She stayed out for a number of years until a rookie put a stop to it. Today, in an interview with Alison Cuddy and Chicago Sky forward Shameka Christon, Ms. Raye-Stout fast-forwards to what happened last week in the New York Jets locker room. She points a finger to the new media-- bloggers and flash journalists-- who don't know the rules of the game, who measured player biceps at the Super Bowl last year, a set up for last week's debacle.
On WBEZ 848 show,the veteran (so marvelously politically incorrect) suggests, that Ines Sainz should not dress so provocatively in the locker room. She tells us that journalists are professionals. They know that the story isn't about them. Why, she implies, use cleavage to draw attention away from the story? She quotes the journalistic bible, perhaps mother's milk at Northwestern:
You don't want to be the story. You want to get the story.Very much like the professional training I had as a young sex therapist in 1981 -- flashback to Loyola University Medical School, the Sex Therapy Clinic in Maywood, Illinois.
Domeena Renshaw, MD who has mentored thousands of sex and marital therapists over the years, emphasized, no, insisted (1) that her interns dress modestly, and (2) that we make a conscious effort to avoid any semblance of seductive behavior with our patients.
But that was 1981, probably about the time that Cheryl Raye-Stout jump-started her own career, like I did mine. Both of us have done well following that prime directive--
It's not about you, just get the history, don't let it be about you, let them talk.Does this mean that Ms. Sainz needs to find a personal shopper with less style? Of course not! If someone wants to harass someone else it won't matter what that person is wearing. What it means is that Cheryl Raye-Stout, whether she knew it or not, somehow communicated--
Don't even think about it, let's just talk. Let's just talk about the game.Of course she was harassed plenty over the years, and she admits it. But she didn't let it bother her. She wanted to do the job.
It was all about the game.
Has the world changed?
100%. It sure has. As a society sexual harassment isn't tolerated, indeed it is illegal in the work place. And there are so many women who would follow athletes home if they could that it is difficult for male athletes to know sometimes, Is she for real? Is she looking at me? Gosh she's . . . Then the remarks begin and the gestures. And this can be considered harassment.
Ines Sainz, by the way, in an interview with CNN's Joy Behar, can't say enough about how she tried to ignore them, how she tried to get the story. She tried to keep her cool, she repeats, to focus on the job. But it bothered her. Their crass, boorish behavior bothered her.
The resolution, as it should be in an enlightened society (see Amy Moritz' statement for the Association for Women in Sports Media) is clearly education.
The players need sensitivity training across the board. For sure. In fact everyone should learn in school about sexual communication, the consequences of words, suggestions, unintentional verbal assault.
And when it comes to the media, the uninvited humans in the locker room, the ones with the microphones, the athletes, the players need to know, above all, that female reporters, like male reporters, are there for the story. It's all about the story. At least, it should be.
Linda Freedman, PhD, LCSW, LMFT
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting subject to me. One that might get me in trouble. Personally, I don't think any journalist should be allowed in the locker room while athletes are completely naked. Since they are, I think they should at least act and dress in a professional manner. I would suggest for you to post pictures of Ms. Sainz's work attire and let us debate whether or not it is professional. I, for one, find her attire unprofessional. I also find her actions unprofessional. For example, in 2007, she was walking around asking Bears players if they would marry her. If someone was feeling my biceps and asking me to marry them, I might think that they had interest in me, besides a story. With Ms. Sainz, it's more about her than the story.
ReplyDeleteI didn't say that the veteran reporter is wrong, I just said she's not P-C.
ReplyDeleteThe responsibility to do no harm rests solely upon the one who physically aggresses (verb?) or emotionally or verbally intimidates, or, wields monetary power, as in, You'll lose your job if you don't comply with my wishes . Or in this case, You won't get the story unless you go out with me
Maybe she was dressed "unprofessionally" by some standards, but Ms. Sainz was wearing exactly what has dictated her success in her profession. And rather than do the whole "she asks for it" thing — which is kind of passe by now, no? — maybe we should question why, in enlightened late 2010, sex still needs to sell a woman in sports media — a predominantly male domain. She's hardly the only one!
ReplyDeleteFunny, I had the same reaction when I saw the original news story, complete with picture of Ms. Sainz. The players are still wrong, but, really - why go into an NFL lockerroom like that, if your goal is objective journalism?
ReplyDeleteBecause that's how people dress now. Women, and men, dress to show themselves in what they consider to be their best light.
ReplyDeleteIf she dressed more conservatively she still would have been harassed (my opinion) because some people can't resist harassing. It's in their personality.
Our job is to change that. And it's not so simple, changing personality, natural reactions, responses. :) You begin, exactly as the Commissioner said, with education.
If she had dressed differently she probably would have gotten a different response. Instead of harassing her, the players likely would have ignored her. So maybe she deliberately dresses that way because she knows it will get their attention -- and that's what she needs to 'get the story'. Unfortunately, we don't get to decide what kind of attention we get.
ReplyDeleteI suspect that something similar happens with male journalists in the locker room -- they have to fit a certain profile to get attention, be accepted, and thereby get the story. The nerds and the geeks might get ignored -- or even harassed.
The locker room -- the sports arena generally -- is an intensely gendered place. That's why there are no female players (or coaches or refs) in the locker room. It's a MALE space. It doesn't justify what they did -- it just puts it in context -- the BIG context of players and cheerleaders and coaches and wives and a culture that expects these guys to be brutes and savages. Just look at how they are expected to behave on the field -- the more brutal the louder the cheers and the better the pay.
Sensitivity training? PUHLEEEEZE. Maybe when professional sports teams are co-ed, and a woman is head coach of the Bears, then we can expect some changes -- the first being that she'll no longer be a lone woman trying to get attention in a room full of naked men...