- Losing My Perspicacity
- Posts
- Losing My Perspicacity May 10, 2024
Losing My Perspicacity May 10, 2024
What's the WTA doing about Saudi Arabia's current abuse of women? The NHL needs your help naming a team. Sally Jenkins makes me feel seen. And Houston shows us why rape victims don't go to the police.
Happy Free Friday here at Losing My Perspicacity. Thanks for subscribing. LMP is 100 percent funded by readers, and if you’d like LMP in your inbox every morning, you can upgrade to a paid subscription for the cost of buying me one really substandard Mai Tai a month. And hey, if you don’t know why this email wound up in your inbox, you can easily unsubscribe. I don’t scrape emails from elsewhere or subscribe anyone without their express consent, so if you wound up here, it’s because someone added your email. I’m happy you’re here either way!
I’m just back from a week in San Diego, where I spent a good amount of time on the beach with my nose stuffed in a book and a Mai Tai in my hand, which is why I still have that particular cocktail on the brain. Five stars, highly recommend, no notes. I would be lying if I said I was “happy” to be back, but here I am anyway and, to be fair, I did miss my dogs. By the way, what are you guys reading these days? I’ve run through most of my Kindle, and I’m always looking for something new and interesting.
Let’s get into today’s news, where I want to know what the WTA is doing to pressure Saudi Arabia on women’s rights, the NHL’s new Utah team needs a name, Sally Jenkins makes me feel seen, and Houston lets down sexual assault survivors in a big way. Here we go:
Women’s sports should be saying ‘no’ to Saudi Arabia
Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’re undoubtedly aware of Saudia Arabia’s attempt to “sportswash” its way into the good graces of Westerners, seeking to improve its reputation on the world stage by investing heavily in sports leagues and events. I initially thought the brutal murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi — which the CIA laid firmly at the feet of Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman — would be enough to put pro sports off of the Saudis for good, but golfers flocking to take LIV’s blood money quickly proved me wrong. And if you haven’t seen the 2021 documentary The Dissident about Khashoggi’s murder, I can’t recommend it enough.
WWE, of course, has been holding shows in Saudi Arabia since 2014 as part of Saudi Vision 2030, the Kingdom’s social and economic “reform” program, though “reform” seems like a pretty generous term for what’s happening there. For the first several years, women wrestlers were not allowed to compete, and women weren’t allowed in the audience until 2018.
In 2019, WWE’s Crown Jewel had its first-ever women’s match, which featured Natalya and Lacey Evans, on the condition that they were covered from head to toe, resulting in long t-shirts over body suits that hid their bodies from their necks on down. These kinds of things are always hailed as huge steps for women, but it’s difficult for me to see women being told they have to conceal their bodies as progress.
Screenshot: WWE Crown Jewel
It became clear pretty quickly after the mass defection to LIV that murdering a dissident journalist wasn’t a deal breaker for many in the sports world, but surely women’s pro sports wouldn’t consider holding events in Saudi Arabia, whose record on women’s rights Amnesty International has described as “abysmal.” Right? RIGHT?
If you aren’t up to speed on how women are restricted in Saudi Arabia, here’s a quick primer from Amnesty International.
As the world gathers to mark 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence, Saudi Arabia’s continued imprisonment of women for their peaceful expression in support of women’s rights and imposition of travel bans against women human rights defenders are a crucial reminder of the inherently discriminatory systems women in the country face.
On International Women’s Day, on 8 March 2022, Saudi Arabia passed its first Personal Status Law (PSL). Previously, matters related to family life were subject to the discretionary application of the rules of Sharia (Islamic law) and interpretations of Islamic texts by a male dominated judiciary. At the time, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman praised the new law for its accordance “with the latest legal trends and modern international judicial practices”. In reality, however, the law codifies many of the informal yet widespread problematic practices inherent in the male guardianship system and entrenches a system of gender-based discrimination in most aspects of family life, including in marriage, divorce, and child custody.
In 2023, FIFA was forced to reverse course, following a backlash from players, after the federation agreed to a Visit Saudi sponsorship for the 2023 Women’s World Cup. Even so, Saudi Arabia has expressed strong interest in hosting the women’s 2035 tournament, and it’s difficult to imagine FIFA saying no to all that money indefinitely, especially as only seven of the 37 members of the FIFA Council are women. Funny, that.
Then, in April, the Women’s Tennis Association chose Riyadh to host the WTA Finals from 2024 to 2026. That possibly inspired tennis greats Martina Navratilova and Chris Evert to write an Op-Ed in the Washington Post trying to head off a partnership between the WTA and the Saudis:
“We fully appreciate the importance of respecting diverse cultures and religions. It is because of this, and not despite it, that we oppose the awarding of the tour’s crown jewel tournament to Riyadh. The WTA’s values sit in stark contrast to those of the proposed host. Not only is this a country where women are not seen as equal, it is a country where the current landscape includes a male guardianship law that essentially makes women the property of men. A country which criminalizes the LGBTQ community to the point of possible death sentences. A country whose long-term record on human rights and basic freedoms has been a matter of international concern for decades.
“Staging the WTA final there would represent not progress, but significant regression.”
That’s what I was thinking about this week when I learned that Saudi Arabia had sentenced 29-year-old fitness instructor Manahel al-Otaibi to 11 years in prison for her feminist advocacy and her clothing. al-Otaibi was sentenced during a “secret hearing” before the Kingdom’s Specialized Criminal Court in early January, but the decision was only revealed to the public on April 30, following a request for information about her confinement from the United Nations. Saudi authorities have called al-Otaibi’s actions “terrorist offenses.”
Both Amnesty International and the London-based Saudi rights organization ALQST have called for al-Otaibi’s immediate release:
Amnesty and ALQST allege Al-Otaibi’s charges are related “solely to her choice of clothing and expression of her views online, including calling on social media for an end to Saudi Arabia’s male guardianship system, publishing videos of herself wearing ‘indecent clothes,’ and ‘going to the shops without wearing an abaya’.”
Her sister, Fawzia al-Otaibi, faces similar charges but was able to flee Saudi Arabia after she was summoned for questioning in 2022, they said.
al-Otaibi was reportedly “disappeared” by the Saudi government from November of 2023 to April of 2024, physically and psychologically abused following her arrest, and told her family she suffered a broken leg and is being held in solitary confinement. According to Amnesty International, al-Otaibi’s arrest comes at a time when Saudi officials are cracking down on free expression both online and on the streets, particularly among women:
Al-Otaibi’s sentencing comes amid an intensified crackdown on free speech in Saudi Arabia, including online expression. In the past two years, Saudi courts have convicted and handed down lengthy prison terms on dozens of individuals for their expression on social media, including many women, such as Salma al-Shehab (27 years), Fatima al-Shawarbi (30 years), Sukaynah al-Aithan (40 years) and Nourah al-Qahtani (45 years).
Moreover, in an attempt to lure more women’s sporting events to the Kingdom, the Saudis have made a lot of noise about relaxing the dress code for female tourists, but those “relaxed” rules don’t apply to the women who are Saudi residents. The Kingdom tried to declare “feminism” to be “extremist thinking” in 2019, but was eventually forced to back down on that claim and publicly clarify that feminism was not a crime. It’s as if Saudi officials keep saying the quiet part out loud, then have to scurry to say, “That’s not what we meant!” whenever the rest of the world raises its eyebrows. It’s clear that’s exactly what they meant.
While no one can deny that funding has always been a major problem for women’s pro sports, and it goes without saying that the Saudis have lots of money that they’re willing to throw at any sports league that will take it, shouldn’t there be a line somewhere that women’s sports refuse to cross? After all, the WTA is the organization that pulled its events out of China after the disappearance of Peng Shuai in 2021. Do the women being harmed have to be famous pro athletes in order for the WTA to care? Is women being imprisoned for expressing dissatisfaction with misogynist Saudi laws not enough? Is the WTA really going to bring dozens of women to Riyadh and put on a tennis tournament while the women who actually live and work in the Kingdom are being tossed into prison as terrorists for expressing feminist views? Where is the line if that’s not it?
I contacted the WTA for comment, but as of the time this newsletter was published, I had not heard back. If the organization does respond, I’ll update this section online with their statement.
Over the past few years, we’ve heard a lot about the rise of women’s sports fans, their buying power, and their influence. This seems like a good time for fans of women’s pro sports, and especially fans of women’s tennis, to make a lot of noise.
You can add your name to Amnesty International’s call for the Saudis to release al-Otaibi and others here.
On a lighter note…
Utah’s NHL expansion team is officially looking for a name, and there’s an online poll where fans can vote. You can click through the link below to see all the names.
Utah! Our NHL team is here. Help us choose a name. survey.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_0i…
— Ryan Smith (@RyanQualtrics)
12:53 AM • May 9, 2024
The initial list is 20 teams long, and fans are encouraged to vote for four teams in this first round of voting, which ends May 22. Some of the suggestions (Utah Hive, Utah Swarm — are bees a big thing in Utah? — Utah Blast, Utah Ice, Utah HC(?)) are pretty bland. (Aren’t we trying to live up to a name like the Seattle Kraken?) But some of the others are actually pretty good — Utah Freeze, Utah Black Diamonds, Utah Squall, and my personal favorite: The Utah Yeti. Wouldn’t you love to go to a Yeti-Kraken game? Which mythical beast would prevail at hockey? The one from the ocean (meh) or the one that purportedly lives in snow and ice? “Sasquatch” is also a word that used to get tossed around a bit in describing the old-timey enforcers, so the name not only has ties to Utah, it has ties to hockey!
Anyone can vote in this thing (though you do have to give a name and email), so even if you don’t like the NHL, you should feel free to cast a few ballots in favor of creativity and good team names.
Sally Jenkins nails it, as usual
I only briefly touched on the Netflix Roast of Tom Brady here, but after several days of thinking about it, I wanted to take a minute to expand on my thoughts. I didn’t watch much of it, but I did catch a lot of clips that were being shared online. What struck me was how a) lame and b) sexist many of the jokes were, and what was supposed to be a rost of Tom too often wound up sounding like a roast of Brady’s ex-wife, Gisele Bündchen or the mother of his first child, Bridget Moynahan. I think it’s worth pointing out that, of all the slut-shaming the roasters did of the mothers of Brady’s children, the only person Brady jumped up to defend was Patriots owner Robert Kraft.
But have no fear, Sally Jenkins was all over it at WaPo:
Tom Brady must really need money, or attention, or proof that he’s a bro. He needed it bad enough to do that Netflix roast, in which he gallantly sacrificed the mothers of his children to clumsy third-rate comics, whose hammy punchlines fell like refrigerators hitting sidewalks, splatting Brady’s reputation for intelligence beneath them. By the time the three-hour vulgarian parade was over, there were two conclusions: Football players can’t do funny, only coarse, and Brady wasn’t the one who got roasted — he stuck his exes with that tab.
I find Tom Brady to be inherently unlikeable, partly because of his purchase of a yacht shortly after he got a million-dollar PPP loan during COVID, partly because of his enabling of Antonio Brown, and partly because I have never understood the hero worship he inspires in grown men, including those in the media. And I felt like Jenkins was seeing into my soul on this one:
There should have been plenty of ways to properly roast Brady: for his dimpled Shirley Temple act at news conferences yet his helmet-throwing rages on the sideline, for his epic loss in a cryptocurrency failure, for the rumors that he had plastic surgery, for his friendship with Donald Trump. Instead, the audience was offered an endless litany of sex organ jokes.
And shots at the women in his life, who he did nothing to defend.
While I’ve already been accused of being “a miserable person” who “wouldn’t know a joke if it slapped me across the face” by a contingent of extremely online men, I'm glad I wasn’t alone in finding the whole thing extremely off-putting. And while there are plenty of of-color (and sometimes even sexist) jokes that I will laugh my ass off at, the Roast jokes were just juvenile and distinctly unfunny.
Tom Brady strikes me as the kind of guy who would throw all the women in his life under the bus if it meant another Super Bowl ring. Tell me some more about what a great "#GirlDad he is.
Houston, we have a huge problem
“I feel there is a clear message”: Sexual assault survivors react to Houston police case backlog – Houston Police Department's admission they dropped the ball on a quarter million incident reports. More than 4,000 of those were sex assault cases.
— Liberty76 (@Liberty__76)
3:23 AM • May 10, 2024
I don’t think there’s been a story written about sexual assault in the last 20 years that hasn’t resulted in someone asking “Why didn’t she/he go to the police?” We’ve gotten to the point where going to the police is seen as the first hurdle in a woman’s proving that she was, really, sexually assaulted, no matter what harm the police do, and without regard for a victim’s trauma.
As I’ve written about in this newsletter before, Olivia Benson is the fantasy projection of the cop who handles your sexual assault case, not the reality of the police presence victims actually get. After all, Houston has a Special Victims Unit, too. Imagine how it feels to have survived a sexual assault, named your assailant (most rapes are perpetrated between people who know each other), lived through re-telling the story of your trauma over and over and over, only to have the police toss your case into a pile and let it languish there. But that’s exactly what the Houston Police did.
Here’s what one of the victims said about the process:
"When (the detective) called to tell me the devastating news (that the District Attorney would not prosecute her case) she sounded extremely flippant to the point that it sounded like laughter, and it was again made clear to me that it was my word against his, and I was the liar—I was blamed," Emily said in a calm matter-of-fact voice to a hushed crowd at the Houston Area Women’s Center. "I feel there is a clear message to Houstonians that sexual assault victims don't matter."
Emily did not hold back on her indictment of the department or its Special Victims Division.
"As I presented evidence throughout the investigation, I was met with silence, casual indifference, annoyed behavior, and actual disgust."
This is why women don’t go to the police. This is what rape culture looks like.
By the way, the Houston Police Chief who presided over this mess (nearly 250,000 active criminal cases were “suspended” and assigned a “lack of personnel” code) retired abruptly on Tuesday. Ya think?
Have a great Friday and a great weekend, and if you like the newsletter, please tell a friend! If you want to get LMP in your inbox every morning, you can upgrade to a paid subscription below. See you all on Monday.
Reply