Hey guys. I wrote the following letter to send to Samantha Shapiro and the editor that contacted me for information about the article. Out of respect I wanted to run it by you guys first. Let me know....
When Cheer Extreme was approached by ESPN about following one of our teams for an article in its magazine, it was proposed as a look into the youngest athletes in a sport growing in popularity and legitimacy. Because the publication was ESPN the Magazine we thought it would be a great opportunity to dispense with the tired, uneducated stereotypes of all star cheer to focus on the athleticism and dedication these athletes show day in day out and the positive life lessons they learn by participating in the sport. We were convinced that this team would be a good focal point because it includes first year athletes with seasoned veterans (Cailyn Jackson is only 8 years old but this is her second year competing with a level 5 team. Last year she was on Youth Elite out of Kernersville and this year she is on Raleigh's Small Jr 5. Because of her talent she is generally placed on teams with athletes that are far older than she is. As her mother, I wanted for her to compete with athletes her own age and younger, where she could be in a position to be a team leader and where she would learn to be a base rather than her traditional position as a flyer).
When Ms. Shapiro came to the gym over the course of a number of days, we worked hard to educate her on the sport. She had no background knowledge and we worked with her so that she would be equip to show the world why all star cheer deserves a spot among other youth sports in the country. It was clear when I read the article, however, that Ms. Shapiro came in with stereotypes in mind and plugged people's names into the ideas she had in her head about what cheerleading is. The situations and conversations were largely taken out of context and edited to pieces by her and perhaps her editors in order to paint a picture she wanted to describe, rather than taking the opportunity to focus on the real story of the athleticism and talent with which these kids have been gifted. She omitted information, descriptions and situations which would have contradicted her world view. The majority of the piece was sensationalized rather than strictly factual. I could go down the line, sentence by sentence and tear most of the piece to shreds.
Much of what was described was misrepresented at best or at worst intentionally colored in a way that was close enough to reality not to be slander but slanted enough not to be truth. For example, her descriptions of a team that was falling all over the floor only to miraculously hit a "passable" routine is dishonest. This team has consistently performed well in its competitions all year. Our training as coaches would not allow us to place anything on the competition floor that was wasn't consistent. Moreover, to describe me as having "mascara painted lids" is laughable. In reality I wear very little makeup and I have very little time to "shriek" during routines, especially a glitter stars routine, where I am busy shouting out reminders, counts and encouragement to the athletes. Am I loud during the routines? Yes. Do I celebrate when parts of the routine are hit? Absolutely. I celebrate with arms upraised or with fist pumps and loud "YEAH'S." I celebrate exactly the same way I do when my Carolina basketball team hits a crucial shot or when a member of my son's baseball team gets a base hit. Do I "shriek?" No. I am not the "girly-girl" that Ms. Shapiro described. Actually, the caricature she chose to portray me with is so unlike my actual values and personality that I can only hope that it creates suspicion about the entire article for those that know me. It was not a true picture of our gym and the values we teach through this sport. She was looking to paint the industry as "Toddlers and Tiaras" regardless of what she saw in front of her.
I don't argue that some of the practices in the sport can seem over the top to an outsider. The make-up on a 6-year-old CAN seem heavy when looked at "face to face" and the uniforms ARE glittery and small. I don't blame anyone for asking questions and looking for honest answers. And I can certainly agree to disagree on the legitimacy of those answers. But I resent the lack of balance in Ms. Shapiro's writing. I resent that she never asked the questions which would clarify our point of view and as a result she misinformed a public that is already largely uneducated about our sport. Had she asked we could have told her that yes, our athletes wear make-up, but so do any actors on a live stage. If we came across an actor about to set foot on stage for a performance we would see that her make-up, though over the top for day to day wear, was intended, not to exude sexuality, but instead to make facial features recognizable over distance and under harsh lights. Yes, our uniforms are form-fitting, but they show no more leg than a gymnast's leotard or an Olympic track star's uniform. Had Ms. Shapiro asked, we could have told her that the design of a skirt and top is a nod to traditional cheerleading, but that the styles must be form-fitting for a variety of reasons. Just as dancers wear leotards so that instructors can see body lines and correct form breaks, as cheerleading coaches we too have to see our athletes bodies to correct their technique in stunting and tumbling when necessary. Moreover, it would be difficult and dangerous to catch a spinning, flipping body with the excessive fabric from a skirt that was "mid-thigh" in length flapping around.
I am also not saying that all of her observations were incorrect. Some were right on, though often described more salaciously than necessary. However, the details she chose to mention at the exclusion of others were indicative of slant she was trying to create. For example, with the one male coach she chose to mention she also included his sexual preferrence and his hairstylist boyfriend. She did not mention any of the heterosexual male coaches, including Ben Pope, co-owner of the gym and married to Courtney Smith-Pope the founder of Cheer Extreme. Just like the mention of the naked dolls and flat-chested girls in the article, the details were unnessesary but to perpetuate sterotypes and to color the sport with the crayons that she had already picked out.
This article could have broken new ground. Had the publication been, say, Glamour Magazine, I may have expected a piece about fashion, make-up and sexuality. I expected more from ESPN, an institution that is supposed to be about athletes and the sports that they play. I would have expected that anyone writing for such a publication would at the very least be well-versed in competitive sports, even if not all star cheer, and that they would "get it" when they saw the athletes in action. ESPN missed a terrific opportunity to report on the amazing athletisism and gravity-defying feats these athletes display while performing and the hard work and dedication it takes for them to get there. Ms. Shapiro made the "fluff" surrounding the sport the main focus of the article. Shame on ESPN for allowing that.
Lymarie Jackson
