Posted on 08/18/2016 12:32:54 PM PDT by Kaslin
My, my, there those feminists go, complaining again. This time the whining concerns supposedly “sexist” Olympics coverage. Their problem?
Many journalists are, we’re told, using different language when talking about female athletes than when speaking of male ones. Oh, the humanity!
There’s the guy who credited a female swimmer’s husband/coach for her success, the talk about a six-foot-three-inch South Korean woman volley ball player’s difficulty finding a boyfriend, and a reporter who called an equestrian rider “blondie.” Putting aside the female teacher who once called me blondie when I was 13, let’s have a reality check. Do you really think sports commentators don’t look for storylines, often infused with frivolity, relating to male athletes? And insofar as the treatment is different, so what? As even über-liberal Bill Maher once observed (I’m paraphrasing), “We have two standards because there are two sexes.” But speaking of standards and differences, let’s get to a quintessential feminist complaint in a recent (very) Lost Angeles Times piece about “sexist Olympics coverage.”
Citing a Cambridge University Press study, writer Julie Makinen tells us, “The research, which analyzed multibillion-word databases of written and spoken English language, found that in general, men are referenced twice as often as women, but when the topic is sports, the ratio is about 3 to 1.” Male athletes earn more money as well, which also irks the feminists.
Of course, this is much like complaining about how heavyweight boxers get more press than lightweights or, speaking of lightweights, like kvetching about Barack Obama getting more exposure than a state legislator from Lakeview. Has Makinen ever heard of “market forces”?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Because, statistically, men are very different from women in strength and stamina. We are made differently.
If a man were on a women’s sports team, the women’s team would have an unfair advantage.
If an all male team were to compete against a women’s team, the male team would usually win.
It would be unfair.
But you can’t say that out loud. Everybody knows it, but nobody dares to say it.
Now to Bruce Jenner. Suppose he decides to play on a women’s team, with his long hair and fake chest. The team would have an unfair advantage, but nobody would ever say anything about it. The opposing team would then go looking for a man who lost his weewee, beard, and grew long hair.
These games have been unwatchable.
Womans wrestling?
Womans weightlifting?
Really?
Last Sunday 90% of the coverage was womans sports.
Unwatchable
__________
I read were 60% of the Olympic TV viewers were women, hence all the women’s sports and all the life stories features.
Show transsexuals can pretend they are class athletes ready to go pro!
I love the sports for women nearly as much as those for men. And in some instances, the women have been given more coverage than the men.
Gymnastics, for instance. OTOH, that coverage is due to the outcomes. Winners always get more coverage than losers.
There is some credibility in covering women athletes. A lot of covering boyfriends, etc.
I loved Ledecky until I heard she is a big Springsteen fan.
who...?
“Most female sports are boring.”
Agreed. Unless of course you are comparing the NFL to the Lingerie Football League. ;)
Suppose he decides to play on a women’s team, with his long hair and fake chest. The team would have an unfair advantage, but nobody would ever say anything about it.
the guy’s 67 years old; he’s not going to give anybody an unfair advantage...
It is some gif.
Why do the Olympic games exist?
There are few sportsman-like athletes these days. Most of them are whiney, selfish competitors who are there partying, badmouthing other athletes, and hoping to get endorsements.
Yes, but then that becomes something other than "sport."
Why do the Olympic games exist?
I’m ready for them to go away...
The only female team sport I can watch and truly enjoy without thinking how much better this would be if it were men playing is softball.
“Male athletes earn more money as well, which also irks the feminists.”
There is no ‘equality’ in female sports. If they want equal money then let them compete against the men.
I was upset when female tennis players demanded equal pay. Wimbledon agreed. What they should have told the females is, “If you want equal pay then you have to play five sets.”
Annnnd. . . .so we can ogle some darned hot looking women. . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAmqs-vL0E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMgmYutL9W0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76ya9jif7nI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTDrBk8eA1o
etc. . . .
sounds good
Have you seen the shoulders on Biles? If she were another foot taller, she could be a linebacker.
Because there's money to be made.
On another note, I was just watching the US Olympic WOMEN'S basketball team a few days ago, and they were almost as entertaining to watch s the men's team. They were putting on a showcase of team basketball skills, whereas the men's team is playing more individually. Not a lot of assists.
The point being, women's sports can generate significant revenues as an entertainment product, so when it makes economic sense, that's when it flourishes.
“C-c-c-catfight!”
Why Do Women’s Sports Even Exist?
Because there’s money to be made.
not really...but feel free to think so...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.