On Monica Seles

On Monica Seles

The collective resentment of Monica Seles was an expression of our cultural discomfort with a kind of overt female aggression that seems to revel in itself.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

At first, Monica Seles was dominant in a way that some people found alienating. Like a lot of tennis players, she had a tendency to grunt while making her shots, and this prompted outrage that I think would never have occurred if she’d been a man. Opponents would lodge complaints, and Seles would be apologetic, but that was the way she played, and she beat everyone. She was just amazing. Looking back, I’m certain that the collective resentment of her—which I confess I felt in moments, mingled with my excitement about her strength—was an expression of our cultural discomfort with a kind of overt female aggression that seems to revel in itself. There was a perception of ugliness or unseemliness about her unbridled strength.

One reason her stabbing was so appalling—beyond the horrific fact itself—was that it felt like the apotheosis of the public resentment of Seles. And then the attack seemed to break her—she didn’t return for such a long time, and it appeared that she wouldn’t ever. I felt personally implicated in that. But the fact that she did eventually come back was an incredible triumph. She got out there all over again and fought like hell, which is what she does. When she finally retired, it was from a position of strength rather than victimization. My guess is that no female athlete will be criticized in the way she was again. I think everyone felt a kind of disgust, in retrospect, over the way she was treated. But she was stronger than all of it.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x