When we drool over soccer players' bodies, are those of us who critique the objectification of women's bodies being hypocrites? No. And here's why.
Mostly, our #shamelessobjectification posts celebrating soccer players' bodies ? the abdominals, the thighs, the man-love, the thighs ? are being met in the spirit in which they are intended: a fun, randy way to participate (one of many) in the global collective experience that is the World Cup. But there have been some understandable concerns with which I've got to disagree. Here's the gist:
If the World Cup featured women, and Gawker were to post Breast Moments as a way to laud legitimate feats of athleticism, we'd be pissed about the objectification. This is not any different.
Yeah, we'd be pissed about it. But it's not the same. Here's why:
1) Context matters.
In our current universe, men do not have trouble being taken seriously based on their looks or perceived sexiness, nor is their worth in society primarily judged by them. Our drooling over Benny Feilhaber isn't just a drop in the bucket ? it also won't contribute to the overall oppression of men, soccer playing or otherwise. They will not be told their primary value is based on whether women want to them. They will not be paid less on the dollar or subject to violence in representation or acts. They will not be treated like meat or chattel. Period.
2) These guys are healthy and at the peak of fitness.
The culture at large is celebrating these men's bodies for their skill, agility, and strength ? achieved partly through genetic blessing, yes, but also through training and hard work. It's true that this is setting up an ideal that most men cannot and do not achieve, but as ideals go, one achieved through activity and, it seems, fun isn't so bad. And presumably no unhealthy starvation or surgical enhancements were involved.
3) At the World Cup and elsewhere, ogling knows no borders.
The other day, a reader remarked on a photo of a North Korean player that it was rare in Western culture to see an Asian man celebrated as being sexy. Other objects of our admiration have come from every continent. Even though they share certain body traits based on their training, these guys come in all colors and facial features and national origins?just as hotness does.
3) They're having fun doing what they love.
This needs little explanation. No sexyface, no corpse-like poses, just spontaneous shirt-shedding and teammate grabbing.
4) Women also like to look.
Everyone keeps telling us that women aren't visually stimulated and are cuddly balls of empathy and need a narrative. I suggest they check out some of the comment threads on #shamelessobjectification. There is something liberating about a woman expressing her pleasure in looking at a man's body as she sees fit.
That pleasure can make some people uncomfortable. One reader wrote about watching a match at the gym: "The men routinely spend their time ogling (and yes I do mean ogling, they make now bones about it) women in the fitness magazines. However these same men were distinctly uncomfortable and put out that we women were cheering and enjoying the Greek footballers taking off their shirts. Double standards? I think so." I do too.
True, we aren't covering the matches themselves, but that's just not our raison d'etre (nor do we have any die-hards on staff) but you're free to do so on #groupthink, or check out our friends at Kickette or Deadspin. We hear you on the respectful request for some gay-lady-friendly objectification. Let's talk at the Women's World Cup next year.
In the meantime, no matter who you're cheering for, I think this is something we can all get behind.
Re: Why it's okay for women to objectify soccer players (according to Jezebel)
Also:
http://jezebel.com/tag/shamelessobjectification/
Who was it who hates Jezebel? Because I might add my name to that list.
Do they need to see the stats on good looking men vs non-good looking men and salary? Because there is a definite disparity.
I don't care for this at all.
#2 is a particularly good illustration of double standards Case in point: Brandi Chastain taking her shirt off at the '99 World Cup and the outrage over it. It wasn't ok for her to show off her athletic figure like men, but $10 says if it was a bra commercial people would have been fine with it.
food blog | garden blog | curly dogs blog
I was thinking of Brandi too. I wonder if the outrage would be the same today?
I didn't even try to read all that.
But I did enjoy the PIP. Ty.
This comment made me LOL:
For fuc's sake. Does all this backlash not underscore just how much a woman's right to gratify herself sexually just like a man would gets COMPLETELY. SHUT. DOWN. in our culture?I mean, are you people serious??? Yeah I'm sure Christiano Ronaldo is just weeping into a mountain of pu$$y over the fact that women want to look at him with his shirt off.
Happy Spring!.
I like this one:
As a hetero guy, I just think it's kind of funny how everyone can get their panties in a twist by women being attracted to fit young men. Those poor, fit, defenseless young men.
And I loves me some shirtless footballers. I have no shame about that.
Another primary difference here that the author failed to point out is that these male soccer players are not going to get on the cover of XYZ magazine with a feature story that focuses on how hot they are and oh yeah they play soccer. The less-hot ones' accomplishments will not be ignored in favor of the hot ones.
That's what bothers me about female athletes and what I think is genuine objectification. I have no problem with men ogling female athletes or watching a sport they're otherwise uninterested in because OMG they're so hot. Some of them are hot! As the article points out, these are young people in their prime, in a physical shape that most people will never achieve. There's nothing wrong with finding that hot, whether male or female.
But what bothers me is when the media and such focus exclusively on their looks and more or less brush aside their other accomplishments. I've never seen that happen with a man, but it happens with women all the time. Look at Anna Kournikova - a great tennis player, sure, but was she really deserving of THAT much attention? Not because of her tennis skills, that's for sure. Yet top-notch female players who were better at tennis but didn't have a pretty face and long blond hair got ignored in favor of her.
I think there is an argument somewhere in here that there is a difference. But what is it?
I think you've nailed a serious difference between objectification and appreciating good looks. We're not looking at these men because they are hot. We're looking at them because they are awesome soccer players and they just also happen to be hot. If they weren't hot they'd still be all over our TVs because of their accomplishments. For women, often the reason they are all over our TVs is due to their hotness first, their accomplishments second.
I can sort of see this argument.
Also, a typical athletic female body ISN'T actually our standard of hot. Mia Hamm is just kind of jockish. And her face isn't gorgeous. I mean, there's nothing wrong with her in any sense, but she's no Anna Kournikova. We're far more willing to accept a so-so face from men because of what athleticism does to a male body. I don't think any of the American soccer players are hot, they just have good bodies. So it's like a miracle when an Anna Kournikova comes along. And they always try to gussy up a Mia Hamm.
But I'm not down with saying that it's totally fine to ogle men and it's not totally fine to ogle women. That's a gross double standard. Everyone's athleticism and hotness should be appreciated equally!