"... and say that it rewards traditional feminine desirability over athletic excellence. And while the female athletes I spoke to said they were consciously deciding whether to play up or down their sexuality, some observers say that the market is dictating that choice.
Andrea Geurin, a researcher of sports business at Loughborough University in England, studied female athletes trying to make the Rio Olympics in 2016, many of them American collegians. 'One of the big themes that came out is the pressure that they felt to post suggestive or sexy photos of themselves' on social media, Geurin said.... Scroll through the social media posts from female college athletes across the United States and you will find that a significant through line on many of the women’s accounts is the well-trod and well-proven notion that sexiness sells."
From "New Endorsements for College Athletes Resurface an Old Concern: Sex Sells/Female college athletes are making millions thanks to their large social media followings. But some who have fought for equity in women’s sports worry that their brand building is regressive" (NYT).
1. Is it regressive of the NYT to illustrate that article with many photos of scantily clad lovely young women?
2. Once we're following sports at all, we're staring at the bodies of people with great bodies. We're talking about spectator sports. What part of spectating is superior to other parts of spectating?
3. When you participate in sports, isn't some part of what you are doing about trying to look good?
4. The article conflates good looks and sexiness. The only "sexiness" it's talking about is good looks. Ironically, that's retrograde. If a woman is just being seen looking great, to say she's using her sexuality is sexist.
Posts
84 comments:
"...who fought for equity.."
Please elaborate, in detail.
"sexiness sells"
No way!
"If a woman is just being seen looking great, to say she's using her sexuality is sexist."
Yeah, but that's a little too subtle for actual feminists.
I've reached the age when good conversation is sexy.
5. The article assumes that athletes should be valued as athletes to the exclusion of other aspects of their humanity and the public shouldn't look at athletes except for their athleticism.
Bullocks. Advertisers want to sponsor athletes who will help move product. It's the same with men--how many ugly guys do you see on your Wheaties box?
I had to laugh at the last picture--the basketball player who consciously chose not to use sex appeal. Again, bullocks.
She's doing the same thing the gymnast is, she's just doing it for a different audience. She is trying to appeal to lesbians while the gymnast is trying to appeal to straight men. But they're both using sex appeal to do it.
Ironically, that's retrograde...to say she's using her sexuality is sexist.
Feminisming ain't easy.
since all the good athletes have dicks now, isn't this article living in the past?
Or, maybe we will get different classes of female athletes? Some built for Comfort? Others for Speed?
I look forward to the future where everyone has access to cheap effective plastic surgery and everyone is sexy.
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
I wonder if anyone who participated in this article have taken a look at male Olympic diver Tom Daley's instagram.
Cheesecake (your post) about cheesecake (WaPo thumb-sucker article) about cheesecake (women using their charms).
Sex sells. That’s why we’re all here. If it didn’t sell, who would ever put up with all that courting and supporting of mate and offspring?
Isn't this article in the New York Times, rather than WAPO?
Women have two paths to success in sport.
Path 1: Win.
Path 2: Be hot.
Men really only have one path: Win.
And somehow people find a way to complain about this as if it oppresses women.
Eventually women will figure out that Feminism was designed by men for men.
"some observers say that the market is dictating that choice"
Because these poor beautiful girls can't be allowed to decide for themselves if they want to monetize their looks. That's not what feminism is!
What I find amazing is that the Internet is awash in beauty, and yet these athletes can still find a market.
From far away, even in winter coats, I can tell female pedestrians from male on my bike. Hip width, slight difference in coat angle over the breasts turning up as sun shading difference. Maybe only men can do it, perhaps to know whether to look for a weapon or something, but it affects viewership and hence pay.
Links to nyt, not wapo
Women's sports are sexist WaPo tells us. The subliminal push is we need more trans in women's sports because we boys don't find the male crotch bulge in tight shorts or bikini bottoms particularly sexy.
Also, capitalism is polluting women's sports because we don't know whether the "flood" of money is buying, performance or sex appeal. We should be really really concerned about that.
And we are, of course, committed only to performance in women's sports. That is illustrated, for example, by the fact that a good boys' high school soccer team can defeat the best women's soccer has to offer./s
Wait until they leave school and get out into the business world. Or the rest of the world, for that matter.
Hot, athletic women popular.
News at eleven...
here's a (sorta) gender related comment..
42% of Gen Z diagnosed with a mental health condition, survey reveals
57 percent take regular medication, and 39 percent attend therapy for mental health issues once a week.
So, my Serious Questions Are:
How many of the 'gender questioning disphorics' are currently doped out of their minds?
Of the great looking girls in sports.. How many of THEM are 'diagnosed with a mental health condition'?
Couldn't we Help America? If we got kids to PLAY OUTSIDE?
Corrected to show the article is in the NYT, not WaPo.
Even before I clicked the link I guessed the article would focus on Dunne. She is sui generis. Is there really a second example? Raducanu, but she's a pro in a sport that has long worked that way.
1. LOL WaPo concern trolling?
2. My old girlfriend pretty much only watched NFL with me to “watch the butts.”
3. Sexy is in the eye of the beholder. Or loins. But with us dudes the visual is powerful. Not so much for you chicks.
From far away, even in winter coats, I can tell female pedestrians from male on my bike
I'm surprised so many pedestrians let some guy wearing a bunch of winter coats talk them into sitting on his bike and letting him look at their hips and breasts, even from far away.
woman shouldn't make money off their good looks. Why do we continue to praise and give approval to women for being good looking?
Its so...crazy and unnatural. People have never done this before. We need to judge women on the quality of their character and their IQ and NOT on their looks. Like we've done for thousands of years.
Thank God, Hollywood and Broadway cast actresses based on their character and IQ.
"If a woman is just being seen looking great, to say she's using her sexuality is sexist."
Wait. How does that work? Remember what I said about the pole vaulters? Male pole vaulters dress like basketball players, in floppy shorts and sleeveless shirts. But female pole vaulters wear shorts that barely cover their ass, and tops that bare the midriff. Obviously, this contributes to the popularity of the sport. Is that a sexist observation?
(Had to double-check with the video on the tops. Damn, those women look good!)
"When you participate in sports, isn't some part of what you are doing about trying to look good?"
100% - Good is relative though. Star athletes cultivate a "look" for themselves as much as rock and roll musicians, actors, etc. When you deify people, the worshipers that attend these rituals expect a certain type of gospel, pomp and circumstance.
'Cheesecake (your post) about cheesecake (WaPo thumb-sucker article) about cheesecake (women using their charms).'
Cheesecake sells well too.
Especially with the delicious graham cracker crust...
'Women have two paths to success in sport.
Path 1: Win.
Path 2: Be hot.'
Being hot helps, as the quality of women's sports at the highest level is similar to 10th-11th grade boys.
In certain sports (hockey is one) it is unwatchable...
Sexy looking women appeal to both men and lesbians. Double the benefit.
First world problems of the wealthy. Life is like a beanstalk isn't it?
Haven't the most popular women's sports been those where appearance and attractiveness are important -- gymnastics and figure skating?
Beach volleyball is trying to cash in on their success.
But is sport qua sport really all that interesting?
Fortunately, we won't have to worry about any of this when the transwomen take over women's sports.
But then, if the transwomen turned out to be especially attractive that would also mess with people's heads.
NYT is suggesting that women should change their presentation, hide their gender. No parades, no feminine pride.
News at eleven...
FILM at eleven..........otherwise, all we're doing is talking about it.
Female shot-put or discus can pose any way they like and no one will find them sexy. Sorry. Does anyone really think that women ignore male athletes? That they are not sexy to women? please.
How many times must we as a species rediscover that males and females form a symbiotic union rather than identical clones?
In our species women are inherently objectified or display-oriented. In peacocks the males with huge tailfeathers are inherently objectified.
Accept the facts of life and move on, or develop Feminism Wave #482,459,245 to first deny it and then rediscover it. "Birds do it. Bees do it. ..."
"Is it regressive of the NYT to illustrate that article with many photos of scantily clad lovely young women?"
They actually had to use toned-down photos of LSU gymnast Olivia Dunne to keep from setting the paper on fire.
Goodness gracious.
My daughter did cheerleading from middle school through four years of Division 1 college. She loved showing herself off, but for female athletes it is not about sexiness, rather athleticism. She was very proud of her six pack abs and muscular legs. Can't show off either without being scantily clad. More of a "women can be athletes too" thing than a "look how sexy women athletes can be" thing. They also want to make sure they are not viewed as male wannabes.
My daughter did cheerleading from middle school through four years of Division 1 college. She loved showing herself off, but for female athletes it is not about sexiness, rather athleticism. She was very proud of her six pack abs and muscular legs. Can't show off either without being scantily clad. More of a "women can be athletes too" thing than a "look how sexy women athletes can be" thing. They also want to make sure they are not viewed as male wannabes.
Point 4 needs to be stated more often. A person can be physically attractive and gain attention without the provider of that attention being interested in sex. This is especially true of sports, whereas point 2 and 3 notes, the physical attraction brings a spectacle of hopefully good performance on the field, not the bedroom.
Then there is the story of Olivia Dunne. How dare an athlete make money selling athletic clothing? A woman earning $2 million before completing college is, looks back at the NY Times article, "an old concern"? When was this a previous concern?
Finally this: "Sure, male football players have garnered about half of the overall compensation estimated to be worth at least $500 million, fueled by collectives formed by wealthy supporters who pay male athletes for everything from jersey sales to public appearances."
These whiny athletes have grown so tiresome. There are so many thumbs on so many scales tipping things in their favor but it's still not enough. Consider the likelihood you just all around suck and life is too hard for you...
If they want to make a team, and certainly for the OLYMPIC team, looks are not defining. It's times, wins, height and other quantifiable measures for the vast majority of sports.
If you are talking about monetizing your athletic prowess it could be a matter of visuals.
But most of those making real bank are not top level jocks. Attractive? Sure some of them are. But the world is full of scantily clad, artificially enhanced women offering suggestive photos.
So if you are really Olympic level, your skills are the base line requisite. Everything above that is for show.
Female athletes are pretty much all sexy by definition, at least to me (so sue me, I have a type). It sounds like to me some sour grapes from the critics.
Traditional feminine desirability is more desirable than the fat or trans models that Sports Illustrated and Victoria Secret tries to fob off on us. That's what really bothers the NYT.
What does an athlete have to promote on social media? Sports talk and game video only engages so many people. The athlete has to provide something interesting to read or see.
If scantily clad lovely young women is regressive, what do the progressives offer? I know which side I'm voting for today.
"One of the big themes that came out is the pressure that they felt to post suggestive or sexy photos of themselves' on social media"
I think this needs the BS tag.
WHO is pressuring these women to post suggestive or sexy photos of themselves? I would wager no one is.
However, the attractive female athletes that post scantily clad (to whatever degree) photos certainly get a lot of views on their social media.
Allowing personal choice and pressuring are literally opposites!
The girls swim meets at our high school had a very loyal male following as the swimsuits were translucent when wet and a lot of the mediocre swimmers were really cute. Everyone was happy; we were fortunate no scolds from the NY times came to the meets.
Ah, the troublesome "some." What would NYT journalists do without the ever anonymous "some" who are troubled by the very things that the writer is obsessing about? "Some say" that that they exist merely to lend the appearance of objective reality to what would otherwise be seen as a purely personal expression of envy or rage.
Women in bikinis. Men in shorts. Cover yourselves, ladies and germs. #NoContextRequired
"sexiness sells"
Invariably, Her -- with a capital "H" -- choice. It is often her choice, too, and his perception, ultimately, in love and life. All's fair in lust and abortion, too, I suppose.
If you are talking about monetizing your athletic prowess it could be a matter of visuals.
A rule by democracy, sometimes dictatorship.
The writer of the article labors to suggest that emphasizing physical beauty and allure in online branding “rewards traditional feminine desirability over athletic excellence.” That view is attributed to the favorite source of agenda-driven journalism: “Some,” as in “Some say.” The sources actually identified are few and the grounds for their views seem dubious
For example: what are the bases for the apparent assumption of the writer and his sources that feminine desirability and athletic excellence are in opposition, somehow mutually exclusive? Is the writer suggesting that the women in question are no-talent bimbos? Does he regard feminine desirability and excellence in the field of acting as similarly inconsistent for female actors who present themselves in ways that highlight their physical beauty and sexuality? How about female pop singers—are they subverting feminism by highly sexualized presentations of themselves along with their music?
Although the women mentioned in the article say they are making their own choices, the writer suggest that they’re pawns driven by sinister, extrinsic forces: “Some [again!] observers say that the market is dictating that choice.” One mentions “the pressure that they felt to post suggestive or sexy photos of themselves” on social media.” But, what’s the source of “the pressure they felt” to post sexy photos, other than the financial returns some female athletes showed were available for doing so? Was Dunne helpless in the face of the financial windfall she saw others collecting?
Nor is it apparent how the expression of sexual allure online reduces “opportunities to compete, to play, to have resources, to have facilities, to have coaches, and all the things that go with Olympic-caliber athletics,” as Ms. VanDerveer claims. Again, the assumption seems to be that athletes such as Dunne are nothing more than pin-ups. Is there a hint of envy there? And, isn’t the online audience that provides such rich financial returns to women such as Dunne overwhelmingly female?
Women’s college golf would have a big audience if given the chance.
I can't get around the paywall but dollars to donuts someone's whining about Paige Spiranac.
I know a couple of Patrick Mahomes fans who could not spot the difference between a drop kick and a safety blitz.
1. Is it regressive of the NYT to illustrate that article with many photos of scantily clad lovely young women?
Everything the Times publishes is regressive in some way or another, so that’s affirmative. I note that the only reason to put in the effort to wriggle past the paywall would be to look at scantily clad female athletes, so they aren’t letting business considerations be subordinated to ideology.
2. Once we're following sports at all, we're staring at the bodies of people with great bodies. We're talking about spectato sports. What part of spectating is superior to other parts of spectating?
It can be argued that the whole reason to watch female sports is to look at pretty, young, scantily clad, physically fit women. It’s not as though one is going to see amazing feats of athletic prowess, except by contrast with other women. Consider Brandi Chastain’s famous photo wearing nothing but makeup and a strategically placed soccer ball. “I worked hard for this body” she is said to have responded when criticized. And consider the fuss over Anna Kournikova. A decent tennis player at the international level, but athletically nothing like Maria Sharapova (another Russian), much less the Williams sisters.
3. When you participate in sports, isn't some part of what you are doing about trying to look good?
When you participate in sports the object — male or female — is to win.
4. The article conflates good looks and sexiness. The only "sexiness" it's talking about is good looks. Ironically, that's retrograde. If a woman is just being seen looking great, to say she's using her sexuality is sexist.
To a feminist everything is sexist. Most men would regard a very physically fit woman as sexy even if she was flat-chested, as many female athletes are since they carry next to no body fat.
So basically standard social media influencer with being an athlete just something to help find followers. The athletics isn’t driving this. Before NIL they would have just quit the sport to make $2 million annual as an influencer.
Colleges leverage female hypergamy in the recruiting process for male sports fodder. Is that sexist, too?
Rush Limbaugh's undeniable truth #24: "Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women access to the mainstream of society"
Rush is proven right once again. These women don't have to post sexy pictures of themselves on social media to make money. Some choose to. They make a lot of money. Good for them. Some choose not to. That's ok, too. Does that particular market favor more attractive women? YES! Life favors more attractive people, in general. No amount of ideology can delete human nature and it's pretty much a waste of time to try.
It is an issue of how we are wired. Men are wired to mate, preferably with as many women as possible. Attractive women are more highly desired for mating. Woman are attracted to successful men because successful men provide security, if you can get one to stick around. The man's attractiveness is secondary in overall goal. When a man sees a successful, attractive female athlete, the first thought is not "she will bring financial stability to our relationship" but "hot damn!"
It also should be noted that most women's sports do not pay well - not surprising since they would lose to men 99% of the time - so even if a man was looking for someone to take care of him, this would be an odd place to go looking for it. Ironically, the "influencer" wearing very little in clothing has a better financial outlook than an elite women's basketball player.
"Scroll through the social media posts from female college athletes across the United States and you will find that a significant through line on many of the women’s accounts is the well-trod and well-proven notion that sexiness sells."
That should be amended to say: scro through the social media posts from female college students...or females.
"Scroll through the social media posts from female college athletes across the United States and you will find that a significant through line on many of the women’s accounts is the well-trod and well-proven notion that sexiness sells."
That should be amended to say: scro through the social media posts from female college students...or females.
Would Tiger Woods have garnered all his endorsement deals if he were as ugly as Charles Barkley? No.
So, the Times is saying that men like women?
A few decades ago, almost all of today’s female athletes would be considered too muscular and “un-feminine”. The enthusiastic acceptance of buff women is progress. Also, it emphasizes the point that there is more than one ideal, perfect body.
Lowered expectations with transgender trends. Sorry, ladies, the finer sex. Germs, too, the utilitarian masses. #ThatsNotAestheticallyEquitable
So, the Times is saying that men like women?
Yeah, Her choice, her choice, his choice, too, are held in row regard in the wake (pun intended) of social progress.
feminine beauty
masculine beauty
but never men in shorts.
A favorable juxtaposition of the sexes in love and life.
So, the Times is saying that men like women?
And women like men in equal and complementary fashion. An outrageous epiphany of Her, her, and his choice.
[She's Got] The Look
So, the Times is saying that men like women?
.. and a woman likes a man.
Kate Bush - Running Up That Hill
Till death do us part... and perhaps thereafter in love. Sweet.
We can only hope that one day we will finally tamp down the urge to procreate.
"Paige Spiranac?"
I only watch her for the articles.... I mean to improve my game. Shwiiiiing.
Gratuitous nudity. It's for the art.
Gratuitous sexuality. It's for democratic appeal.
Nudity is for the bedroom. Sexuality is for the dance floor.
Lambada
The Forbidden Dance.
Lust, love, and tender care in reciprocal affection.
So, the Times is saying that men like women?
Lust, love, and tender care in reciprocal affection.
There is a reason no one watches curling but everyone watches figure skating. The money follows.
Jeebuz, the things women choose to butch about.
Repeal the Nineteenth. And F to there J to the B.
Jeebuz, the things women choose to bitch about.
Repeal the Nineteenth. And F to there J to the B.
So... You want Bella Abzug on the Parallel Bars?
One of the things that bugs the shit out of me about the NCAA is how hypocritical our colleges and universities are.
Poor kids -- mostly black -- make millions of dollars for universities. In return they get scholarships that have limited value. (And are getting less and less valuable). Lots of people get out of college and have to work at Starbucks.
So imagine being a college athlete, and your school makes millions of dollars off you, and then a few years later you're trying to sell used cars or whatever job you can get.
They screwed you.
If universities were conservative, the liberals would hate them.
Universities call themselves "non-profit" and they are making obscene amounts of money off these kids.
Now imagine this fucking hypocrisy. A rich white guy, gives a poor black kid, a BMW. What's wrong with that? In what universe is it evil for a rich white guy to give a poor black kid a BMW?
In the NCAA universe. In the world run by liars, hypocrites, knaves and thieves.
It's rather like the Soviet Union pretending their athletes are "amateurs." The fucking pretense that money "corrupts" these student-athletes. Oh yeah? Does that money corrupt you, the university, you dishonest fucks?
I say, if rich people want to give poor people money, hooray! That's basic Christianity. And if it burns your ass, NCAA, that you can't get some of that money, fuck you.
Your coaches with their huge salaries and their Nike contracts.
Theft. How dare you punish people for giving money to the poor. I love college athletes. But I loathe the NCAA and those corrupt money fucks who run our universities.
First, why do people care about - and watch - female sports?
Its not because women are good at it. A good boys HS BB team could beat the best WNBA team. The best female pro golfer or pro tennis player isn't as good as the top 200th male (I'm being generous). The US national women's soccer team would lose to a men's college team (its probably worse than that).
And so on.
I'm all in favor of girls getting some good healthy exercise in HS and learning a sport they can indulge in for the rest of their lives. Golf, Tennis, Gynastics, Swimming, Running, volleyball, skating, etc. But female team sports are usually just silly, badly done copies of the men's sports.
So, why do we watch?
Obviously, because we like to see good looking young girls. Which is why good looking women atheletes make more than less good looking ones. Its no different with men, except the criteria is different. With men, its winning vs. losing. But even then, if a male athelete is handsome and charismatic AND A WINNER, he will get more $$ in endorsements than an ugly dull winner.
You saw that with Jack Nicklaus. In the 60s he was "fat jack", wearing a crewcut and defeating America's idol Charismatic Arnie Palmer. In the 70s he lost weight, wore stylish clothes instead of a t-shirt, and ditched the crew cut. Suddnely everyone loved Jack.
Paige Bueckers of UCONN is about as sexy as a 2x4. What she is is a great athlete and a good kid who sets a wonderful example for young girls.
So, the way you look is now *not* a deciding factor? And a Bad Thing?
Athletics is superficial and sex appeal is superficial.
We never had these kind of issues in AV club.
n.n.
thanks for that link!
never saw that movie
always loved the title
"the forbidden dance"
People forget but back in the day men used to take dance classes all the time to learn to dance like Fred Astaire. Because he was rocking it with Ginger Rogers. Dancing has always been sex foreplay.
Is that movie worth watching?
Post a Comment