Melissa Ludke is a well-known name to those who follow or study women’s rights. After being denied access the the locker room of the New York Yankees following their win in game 6 of the 1977 World Series, she and Time Inc. (the owner of the magazine Ludke wrote for, Sports Illustrated [SI]) sued Major League Baseball on the grounds of sex discrimination. Ludke’ a recall of the judicial hearing and her personal life at the time are the subject of this book she authored.

Ludke shares the story of how she became interested in sports journalism, the blatant sexism she faced and her happiness after obtaining that vaunted press credential when she started covering the Yankees for SI. During that time, she did have access to the Yankees locker room for interviews so it was quite a shock to her when she was denied access after the World Series by commissioner Bowie Kuhn. The story Ludke shares about the many obstacles and denials she faced that night will sadden and anger a reader today who may not be aware of how much discrimination female sports journalists faced at that time.

Stories about Luke’s personal life, most notably her rushed decision to marry a man she barely knew, don’t seem to have anything to do with her legal case, but by the end of the book it seems to make sense. This is especially the case when she shares the story of her decision to obtain an abortion not long after Roe v. Wade. Since the story is about women’s rights, it certainly does tie in with the main subject.

The testimony given before the hearing and that actual case make up the bulk of the book and while on the whole it is very fascinating, there is so much repetition of statements and opinions by Ludke that much like the judge during the hearing, the reader may ask when this part will ever end. The additional stories about female sportswriters who had access to NBA and NHL locker rooms at the time make Luke’s case even stronger.

There is text on MLB’s argument that it wanted to ban female reporters to protect the players’ privacy but both Ludke and the judge end up ridiculing that argument and the hearing ends up in favor of Ludke. However, that doesn’t mean a happy ending for her as she still has struggles with her professional life but will eventually come to a good place and seems to now be doing well. Well enough to write a book about a very important case in the struggle by women for equal rights.

I wish to thank Rutgers University Press and NetGalley for providing a copy of the book. The opinions expressed are strictly my own.

In 1977, Time, Inc. sued Major League Baseball on behalf of Sports Illustrated reporter Melissa Ludtke. A year later, Justice Constance Baker Motley ruled that Ludtke and all women reporters must be given the same access to the New York Yankees clubhouse as male reporters were. This ruling was a tipping point for women sportswriters. Attitudes, as Ludtke points out, didn't change overnight, but with their foot in the door, women began being hired in greater numbers and entrusted with major sports beats.
I interviewed Ludtke in 2019 for my own book about women sportswriters, called Who Let Them In? Pathbreaking Women in Sports Journalism. It is a testament to how much I enjoyed this book that, even though I knew how it ended, I was swept along by the details of Melissa Ludtke's court case. Ludtke provides historical context that brings to life the 1970s and what was going on in society at that time. She also explains well, in laymen's terms, the court cases upon which Judge Motley based her decision.
More importantly though, she makes flesh and blood characters out of the players in this drama. (I never would have guessed that Judge Motley hated baseball). She is excruciatingly honest in the retelling of how the events of that time affected her personally, including her short-lived marriage and the mysterious illness that undoubtedly was brought on by the stress she was under.
She takes to task the relentless media that took MLB's side and portrayed Ludtke as a harlot who only wanted to look at naked men. One surprising detail was how unkind Jane Pauley was to Ludtke during her Today Show interview. I might never be able to watch Pauley on CBS Sunday Morning again!
This book really is nonfiction at its best. It is exhaustively researched and eminently readable! Thank you to the publisher for providing me with a pre-publication copy.

A Lawsuit Absurd Enough to Win Women a Right
The “Prologue” adds that when she was reporting in the 1970s, she “was the only woman in the nation doing this job full time, though a few other female writers dipped in and out.” She accepted this full-time job in 1974, and the lawsuit was filed “a few years later”, in 1977-8. She had been “barred… from the locker rooms at the 1977 World Series.” The case was filed on her behalf by her corporate boss at Time Inc. She argues that her lawsuit helped to open Major League Baseball to women at all levels, including in operations, in management and coaching, as well as broadcasting. One option she mentions in this intro is that both men and women reporters could have been barred from interviewing in the lock rooms. One of the reasons I did not attempt competing in or writing about sports is because changing in front of others, or being somewhere while anybody is changing makes me dizzy and sick. I have seen a few documentaries recently that explain that locker room is where orgies happen among wrestlers and in other over-puffed sports. Allowing male reporters in these spaces is likely to be inviting them to join in these orgies to corrupt their reporting in favor of certain teams or players. Thus, there should have been a lawsuit to block this possible corrupting point of influence. Ludtke notes that there has not yet been a female umpire, and she does not name many examples of women in charge of sports today. Her case did not really change the situation much. More useful cases might have been the recent women’s soccer lawsuit for equal pay that won $24 million in 2022. This lawsuit began in 2016. Though the actual pay discrepancy appears to have remained high after this win, as in 2023 during the Women’s World Cup, women were making “25 cents for every dollar earned by men”, according to CNN. Though the gap was even wider in past years: 7.5% in 2018, 4% in 2014, and 2.5% in 2006. Ludtke is likely to have been banned initially from the locker rooms because women are not as easily tempted or corrupted by sex as male reporters. It would have been a gross, but bearable annoyance for her to be in that room, while she asked difficult questions, whereas male reporters might have joined in on a fraternity-atmosphere. When she won access after the character-assassination publicity campaign against her, it made it seem as if she was desperate to join the frat-party, instead of fighting for a better space to ask difficult questions. I want to be with Ludtke, but it is difficult for me to fully see this issue with her as the “Joan of Arc” that she objects she was labeled erroneously as in comedy sketches about her.
One such criticism was Smith’s January 9, 1978 column called “Another View of Equality”, which “titled toward the sexual nature of my endeavor”, by arguing that she “could not cover the World Series for a weekly magazine unless she could watch Reggie Jackson undress.” She corrects Smith by arguing that Kuhn had died her “access to my sources” (19). She points out: “For the record, I never went on a date with any ballplayer, coach, or manager.” With her “closest” being when she had “a lunch… with Cincinnati Reds catcher Johnny Bench in a New York City hotel dining room in July 1977.” This was a public meeting that was sponsored by her publication, as it was part of a major story. She adds that the other side was the opposite from her in this regard. She noticed this in reports about at the 1973 New York Baseball Writers Association of America gala, where the keynote speaker was “Casey Stengel, the former manager of the Mets and the Yankees”. He had previously “advised ballplayers”: “It’s staying up all night looking for a woman that does him in”, instead of “being with a woman all night”. Hugh Hefner, the publisher of Playboy, “showed up in spring training with a bevy of his ‘bunnies,’ Strengel joked” and challenged the bunnies to engage in a sexual competition with him and the teams, as if it was a “stag”, and not a “prestigious… association” speech. This 1973 meeting was exclusively for men-only, but Stephanie Salter got a ticket and attended to challenge this exclusivity. Salter only managed to eat “her fruit cup” before “the headwaiter told her to leave. She refused.” She refused a few more times until security told her to leave, and then she left, threatening to sue. This story was also treated as a joke by Newsday, who titled it: “Writers Block a Damsel at the Plate”. Salter had believed Time Inc. “would back her” lawsuit against BBWAA. Time sent a letter, but was internally resistant with taking the case to a lawsuit. Back in 1971, there was a petition signed by “female editorial employees”, which cited “seventy alleged gender discrimination incidents related to practices at Time Inc. publications.” Time responded by faking concern without taking actions, and they did the same for Salter, but changed this policy for the far more surface-absurd Ludtke locker room-access case (58-9). They might have agreed because they had assumed the case would fail, after garnering similar jokes as Salter received when she complained. But they were probably surprised when the jokes came with a decision in Ludtke’s favor. The mention of the “stag” atmosphere between the press, sports and sex-workers strongly supports my own interpretation that women were barred from locker rooms because they would have been against these corrupting interactions. If Ludtke’s case had seemed serious when it was first-filed, it is more likely that Time would not have invested in filing it in the first place. Thus, women can at least be happy with their accidental victories. A step towards equality is a good step.
I recommend this book for women who are considering sports or sports journalism as a career. Libraries should also purchase it, so it is accessible to such women. And it would be good for me to consider the women’s perspective as well.
--Pennsylvania Literary Journal, Summer 2024 issue

**3.5 Stars**

I have some mixed feelings about this one, it was quite the slog however I did ultimately find it a really interesting read so I am glad I picked it up despite knowing nothing about baseball.

As someone with a newly discovered interest in women's sports, this book piqued my interest as it focused on women working within sports as an entertainment industry rather than as athletes. It was interesting (and super fucking depressing) to see how women have come up against the exact same issues whenever they enter the sporting world in any capacity.

I particularly found it interesting how Ludtke didn't appear to ever really see herself as an activist, and at the time she stayed pretty detached from being associated with the women's liberation movement despite actively fighting for women's equality. However given how she was treated, I can understand why she tried to keep this distance. But books like this really do make you appreciate how many women came before us and whose resilience and pain won us so many of the rights we enjoy now. While also highlighting the importance of continuing that legacy so that we can improve things for the next generation of women.

I think my main gripe with this book (and the reason I found it a bit of a slog) was just the structure, it bounced back and forth a lot in the timeline and made it a little confusing. The chapters about the court case were sprinkled through (probably in an attempt to keep the book feeling dry to some readers) but it just jumbled things up for me. Personally, the court case chapters were easily the most interesting parts of the book to me as they gave a real insight into how this case was presented, and how it was won. I also really enjoyed how she wrapped up her story in the end by speaking on the current state of women's involvement in sports (mostly as writers and pundits but also as athletes).

All in all, I think this was a worthwhile read for anyone with an interest in baseball but also more broadly women in sport and women's equality in general.

Thankyou to Netgally and Rutgers University Press for an advanced copy in exchange for this honest review.

We're coming up on the 50th anniversary of one of the biggest issues in the history of sports media, one that changed a great deal about how we hear about our fun and games.

The subject concerns allowing half of the population to be allowed to do their jobs. Yes, it's the "women in the locker room" story. Those who don't remember the beginnings need to be educated as to how difficult it was for women in those transformative times.

Melissa Ludtke comes to the rescue with her book,"Locker Room Talk." And why not? She was front and center at the biggest battle of them all in this area.

Ludtke was a reporter in 1977 for Sports Illustrated magazine, and she did some work on major league baseball stories at the time. In those days, you could only do so much reporting without setting foot in a team's locker room after a game. That catch was that baseball players needed to shower, etc., after games, and for decades they had simply gone about their business while male - always male - reporters milled about collecting information. So the locker room was part personal space and part workplace. While male reporters probably would be willing to whisper that interviewing naked athletes after games left them a little bit uncomfortable - the people covering Congress didn't have to worry about that - it more or less came with the territory.

But in the mid-1970s, more women started to enter the sports media and covered teams in the NBA and NHL. All right, that was where newspapers and magazines sent promising beginners to learn the business, and there weren't many problems. But in 1977, Ludtke was assigned to cover the World Series between the Yankees and Dodgers, and baseball commissioner Bowie Kuhn decided that Ludtke couldn't walk into the Yankees' dressing room after the game even though she had been given a pass. And thus started a loud and at times juvenile debate (at least from many of the men) about women reporters' rights and locker room.

Not surprisingly, the whole thing went to court. Ludtke and SI sued Major League Baseball, and a hearing took place for a couple of hours. A judge more or less begged the two sides to come up with some sort of compromise, such as having players wear robes when they were in areas of the locker room space that were open to reporters. But Kuhn wouldn't hear of it, relying on his call that an all-male space was "in the best interests in baseball." So the judge had little choice but to tell MLB to open the doors to everyone, using the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment along the way. .

Ludtke became embroiled in all of this, of course, and the entire affair took quite a toll. That includes some health issues and a failed marriage. Not too many of her journalistic peers rushed to her side of the story, and she received plenty of hate mail - even if she didn't see some of it until years later. It's rather striking to read some of the comments from male journalists, particularly from names such as Red Smith and Dick Young. (OK, you might expect that from Young, but not from Smith.) They had views that seemed straight of Jurassic Park. Ludtke went to Time magazine for a while, almost returned to Sports Illustrated in an episode that showed SI wasn't completely innocent here, and moved on to CBS. The details of Ludtke's life aren't detailed from there, although it looks like she had some academic honors from Harvard and Columbia.

It's interesting how the subject of women in the locker room eventually became moot in many cases. I have covered a variety of sports in the past several years, and I've rarely gotten close to the inside of a locker room. In many sports, coaches and athletes are brought to a media room for interviews. Everyone has a chance to ask a few questions. It's even true when I'm the only reporter there. With the Sabres, the players change out of their equipment in one room that's open to the media, but then walk into an off-limits area to finish changing and take showers.

Ludtke brings up some comments by veteran sportswriter Leonard Koppett from the time the controversy was raging. Koppett, as close to an intellectual as anyone in the business, pointed out that a system that only allows group interviews will hurt the quality of the journalists' product. That thought struck me as I was reading the book. I remember in 1997 when the Sabres won a playoff series in Game Seven, I went into the Buffalo locker room and saw Garry Galley sitting in his stall (the defenseman beat everyone into the room.) He recounted for me his pleasure in seeing his teammates come off the ice, one by one, trying to figure out a way to express his joy. It became my lead to the story, and under today's rules I might not ever had the chance to talk to Galley that night.

But I'm willing to give up a little access to guarantee equal rights for all reporters in doing their jobs. Press boxes have become a more civilized place since women started to arrive in good-sized numbers, and that's a step forward. And where would we be today without the perspective of such sports writers as Sally Jenkins, Helene Elliott, and Christine Brennan?

As for the book, the main framework of the narrative centers on the court hearing. Ludtke chose to review the proceedings at length, often quoting the principals and documents word for word along the way. It's a bid of a grind to get through it all, at least for those without bringing a law degree into their background while reading. Along the way, the author does a little jumping through time in reviewing her life. That leads to some redundancies, and maybe some editing decisions could have gone another way.

But it is great fun to read about how people reacted to the controversy along the way - and how silly they look in hindsight. It's nice to have Ludtke's memories of that time down on paper; it's always good to find out a more complete version of a significant story like this. "Locker Room Talk" will force many to shake their heads and say about the era, "What were we thinking?"

Melissa Ludtke was a journalist for Sports Illustrated in the seventies, she was covering baseball. Because it was the seventies, she had to fight for her position because sports was still very much a man’s world (like many other places), and that included the right to enter the locker rooms after the games to interview the players and write her stories, just like her male colleagues could. Bowie Kuhn who was the baseball commissioner (please do not ask me what that is exactly) wouldn’t allow it, so she sued and her case was the Ludtke vs Kuhn of 1978.

Locker room talk is mostly about that case but the author uses the case to paint a broader picture of what being a woman in the seventies looked like. If you think our society is sexist (it is) boy let me tell you about back then ! The comments around her case, including from some very serious press, were absolutely horrendous. People didn’t see her as someone fighting for equal rights, they saw her as a loose woman trying to see men naked. The public was all of a sudden very concerned about those baseball players sexual privacy, never mind that nobody was naked during that time with the press, and that the players weren’t against her presence at all. Most comments showed how female emancipation was seen, women who wanted a seat at the table were ruining it for everyone else and it was fair game to insult them and accuse them of having loose morals. I’m not American so I’m not very familiar with baseball (it doesn’t stop you from enjoying the book if you’re worried about that), so I like that Melissa talks about how it was such a traditional sport back then, really much a boys club. It’s not just that they didn’t want women journalists in the locker room, they didn’t want women in the sport at all. If women had a place in baseball, what would be left for the boys? In the US and in many other parts of the world, the seventies were a time when women gained many rights and started more and more to emancipate from a very patriarchal society. That kind of change doesn’t come without some backlash, and that was obviously one of them.

Melissa also talks about her private life around that time. How she became a journalist, that guy she met and married way too quickly and who wasn’t a fan of having a wife who traveled so much. Her first abortion in the decade when Roe vs Wade was voted (was it voted? Again not American here, not that familiar with the legal system).

A part I really liked is that she talks about feminists today, and not in the condescending way some people do it sometimes when they’re from an older generation, but with admiration. Women her generation were pioneers and to gain more rights they had to be smart and discreet, often that meant acting like the men and not being too loud. Women today do not ask kindly for their rights, the demand them loudly. But she also talks about the sadness of seeing some rights she gained during her twenties, being erased during her daughter’s twenties. A painful reminder that when you get rights, the fight is not over.

Thanks to the author, Rutgers university press and Netgalley for a copy of this book that will be out August 16

In 1977 at the World Series, Melissa Ludtke, a writer for Sports Illustrated was denied access to the locker rooms by the Commissioner of Baseball, Bowie Kuhn. You mustn’t go in as there may be naked players, but you can stay outside the door and somebody who works for the team will get the players you want to interview. This didn’t work for her. Most players were done talking to the media and also she couldn’t see what happens in the locker room before and after games. Did this player really shed a tear when they talked about the winning run. Was there a heated discussion amongst teammates? What was the ambiance like? Melissa wasn’t able to see or hear any of this. The parent company of Sports Illustrated was Time Inc, and they sued for discrimination as they wanted equal rights to what the men had.

This books tells her story of the trial and her personal story. It was really awesome to learn that the Judge, Constance Motley, was one of the first black female judges in the country to hold higher positions. She was a key part of the Civil Rights Movement and was an aide to Thurgood Marshall in and helped him with the Brown Vs Board of Education case.

Melissa’s lawyer was Frederick A.O. Schwarz Jr. She called him Fritz and he was the great grandson of Frederick A.O. Schwartz, the founder of the mega toy store, F.A.O Schwarz.

Even though it was a bit too much legal jargon regarding the case for me, the dialog from the courtroom was interesting.

Oh, she won the case! Yay! I can’t even believe that at one point, females weren’t allowed to access locker rooms – how stupid are people to deny that.