Are Controversial Personalities Good Or Bad For Women's Sports?

Are controversial personalities good or bad for women’s sports? Our roundtable tackles a tricky question that’s rooted in a double standard.

- Ramona Shelburne

THERE IS MORE than just a debate point here for female athletes; there is a double standard.

When Ronda Rousey wouldn’t touch gloves with Holly Holm before their fight last November, people absolutely crushed her for it, even though male UFC fighters—Dominick Cruz, Anderson Silva, Nate Diaz, Conor McGregor (to name just a few)—don’t always touch gloves. In Rio, Gabby Douglas appeared disappointed (gasp!) that she narrowly missed the chance to defend her gymnastics all around title. Social media critics came down on her hard for showing her desire to compete, an athletic virtue that’s as revered as the Games themselves.

With this as a baseline, when someone is as outspoken as Hope Solo—who was taken to task for her blunt criticisms well before her recent legal trouble—it stands out.

The dilemma female athletes face is that those who stay in the safe, wholesome lane are labeled “boring” and cited as a reason women’s sports aren’t as popular as men’s. So how can a female athlete be compelling without also being viewed as controversial?

I emailed a group of phenomenal female athletes—and one legendary women’s coach—to pose those questions. Here is an edited version of our reply-all thread. - Ramona Shelburne

RAMONA SHELBURNE: Why can’t women just own their feelings and be competitive? Why can’t we be pissed off or visibly disappointed when we lose or don’t see our name in the lineup?