Controversy as interviewer asks Bouchard and Serena to twirl

The BBC have been fuming this week, after an interviewer asked both Bouchard and Serena to twirl.

Bouchard said she was 'ok' with it, adding 'I'm not offended'; but the journalists at the BBC are very offended on her behalf.
Serena was angrier than Bouchard, saying 'she wouldn't ask Nadal or Federer to twirl' but she didn't clarify if she thought the incident was sexist.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/30943738

What do you guys think ? Sexist, or a harmless bit of fun ?

Least it wasn't twerking!

Imagine the meltdown on social media!

It's another idiotic example of the insatiable desire of some in our society to be offended.

And it's entirely predictable that the BBC correspondent would chip in and show how right-on he is.

HM Murdoch wrote:It's another idiotic example of the insatiable desire of some in our society to be offended.

And it's entirely predictable that the BBC correspondent would chip in and show how right-on he is.

Sounds about right. Pretty disappointing from the BBC.

The media seemed much more bothered about it than the players, which is concerning.

It is odd, though. Wear a rather extravagant dress... and be offended when you're asked to show it off. On the other hand, nobody asked Rafa to show off his pink disco light stripes... but I'd wager a guess and say his gear, and more specifically, the shortness of it, has attracted more attention than anything on the WTA.

kingraf wrote:It is odd, though. Wear a rather extravagant dress... and be offended when you're asked to show it off. On the other hand, nobody asked Rafa to show off his pink disco light stripes... but I'd wager a guess and say his gear, and more specifically, the shortness of it, has attracted more attention than anything on the WTA.

In the exhibition match before the tournament started, they did actually point out Nadal's shiny stripe and ask him to comment on it.

Also odd that there isn't the same outrage that women aren't being asked to play 5 sets.

We should note though that neither Bouchard, nor Serena were offended, Billy Jean King was offended, which isnt hard as she seems offended by absolutely anything. Bouchard was pretty jokey about it and knowcked it out of the park.
It was an older interviewer who didnt intend it in any perverted, or sexist way, just as an opportunity to show the dresses. Its old fashioned for sure, but the idea that you cant ever ask a lady to show off her fashionable dress is a scary level of being offended.

King can pi$$ off!

It's not the 20th century!

From a female perspective what the hell Serena ?? you want the men to be treated like you? then let them play three sets instead of five. Why do women play three sets if they wish to be equal !!! God save me from these feminists who play  both ends to the middle.

The on court interviewers at the AO always like to be a little different...

As far as fashion goes IMO this years clear winner on the women's side is Azarenka. She looked "brilliant" and played the same way I know some of you "guys" don't watch too much women's tennis so to give you an idea of how she played in her last match against Wozniacki imagine a super aggressive dynamic Djokovic. It was perhaps one of the highest quality matches of the tournament so far.

Afterwords she wasn't asked to twirl she just took it upon herself to do so. Maybe that's the best way. It should be a woman's right to choose

A woman is empowered to say one thing NO. Without suggesting that the men flex. Once comparing yourself to the male of the species you have to realise that other comparisons will be made. You wanna be a woman then be so.. don't ask for equality when it suits and then complain when it doesn't

I imagine that Serena is worried about being objectified:

So now do you see my point.???.. duplicity tsk

The thing I don't like most about it is that the interviewer is now in the middle of a storm of confected outrage about a totally innocuous comment.

People are reacting as if he asked them to lapdance for him!

HM Murdoch wrote:The thing I don't like most about it is that the interviewer is now in the middle of a storm of confected outrage about a totally innocuous comment.

People are reacting as if he asked them to lapdance for him!

How often in my life, when I have worn something that has attracted a man's (or indeed another woman's) attention, have I heard "give us a twirl" oh shock horror !!!
It can hardly be called sexist.. what difference when I have seen a man I know looking really good, new suit, hair cut, going out on a date and I have said "turn round" what the hell is the difference..what planet am I now occupying ???

It is a woman's right to choose. She could have simply said no. There would have been absolutely no news there.

Anyway, feminism is a touchy topic. Sometimes they want nudity in films and music videos to stop, as they demean women, other times they want Instagram to #FreeTheNipple.

KR .. women demean women they betray their own sex. Supply and demand ..whilst women sell themselves in this manner it will never stop.
Its not all about money.. some just love the  exhibitionism. It gives them power over men; and men buy into it..!!! And so the world goes around and around

This is what the great Billie Jean said

https://twitter.com/BillieJeanKing/status/558321827668189184/photo/1

Now that I have read it I have to agree with her expertise on matters of tennis players equality.

If ALL the women are being routinely asked to "twirl" then ALL the men should be routinely asked to perform something similar (a star jump perhaps?). Both men and women could then choose to perform or not Unless of course it is written into their ATP or WTA contracts then twirling and star jumps (or something similar) will be mandatory.

Haddie-nuff wrote:KR .. women demean women they betray their own sex. Supply and demand ..whilst women sell themselves in this manner it will never stop.
Its not all about money.. some just love the  exhibitionism. It gives them power over men; and men buy into it..!!! And so the world goes around and around

How come it's only women who are put in the position of having to "sell themselves". Who is it that controls the capital and is able to buy?

hawkeye wrote:This is what the great Billie Jean said

https://twitter.com/BillieJeanKing/status/558321827668189184/photo/1

Now that I have read it I have to agree with her expertise on matters of tennis players equality.

If ALL the women are being routinely asked to "twirl" then ALL the men should be routinely asked to perform something similar (a star jump perhaps?). Both men and women could then choose to perform or not Unless of course it is written into their ATP or WTA contracts then twirling and star jumps (or something similar) will be mandatory.

So as men play 5 sets in a Slam, is it then too much to ask women to do the same?

hawkeye wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:KR .. women demean women they betray their own sex. Supply and demand ..whilst women sell themselves in this manner it will never stop.
Its not all about money.. some just love the  exhibitionism. It gives them power over men; and men buy into it..!!! And so the world goes around and around

How come it's only women who are put in the position of having to "sell themselves". Who is it that controls the capital and is able to buy?

Whilst men are born with those things they play tennis with (and they keep their brains in ) so it will go on HE.  Women put themselves in that position.. as I say it gives them power over men, because its the one commodity they have and the one men want. Supply and demand !!! and women market the goods

legendkillarV2 wrote:

hawkeye wrote:This is what the great Billie Jean said

https://twitter.com/BillieJeanKing/status/558321827668189184/photo/1

Now that I have read it I have to agree with her expertise on matters of tennis players equality.

If ALL the women are being routinely asked to "twirl" then ALL the men should be routinely asked to perform something similar (a star jump perhaps?). Both men and women could then choose to perform or not Unless of course it is written into their ATP or WTA contracts then twirling and star jumps (or something similar) will be mandatory.

So as men play 5 sets in a Slam, is it then too much to ask women to do the same?

No it is not too much to ask LK they should play five sets without a doubt imo

Haddie-nuff wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

hawkeye wrote:This is what the great Billie Jean said

https://twitter.com/BillieJeanKing/status/558321827668189184/photo/1

Now that I have read it I have to agree with her expertise on matters of tennis players equality.

If ALL the women are being routinely asked to "twirl" then ALL the men should be routinely asked to perform something similar (a star jump perhaps?). Both men and women could then choose to perform or not Unless of course it is written into their ATP or WTA contracts then twirling and star jumps (or something similar) will be mandatory.

So as men play 5 sets in a Slam, is it then too much to ask women to do the same?

No it is not too much to ask LK they should play five sets without a doubt imo

It's a slippery slop saying what happened was sexist, especially given the format of matches which I don't think King or HE have considered.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

hawkeye wrote:This is what the great Billie Jean said

https://twitter.com/BillieJeanKing/status/558321827668189184/photo/1

Now that I have read it I have to agree with her expertise on matters of tennis players equality.

If ALL the women are being routinely asked to "twirl" then ALL the men should be routinely asked to perform something similar (a star jump perhaps?). Both men and women could then choose to perform or not Unless of course it is written into their ATP or WTA contracts then twirling and star jumps (or something similar) will be mandatory.

So as men play 5 sets in a Slam, is it then too much to ask women to do the same?

Read my comment again. "twirling" and "star jumps" are clearly different but I judged them as having equal value. The high quality tennis in the Azarenka/Wozniacki match was equall in entertainement value to Monfils and Janowicz clowning around in their match. Of course some womens matches and some mens matches are equally bad. The women could play 5 sets if they were asked but I doubt they will be. The 5 set match is restricted to slams and even for men the pressure is on to shorten matches to fit in with TV schedules.

hawkeye wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

hawkeye wrote:This is what the great Billie Jean said

https://twitter.com/BillieJeanKing/status/558321827668189184/photo/1

Now that I have read it I have to agree with her expertise on matters of tennis players equality.

If ALL the women are being routinely asked to "twirl" then ALL the men should be routinely asked to perform something similar (a star jump perhaps?). Both men and women could then choose to perform or not Unless of course it is written into their ATP or WTA contracts then twirling and star jumps (or something similar) will be mandatory.

So as men play 5 sets in a Slam, is it then too much to ask women to do the same?

Read my comment again. "twirling" and "star jumps" are clearly different but I judged them as having equal value. The high quality tennis in the Azarenka/Wozniacki match was equall in entertainement value to Monfils and Janowicz clowning around in their match. Of course some womens matches and some mens matches are equally bad. The women could play 5 sets if they were asked but I doubt they will be. The 5 set match is restricted to slams and even for men the pressure is on to shorten matches to fit in with TV schedules.

They might be different, but the context you implied was the same. Why should women do something men don't.

People could of course do a frozen and "let it go"...

In life sometimes people will say or do stuff that might irk you. The normal response is to do what Genie does and move on.

hawkeye wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

hawkeye wrote:This is what the great Billie Jean said

https://twitter.com/BillieJeanKing/status/558321827668189184/photo/1

Now that I have read it I have to agree with her expertise on matters of tennis players equality.

If ALL the women are being routinely asked to "twirl" then ALL the men should be routinely asked to perform something similar (a star jump perhaps?). Both men and women could then choose to perform or not Unless of course it is written into their ATP or WTA contracts then twirling and star jumps (or something similar) will be mandatory.

So as men play 5 sets in a Slam, is it then too much to ask women to do the same?

Read my comment again. "twirling" and "star jumps" are clearly different but I judged them as having equal value. The high quality tennis in the Azarenka/Wozniacki match was equall in entertainement value to Monfils and Janowicz clowning around in their match. Of course some womens matches and some mens matches are equally bad. The women could play 5 sets if they were asked but I doubt they will be. The 5 set match is restricted to slams and even for men the pressure is on to shorten matches to fit in with TV schedules.

No I dont think it will happen either, for varying reasons. However I think its the principle we are discussing. They should play five or have their prize money adjusted pro rata which would seem to be more fair imo

I don't mind the prize money split. Prize money is what it says it is. The money given to you as a prize for work done. It doesn't need to be pro rata, whoever draws more deserves more. Time doesn't come into it. Mike Tyson made more for 76 seconds work than any tennis player will for a whole year's tennis

kingraf wrote:I don't mind the prize money split. Prize money is what it says it is. The money given to you as a prize for work done. It doesn't need to be pro rata, whoever draws more deserves more. Time doesn't come into it. Mike Tyson made more for 76 seconds work than any tennis player will for a whole year's tennis

I dont agree are you trying to tell me that women draw more than men.?? There is not the following for womens tennis as there is for their male counterparts Im sure. Id like to see the figures if that is the case

Not now, no. I'm speaking about the idea of equal pay. Not so much the practical implementation. I'm sure there will come a swing in fortunes eventually.

^ Yes exactly. With tennis it tends to be the stars that attract. At the moment we have FEDAL + their tough rival Novak But give it a few years and I for one would rather watch the sort of tennis that Azarenka/Wozniacki produced rather than something like Raonic/Cilic which may very well be the best the men can produce. Even if heaven forbid Raonic/Cilic battled on until 18 -16 in the fifth  

Anyway if prize money were based on popularity FEDAL would earn for their first round wins than another player might "earn" for winning a slam.

This whole thing reminds me of that episode of Porridge - what was it called? Storm in a teacup.

legendkillarV2 wrote:King can pi$$ off!

It's not the 20th century!

Well, this says it all...what do you think it is? The 19th century?

King is right to be offended, and Serena was right to be unamused....

It's time the fans of The Sun's Page Three, who clearly frequent this messageboard, overcame their inherent hatred of women standing up for what they believe in.

shivfan wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:King can pi$$ off!

It's not the 20th century!

Well, this says it all...what do you think it is?  The 19th century?

King is right to be offended, and Serena was right to be unamused....

It's time the fans of The Sun's Page Three, who clearly frequent this messageboard, overcame their inherent hatred of women standing up for what they believe in.

Another bliddy feminist when it suits... and when it doesn't ????? offended at "give us a twirl"oh pleeeeeeeeeeeeeze!!!!
Who on this message board to you lable as FANS of The Suns Page 3 !!! not everyone on this message board lives in Britain.

At the end of the day Bouchard had no problem with it so the matter ends there but of course people insist on trying to make something out of it.

shivfan wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:King can pi$$ off!

It's not the 20th century!

Well, this says it all...what do you think it is?  The 19th century?

King is right to be offended, and Serena was right to be unamused....

It's time the fans of The Sun's Page Three, who clearly frequent this messageboard, overcame their inherent hatred of women standing up for what they believe in.

Please tell me you're joking, shiv.

shivfan wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:King can pi$$ off!

It's not the 20th century!

Well, this says it all...what do you think it is?  The 19th century?

King is right to be offended, and Serena was right to be unamused....

It's time the fans of The Sun's Page Three, who clearly frequent this messageboard, overcame their inherent hatred of women standing up for what they believe in.

Id happily look at page three models, after all feminism is about choice, and those women choose to pose for the sun. Sadly, that would require me either buying the sun, or indeed touching one.

Stephen frys views on the right to be offended come to mind. People think being offended offers them some sort of special rights or moral superiority over other people, but it is just whinging unless what happened actually caused someone harm, and you actually do something over than whinge about it.

Older feminists had real proper discrimination problems, and they got off their arses and did something about it, nowadays people just complain and expect that to be good enough to be warranted a voice.

Ultimately youre allowed to be offended, but you dont get the right to broadcast it as though youre somehow more important because of it. Other people also hold the right to tell you "soo f****** what!"

What youre saying is

We disagree with what a woman said, therefore it must be because shes a woman and were all sexist. I reserve the right to call a whinge a whinge, regardless of race or gender.

I dont mean this to be directed at Shiv though of course, its just general observation I seem to see all the time nowadays

temporary21 wrote: What youre saying is

We disagree with what a woman said, therefore it must be because shes a woman and were all sexist. I reserve the right to call a whinge a whinge, regardless of race or gender.

I dont mean this to be directed at Shiv though of course, its just general observation I seem to see all the time nowadays

I have worked and played with so called feminists.. I do not have a problem with that until they play both ends to the middle.
Its a long slippery slope that leads them to have to admit, whilst intellectually yes we can be compared to men. In most other areas we cannot. But dont be like Serena who wants comparison to men, complain about the comment that was directed at her, and then get payed to plaster her half naked body over the front page of magazines. Do you get my drift ??? I would categorically state that women of the 21st century have never had it so good... dont push your luck!!

I'm a feminist supporter. My girlfriend is a med student and I fully plan on living off her once she gets the MD

kingraf wrote:I'm a feminist supporter. My girlfriend is a med student and I fully plan on living off her once she gets the MD

Hmm... Tennis players are not "page 3 girls". Asking the female players to "give a twirl" can be interpreted as a way of indicating that there is less interest in their backhands than (as with page 3 girls) their looks. Putting them in their place.

My initial reaction was that it was perhaps just a bit of fun but having heard the great Billie Jean's view I have changed my mind.

I don't think it was about their looks, but about their gear; well that's what I've managed to gather so far.

Should they really be offended though? Considering many female tennis players have done some very lucrative bikini shoots and that they were expensive dresses to the court ? I'm with haddie here you can't have your cake and eat it too. King being famous does not demand everything she said be gospel

So Hawkeye...

You rate Pam Shriver was a creepy sex pest when she asked Nadal to do an on court interview shirtless?

Also why is being a page three girl sonehow worthy of derision ?

Does anyone pay any attention to Billie Jean King anymore.. ??? really coming from her standpoint I find her comments almost laughable. !!!

shivfan wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:King can pi$$ off!

It's not the 20th century!

Well, this says it all...what do you think it is?  The 19th century?

King is right to be offended, and Serena was right to be unamused....

It's time the fans of The Sun's Page Three, who clearly frequent this messageboard, overcame their inherent hatred of women standing up for what they believe in.

I respect the great Billie Jean because of what she has done not only to promote women in tennis but to promote women in general. She is familiar with what a sexist pig looks like and is not scared of shouting out when attempts are made to undo all her hard work.

kingraf wrote:So Hawkeye...

You rate Pam Shriver was a creepy sex pest when she asked Nadal to do an on court interview shirtless?

Ha ha! Did she really? It's different for men. They don't have a history of having to sell themselves in order to earn a crust. It's to do with power and money. If you don't understand maybe your clever girlfriend might want to explain it to you. I've got enough to worry about now with Anderson...