The LPGA

In class a couple weeks ago, there was a discussion about a rule in the LPGA requiring all athletes to be able to speak English. The rule was said to be the result of a lack of communication between several tour players, a considerable amount who are Asian, and sponsors. The discussion within class made me think about other possible reasons the LPGA would create such a rule, and something that stuck out to me was the use of this rule as a scare tactic. By requiring those athletes who cannot speak English to learn or suffer the consequences, which originally were talked as being fines or suspensions, successful athletes had more to worry about than their English speaking counterparts. After looking up more information on this topic from the LPGA website, http://www.lpga.com/, I was able to find information on the KOLON-LPGA Cross-Cultural Professional Development Program. This program was developed to "offer educational and cross-cultural training for all members" (LPGA). There are topics such as learning a new language and cross-cultural interactions discussed on the webpage. This program seems to be a better alternative because it encourages all tour members to learn about the different cultures that make up this international organization. However, it seems the LPGA needs to take more care with how it responds to diversity. Another example would be the recent controversy regarding the rule stating to be a member of the LPGA tour you must be born female. Although overturned in 2010, it was not until a lawsuit was filed and a threat of losing the ability to play tournaments in the state of California, did the LPGA begin to address the rule. While it appears the LPGA is moving in the direction of creating a more diverse and culturally friendly environment, these changes should be made because it's the right thing to do and not because of a lawsuit.

"Tiger In The Rough" by Buzz Bissinger

As a sport fan and golfer, I can agree with the feeling of disappointment conveyed in Bissinger's (Feb. 2010) article about the short comings of Tiger Woods. Although I feel like my direct feelings towards Tiger are more of sadness and compassion, unlike the remarks made within the article. Tiger Woods is more than an athlete, he is human. As humans, we make mistakes and it is a well known fact that no one is perfect. However, when in the public eye, athletes transcend the normal expectations and become role models. It would be nice to expect all athletes to be perfect role models but is that a reasonable expectation to have? Tiger Woods truly seemed to be a 'perfect' role model until recent events proved otherwise. Now, fans and the sport world have shunned and judged him for his acts. Feelings of disapproval for Tiger's actions I can agree with but the harsh judgment of another human being for their problems and short comings, I cannot support.
One line that caught my attention "...it is hard not to conclude that the only reason he got married was to burnish that precious image even more, family man..." (paragraph 25), really took me by surprise. With his remark, Bissinger is challenging the feelings Tiger has for his family in a completely unacceptable way by implying that Tiger's family was a sham to boost his image. Mr. Bissinger's statement is not only targeting Tiger but also his ex-wife and two young children. What can be gained from a statement such as this except emotional damage for a family already in shambles? It seems to me this article by Buzz Bissinger is a childish outrage with no purpose other than taking the opportunity to scrutinize and judge another human being because that is what Tiger Woods is, human.