With the Law of Averages being what it is, we
do not doubt
there are many who are content with the current
way of
reporting sport events. Of roughly 1260 football
players,
there must be some who don't care who sees them
naked. In
fact, there must be some 100 plus Adonises who
downright
enjoy it! Of the women sportswriters, there
must be some who
have no problem, some that do and "tough it
out," and those
who stay out of the locker rooms altogether.
And for the
League, teams and media, the Law of Averages
must apply,
though on the surface, the arrangement seems
to work well.
Professional sports, the media, the sponsors
and the
subsequent fan following -- measured in tickets,
trinkets,
viewership and readership -- provide the cornerstones
of a
big business. It's a symbiotic system of interrelated
structural supports. And like all systems, it
turns into a
house of cards if one part fails.
Where do naked athletes get dressed in this house?
It seems unlikely that whatever the answer is
today will
remain the answer, tomorrow. The interpretation
of sexual
harassment laws are already broad and are broadening.
The
realization of this fact along with the increased
awareness/insistence by athletes to their right
to privacy,
and the renewed movement toward true equality
by women sport
reporters will force the League, team ownership/management
and media management to ask and answer the question,
"Is the
current locker room arrangement in our best
interest?"
The prudent-person rule indicates "No." The
risks are far
greater than the rewards. Beside the usual "death
and
taxes," in the US there are two other certainties
in 1990:
1. Place concrete, uranium, and a heat exchanger
next
to flowing water and an anti-nuclear power
protest will occur.
2) Place a male, a female, and nudity in a "hostile
work
environment" and a nuclear reaction will occur...
the fallout being sexual harassment lawsuits
from
either or both sides.
The locker room scoop -- the current cause
for nudity --
is not a critical success factor in the
reporting of sports...
It is an "equal" advantage to all male
reporters.
Hence, to them it's not even a benefit.
But it does advantage
them over females reporters.
When the Incident first occurred, opinions were
pretty well
predicated by gender... especially among women
who felt that
women had a right to be in the men's locker
room, period. As
time has passed, both genders are less strident
and now
commonly recognize that the better way to secure
the female's
right to a living and the male athlete's right
to privacy is
to shield all the media from the nudity. Amazing!
Their
opinion is precisely what the court determined
in pivotal
case of Ludtke v. Kuhn which gave women access
to the locker rooms.
We will explore all the above, further.
But first let's go for a little
Constitutional Rights refresher.
