Don Imus
Until very recently I'd never heard of Don Imus. Clearly he said something stupid. But the recent controversy has led to articles like this one that annoy me.
Everyone in this article makes a great song and dance about sexism, when it seems clear to me the issue is racism. Sure, there's sexism IN the racism, like one of those Russian doll thingys, but it's secondary.
Secondly, there's a lot of complaining about how the male patricarchy of sports coverage is oppressing women's sports. Everyone who has followed women's sports, and is honest, knows that while there's some truth to this, it's also largely irrelevant. Women's sports don't struggle because men don't support it, women's sports struggle because women don't support it. Most female highschool basketballers can't name more than one or two WNBA players, if that. The coverage is available, they just don't care. This is politically unpalatable for many, but blaming something else doesn't help the problem.
Thirdly, you get quotes like this,
"It used to be that female athletes were portrayed as wholesome, All-American girls," Kane says. "Now you get female athletes in GQ, Playboy and the Swimsuit issue. The result of it is coverage that is very damaging - that trivializes and marginalizes women athletes because it does not give them the respect they deserve as competent athletes."
What a crock. It presupposes that old feminist myth that there's something inherantly degrading about female sexuality. Which actually does female athletes a huge disservice, because male athletes don't have to deal with this nonsense. How much does a top footballer get paid for doing a deodorant commercial with his shirt off? Does his obvious sex appeal demean him as an athlete? Of couse not. And here's the real double standard -- people who make this argument are actually engaging in sexism, the sexism that supposes that male sexuality is uplifting and empowering for men, while female sexuality is a ball and chain about every woman's neck. His sexuality is natural, hers is perverse. Who are these people, the Taliban?
It's about function. The things that make a man athletic are also what pop culture considers sexy -- shoulders, chest, biceps, etc. Women haven't been so lucky, and that means that while for men being athletic and sexy go naturally together, for women, they don't. This is the single biggest problem in getting girls to play sports -- the fear that it'll make them unsexy, by making them unfeminine. Function is masculine. Female sexuality is supposed to be ornamental, not functional. Women too, in some cultures... and occassionally this one.
To change this, you have to get more people, especially young people, to associate female sex appeal with function. Thus, having female athletes displaying their sexuality, and proving to all that function and sex appeal do go together in women (and does it ever!), actually helps. Imagine if the dominant pop-culture association was that female sexuality meant actually being good at stuff. Instead of looking like a half-starved stick insect on smack, and about as useful, like most of the world's models. But you can't change body image by hiding bodies. It's crazy to think you can. What is gender about, if not bodies and sex? And how useful is it for young women to be frightened or ashamed of either or both? It's like trying to seperate the waves from the sea.
Everyone in this article makes a great song and dance about sexism, when it seems clear to me the issue is racism. Sure, there's sexism IN the racism, like one of those Russian doll thingys, but it's secondary.
Secondly, there's a lot of complaining about how the male patricarchy of sports coverage is oppressing women's sports. Everyone who has followed women's sports, and is honest, knows that while there's some truth to this, it's also largely irrelevant. Women's sports don't struggle because men don't support it, women's sports struggle because women don't support it. Most female highschool basketballers can't name more than one or two WNBA players, if that. The coverage is available, they just don't care. This is politically unpalatable for many, but blaming something else doesn't help the problem.
Thirdly, you get quotes like this,
"It used to be that female athletes were portrayed as wholesome, All-American girls," Kane says. "Now you get female athletes in GQ, Playboy and the Swimsuit issue. The result of it is coverage that is very damaging - that trivializes and marginalizes women athletes because it does not give them the respect they deserve as competent athletes."
What a crock. It presupposes that old feminist myth that there's something inherantly degrading about female sexuality. Which actually does female athletes a huge disservice, because male athletes don't have to deal with this nonsense. How much does a top footballer get paid for doing a deodorant commercial with his shirt off? Does his obvious sex appeal demean him as an athlete? Of couse not. And here's the real double standard -- people who make this argument are actually engaging in sexism, the sexism that supposes that male sexuality is uplifting and empowering for men, while female sexuality is a ball and chain about every woman's neck. His sexuality is natural, hers is perverse. Who are these people, the Taliban?
It's about function. The things that make a man athletic are also what pop culture considers sexy -- shoulders, chest, biceps, etc. Women haven't been so lucky, and that means that while for men being athletic and sexy go naturally together, for women, they don't. This is the single biggest problem in getting girls to play sports -- the fear that it'll make them unsexy, by making them unfeminine. Function is masculine. Female sexuality is supposed to be ornamental, not functional. Women too, in some cultures... and occassionally this one.
To change this, you have to get more people, especially young people, to associate female sex appeal with function. Thus, having female athletes displaying their sexuality, and proving to all that function and sex appeal do go together in women (and does it ever!), actually helps. Imagine if the dominant pop-culture association was that female sexuality meant actually being good at stuff. Instead of looking like a half-starved stick insect on smack, and about as useful, like most of the world's models. But you can't change body image by hiding bodies. It's crazy to think you can. What is gender about, if not bodies and sex? And how useful is it for young women to be frightened or ashamed of either or both? It's like trying to seperate the waves from the sea.
3 Comments:
I agree with your blog entirely. There are sooooooooooo many fundraising calendars and stuff each year where male sports players get there gear off but when a group of women do it it becomes tabloid news.
The female body image never seems to improve and you think it would as a backlash to the Nicole Ritchies and Olsen twins etc who look like:
"a half-starved stick insect on smack, and about as useful, like most of the world's models."
Apparently curves are back in Hollywood (why the hell did they leave???!!!!!) So we will have to wait and see... I won't hold my breath though.
I think it's pretty well accepted that the reason curves disappeared from fashion modelling is that most of the men who run fashion are gay. Which is not to knock gay men, who have demonstrated a whole range of talents straight men don't tend to have, and the world would be poorer without... but figuring what makes a woman sexy probably isn't one of them.
How about curves AND personality? That'd be something, huh? Hollywood probably hasn't seen that consistently since the '30s.
Hey Joel
so it's you who has been crawling around my head.
As a dancer teacher I taught a young ballerina the dux of her school, who was told to get a breast reduction, a Bcup and only 16. She kept ending up in hospital for ripping her esophagus. Until I told her in no uncertain terms that she was living her dumpy mother's dream and didn't she have better things to do with her vast talents.
I,(I not ashamed to say)have made plenty of good cash out of my curves. I'd rave more but I have to go and bellydance in a restaurant in town. Little will they guess that I'm really a SF geek...
Donna
Post a Comment
<< Home