Serena Williams Injured; Still Allegedly Female

10 Responses to “Serena Williams Injured; Still Allegedly Female”

1. anon
   July 2nd, 2007 at 18:33

   not sure what you’re talking about

   
   
2. A. Nonymous
   July 2nd, 2007 at 21:49

   The Incredible Hulk?

   
   
3. Rob Hyndman (317 comments.)
   July 2nd, 2007 at 22:36

   That’s what I thought.

   
   
4. Nav (7 comments.)
   July 2nd, 2007 at 23:29

   Nope - it’s just you. Oh, and patriarchy. And, uh, the very masculine fear of people not fitting neatly into ‘predetermined’ gender roles.

   Seriously, what are you, sixteen all of a sudden? I expected better.

   
   
5. Rob Hyndman (317 comments.)
   July 3rd, 2007 at 05:57

   “I expected better”? LOL. “The very masculine fear of people not fitting neatly into ‘predetermined’ gender roles.” LOL again. What, did you get that out of a book?

   
   
6. A. Nonymous
   July 4th, 2007 at 08:20

   Regarding Nav’s comment, and getting stuff out of feminist-informed books: Competitive sports on the level that Serena Williams plays are very masculine gender roles, by definition. As for patriarchy, yes, she has chosen to play in that particular court, and willingly and actively contributes to patriarchy, dominant hierarchies, and all those sorts of contra-feminist structures. I would go so far as to say that the type of musculature displayed in the photo is not biologically female, either, but I’m not a specialist in anatomy or kinesiology, so you can take that with as many grains of salt as you wish.

   As does a good referee, Rob’s just callin’ ‘em as he sees ‘em.

   
   
7. Rob Hyndman (317 comments.)
   July 4th, 2007 at 09:30

   I was wondering more what an expert in, um, chemistry might think (!)

   
   
8. Nav (7 comments.)
   July 4th, 2007 at 22:28

   To me, it just seemed remarkably adolescent to essentially say “Dude, Serena totally looks like a man, man!”, particularly since this blog’s other content seems quite intelligent and insightful. Hence the “I expected better”.

   As for Serena Williams contributing to patriarchy, even if she were (women’s tennis is contra-feminist because it’s competitive? uh-huh.), so what? That gives Mr. Hyndman free reign to reinforce rules about what men and women are and are not? I think that A. Nonymous is missing the point: that the links between certain traits and gender is far more arbitrary and less determined than it seems and that, furthermore, the broaching of gendered convention is hardly something worth criticising someone for.

   Also, the fact that something being “from a book” was used as an accusation - dude, not helping your cause at all. Anyway, I realise this is totally random, will go nowhere and change no-one’s mind. Sometimes you feel you just can’t keep your mouth shut - or your fingers still, as the case may be.

   -Nav

   
   
9. Another
   July 9th, 2007 at 21:24

   yes, nav got it from a book. if you’d like a reading list, i’d be glad to help you understand some of this.

   or you can just keep making fun of people and saying “LOL” like a 12 year old.

   i recommend the latter actually. it’s much, much easier.

   
   
10. rod / techfold.com (1 comments.)
    July 12th, 2007 at 16:03

    Rob is suggesting that Serena’s on the juice - I don’t think he’s suggesting that she looks like a dude, should conform to gender expectations, or whathaveyou.

    If Aggasiz or Sampras bulked up to Serena’s proportions I’d ask “is there something wrong with this picture” about those men too. That physique looks more suited to the football field or rugby pitch than the tennis court - not that I play tennis, mind you.