as
young as nine are sold or tricked into slavery to
harvest cocoa beans in Ivory Coast, a West African nation that
supplies 43 percent of the world’s cocoa. The State
Department estimates that as many as 15,000 child slaves work on
Ivory Coast’s cocoa, cotton and coffee farms. The
industry group has retained former senators Bob Dole and George Mitchell
to lobby against a proposal to require “slave-free” labels on chocolate
sold in the US.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate