0
0
On August 20, Spain won the Women’s World Cup Soccer, and during the post-victory celebration Luis Rubiales, President of the Royal Spanish Football Association, planted a kiss on the lips of Spanish player Jenni Hermoso–and then all hell broke loose.
Beginning with calls for his resignation, players on the Spanish national teams, both males and females, later indicated that they would refuse to play soccer for their nation unless the offending official were removed. Rubiales later apologized for his behavior, but his words were criticized and derided, with many calling them “insufficient” and “inappropriate.” The matter has escalated to the point that Rubiales now faces formal charges from the Spanish national prosecutor “for the crimes of sexual assault and coercion against Jenni Hermoso.”
So I’ve gone back and watched the tape many many times. The first thing I noticed was that there were a great many intense, physical, and prolonged hugs for the female players on the part of female teammates and both male and female officials. My assumption is that hugs don’t count as part of sexual assault, however intense and physical they may be. Or else I may have failed to notice that each one was consensual, that before each of these, formal permission had been granted to the hugger by each of the hug-ees.
Then I turn on the video and look, stop action and slow motion, at IT—the kiss. Was it prolonged? Nah. I didn’t use a stop watch, but it was over very quickly. Was the kiss of a sexual or intimate nature? Nah. Rubiales didn’t attempt to stick his tongue into her mouth, he didn’t even embrace Hermoso during the kiss. He didn’t touch any other parts of her body, intimate or not. Was it predatory? Did it look as if his purpose was assault or power? Hardly. If I had to caption that kiss, I would have said that it its message was, “You are terrific. I am so proud of you” rather than, “I am a man. I can touch you where and how I like.”
So what was it? It was definitely an over-reaction, a moment of enthusiasm that certainly went overboard, but am I being just too sexist, too out of touch with the times when I say that, however misguided, it looked like an act that was quite well-intended and congratulatory. The kiss was 100% spontaneous, a reaction of joy and thankfulness and congratulations. Asking whether the kiss had been consensual seems a bit far-fetched to me. At a wedding, fathers of the groom typically embrace and kiss their new daughters-in-law enthusiastically. Shall we have them—and, for that matter, all the guests—read and sign consent forms upon entry to the event explaining to them what acts they have been granted permission for, and with whom.
So calling this sexual assault and painting this official as a bad actor just doesn’t do it for me. Was this the greatest offense against women since Clarence Thomas, Justice of the Supreme Court, said and did all sorts of clearly inappropriate things to Anita Hill? Can we make the analogy that Harvey Weinstein is to the entertainment industry as Luis Rubiales is to sports?? Gosh, I just don’t buy it.
********************************
It is August 14, 1945. Navy quartermaster George Mendosa is on leave in Times Square when he hears people shouting, “The war is over.” Having recently been with nurses as they saved the lives of his fellow sailors and overwhelmed to hear he will not have to go back into battle, he spots a stranger in a nurse’s uniform, later identified as Greta Friedman Zimmer, and feeling true jubilation, he grabs and kisses her. Two weeks later the photo of that kiss is on the cover of Life Magazine.
What a pity that Nurse Zimmer died in 2016, or else she could have testified against Mendosa as having subjected her to a heinous and unwelcomed sexual act. And lucky for Mendosa that he’s also dead because otherwise we would have dragged his sorry ass into court and made him pay the penalty for his evil and predatory behavior.
Was the World Cup kiss an important lesson for men, that forever more they have to be careful not to take advantage of women, or was it, perhaps, much ado about…
1945 and 2023 are, obviously, a great many years apart: and standards have changed. The act of a sailor at the end of a World War almost 80 years ago, yes, it was regarded as appropriate exuberance, and indeed celebrated. Rubiales is a man of his time and should behave as the times dictate–for good or ill. Was what he did vile, terrible, predatory? I think not. But was what he did a really bad choice of action at the time he did it? Yes, I think it was. And, since the follow-up to his actions have revealed all sorts… Read more »
I write merely to observe that, in the USA, an admitted serial sexual assaulter, later found by a trial jury to have raped a woman, seems to have suffered little opprobrium by “fans” for his far more predatory acts.
I’m not sure what to think, really, Ed. My first reaction to learning about it was molehill, but, Arnold nudges me more toward foothills around a mountain!
I guess I never meant that this was nothing, and I’m convinced by the feedback I’ve received that it’s more than a molehill, if less than a mountain. This is the sort of thing whereby I wish that Rubiales, realizing that he got carried away, called Hermoso later that day to apologize, saying he meant no offense–in fact just the opposite. Then she accepted his apology, with both recognizing it really wasn’t that big a deal, and the media went back to covering the many real offenses that exist in the world. Then the two of them and the rest… Read more »