In a society that is often unfairly dominated by males, some female athletes are often portrayed in a sexual way. Women should obviously not be degraded and looked at as objects. However, a woman and a man have the choice to not pose in their underwear, swimsuits, or any other sexual ways. Athletes earn a lot of money for posing in little or no clothing and as a result can gain a lot popularity. They are the ones that put themselves out there to be viewed as eye candy and judged not by their performance or character, but instead how attractive they are. In my opinion, athletes should focus more on their performance on the field and involvement in the community with charities instead of taking off their clothes. I understand that a human body can be viewed as "artistic" when someone poses in a photo shoot wearing little or no clothing. However, I feel like it degrades women and it is not necessary at all for someone to pose in a sexual manner. I even feel like if women want to have even more respect in sports, then female athletes shouldn't pose in sexual ways for magazines or any other types of media outlets. They should leave all of that to models and other celebrities.
-Corey Krupa
Corey,
ReplyDeleteI do agree with what you are saying here. I think that it is also the athlete's choice as a whole to be able to determine whether or not they are comfortable doing these shoots. I believe they can take it upon themselves not to be viewed in that way by not standing for certain aspects of how they are being portrayed. Some women athletes may be more open towards being portrayed in a sexual way, while others are not. I don't think that it is something that should be necessary for a women in sports to be portrayed solely based on sex. However, if it something that they themselves are alright with, I believe that decision to be theirs alone.
-Chris Lang
Corey,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you on this topic. While it is degrading to have naked women or even half naked women on magazines and advertisements, I think that it's part of the business. If the athlete wants to put themselves in that situation and sign on to a photo shoot then they have every right to do that. If they feel that it is best for their career to appear half naked on magazine covers or in advertisements then they can do that. Many female athletes do not have the same earning potential as their male counterparts, and while this is not fair, modeling and posing in advertisements does give them a way to make extra money. I agree with you when you say that athletes should focus more on their performance. If they want to be recognized more then they should compete and win in their respective sport.
- Brian Kochheiser
I agree with Corey that women can deny an opportunity to be in a magazine that promotes objective pictures of women. Still I feel that some athletes (boy or girl) simply do not see the objective intentions some magazines have. Sure magazines like playboy have made a name for themselves in terms of objective photography, but what about the magazines that have standards. An ESPN magazine (as showed in class) has Serena Williams posing naked on their front cover. Maybe some athletes simply see a photo shoot for a magazine as a sign that they have made it big. Maybe they feel that it is their duty or honored privilege to have photos taken for a magazine. If this is the case in more instances then one, then the magazine companies are the ones at fault. They are the ones that set the standard for the acceptance of objective photography for both men and women.
ReplyDeleteJay Clark
I agree and disagree with Corey in some areas of his blog. I agree totally at the beginning when he mentions that some female athletes are often portrayed in a sexual way and when he says that women should obviously not be degraded and looked at as objects. But the area in which I disagree is when Corey mentions that athletes should focus more on their performance on the field and involvement in the community with charities instead of taking off their clothes. You can say that for superstars of the sports, but for an average athlete who isn’t guaranteed as much money and has to think about ways to earn more cash, I believe they should go ahead and do it. It’s not like their posing for Playboy, their posing for ESPN and SI. This may sound wrong but involvement in the community is not going to get you money. It’s looking for business elsewhere that will.
ReplyDeleteAnthony Cornwell, Jr.
Corey,
ReplyDeleteYou're completely right about money being the most important factor, but that is going to be extremely hard to change. While there are athletes that would much rather gain publicity through charitable efforts and humanistic campaigns, there will always be those athletes that would rather make an extra hundred thousand dollars than help out the community and there is nothing that can be done about that. I think that if there was a shift in culture in professional sports where athletes were more worried about setting positive examples than making money, then society would benefit more from sports as a whole. Also, the media could help out by promoting athletes in ways other than having them take their clothes off for a camera. Maybe producing a special issue of SI where they have a charity issue that covers all athletes that help out in their community. That could be a good way to encourage a change of culture in sports.
-Travis Kash
Corey,
ReplyDeleteI see it the same way you do I don't see why athletes receive so much scrutiny for wanting to do what they want with their lives. However, I do understand that some are role models and being portrayed they way they are in some ways in the media doesn't provide the best example for children. Due to that fact it is not up to the media to change what they are trying to sell but the responsibility falls more on the athlete himself. Men or female it is time we get more athletes willing to stand against doing certain things that promote the "sex sells" image of sport but better yet promote their individual sport. As males I don't believe we will ever be able to understand the female struggle in athletic revenue. They don't get paid as much in their respective sport so these endorsements are the main way of making a lot of money so there's definitely a conflict of moral interest when it comes to this subject.
Jude
Corey,
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to athletes wearing little to no clothes in photo shoots, I think it should be relevant to the media production that is taking the pictures. For example, if Lindsey Vonn has a photo shoot for a sports magazine then she should be in her sports attire that she would actually wear in competition as it is a magazine geared toward sports. Now if Michael Phelps was partaking in a photo shoot for swimming magazine and was in a wetsuit/swimming suit that too is alright because these are the athletes in their gear they would wear for competition. However, if an athlete agrees to partake in a magazine that focuses on the athletes body such as Playboy or Flex then that is up to the athlete to make that decision what to wear since at that moment they are not trying to sell sports, they are selling some other object that they are being paid for. Ultimately, in today’s society sex sells sex but wish it didn’t have to and sports could be equal.
Billy Nowak
Corey-
ReplyDeleteI understand where you're coming from when you say athletes should focus more on their on-field performance instead of how they look but the only problem with that is that female athletes don't get the recognition otherwise. So, these female athletes are trying to make money but aren't getting the attention so they turn to modeling and endorsements to earn more money. While I may not agree with that, these athletes make their own choices and live their own lives so who am I to judge? In regards to what Jude said, I agree that if we want to see a change, these athletes have to be the ones to make it. It's going to take dozens of them coming out and saying enough is enough and we are not going to be exploited as sex symbols any longer. If that happened, we may see advertisers look to other avenues to promote their products but in the end, the decisions lie with each individual athlete and we can't make those choices for them.
Ben Mathey
Corey,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you. When male and female athletes pose in little to no clothing for magazines, they are doing it willingly. Although magazine publishers like Sports Illustrated and ESPN might be objectifying women just to make a quick buck, I feel as though the female athletes really do want to pose for these magazines. For their whole lives these women have been portrayed as being dominant at their sport, so doing a sexy photo shoot for SI or ESPN is their chance to show the world that they can also be girly. That being said, I think when female athletes pose for magazines it gives a lot more people a chance to find out who they are and build a little interest. For instance, when I saw Danica Patrick in SI I really didn’t know who she was. But as I looked at her pictures and read a little bit about her I couldn’t help but think, “Wow, this tiny, gorgeous girl drives cars 200 mph along side 42 other cars? That’s incredible!” Then, consequently, I had more of an interest in watching NASCAR.
Evan Sechler
I agree that the posing half-naked should be left to the models. Overall, the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue isn’t as offensive to me due to the fact that the women are models and they are paid to pose in those sorts of outfits. However, when a female athlete does it, it puts the athlete in a difficult position because of the message it sends. There is a big difference between men and women posing with very little clothing on. It seems to be much more “taboo” in our society for a woman to be wearing practically nothing than it is for a man. We see interviews in locker rooms all the time where male athletes are walking around in just a towel, whereas I don’t believe I have ever seen that with a woman. I guess that is just another area where male and female athletes are not viewed equally.
ReplyDeleteShaun Higgins
Corey,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that it is an individual's decision as to how they choose to portray themselves, but I also think there are external factors that athletes and fans alike do not even realize are influencing their decisions. A female athlete is constantly fighting the public's view of her that she is masculine because of her muscles and athletic talent. In order for her to counterbalance this perception and "prove" her femininity to the world, who she likely feels is against her, posing without clothes is an easy and beneficial (in terms of publicity and pay) way for a female athlete to feel better about herself internally. While this is not beneficial to women's sport as a whole, the female athletes who have done this likely felt it was good for them while they were doing it.
Whitney
I definitely agree that the way some female athletes pose and are viewed in the media can be interpreted as sexual in nature and often times that’s the intention. However I don’t think that if female athletes stopped posing like this that they would instead receive more attention for their athletic accomplishments. I’m in no way endorsing this train of thought and I agree that is inherently wrong for a female athlete to have to capitalize on their sexuality to become popular in their sport, however that seems to be the way our society operates. It would be nice if we lived in a world where we could just enjoy both genders athletic accomplishments for what they are, but the problem is sex does sell and it also brings attention and publicity to female athletes and sports that just wouldn’t be there. Should Lindsey Vonn have to pose in the Swimsuit Edition of Sports Illustrated to gain attention for her sport? No. But does it work? And does it make her more marketable and increase her profit potential? Unfortunately yes and yes, so I don’t see the model changing anytime soon.
ReplyDeleteMax Perry