Interesting column from the normally logical Gwen Knapp today. She wonders why a 40 year-old male like Barry Bonds received a free pass when he belted a home run every time he spit, meanwhile a successful 41 year-old female swimmer -- Dara Torres -- comes under the intense scrutiny of the doping-suspicions crowd. (Torres simply delivered a baby at age ~39, then records 5% faster times in her postpartum swimming years than she did in her college competitions; maybe she cut down on that college drinking).
We are going to suffer from the fallout after we deliver our opinion, however it is obvious where this is going: a double standard of men receiving the pass and women receiving grief. Knapp might have added in the double standard between Euro and African genes -- some say African-American athletes suffer discrimination and thus are accused of doping more often than Euro athletes. We can't keep up with all the double standards...
A 41-year-old woman did the
impossible. Dara Torres swam faster than she ever did before, making
her fifth Olympic team. As a result, she faced questions about doping,
suspicions she fully expected and completely deserved.
But when Barry Bonds, at age 37, suddenly went from a great hitter
to a supernatural one, increasing his home run output by nearly 50
percent, the media didn't put him on the defensive about steroids. It
would take a lot more than 73 home runs in a single season to make that
happen.
When Lance Armstrong returned from cancer treatment and transformed
himself from a cyclist who barely could get through a Tour de France
into the imperial master of the event, no American reporter dared
challenge the authenticity of his accomplishment.
We've come a long way since the BALCO investigation schooled us on
performance-enhancing drugs. But how far have we really come? Olympians
are still held to higher standards than better-known jocks, and women
somehow keep paying higher prices for doping awareness than their male
peers.
A great deal of water flowed under the doping bridge since Barry Bonds lit up the night with steroid-fueled home runs in 2001. BALCO. Operation Puerto. The Mitchell Report. The Carolina Panther Superbowl Scandal. More Tour de France scandals involving luminaries like Floyd Landis. Of all these various doping and steroid scandals, only several women trickled out of the predominantly male scandals: Marion Jones, Chryste Gaines, and cyclist Tammy Thomas to name several of BALCO fame. Jones and Thomas exacerbated part of their plights: the simple doping truth would have saved their souls and actually their careers. (And why is BALCO-linked swimmer Amy Van Dyken less notorious than Jones or Thomas? Gender bias?)
Point is that the sporting public is much much more aware of steroids and HGH and insulin and modafinil now than in 1998 when McGwire and Sosa set personal bests in home run totals, not in the 50 freestyle.
Performance alone rarely
triggers widespread suspicion in the media, but it sufficed for
accusations against Torres and, 20 years ago, Florence Griffith-Joyner.
The same scrutiny does not apply to men until they have a failed test
on their record, federal investigators on their tails or a member of
their entourage under indictment.
Oh really? Roger Clemens comes to mind. How many dope tests did Roger Clemens fail? The Rocket suffered more scrutiny than anyone since Bill Clinton over the past year. Time and time again fans
referred to Clemens rather mundane pitching numbers in his last years with Boston, and the sudden revitalization of the 34 year (that's right 34, not 41) at Toronto. No doping positives there either. Clemens doesn't even live with an endocrinologist, although wife Debbie is expert in HGH use.
Need some other names who never failed a test, yet are mentioned in doping: Brady Anderson and Luis
Gonzalez come under scrutiny for storybook -- but unusually dubious -- sporting achievements. None is admitting to cooking the books (or their looks), nor are Internet pharmacy receipts found for these males, yet the steroids-scrutiny continues on.
Is there some belief in male
athletic accomplishment, perhaps its confirmation of masculinity, that
does not surrender as easily to the realities of doping? Or is it
simply that the most prominent women tend to be Olympians, and we
expect greater purity from athletes who represent our country? Whatever
the reason, men get to spin their fairy tales with less resistance.
Fairly tales with less resistance? How about Usain Bolt, a young athlete setting the world record in the 100M? In his 3rd or 4th 100M he was under scrutiny for doping, with nothing much known about the guy. The Y chromosome sure didn't save his butt from the hot spotlight of doping suspicion. Every remarkable achievement in sports henceforth will come under 'PED scrutiny'; such is modern life post-pharmacology.
(more controversy after the jump)
Recent Comments