Sloane Stephens gave scope on Serena and will her image be tarnished after US Open meltdown

Elektra

Professional
As a long time Serena fan I can easily say that behavior at the US Open was bad and embarrasing to watch. She has been trying for the last five years to turn a new leaf, soften up her image and also show more maturity. What we saw from her was a spoiled petulant child not a mature woman. Her temper tantrums and playing the sexism card and privilege card exposed the fact that this woman is an egomaniac, narcissist and prima donna.

It has gotten worse by her hustling her baby and acting like she is the only mother who ever gave birth.

Here is the issue Serena Williams for a long time has been saying she wants to a role model to young woman and girls. Her behavior was anything like a role model.

US Open champ Sloane Stephens gave the scoop on Serena a couple of years ago after Sloane beat Serena in Australia open 2013

Stephens claims Williams is not the ultra-friendly character regularly seen in the public, insisting the 15-time major winner has shunned her ever since Stephens won an Australian Open showdown against her in January.

The pair compete on the same Fed Cup team, beating Sweden in April, but Stephens says their relationship off-court has been soured by Williams' behaviour.

"People should know. They think she's so friendly and she's so this and she's so that. No, that's not reality," Stephens said.

"She's not said one word to me, not spoken to me, not said 'hi', not looked my way, not been in the same room with me since I played her in Australia.

http://en.espn.co.uk/tennis/sport/story/205864.html


Serena's meltdown was a disservice to Naomi Osaka who is the winner and the champion. Serena could not handle a young woman doing the upset and she meltdown and spoiled this young woman's glory.

Do you think Serena's image is tarnished after her meltdown
 

upchuck

Hall of Fame
I think she has armed her critics with another weapon they will try and use to define her. Three bad nights in a 20-plus year career shouldn't do that but Serena's critics have rarely been reasonable. In terms of impact on her legacy, this will be greatly minimized over time, just like the 2009 incident.
 
D

Deleted member 733170

Guest
I think she has armed her critics with another weapon they will try and use to define her. Three bad nights in a 20-plus year career shouldn't do that but Serena's critics have rarely been reasonable. In terms of impact on her legacy, this will be greatly minimized over time, just like the 2009 incident.
This is by far the worst one as even post the event she is trying to distract and manipulate public attention away from her wrongdoing and brush it off with the politics of feminism and race.

At least during her prior outbursts there was a small air of contrition.

She’s a truly remarkable tennis player but clearly the fame and celebrity status has gone to her head.
 

ausfrewimuso

Semi-Pro
WOW I have more respect for Sloane Stephens now. We all knew Serena is an inauthentic personality, its not hard to read her even through the screen. Her gesture towards Osaka at the end was inauthentic as it gets, she even bumped into her crossing the net.
Yeah because she did that deliberately :rolleyes:, or did you just go partially blind for 5 seconds when she said sorry right after?
 

spirit95

Professional
Off court behaviour shouldn't really be relevant for whether you get docked games by the umpire on court
 

Elektra

Professional
Sloane played the victim but she knows why Serena basically put her on ice. It was because of her behavior in that Brisbane match against Serena right before the Australian Open and her snippy interview after beating her in Australia. Serena is no angel but neither is Sloane.
Sloane has mellowed a lot since then and does not even talk about Serena anymore.

The more these girls stop being fans of Serena and starting being tennis professionals the better they will be as tennis players and can make more money off the court.
 

Elektra

Professional
Amazing how the American lowlifes support Serena. Not only that she gets big corporate sponsors like Chase promoting her. Sickening! This is why I despise corporations, they push immorality on us without our consent.
To be fair Serena did not start getting big time luxury sponsors until her behavior mellowed after her comeback from pulmonary embolism.
 
Sloane has mellowed a lot since then and does not even talk about Serena anymore.

The more these girls stop being fans of Serena and starting being tennis professionals the better they will be as tennis players and can make more money off the court.
Yea and she was a petulant child so why are you using her words from 5 years ago as some voice of reason?

They're all competitors and tennis professionals anyway and not fans of Serena and why does it seem to bother you so much? I'm sure them making money and being better tennis players has nothing to do with Serena.
 

smoledman

G.O.A.T.
To be fair Serena did not start getting big time luxury sponsors until her behavior mellowed after her comeback from pulmonary embolism.
Will Chase withdraw their sponsorship in light of her recent behavior? NO! Their board is probably infested with SJW types by now, like most corporations. Real business for real people is now only done on the smaller level.
 

SeeItHitIt

Professional
To paraphrase: “We’re all sorry that the match didn’t turn out like we wanted’. With the baby-momma commercials intertwined with sexism/feminism and the NIKE scandal of the knee pad guy, it makes me want to turn of tennis (too).
 

Elektra

Professional
Yea and she was a petulant child so why are you using her words from 5 years ago as some voice of reason?

They're all competitors and tennis professionals anyway and not fans of Serena and why does it seem to bother you so much? I'm sure them making money and being better tennis players has nothing to do with Serena.
You are the one being bothered.
 

DariusD

Rookie
Are we really gonna go to the archives to quote random players and their feelings on Serena? Who's next Sharapova? None of the women seem to like each other much and they get the label catty for a reason. I'm glad Naomi was able to put in work and rise above this because she could have definitely played the victim and acted traumatized from that whole ordeal. I was cringing watching a "mom" act worse than her toddler.

I asked my coworker if in a decade or so will we remember Serena's outbursts with fond memories as just a quirk of a champion. Time will tell...
 

Medved

Rookie
Is Serena an active Jehovah's witness? Didn't she get pregnant out of wedlock? Don't you get excommunicated from that church for doing that?
 

PDJ

G.O.A.T.
I think she has armed her critics with another weapon they will try and use to define her. Three bad nights in a 20-plus year career shouldn't do that but Serena's critics have rarely been reasonable. In terms of impact on her legacy, this will be greatly minimized over time, just like the 2009 incident.
Yes. And. No.
This latest incident only brings back previous outbursts. View most articles/tv and few don't mention 2011, and especially 2009.
Each outburst perpetuates the others.

And it's not just down to the now three major breakdown USO incidents. It also highlights the racquet breaking montages, bizarre Wimbledon doubles.

YouTube thanks her.
 

r2473

Talk Tennis Guru
Is Serena an active Jehovah's witness? Didn't she get pregnant out of wedlock? Don't you get excommunicated from that church for doing that?
Serena was a virgin (not a fornicator) until her wedding night, or she would have been shunned:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excommunication#Jehovah's_Witnesses

Jehovah's Witnesses[edit]
Main article: Jehovah's Witnesses and congregational discipline
See also: Jehovah's Witnesses and child sex abuse
Jehovah's Witnesses practice a form of excommunication, using the term "disfellowshipping", in cases where a member is believed to have unrepentantly committed one or more of several documented "serious sins".[35] The practice is based on their interpretation of 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 ("quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man....remove the wicked man from your midst") and 2 John 10 ("never receive him in your home or say a greeting to him"). They interpret these verses to mean that any baptized believer who engages in "gross sins" is to be expelled from the congregation and shunned.

When a member confesses to, or is accused of, a serious sin, a judicial committee of at least three elders is formed. This committee investigates the case and determines the magnitude of the sin committed. If the person is deemed guilty of a disfellowshipping offense, the committee then decides, on the basis of the person's attitude and "works befitting repentance" (Acts 26:20), whether the person is to be considered repentant. The "works" may include trying to correct the wrong, making apologies to any offended individuals, and compliance with earlier counsel. If deemed guilty but repentant, the person is not disfellowshipped but is formally reproved and has restrictions imposed, which preclude the individual from various activities such as presenting talks, offering public prayers or making comments at religious meetings. If the person is deemed guilty and unrepentant, he or she will be disfellowshipped. Unless an appeal is made within seven days, the disfellowshipping is made formal by an announcement at the congregation's next Service Meeting. Appeals are granted to determine if procedural errors are felt to have occurred that may have affected the outcome.

Disfellowshipping is a severing of friendly relationships between all Jehovah's Witnesses and the disfellowshipped person. Interaction with extended family is typically restricted to a minimum, such as presence at the reading of wills and providing essential care for the elderly. Within a household, typical family contact may continue, but without spiritual fellowship such as family Bible study and religious discussions. Parents of disfellowshipped minors living in the family home may continue to attempt to convince the child about the group's teachings. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that this form of discipline encourages the disfellowshipped individual to conform to biblical standards and prevents the person from influencing other members of the congregation.[36]

Along with breaches of the Witnesses' moral code, openly disagreeing with the teachings Jehovah's Witnesses is considered grounds for shunning.[36] These persons are labeled as "apostates" and are described in Watch Tower Society literature as "mentally diseased".[37][38] Descriptions of "apostates" appearing in the Witnesses literature have been the subject of investigation in the UK to determine if they violate religious hatred laws.[39] Sociologist Andrew Holden claims many Witnesses who would otherwise defect because of disillusionment with the organization and its teachings, remain affiliated out of fear of being shunned and losing contact with friends and family members.[40] Shunning employs what is known as relational aggression in psychological literature. When used by church members and member-spouse parents against excommunicant parents it contains elements of what psychologists call parental alienation. Extreme shunning may cause trauma to the shunned (and to their dependents) similar to what is studied in the psychology of torture.[40][need quotation to verify]

Disassociation is a form of shunning where a member expresses verbally or in writing that they do not wish to be associated with Jehovah's Witnesses, rather than for having committed any specific 'sin'.[41] Elders may also decide that an individual has disassociated, without any formal statement by the individual, by actions such as accepting a blood transfusion,[42] or for joining another religious[43] or military organization.[44] Individuals who are deemed by the elders to have disassociated are given no right of appeal.[45][46]

Each year, congregation elders are instructed to consider meeting with disfellowshipped individuals to determine changed circumstances and encourage them to pursue reinstatement.[47] Reinstatement is not automatic after a certain time period, nor is there a minimum duration; disfellowshipped persons may talk to elders at any time but must apply in writing to be considered for reinstatement into the congregation.[48][49] Elders consider each case individually, and are instructed to ensure "that sufficient time has passed for the disfellowshipped person to prove that his profession of repentance is genuine."[50] A judicial committee meets with the individual to determine their repentance, and if this is established, the person is reinstated into the congregation and may participate with the congregation in their formal ministry (such as house-to-house preaching),[51] but is prohibited from commenting at meetings or holding any privileges for a period set by the judicial committee. If possible, the same judicial committee members who disfellowshipped the individual are selected for the reinstatement hearing. If the applicant is in a different area, the person will meet with a local judicial committee that will communicate with either the original judicial committee if available or a new one in the original congregation.

A Witness who has been formally reproved or reinstated cannot be appointed to any special privilege of service for at least one year. Serious sins involving child sex abuse permanently disqualify the sinner from appointment to any congregational privilege of service, regardless of whether the sinner was convicted of any secular crime.[52]
 

Medved

Rookie
"Serena was a virgin (not a fornicator) until her wedding night, or she would have been shunned."

That's hard to believe seeing how late in life she married. Wasn't she dating Patrick Mortoligu, her coach?

I've talked with other Jehovah's witnesses in passing and they didn't consider her a "good witness." Do we have any evidence at her actual level of commitment to the faith?
 

r2473

Talk Tennis Guru
"Serena was a virgin (not a fornicator) until her wedding night, or she would have been shunned."

That's hard to believe seeing how late in life she married. Wasn't she dating Patrick Mortoligu, her coach?

I've talked with other Jehovah's witnesses in passing and they didn't consider her a "good witness." Do we have any evidence at her actual level of commitment to the faith?
You owe Serena an apology
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ann

Shaolin

G.O.A.T.
Amazing how the American lowlifes support Serena. Not only that she gets big corporate sponsors like Chase promoting her. Sickening! This is why I despise corporations, they push immorality on us without our consent.
What do you expect from a soul-less, heartless corporate behemoth? All they care about is their quarterly earnings report and appealing to the lowest common denominator to make money. As long as they think Serena is marketable in the public eye they will stand in line to pay her for endorsements.
 

upchuck

Hall of Fame
Yes. And. No.
This latest incident only brings back previous outbursts. View most articles/tv and few don't mention 2011, and especially 2009.
Each outburst perpetuates the others.

And it's not just down to the now three major breakdown USO incidents. It also highlights the racquet breaking montages, bizarre Wimbledon doubles.

YouTube thanks her.
Come on. Wimbledon doubles issue? This is exactly the kind of Serena derangement syndrome I talked about that she has now helped empower.
Oh so now racquet cracking has been elevated to the area of grave character flaws?
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
I think she has armed her critics with another weapon they will try and use to define her. Three bad nights in a 20-plus year career shouldn't do that but Serena's critics have rarely been reasonable. In terms of impact on her legacy, this will be greatly minimized over time, just like the 2009 incident.
Add a few more days. At the Auckland WTA events last year she screamed at staff/volunteers because she was annoyed about the poor weather. She showed up to get her appearance fee and was so snappy to the travel staff they apparently vyed to not cart her around the city. Check-in desk staff were also irked about her tut-tutting them for not being able to conjure up a practice court the moment she wanted one.
 

upchuck

Hall of Fame
Add a few more days. At the Auckland WTA events last year she screamed at staff/volunteers because she was annoyed about the poor weather. She showed up to get her appearance fee and was so snappy to the travel staff they apparently vyed to not cart her around the city. Check-in desk staff were also irked about her tut-tutting them for not being able to conjure up a practice court the moment she wanted one.
Is there a credible news report about this? I haven't heard of it until now.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
Is there a credible news report about this? I haven't heard of it until now.
Yeah. From my mouth. I personally know people who work at the tournament, including drivers.

Not everything makes it to the news. And when it does people who don't want to believe it just claim it's fake.
 

Kevin T

Hall of Fame
Serena was a virgin (not a fornicator) until her wedding night, or she would have been shunned:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excommunication#Jehovah's_Witnesses

Jehovah's Witnesses[edit]
Main article: Jehovah's Witnesses and congregational discipline
See also: Jehovah's Witnesses and child sex abuse
Jehovah's Witnesses practice a form of excommunication, using the term "disfellowshipping", in cases where a member is believed to have unrepentantly committed one or more of several documented "serious sins".[35] The practice is based on their interpretation of 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 ("quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man....remove the wicked man from your midst") and 2 John 10 ("never receive him in your home or say a greeting to him"). They interpret these verses to mean that any baptized believer who engages in "gross sins" is to be expelled from the congregation and shunned.

When a member confesses to, or is accused of, a serious sin, a judicial committee of at least three elders is formed. This committee investigates the case and determines the magnitude of the sin committed. If the person is deemed guilty of a disfellowshipping offense, the committee then decides, on the basis of the person's attitude and "works befitting repentance" (Acts 26:20), whether the person is to be considered repentant. The "works" may include trying to correct the wrong, making apologies to any offended individuals, and compliance with earlier counsel. If deemed guilty but repentant, the person is not disfellowshipped but is formally reproved and has restrictions imposed, which preclude the individual from various activities such as presenting talks, offering public prayers or making comments at religious meetings. If the person is deemed guilty and unrepentant, he or she will be disfellowshipped. Unless an appeal is made within seven days, the disfellowshipping is made formal by an announcement at the congregation's next Service Meeting. Appeals are granted to determine if procedural errors are felt to have occurred that may have affected the outcome.

Disfellowshipping is a severing of friendly relationships between all Jehovah's Witnesses and the disfellowshipped person. Interaction with extended family is typically restricted to a minimum, such as presence at the reading of wills and providing essential care for the elderly. Within a household, typical family contact may continue, but without spiritual fellowship such as family Bible study and religious discussions. Parents of disfellowshipped minors living in the family home may continue to attempt to convince the child about the group's teachings. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that this form of discipline encourages the disfellowshipped individual to conform to biblical standards and prevents the person from influencing other members of the congregation.[36]

Along with breaches of the Witnesses' moral code, openly disagreeing with the teachings Jehovah's Witnesses is considered grounds for shunning.[36] These persons are labeled as "apostates" and are described in Watch Tower Society literature as "mentally diseased".[37][38] Descriptions of "apostates" appearing in the Witnesses literature have been the subject of investigation in the UK to determine if they violate religious hatred laws.[39] Sociologist Andrew Holden claims many Witnesses who would otherwise defect because of disillusionment with the organization and its teachings, remain affiliated out of fear of being shunned and losing contact with friends and family members.[40] Shunning employs what is known as relational aggression in psychological literature. When used by church members and member-spouse parents against excommunicant parents it contains elements of what psychologists call parental alienation. Extreme shunning may cause trauma to the shunned (and to their dependents) similar to what is studied in the psychology of torture.[40][need quotation to verify]

Disassociation is a form of shunning where a member expresses verbally or in writing that they do not wish to be associated with Jehovah's Witnesses, rather than for having committed any specific 'sin'.[41] Elders may also decide that an individual has disassociated, without any formal statement by the individual, by actions such as accepting a blood transfusion,[42] or for joining another religious[43] or military organization.[44] Individuals who are deemed by the elders to have disassociated are given no right of appeal.[45][46]

Each year, congregation elders are instructed to consider meeting with disfellowshipped individuals to determine changed circumstances and encourage them to pursue reinstatement.[47] Reinstatement is not automatic after a certain time period, nor is there a minimum duration; disfellowshipped persons may talk to elders at any time but must apply in writing to be considered for reinstatement into the congregation.[48][49] Elders consider each case individually, and are instructed to ensure "that sufficient time has passed for the disfellowshipped person to prove that his profession of repentance is genuine."[50] A judicial committee meets with the individual to determine their repentance, and if this is established, the person is reinstated into the congregation and may participate with the congregation in their formal ministry (such as house-to-house preaching),[51] but is prohibited from commenting at meetings or holding any privileges for a period set by the judicial committee. If possible, the same judicial committee members who disfellowshipped the individual are selected for the reinstatement hearing. If the applicant is in a different area, the person will meet with a local judicial committee that will communicate with either the original judicial committee if available or a new one in the original congregation.

A Witness who has been formally reproved or reinstated cannot be appointed to any special privilege of service for at least one year. Serious sins involving child sex abuse permanently disqualify the sinner from appointment to any congregational privilege of service, regardless of whether the sinner was convicted of any secular crime.[52]
Prince was the GOAT Jehovah's Witness!! He was first married in 1996 and was never shunned, thus he was a virgin during the wild and crazy 80's. :)
 

Federev

Hall of Fame
Huge respect for Sloane, a class act on tour. Can you imagine the fury if Federer treated somebody like John Millman like that? You know he will harbor no ill will towards the guy and probably will practice with him again! That's just how Roger rolls.
Don’t think Fed would ever ever lose it like Serena did, but Fed- Millman analogy doesnt seem apt as Serena didn’t treat Osaka bad. Osaka was a byproduct of Serena treating the ump bad.

And Fed can be quite salty to umps. Though nothing like Saturday.
 
I think she has armed her critics with another weapon they will try and use to define her. Three bad nights in a 20-plus year career shouldn't do that but Serena's critics have rarely been reasonable. In terms of impact on her legacy, this will be greatly minimized over time, just like the 2009 incident.
Just because someone's extremely successful doesn't mean they're a great person.
I don't even know why these get conflated nowadays.

Even if it's just three times, it's three times too many if you're trying to build her as a role model.
Why can't someone slightly less successful but nicer be a better role model?
I personally think Clijsters is a much better role model than Serena.
Or Venus.
Why is that when we search for a role model we start at the top of the success ladder and only then look at the actual behaviour?
Why not look at the behaviour first and then look at who among those who distinguished themselves is perhaps the most successful?
Why this need for the greatest to be the greatest at everything?
I would say the exact same thing about Federer, although he hides his more unpleasant traits much better than Serena.
It's the logic I was talking about - look at the people who display the best sportsmanship and among those choose the most successful - that gave us Edberg as the role model for sportsmanship; whereas it's the second, more recent method of looking at success first that gave us Federer being awarded "greatest sportsman" about 3x more often than Edberg.

The whole thing is upside down.
 
Last edited:

TennisDawg

Hall of Fame
To paraphrase: “We’re all sorry that the match didn’t turn out like we wanted’. With the baby-momma commercials intertwined with sexism/feminism and the NIKE scandal of the knee pad guy, it makes me want to turn of tennis (too).
That might have been a Freudian slip by Katrina Adams. After things settled the next day, she explained she meant the distraction by the penalties. I don’t buy that, why would she talk about mamas right after the comment? I’m thankful she did recognize Naomi. The USTA powers that be and tennis pros are going to side with Serena’s behavior or not comment. The ESPN tennis commentators are not going to be to outspoken about it all because ESPN sets the tone and they work for ESPN. ESPN might make Serena the victim in all this. McEnroe of course has already sided against Ramos, basically all officials. He must, he too was a spoiled brat when he played. The only level headed one Ive heard thus far has been Navrotalova saying Serena handled it poorly. It was in the NYT op ed.
 

Rattler

Hall of Fame
I think she has armed her critics with another weapon they will try and use to define her. Three bad nights in a 20-plus year career shouldn't do that but Serena's critics have rarely been reasonable. In terms of impact on her legacy, this will be greatly minimized over time, just like the 2009 incident.
Do you really think the 2009 ‘incident’ has diminished?
 

TennisCJC

Legend
Sloane picked Nadal to win the US Open. Sloane is confused.
No, Sloane's assessment of Serena is spot her. Serena is a self serving diva. Carlos did absolutely nothing wrong and to accuse him of sexism is 100% unfair. Serena's coach obviously cheated. Serena obviously smashed her racket. Serena obviously berated the umpire after he made 2 correct calls. To then berate him was idiotic on Serena's part.
 
Top