There's nothing out of bounds about any of those pics such that she now "deserves" ridicule. ESPN regularly features nude photos of top male and female athletes. And they all look beautiful.
But HeyJude, I really don't think she's being ridiculed here. She's saying she's being "ripped to shreds" and I just don't see it in the article. I think the article brings up the very good point that she caters to the female athlete falling back on objectifying herself.
I'm not criticizing her for posing for the pictures. Plenty of female athletes do it. Yes, I think it hurts female athletes, but whatever. I don't see the ridicule here though.
My criticism is in now crying about being seen as a pretty face and not an athlete. You can't have both.
He is incredibly hot. When he played for Fulham I used to pretend I wanted to go to matches with dh because he was interested but really it was to look at him.
If you check out the ESPN link you will see many famous male athletes posing nude but when they lose people don't criticize them for posing nude.
People arent criticizing her for posing nude. They are critizing her for being a crybaby about her "objectification" when she "objectified" her self.
If ol Carlos came out crying about being seen only for his looks in the "bodies we want story" I'd tell him to STFU too. Probably while naked. But that's neither here nor there.
But isn't the argument that, "but she did it first by putting it out there!" a bit like the "she deserved it" sexual assault argument?
Doesn't matter what they have done, wrong is wrong. (Unlike illegal is illegal.)
I don't think it's the same at all. She actively chose to be portrayed as "hot female athlete" and profited from being portrayed as such. So it is hypocritical for her to turn around and be upset at people talking too much about her looks.
But isn't the argument that, "but she did it first by putting it out there!" a bit like the "she deserved it" sexual assault argument?
Doesn't matter what they have done, wrong is wrong. (Unlike illegal is illegal.)
No, I don't think it's the same in this case. I agree with what ttt just said. It's hypocritical.
I think if this were a case like Leisel Jones or Jessica Ennis, who got attacked and called fat in the media, then you can start saying Lolo's being attacked, or they're unfairly focusing on her looks.
But she's put it out there. She's chosen to market her sexuality. Nothing wrong with it. It's her choice. But again, to now criticize the media for focusing on her looks is hypocritical.
And again - no one is criticizing her for doing the pictures.
And again - no one is criticizing her for doing the pictures.
But they are. This whole thread is criticizing her for doing those pictures and then not taking her lumps when she was called out for them.
I didn't and think it is running somewhat similar to "she deserves it". She chose to be in there, it is done tastefully and the continued objectification, per the article, is reason to lash out.
But they are. This whole thread is criticizing her for doing those pictures and then not taking her lumps when she was called out for them.
I didn't and think it is running somewhat similar to "she deserves it". She chose to be in there, it is done tastefully and the continued objectification, per the article, is reason to lash out.
She's sad because people are mean to her about her looks but it's not okay for her to be sad because she posed for photos and therefore its okay to be mean to her even though many men pose for photos too and that's totes cool because they're hot. Got it.
But isn't the argument that, "but she did it first by putting it out there!" a bit like the "she deserved it" sexual assault argument?
Doesn't matter what they have done, wrong is wrong. (Unlike illegal is illegal.)
Not even close.
Posing for nude pictures and then crying about being "objectified" is not akin to dressing less than modestly and getting raped. It's like having sex on the first date then crying about how the dude doesn't respect you when he doesn't see you as anything more than a sure lay.
But isn't the argument that, "but she did it first by putting it out there!" a bit like the "she deserved it" sexual assault argument?
Doesn't matter what they have done, wrong is wrong. (Unlike illegal is illegal.)
Not even close.
Posing for nude pictures and then crying about being "objectified" is not akin to dressing less than modestly and getting raped. It's like having sex on the first date then crying about how the dude doesn't respect you when he doesn't see you as anything more than a sure lay.
The nude photos are a work of art, though. It's not like she did playboy and splashed her vag all over the feature insert.
There's classy and displaying the body as a masterpiece, and displaying yourself like you're a sex object.
Posing for nude pictures and then crying about being "objectified" is not akin to dressing less than modestly and getting raped. It's like having sex on the first date then crying about how the dude doesn't respect you when he doesn't see you as anything more than a sure lay.
The nude photos are a work of art, though. It's not like she did playboy and splashed her vag all over the feature insert.
There's classy and displaying the body as a masterpiece, and displaying yourself like you're a sex object.
And?
I disagree with none of this, but it doesn't change the fact that she put her body out there as an object (a classy, arty one, but still an object) willingly and is now crying about the fact that she is being objectified.
The nude photos are a work of art, though. It's not like she did playboy and splashed her vag all over the feature insert.
There's classy and displaying the body as a masterpiece, and displaying yourself like you're a sex object.
And?
I disagree with none of this, but it doesn't change the fact that she put her body out there as an object (a classy, arty one, but still an object) willingly and is now crying about the fact that she is being objectified.
Being objectified to the point that her athletic accomplishments are taking a back seat. Yet no one seems to have a problem with this because she deserves it for putting herself out there in the first place.
It goes along with all the other objectifying that is going along with the games. Hair, clothing, etc. are all being scrutinized on the female athletes to the exclusion of their athletic accomplishments. Based on what else has been coming out in the news about the female athletes, I feel she has every right to be upset.
FTR, I have just as much of a problem with the men in ESPN's Bodies Issue as I do the women. I hate the Bodies Issue on principle for all athletes.
I saw Lolo on the Today Show this morning in tears, all broken up about how unfair the NYT article was and how they should support her, blah blah.
Then I read the article. Maybe I'n biased as someone that spends the bulk of my job doing gender research in sports, but I saw nothing in that NYT article that was harsh.
The fact is out there. Lolo has chosen to take the road to objectify herself. The NYT article is right - that's the main way female athletes can stay relevant today. Is it right? No. Does it suck? Yes. But you don't see Anna Rawston, Gretchen Bliedlier (sp), Hope Solo, or any of the other ones that go that route blaming the media for how they are portrayed when they have a bad meet/match/race.
I just watched a piece on ESPNW where they' e now reduced this to a cat fight between Lolo and the two medalists that won. Oh, awesome. That's just what women's sports needs.
I disagree with none of this, but it doesn't change the fact that she put her body out there as an object (a classy, arty one, but still an object) willingly and is now crying about the fact that she is being objectified.
Being objectified to the point that her athletic accomplishments are taking a back seat. Yet no one seems to have a problem with this because she deserves it for putting herself out there in the first place.
It goes along with all the other objectifying that is going along with the games. Hair, clothing, etc. are all being scrutinized on the female athletes to the exclusion of their athletic accomplishments. Based on what else has been coming out in the news about the female athletes, I feel she has every right to be upset.
See, I think this is bunk.
She doesn't have any Olympic accomplishments. Of course they are going to take a back seat. If she hadnt put herself out there the way she has, no one would be talking about her at all. Just like no one is talking about many of the other non-medaling americans. Anyone who makes a splash personality wise is scrutinized extra, no matter their sex (see Ryan lochte), it is not gender specific.
That said, she still has every "right" to be upset. But that right doesn't make her emotional response at all logical.
Being objectified to the point that her athletic accomplishments are taking a back seat. Yet no one seems to have a problem with this because she deserves it for putting herself out there in the first place.
I'll argue that it's her job to put her accomplishments out there as well.
It's self promotion either way. Mia Hamm was a successful athlete, right?
Here's a better example - Serena Williams has done plenty of self-objectifying things (including the Bodies Issue). Yet I bet people can more easily list out her athletic accomplishments then they could Lolo's.
It makes complete sense that women want and require to be treated/seen as equals to men. However, here is a list of synonyms for the word Equal: equivalent, identical, like, alike, the same, one and the same.
Stop the got dang martyrdumb and try earning it! lol
Post by sporklemotion on Aug 8, 2012 18:34:43 GMT -5
I feel sorry for her, not because of the "ridicule" that she's experiencing, but because she seems really unable to handle the spotlight and to keep it together. I saw the same interview that Mery referenced, and it just seemed like she was all over the place. Nothing I read in those articles seems to bashing her in the way that she claims. I don't follow tennis closely, so I don't really see why it's SO awful to be compared to Anna Kournikova (I'd be pissed if I were Anna K.!). I can understand not wanting to be objectified and being upset that people are more focused on your looks than on your athleticism, and to critique that, but the NYT article was pointing that out, too. It was critical of her for capitalizing on it, but I don't see how it was "ripping her to shreds," as she claims. It's not like it was saying that she didn't earn her spot in the Olympics-- it was just pointing out that she has gotten more attention than the more likely winners (who did end up winning) in her event. I feel a lot sorrier for Dawn Harper, at least based on the article. At the end of the day, it seems like most of the memorable athletes are either jaw-droppingly successful (ala Michael Phelps), good at capturing the spotlight, or really, really hot. There's a limited window of opportunity to get widespread attention, and I don't think it's restricted to one gender. It seems like she's hoping to be known for being extraordinary, but not many fourth-place finishers become known for that. I feel like Lolo's manager or agent should probably help her manage her image and perhaps keep quiet until she has a chance to process the attention she's getting.
The article was mean spirited and rather rude. I don't think that she put herself out there so much as she is a beautiful woman who warrants a second glance. Her performance in the Olympic has not been medal worthy but it certainly hasn't been dismal.
I know I am late as hell but honestly she isn’t that pretty. I would give up foot for her abs but she isn’t drop dead or even the best looking one competing. OP you and a HOST of other ladies on this board put her to shame. Additionally I saw that interview when she broke down. I was with her until she started the fake crying. H and I couldn’t stop laughing at that point especially when she went on about being the record holder, blah blah blah. Who was it that called her the Anna Kournichova(I know I fucked up the spelling) of track, because that make me LOL as well. Finally can anyone comment about the drug testing for the Olympics vs. other events? I have noticed a few track athletes having kick ass times when they are not competing in the Olympics as opposed to their times in London 2012. Oh yeah and that one woman has BAD acne.