Martina Navratilova talks with sense and intelligence on Trump, trans and tennis
Defecting to the United States from Czechoslovakia aged 18, not knowing if you would ever see your family again? That's brave. Coming out as gay in the early 1980s, at a time when sponsors threatened to pull out of tournaments over such a 'scandal'? It takes guts. Dealing with cancer? Not for the faint-hearted.
Rajan's journalistic instincts led him to quiz Navratilova on trans issues and her unhappiness with living in Donald Trump's America (now a totalitarian state, in her eyes). But they took up just a few minutes towards the end of the programme, because he rightly identified that there is so much more to this sporting icon. Some interviews are good because of the spark and tension between the two parties. Others, like this one, are good simply because the interviewee is an engaging person with a remarkable life story, and Navratilova scores highly on both counts.
Half of the people raging about Navratilova on social media will know nothing about her early years, and Rajan was keen to fill them in. 'Your life reflected the great ideological battle of the 20th century – you went from communism to capitalism,' he told her, which is a very Amol Rajan way to look at things but led us to her memories of growing up behind the Iron Curtain, and then to archive footage of 18-year-old Martina holding a press conference to announce her defection. She made her decision after speaking to her father. 'Don't come back, no matter what we say, because they'll be telling us what to say. Don't believe us,' he said, anticipating the pressure that the authorities would apply to the family.
Navratilova watched footage of that press conference on an iPad, and claimed that it was the first time she had seen it. 'You've never seen this? That's one of the most famous videos in 20th-century sport!' cried Rajan, which may be a tad hyperbolic. Another film from the archives was very moving: a crowd at the US Open final in 1981 giving Navratilova a resounding ovation after her sexuality became public. 'I thought, wow, they are really accepting me,' she said, although when she started winning matches (many against golden girl Chris Evert) then 'the gay thing was a minus and it was difficult to deal with'.
In a 45-minute programme covering Navratilova's life story, there wasn't too much time for the tennis itself, although her domination of the game – 59 Grand Slam titles and a record-breaking nine Wimbledon singles – was celebrated.
On the trans debate, Navratilova sounded eminently sensible. She pointed out that, even if a trans athlete's testosterone levels have dropped to a level acceptable to tennis's governing body, they're not going to lose five inches in height or an advantage in reach. Girls competing at high-school level will feel that they don't stand a chance against competitors who were born male: 'Go to your local meet and there's a boy that now has a ponytail and nail polish and identifies as a girl – that's all fine and well, but the ponytail and nail polish does not a female make.'
Reporting on the interview, the BBC News website said Navratilova's assertion that trans women have biological advantages in sport is 'hotly debated'. Is it really? Against someone with Navratilova's intelligence and experience, I'd say it's no contest.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
16 minutes ago
- The Independent
Judge denies Trump administration request to end a policy protecting immigrant children in custody
A federal judge ruled Friday to deny the Trump administration's request to end a policy in place for nearly three decades that is meant to protect immigrant children in federal custody. U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee in Los Angeles issued her ruling a week after holding a hearing with the federal government and legal advocates representing immigrant children in custody. Gee called last week's hearing 'déjà vu' after reminding the court of the federal government's attempt to terminate the Flores Settlement Agreement in 2019 under the first Trump administration. She repeated the sentiment in Friday's order. 'There is nothing new under the sun regarding the facts or the law. The Court therefore could deny Defendants' motion on that basis alone," Gee wrote, referring to the government's appeal to a law they believed kept the court from enforcing the agreement. In the most recent attempt, the government argued they made substantial changes since the agreement was formalized in 1997, creating standards and policies governing the custody of immigrant children that conform to legislation and the agreement. Gee acknowledged that the government made some improved conditions of confinement, but wrote, 'These improvements are direct evidence that the FSA is serving its intended purpose, but to suggest that the agreement should be abandoned because some progress has been made is nonsensical.' Attorneys representing the federal government told the court the agreement gets in the way of their efforts to expand detention space for families, even though Trump's tax and spending bill provided billions to build new immigration facilities. Tiberius Davis, one of the government attorneys, said the bill gives the government authority to hold families in detention indefinitely. 'But currently under the Flores Settlement Agreement, that's essentially void,' he said last week. The Flores agreement, named for a teenage plaintiff, was the result of over a decade of litigation between attorneys representing the rights of migrant children and the U.S. government over widespread allegations of mistreatment in the 1980s. The agreement set standards for how licensed shelters must provide food, water, adult supervision, emergency medical services, toilets, sinks, temperature control and ventilation. It also limited how long U.S. Customs and Border Protection could detain child immigrants to 72 hours. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services then takes custody of the children. The Biden administration successfully pushed to partially end the agreement last year. Gee ruled that special court supervision may end when HHS takes custody, but she carved out exceptions for certain types of facilities for children with more acute needs. In arguing against the Trump administration's effort to completely end the agreement, advocates said the government was holding children beyond the time limits. In May, CBP held 46 children for over a week, including six children held for over two weeks and four children held 19 days, according to data revealed in a court filing. In March and April, CPB reported that it had 213 children in custody for more than 72 hours. That included 14 children, including toddlers, who were held for over 20 days in April. The federal government is looking to expand its immigration detention space, including by building more centers like one in Florida dubbed ' Alligator Alcatraz,' where a lawsuit alleges detainees' constitutional rights are being violated. Gee still has not ruled on the request by legal advocates for the immigrant children to expand independent monitoring of the treatment of children held in U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities. Currently, the agreement allows for third-party inspections at facilities in the El Paso and Rio Grande Valley regions, but plaintiffs submitted evidence showing long detention times at border facilities that violate the agreement's terms.
The Independent
16 minutes ago
- The Independent
‘No deal': Putin met a tougher Trump in Alaska than the one he steamrolled in Helsinki seven years ago
Nearly eight years after Donald Trump turned in such an embarrassing performance at his first summit with Vladimir Putin that members of his own party were left struggling to defend him, critics feared he was set for a repeat performance in Alaska Friday. Putin — on what was once sovereign Russian land — after three years of isolation brought on by his unprovoked invasion of Ukraine, hoping he could charm, cajole and flatter Trump into taking his side over that of Volodymyr Zelensky. Trump arrived first, and the two leaders met on a red-carpeted tarmac for a handshake. It was there that Putin got his first surprise. As the leaders walked towards waiting reporters and photographers, a noise above drew the Russian leader's attention. He looked up to see something that on any other day, in any other place, would have meant very bad things for him: The belly of an American B-2 bomber, a machine built to kill him by dropping nuclear weapons on Moscow without detection by Soviet (later Russian) air defense systems. Trump then pulled Putin into his waiting limousine for a shared ride to their talks, bypassing the armored car that had been brought from Moscow for the Russian president's use. Next, the one-on-one meeting Putin had expected became a three-on-three session with him and two of his aides across from Trump, his special envoy Steve Witkoff, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Only after that could Putin expect to have Trump sit down with a group of Russian business leaders who he'd brought with him, expecting the American leader to be swayed with the promise of investment and business opportunities in the same way other foreign leaders have curried favor with Trump. It never happened. After nearly three hours of talks, Trump and Putin walked out to face hundreds of reporters who'd gathered in expectation of a joint press conference. Speaking first, Putin appeared optimistic about the talks as he said he and Trump had come to 'agreements' and described Ukraine — the sovereign nation he invaded and has been pillaging since March 2022 — as Russia's 'brotherly nation' and claimed Russia wants to end the conflict. Through a translator, the Russian strongman repeated oft-used lines about addressing what he calls the 'primary roots, the primary causes of that conflict' — meaning his desire for Ukraine to end any ambitions to integrate with the West by joining the European Union or NATO — and said any settlement in the conflict must 'consider all legitimate concerns of Russia and to reinstate a just balance of security in Europe and in world on the whole.' But moments later, Trump torpedoed Putin's claim to have reached an agreement, telling reporters instead that there were 'many points that we agreed on' during the talks but there were still 'a couple of big ones that we haven't quite gotten there.' 'So there's no deal until there's a deal,' Trump summed it up. The president stressed that any future deal would have to receive assent from the Ukrainian government as well as America's NATO allies, and said he'd be 'calling up ... the various people that I think are appropriate,' as well as Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to read them in on what transpired behind closed doors today. Trump added that the meeting, in his estimation, had been 'very productive' and included 'many points' that had been agreed to, and said there was a "good chance" of reaching some sort of accord going forward. A second meeting has been floated in recent days by Trump but has not been confirmed. Putin suggested to Trump in English: 'Next time in Moscow,' which the president said he could 'get a little heat' for but added he could see it 'possibly happening.' Trump thanked the reporters for attending and he and Putin quickly left the stage. Within the hour, both leaders' aircraft were wheels up and bound for home. There were no fireworks, there was no grand bargain rolled out, and it wasn't clear what — if anything — the two leaders had actually agreed on at all. And while some commentators were casting the lackluster result as a win for Putin because Trump hadn't rolled out the sanctions he has spent weeks threatening, the Russian leader most likely wasn't smiling as his plane climbed away from Alaska. That's because he failed to do what he'd done in Helsinki, where he'd charmed and flattered Trump into taking his side over America's own intelligence services. He'd even failed to bring Trump back to his previous anti-Ukraine worldview, that which was on display in February when he and Vice President JD Vance got into an Oval Office shouting match with Zelensky before throwing him out of the White House. Instead, he had to watch as Trump reaffirmed that the final settlement in the war he'd started would have to pass muster with Zelensky, the man who he'd hoped to kill in the opening days of the war. The years between Helsinki and Anchorage — and the months between February and now — have seen Trump go through trials (literally) and tests. For better or worse, he's no longer the neophyte, easily flattered naif who Putin made a fool of in Finland all those years ago. And though he's long had an uneasy relationship with both Zelensky and NATO, the months since that disastrous bilateral meeting have seen him grow more and more frustrated with Putin and better understand the European desire to avoid rewarding attempts at military conquest on their soil. It wasn't a perfect result, but Trump is learning. And now, Putin knows that.
Daily Mail
17 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Stephen A. Smith reveals his true thoughts on LeBron James in wake of ugly public feud
Stephen A. Smith insists his relationship with LeBron James has deteriorated to the point that he would be happy never to speak to the NBA legend again. Back in March, cameras caught James and the ESPN personality in a heated confrontation during the Los Angeles Lakers' matchup against Smith's beloved New York Knicks. Smith later revealed that James had taken issue with remarks he made about his son, Bronny. They then continued their war of words, with the ESPN star accusing the Lakers star of being a 'liar' and a 'bully'. He even claimed: 'Had that man put his hands on me, I would have immediately swung on him' LeBron, meanwhile, went on The Pat McAfee Show, and mocked Smith for repeatedly discussing their feud. 'He is on a Taylor Swift tour run right now,' James joked. Now, nearly six months on, Smith insists he and James have 'no relationship'. 'He doesn't like me, and I don't like him... if I never, ever speak to him again in life, that will be OK. And I'm good with it,' Smith said Friday on the Gil's Arena livestream. 'There's nobody that can mediate.' He continued: 'All I would say is people don't know the things that have happened behind the scenes... things that have been said, who they've been said to. The kind of things that have been engaged in in an effort to hurt me, along with contemporaries and others.' Smith insisted there is 'a lot of s***' he doesn't say and that 'there's a reason that I feel the way that I do.' 'And the last straw was him approaching me and turning the Bronny thing into something about me attacking somebody's family, when it was him I was talking about. Not Bronny,' the ESPN star continued. The analyst has always maintained that the four-time NBA champion misconstrued his comments about his son. 'And then to go on The Pat McAfee Show, which comes directly on after my show, on the channel that I work on. To insult me. Now, people can get into all kind of components that go into it and all that other stuff. I have nothing to say,' continued Smith, who suggested he would now only discuss James when he has to. 'I'm never going to denigrate any employer, any partner, or myself by getting into anything excessively, unnecessarily, when it comes to him or anybody else,' the ESPN star explained. 'I'm going to do my job. I'm going to cover the game of basketball.'
