Rita Panahi: Faint praise damns Tennis Australia, not Margaret Court
Tennis Australia is more proud of the opening of gender neutral toilets than it is of tennis legend Margaret Court. Which is painfully hypocritical for an organisation that claims it is all for “diversity and inclusion”, writes Rita Panahi.
Opinion
Don't miss out on the headlines from Opinion. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Tennis Australia looks determined to mar the celebration of Australia’s greatest ever female player, Margaret Court, with its infantile moral posturing. For reasons that defy logic, TA continues to play divisive political games, grandstand on issues that have nothing to do with tennis and risk alienating a sizeable portion of the Australian community.
Instead of simply celebrating the 50th anniversary of Court’s groundbreaking Grand Slam achievement, just as they celebrated the 50th anniversary of Rod Laver’s Grand Slam last year, TA is tying itself in knots distancing itself from the woman at the centre of the celebration.
Court’s extraordinary sporting feats make her arguably Australia’s greatest ever female athlete and inarguably a tennis legend.
But the Australian Open organisers appear more proud of the opening of gender neutral toilets at Melbourne Park than a trailblazing female who dominated the sport at the highest level. It’s worth noting that Court came back to tennis after motherhood to win the French, Australian and US Open, something that had never been done before.
That’s why Court is to be lauded next week at the Open; it has nothing to do with her personal or religious beliefs and everything to do with winning every Grand Slam singles title in 1970. But TA’s obsession with grandstanding has seen the sporting great repeatedly condemned and her record-breaking exploits cheapened.
First, the sport’s governing body was reluctant to acknowledge Court’s anniversary and made contact with her only after she went public about being snubbed. When TA belatedly agreed to recognise her “unmatched tennis career” back in December, in the same press release it lambasted her at length: “Tennis Australia does not agree with Margaret’s personal views, which have demeaned and hurt many in our community over a number of years. They do not align with our values of equality, diversity and inclusion.”
In a cringe-worthy, comically hypocritical and at times sinister open letter, TA showed just how intolerant the organisation is to diverse views. TA had made it clear that if you are a devout Christian or Muslim or one of roughly 38 per cent of Australians who voted against same-sex marriage, then you’re apparently not welcome at the tennis.
“We seek to foster a sport that is inclusive and welcoming of everyone. We all bear some responsibility for creating a safe and inclusive society,” the TA letter read. “We respect that everyone has a right to an opinion — and a right to express it. Equally, we all share an obligation that while living our lives freely, we do not harm others, and we understand that there are consequences to our words.”
How very Orwellian. TA is all for free speech as long as you support their Leftist agenda, otherwise you are deemed to be harming others and deserve censure. In other words: agree with us or shut up.
“Publicly stated views of intolerance and demeaning language about others can have enormous impact and are particularly hurtful and harmful to those who believe they are targeted.”
I wonder if religious folk feel demeaned and targeted by TA and its simplistic characterisation of their beliefs. Certainly Court’s four children were sufficiently hurt to release a statement in response to TA. And, whatever you think of Court’s religious beliefs — as an atheist and SSM supporter I am deeply at odds with many of her positions — there is no doubt that she has done extensive charitable works, including feeding thousands of Perth’s homeless and needy.
“We believe any public figure has a big responsibility to ensure their views are expressed in a way that demonstrates respect and tolerance and does not cause harm to, or degrade others. As a sport, tennis is unwavering in playing our part to ensure an inclusive society. We cannot condone views that fracture our incredible tennis community, nor indeed, the wider community. Inclusivity is at the very core of what we do …”
Except if you want to live your life in accordance with your religious beliefs. Sadly, there is not much tolerance or inclusivity for you or for the two in five Australians who agree with Court’s SSM stance and believe that “marriage is a union between a man and a woman”.
This week TA doubled down on its censorious, painfully PC rhetoric with CEO and Australian Open tournament director Craig Tiley again distancing the sport from Court and blabbering about painting rainbows on Margaret Court Arena.
One would have thought that TA might have learnt from the many mistakes made by Rugby Australia which, in its eagerness to showcase its diversity and inclusiveness, succeeded only in alienating a significant number of Polynesian players who shared Israel Folau’s religious beliefs as well as many members of the wider community who didn’t agree with the Wallaby but were appalled that he was sacked for expressing those beliefs.
And as we know, in the end, after much reputational damage, RA issued a grovelling apology and a multimillion-dollar cheque to Folau.
Rita Panahi is a Herald Sun columnist