Separate the work from the author or separate the athlete from their words. Rafa Nadal retires with 92 titles in his history, including 14 at Roland Garros, four US Opens, two Wimbledons and two Australian Opens, two Olympic gold medals and five Davis Cups. She also leaves with these statements: what men and women earn “is a comparison that should not even be made”, “the term feminist is taken to the extreme…”, “I have a mother , I have a sister, and they are some of the people I love most in the world, in other words, what more do I want for men and women to be exactly the same and have the same rights?, “equality is not about giving gifts”, “I want women to earn more than men if they generate more than men”, “I do not plan [la paternidad] This means a change in my professional life.
We can separate the work from the author or separate the athlete from his words to benefit from his successes and achievements, to value his merits as he deserves. But this does not mean that we should ignore that what someone says and repeats with such relevance has the power to transmit and amplify speeches and that, in the same way that he is responsible for his successes, he is also responsible for his words. Why forget that his impact on society goes beyond the pleasure that so many people experienced watching him play and win, grow, break, come back.
It is quite possible that the columns, columns and all kinds of articles that all types of media publish from today after Rafa Nadal’s retirement will praise his efforts, his talent, his career. And it is almost certain that they will ignore this other social aspect, unless they mention, for their greater glory, the foundation that bears their name and, of course, their enormous solidarity commitment. Too often, sports journalism is about praising and flattering, avoiding uncomfortable questions, uncritically praising numbers, when that is exactly what journalism tries to avoid.
These days, another retirement, that of footballer Andrés Iniesta, has also attracted attention. The “performances” of the men’s retreat are always similar: great heroes who make solemn announcements, who appear with tears in their eyes during events organized by their clubs or federations and their families in the front row. People applaud, praise, their faces occupy the covers and videos, in the street people are asked what they think of the withdrawal. We do not know whether we are facing heroes who have contributed enormously to society or men who, through effort, talent and work, have managed to succeed in sport and, in doing so, become millionaires, without their “media” apparently being able to do so. ask them about their goals, their bank accounts, their career or their figure.
Iniesta said in an interview that he is not retiring from Albacete because he is not realistic, because it seems wrong to him to go to this humble team just to say goodbye and because he doesn’t do things for fun. On the reason that led him to the Emirates Club, a team from the United Arab Emirates, a country in which, according to Amnesty International, there are prisoners of conscience because of freedom of expression, association and assembly peaceful is extremely restricted and labor rights, especially for migrants, have big gaps, he said nothing or was questioned. Like many others who, even with enough millions in their accounts to buy homes, Lamborghiniislands and private jets, decide to contribute to cleaning up the image of States that use sport (and money) to be kinder to the world.
In this “performance” of male withdrawal, the family is always this picture in which women are ideal companions, suffering mothers, friends and wives capable of adapting to their career in any way, and the children, little beings who brighten up their lives. but it’s unclear how they manage to care for themselves without expecting fatherhood to alter their careers. “Coming home and seeing my son grow every day has been a force that has kept me alive and with the energy I need,” Nadal says in his farewell video. His wife, he says, was “a perfect old lady’s companion” and his mother made “all the sacrifices she had to make so that we always had everything.” His uncle, on the other hand, made him “an overcomer of many situations” and his father “a source of inspiration, an example of effort, of improvement”.
This is an example of how gender stereotypes are reproduced in the form of praise and good intentions about what people contribute and involve in someone’s life, and what we expect from them.
I know that Rafa Nadal is not obliged to think like me, nor to share values nor to say what I would like him to say, but I don’t know why we always have to treat the or why we have to surround these men of such favorable circumstances, with so many ceremonies and fine words, nor why the “normal” thing is to ignore their errors, their political positions (because they are, the omissions and absences are too). statements) and praise his figure without there being criticism, dark points and without explaining what his speeches were on important subjects. Without being able to say loud and clear that someone can be a great athlete and give the most rancid speeches.
