
A more subdued University of New Mexico soccer player Elizabeth Lambert recently spoke out for the first time since her highly publicized violent play.
Her apologetic comments seem sincere; the academic all-star admits to simply losing her head during the match and acknowledges that her behaviour was inappropriate. She does, however, say that the referee lost control of the game, and concedes that “it would have been a very different game” had more cards been handed out.
More appalling than her behaviour were the anonymous comments she received post-match, one of which stated that she should be “…taken to a state prison, raped, and left for dead in a ditch.” Male suitors sent her messages asking if she’d like to meet up. “That appalled me,” she said. “A lot of people think I have a lot of sexual aggression. I was like ‘Woah, no, I don’t feel that way at all. That’s bizarre and shocking to me.”
In an effort to restore her credibility and to earn herself a spot on next year’s squad, Lambert is seeing a campus psychologist in order to “better understand what caused the hair-pulling incident.”
Most clear in the evolution of this situation are the vastly differing notions of acceptable gendered performances in sport. Would violent play in a men’s match earn the player massive criticism? Would he be violently threatened? Would assumptions about his sexuality be made? Would he feel pressure to visit a psychologist in order to restore his credibility? I don’t think so, but I'd have to ask Zinedine Zidane to be sure.