Thanks for the link, fromorbit, interesting article and I agree with TheywontletmehavethenameIwant's take on it.
The author seems to be trying to push SC into being political, which she herself carefully avoids - suggesting she might align herself with Gaines, referring to the "MAGA Barbie" moniker she seems to want to shed" .
That's really sneaky because to the best of my limited knowledge of SC, she never wanted, sought or accepted the "MAGA Barbie" moniker but 'seems to want to shed' implies that she encouraged being called MAGA Barbie at some point.
This para is a tangle of contradiction, innuendo and speculation:
If Cunningham's goal is to ultimately translate her WNBA career into a political one, this may give her the glaring opportunity to do so. Maybe, like many people, she doesn't want to be "political" when sharing her views. That's fine, but she's got a mighty soapbox.
Has SC ever said she wants a political career? I don't think so. Has she denied being "political" ? I don't think that's a 'maybe', I think she has definitely says she is not.
But the article has set SC up as a right wing christian anti-trans campaigner who will use her sporting career as a springboard to politics.
Being re-tweeted by Gaines and praised by the White House adds fuel to that fire, but that's not in SC's control .
It is a long, detailed, and in some ways a thoughtful article. But it could be studied on journalism courses as an example of how to take some facts about an individual, and then weave a whole web of suggestion, innuendo and speculation around those facts to turn the subject into an avatar of something the writer disagrees with.
Maybe SC will end up with a political career, proudly wearing a 'MAGA Barbie' cap, on the 'right wing' of US politics, who knows?
My point is that she's being unjustifiably critiqued in this article as if she already was.