The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Margaret Court's legacy is about more than opinions

Benjamin Goh new author
Roar Rookie
25th January, 2018
Advertisement
Margaret Court (Wikimedia Commons/Tourism Victoria)
Benjamin Goh new author
Roar Rookie
25th January, 2018
15

I love my tennis and I love my politics, but combining the two needs to end.

Politics should never be allowed to interfere with sport, and the vilification of Margaret Court’s decision to call for Australians to boycott Qantas because of the company’s support for same-sex marriage demonstrates how sad Australian society has become.

Ever since Court wrote an article stating her views on same-sex marriage she has faced a barrage of abuse just because she has given her opinion. Yes, her views have offended some parts of the community, especially the LGBTI community, but there is more to the question of her legacy than her opinions.

Australians are known for their tolerance and their bravery, but now I fear our society has become so soft that feelings come before the freedom to speak.

Margaret Court is indeed a sporting legend in Australian sporting history, but she is also a human, and every human being should be allowed the right to voice their opinions without the fear of being silenced.

Australia is an amazing country, but I worry for our country when respected sporting legends are suddenly labelled unfairly as insignificant just because they have voiced views that oppose society’s current popular narrative.

(Wikimedia Commons/Tourism Victoria)

Court’s opinions may be controversial in the eyes of some, but that should never affect or diminish the major contributions she has made to Australian tennis. The calls for Margaret Court Arena to be renamed on the basis of Court’s opinions being ‘hateful’ is simply ridiculous. I love my freedoms, but this must come to an end.

Advertisement

Margaret Court Arena was never named because of Margaret Court’s political views; it is named for her outstanding contributions. Who are we to ignore her contributions – to dismiss her 192 career titles, including winning the Australian Open seven times in a row between 1960 and 1966, as well as her becoming the first Australian woman to win a grand slam abroad?

The last time I checked the arena was named after her because of her achievements. Political opinions have never come into consideration when naming stadiums after sporting heroes.

Take this, for example, Shane Warne. Warne has been the subject of numerous controversies, but he still has a statue in his honour outside the MCG. If we are to apply the current Margaret Court narrative to him, should his statue remain standing?

It is simple: honours are given to Australians because of their achievements, not because of their opinions.

close