NFL players Ray Rice, Greg Hardy, Adrian Peterson, Ray Mcdonald and Jonathan Dwyer are all on leave from competition until their domestic violence cases are sorted out. But what about the case against USWNT goalkeeper Hope Solo?
The story has started to pick up steam due to public outrage surrounding the cases above, but Hope Solo pleaded not guilty to domestic violence charges which involved an instance with Solo’s 17-year-old nephew and half sister. Solo allegedly hit the 17-year-old and then attacked his mother when she tried to intervene. It is said that alcohol could have been involved in the case. The charges against Solo are misdemeanors. In the last week, Solo came out on her Facebook page and wrote about the leaked nude photos of celebrities and the domestic violence charges against her. She maintained her innocence:
This brings us to the argument at hand, which has been floating around in the media: Why is Solo still allowed to play for the U.S. Women’s National Team when facing domestic violence charges when NFL players are being suspended? Here's a round-up of media perspectives on the issue:
ESPNW writer Kate Fagan: "Why Hope Solo Should Be Suspended From Team USA – Immediately"
“…the issue shouldn't be limited to the NFL. The debate shouldn't just be about how a small but significant number of football players have hit women or other men or children. The issue is bigger than just that. The issue is about anger and power, about controlling relationships with violence, regardless of the gender of the perpetrator, regardless of the gender of the victim.
Solo is accused of violence against a family member; she should be suspended until she handles her legal issues. It's worth noting that a lack of national coverage (to this moment, anyway) of Solo's situation isn't as much a reflection of a double-standard in the coverage of assault as it is a reflection of the attention paid to the NFL versus the attention paid to women's sports. Female athletes mostly fly below the radar - for better and for worse.”
3 days after releasing the article, Kate Fagan released, "Why I Feel Bad About My Last Hope Solo Column":
"Almost since the moment it went live, I've felt uneasy. Not about whether Hope Solo should be suspended from playing for the women's national team right away. She shouldn't be on the field, period. I stand by that opinion.
Solo is facing domestic assault charges stemming from a late-night incident on June 21 involving her 17-year-old nephew and her half-sister (the boy's mother). I believe U.S. Soccer should bench Solo immediately, until she resolves her legal issues (her trial begins in November). U.S. Soccer doesn't need to cut her from the team; just put her on a leave of absence until she is either convicted or cleared of charges. That's a standard option exercised by many employers when employees face similar situations. Definitely do not start her or continue honoring her for her on-field accomplishments.
And yet I still feel uncomfortable. Why?
Because I've seen too many people take my column to mean that it's OK to equate Hope Solo with Ray Rice. That takeaway isn't just false, it's potentially dangerous. I feel like my column allowed too many people to reach a quick and easy resolution to a problem that is incredibly complex.
So exactly what does Hope Solo's story represent? What epidemic does she embody that needs addressing in the rest of our culture - sports or otherwise?
Does U.S. Soccer have a history of domestic violence allegations? (No.) Do female athletes have a high rate of off-the-field incidents? (No.) Do we cover in the media and financially reward female athletes in a way that justifies this equivalent measure of scrutiny? (No.) Does Hope Solo need to be held accountable for her own conduct and domestic violence allegations? (Yes.)
The reason the "NFL and Domestic Violence" story is so important is because it's holding up a mirror to the rest of society. We can get somewhere better by examining the NFL's failures.
Every minute we spend talking about Hope Solo is a minute spent walking down a dead end.
ESPN’s Keith Olbermann had this to say:
Washington Post's Cindy Boren: "Hope Solo and the domestic violence case no one is talking about":
“'We are aware that Hope is handling a personal situation at the moment,' Neil Buethe, U.S. Soccer director of communications, told USA Today’s Christine Brennan, who criticized the organization’s decision to honor Solo’s record with a social media campaign, last month. 'At the same time, she has an opportunity to set a significant record that speaks to her hard work and dedication over the years with the National Team. While considering all factors involved, we believe that we should recognize that in the proper way.'
While U.S. Soccer doesn’t have the same high profile as the NFL, how do the cases differ? Aren’t women’s soccer players just as much role models as male football players? The goalkeeping record is an an important one, both for Solo and for women’s soccer, but does it really trump an accusation of domestic violence? Why is the notion of awaiting due process so inconsistently applied? And why aren’t more people talking about the fact that domestic violence isn’t simply an issue of men against women?
Many personalities on Twitter have also chimed in on the issue of domestic violence and the USWNT:
Watching @espn and they are showing women’s soccer highlights. Not a single mention of @hopesolo & domestic violence. Why?
— rolandsmartin (@rolandsmartin) September 19, 2014
The folks at @nike dropped @adrianpeterson but they’ve said not a peep about @hopesolo and domestic violence. This makes no sense.
— rolandsmartin (@rolandsmartin) September 19, 2014
If we're going to criticize #NFL teams for their handling of domestic violence, how do we feel about #USWMNT letting Hope Solo play?
— Robert Flores (@RoFloESPN) September 18, 2014
On Hope Solo: 1) She's not Ray Rice 2) Can have reasonable debate on whether she should be playing 3) Shouldn't have been captain last week.
— Grant Wahl (@GrantWahl) September 23, 2014
What do you think 18ers?
