A reader writes:
As a female athlete, I agree heartily with the reader disagreeing with the sex appeal study. My sport is competitive sailing, which at many levels (including the Olympics and college) is co-ed; men and women compete together. So, I've thought a lot about the differences between male and female athletes and how we are treated.
Yes, there is a lot of sexism in athletics (as in pretty much any other field). But I and many of my peers (I am 27) believe strongly in a new version of feminism: one which says we can succeed and look great doing it, no apology necessary. The key is in how we measure our own success – to not rely on or be celebrated for only on our physical attributes, but first and foremost for our accomplishments. I believe that is what the Olympics represents. It's true there are a lot of gorgeous people competing (men and women alike!), but more importantly they are the current peak of human physical performance, and every time the games display more and more impossible feats.
I seems to me that this "sex appeal" conversation has parallels to the Sheryl Sandberg vs. Anne-Marie Slaughter debate.
The huge gains made by the women's lib movement should certainly be honored, but at the same time the attitude of that classic feminism has led to stigma against celebrating womanhood. Women showing more skin get more screen time? Great. I love that two of the most iconic and popular sports from both the summer and winter games are women's events: gymnastics and figure skating. Until this week, a woman held the record for most Olympic medals. We get to watch powerful, skilled men practically every day of the year in professional sports (often in Spandex, I might add). But during the Olympics, we get to revel in the female body – not for the big boobs, but for its grace and athleticism. Maybe we should go back to playing all Olympic sports in the nude.
As for television ratings, sailing has been in the Olympics since the first modern games in 1896. But how much screen time do we get? Almost none. Probably even less than fencing. Most people don't know sailing is in the Olympics at all. Even serious sailors agree that it is a pretty boring sport for spectators; an extremely complex sport that requires a lot of background knowledge. It's true most sailors at the highest level probably aren't wearing only bikinis (though plenty do in warm weather competition), but I suspect that's not the driving force behind our lack of media coverage.
Another writes:
Your reader brought up the US Women's soccer team, which is an interesting case study of this very question because the team has openly, and obviously, gay athletes. The way that stars Alex Morgan and Hope Solo, who are attractive in the straight world, are treated in the media compared to stars Abby Wambach and Megan Rapinoe, who are attractive in the queer world, is very different. It is Alex Morgan in the SI swimsuit edition, not Abby Wambach. I can't decide which is more offensive – that Alex Morgan gets attention because she is hot and not first and foremost because she is an amazing athlete or that Abby Wambach gets attention because she is an amazing athlete and not because she is hot.
It does seem like a female athlete who is not attractive by straight world standards has to be even more amazing of an athlete to get attention. But if you read the comments under US Women's soccer YouTube, videos you will find that they are being objectified by straight men and queer women alike. We all like to see hot athletes.
Don't forget the siblings.
The Dish 