As the French Open progressed in Paris, a debate surrounding comments made in distant Melbourne garnered unusual attention. It started when Aussie legend Margaret Court (in picture), who has won more Grand Slam titles than anybody else in history, first criticised Qantas airlines for its support of same-sex marriage, said transgender children were the work of “the devil”, and then claimed that “tennis is full of lesbians” who ‘influence’ younger players.
Nearly every top player has been asked for his/her response to these comments, which have brought the topic of homophobia in tennis back into the spotlight. Predictably — and rightly so — Court’s comments have received staunch criticism. There have been calls for the Margaret Court Arena, the second show court at the Australian Open, to be renamed.
The legendary Martina Navratilova, a lesbian herself, wrote a stirring open letter in The Sydney Morning Herald , in which she said, “It is now clear exactly who Court is: an amazing tennis player, and a racist and a homophobe.”
Tennis has always been seen as one of the more progressive sports. All four Grand Slam tournaments now offer equal prize money to the men’s and women’s title winners. It is also a sport which has dealt with gender and sexuality more openly. In this context, it is indeed easy to dismiss Court and her comments with a collective eye-roll and a heavy sigh.
But not for those who know the sport’s history and the struggle to bring about a change. No lesbian athlete publicly came out until Billie Jean King and Navratilova did in 1981. It required enormous courage and such were the circumstances that both lost most of their commercial endorsements following the revelation. Navratilova, in her competitive prime, was often cast as the ‘beast’ to Chris Evert’s ‘beauty’; with some of her opponents attributing her tennis accomplishments as much to her sexuality as to her training.
So, when someone like Court, with a profile as significant as hers, makes such comments, it feels like a throwback to the 1980s when such rants were used to trivialise, marginalise and stigmatise women athletes. Even as one may argue that the situation isn’t as dire now, it is important to be sensitive to the idea that homophobia is still alive within the sporting community. It is, therefore, important to empower athletes who are homosexuals to respond to insinuations with confidence and power like Navratilova has done.
This whole debate is, of course, part of a larger question — what do we expect of our sporting icons? Should professional sportspersons be judged only on their performance? When they voice their opinions, should they restrict themselves only to their field of endeavour? It would be rather unfortunate if things are reduced to such a state.
With 62 Majors, Court is undoubtedly one of the greatest players of all time and her opinion matters. Her mixing of beliefs with tennis is as much her right as Navratilova’s. It is rather unfortunate that she is on the wrong side of the net this time, that her name is being associated more with her homophobic views rather than with having inspired young women to play more tennis.
