Moments ago, Tiger Woods made a public apology to his family, friends, colleagues, and fans. In the thirteen minute speech, Tiger addressed the media, asking individuals to leave his wife and children alone as they work to heal. Tiger talked about accountability and taking complete responsibility for his actions through his actions.  At the end of the speech, he and his mother, Kultida embraced in front of flashing cameras and onlookers. Tiger is set to immediately return to rehab.



Click here to watch entire speech.

A few notable quotes from the speech:

"I felt I was entitled."

"I was wrong I was foolish. The same boundaries that apply to everyone apply to me."

"I've hurt my wife, kids, my mother . . . and kids all around the world who admire me."

"It's not what you achieve in life that matters, it's what you overcome."

"It's hard to admit that I need help, but I do."

"Character and decency are what really counts."

There is much to be said for the implications and ramifications of celebrity and fame, particularly in sports.  Nonetheless, it's good to witness Tiger speaking publicly about these issues, and about his problems, because this is obvious something he had to do for himself and for his family. I wish Tiger and his family all the best as they embark upon a long and challenging journey toward recovery.  Here's hoping they can find peace going forward.

Did anyone happen to catch the cover picture on the latest issue of Vanity Fair?

Unless you've been living under an enormous rock for the past few weeks, you're well aware of the recent controversy surrounding Tiger Woods.  Woods has admitted to having several extramarital affairs over the last few years. Surprised? Maybe a little. Woods has done a pretty good job maintaining a clean cut image, up until this point.  There are also allegations swirling around about drug use (including ecstasy) and homosexual sex.

Shot in 2006, before the controversy, Tiger Woods posed before famed photog Annie Leibovitz.  How fitting that now this image, portraying Tiger shirtless wearing a black scully in a seemingly threatening or machismo pose, is gracing the cover of Vanity Fair.  Why now? Why this picture?

This past week, I got a chance to peruse some other blogs about the questionable photo. Even though our own blogger James warned of injecting race in this controversial story about infidelity and arguably abuse, ultimately race has taken center stage - (thanks to Vanity Fair further perpetuating racial stereotypes). 

Here's what some other bloggers had to say:

From Womanist Musings,

Since Tiger crashed his car and women started coming out of the wood works about his sexual exploits, Tiger's image has been irrevocably changed.  Gone is the family friendly nice guy; now we have Tiger Woods the sex addicted thug.  Unfortunately, Tigers activities fall directly in line with many of the racist understandings of Black male sexuality.  Not only did he have sex with numerous women, they all have one thing in common; they are white.

From A Belle In Brooklyn,

[The image is] a direct contrast to all the images we’ve ever seen of Mr. Woods, a smiling, Polo-down, khaki-wearing, come-to-life Carlton Banks if ever there was one.  And I get that in the last few weeks we’ve seen a new side of Tiger, a contrast to all we ever thought of him. The dichotomy between image and reality that the photo is evoking isn’t lost on me. But this image of Tiger doesn’t reflect what we now know of the billion dollar gentleman who prefers blonds. Tiger might be a whore, a cheat, an infidel, a sex addict, a so-called “Oreo” and a whole lot more. But whoring with white women is not a crime.  Thus, Tiger doesn’t deserve to be depicted as one in light of his “recent” scandals.

From Native Notes,

The media has successfully placed you in the category of the brute/ buck blaxploitation caricature. You are now being promoted as this hyper sexual black male. This picture is a poor attempt at making you look strong. We heard the voice mails, you’re not. Kick Rocks Uncle Tom!

I find it hard to believe that there isn't a method behind Vanity Fair's madness. In fact, the motive most obviously is to stir up controversy in order to sell magazines.  But what's the real cost of Vanity Fair and other media invoking the infamous hypersexual black male trope?  Who's paying for this? 

There is a deep seeded pathology in this country about black male sexuality or, eh-hem, hubris, that simply cannot continue to be exploited in the name of selling controversy.  But believe me, this type of mess isn't new.  Salt has been pouring over these wounds for centuries.  We are far from being a post-racial nation, despite having a biracial President.  Until we can have a grown-up conversation about what it actually means to racialize a human being while invoking dangerous stereotypes--athlete or otherwise, then we'll remain just as we are; at a stand-still.

Besides the issue of media perpetuating racial stereotypes as a major factor in this controversy, if we look at this entire story as it has unfolded, we notice an incredibly sad situation.  If the allegations of drug use are true, then what we're witnessing is something far more damaging than a casual affair.  Tiger Woods is a troubled athlete who has, for whatever reason, permanently scarred those around him, including himself. I'm hoping he and his family can find some sense of peace this year, but if cover stories like the one Vanity Fair released this month is any indication of what's to come, then unfortunately 2010 is going to be another rough year for Woods.

Water conservationists and golf course owners have never been the best of buddies. An eco-friendly golf course sounds like an oxymoron—a big green water hog sounds more familiar.

But last week, the New York Times posted an article about new wireless sensors that can help reduce water usage on golf courses. These "subterranean wireless sensors...monitor moisture, temperature and salinity in the soil and feed the data to a software network accessed remotely on a laptop, a handheld device or a desktop computer," reports NYT. Pretty clever, if you ask me.

These systems will help some golf courses save millions of gallons of water per year. This will cut operating costs and reduce the strain on drought-affected communities where water usage is a hotly contested issue.

Will water-saving sensor technology transform golf into a "green" sport? Surely, there are other factors to consider, including synthetic fertilizer and pesticide use, and responsible land management. But water conservation efforts are a step in the right direction, especially when considering the fact that we can use this technology for other applications such as soccer and football fields, public parks and recreational facilities.

At around $11,000 a pop, these systems are still out of reach for most Little League baseball fields and community recreation areas. But if golf courses begin adopting these systems en masse, manufacturers may start producing smaller, less expensive setups that will help athletic field owners across the country adopt smarter water management practices...

...Or lazier practices, since machines would actually be doing most of the work. I guess this saves time and energy that can be used to perfect that golf swing.

What do you think?

Holy guacamole! So I'm reading alls about the income disparities between female and male pro athletes over at AskMen.com - and um, yeah the gap is mighty wide.

This post is sort of a follow-up to my previous post about non-major sports getting kicked to the curb because of the recent economic crisis.

In any event, here's a couple of examples in brief: (Note that Annika Sorenstam's salary is pretty good considering all of the other female athletes' salaries - but then again, it's prize money and not necessarily an income like basketball or football).

Basketball

Sue Bird - WNBA

WNBA maximum salary: $87,000

Shaquille O’Neal - NBA
2005-06 salary: $20 million

Golf

Annika Sorenstam - LPGA

*Football

Stacy Agee - WPFL

 

*The article also mentioned that NFL Cheerleaders get paid way more than professional female football players.  Hmm, I wonder why . . .

So I guess it's not really a question of whether or not these salaries are fair because they're not (well, according to some they are because women don't bring in the same amount of fans - whatevs).

The question really is: Do you believe we will ever close the gap between male and female pro sports salaries?