Posted on 01/29/2019 5:12:06 AM PST by Kaslin
If I were to tell you that a growing group of killjoys wants to ban NFL cheerleading, would you guess that this group is on the political left or right?
Must be the right, right? They're the religious ones with all the sexual hang-ups.
Wrong.
They're on the left.
And what's their problem with cheerleading?
I'll let them speak for themselves.
In The Boston Globe, Margery Eagan, Globe columnist and co-host of NPR's "Boston Public Radio," wrote a column titled "It's time to say goodbye to the NFL cheerleaders." She described NFL cheerleading as "creepy and demeaning."
USA Today sports columnist Nancy Armour came to the same conclusion: "The underlying premise of NFL cheerleaders is degrading. ... NFL cheerleaders need to go."
Chicago Tribune sports reporter Shannon Ryan wrote, "The league has shown only that it regards cheerleaders as pieces of sideline eye candy." To make her point, she asked, "why aren't there scantily dressed male cheerleaders and dance teams?"
Only the well-educated could ask such a stupid question -- because only the highly educated deny that, with few exceptions, the only people who would like to see scantily dressed male cheerleaders are gay men.
In USA Today, Yale Divinity School Director of Communications Tom Krattenmaker added a theological voice to the anti-cheerleader chorus. "It's time," he intoned, "to call this out for what it is: demeaning to women and an anachronism that ought to be beneath the male fans to whom this titillating eye candy is served." This sentence, and his whole piece, is what goes for deep thought on the left today. He doesn't explain how being an NFL cheerleader is "demeaning." He simply declares it so. Did he bother to interview any cheerleaders? I did, and the consensus among cheerleaders is that it is one of their greatest life experiences.
Jacie Scott, a black woman who retired from being a Dallas Cowboys cheerleader in 2016, wrote in response to Nancy Armour: "I spent four years as a cheerleader in the NFL, and the experiences that each year brought helped shape me into the woman I am today. ... I saw countries I never imagined seeing. I made a positive impact in lives, young and old, and I did it all with 30-something incredible women. I wouldn't trade my time as a cheerleader for anything."
What is demeaning to cheerleaders is not cheerleading but people like Tom Krattenmaker, Shannon Ryan, Margery Eagan and Nancy Armour who have the conceit -- and meanness -- to label these women demeaned.
I interviewed a former Atlanta Falcons cheerleader, Nina Ahlin (now Noa Hami), on my radio show. When she entered my studio, I was struck by how attractive she was 20 years after retiring from cheerleading, and by her modest dress. Regarding her dress, she explained that soon after retiring as a cheerleader, she met an Orthodox Jewish man, fell in love, converted to Orthodox Judaism and married.
Apparently, her religious husband, a successful businessman, didn't find this woman's cheerleading background "demeaning." On the contrary, like the vast majority of men -- religious or secular -- he was delighted to be dating and ultimately marrying an NFL cheerleader. Good thing he didn't go to Yale Divinity School.
It was clear that even now, as an Orthodox Jew who dresses in the long skirts and long sleeves, she doesn't find cheerleading demeaning: She sent me a photo of herself from her cheerleader days.
As she wrote to me: "I can't imagine my life without having the experience I did as an NFL cheerleader. It was literally life changing for me. The friendships I made, the places we were able to go and the people we were able to meet can't be duplicated. ... The thought of that being taken away from young girls who dream of one day becoming a pro cheerleader scares me!"
Why do leftists have contempt for cheerleading and cheerleaders (who, after all, choose to be cheerleaders -- and for virtually no pay)?
A Vanity Fair piece on cheerleaders gave the game away: "The league profits from selling a retrograde notion of masculinity -- big, strong men, unafraid to take a hit, surrounded by enthusiastic, scantily clad women."
Or as a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation article titled "Pro cheerleading 'should be abolished'" reported, former professional basketball player Mariah Burton Nelson said, "Cheerleading implies that women's proper role is to support men, smile at men and fulfill the sexual fantasies of males."
The left has contempt for masculinity and the male sexual nature that is part of it. The new emasculated man will not look at sexy women. And the new defeminized woman will not want to "support men," let alone appear sexy for them.
The left claims to be pro-choice. But it demands the abolition of NFL (and NBA) cheerleading without giving women a choice to be cheerleaders -- just as it never gave Miss America participants a choice when it abolished the Miss America swimsuit competition. Leftists believe they are morally superior people and, therefore, have the right to deprive anyone -- man or woman -- from choosing what the left disdains. The only woman's choice the left cares about is the choice to extinguish nascent human life.
Even if you have no interest in football or cheerleading, this should be your issue. We have to tell the left here, as in virtually every other area of life, and in the most forceful terms possible: Just leave us alone. Let us live our lives with our small joys. And grow up -- men like looking at women, and women like being looked at.
A world with NFL cheerleaders is far preferable to the world the left wants to create: a dystopia in which men and women are interchangeable.
>>No, it’s not a good point.
Apples and oranges, again.<<
I think you need to learn some forensics. Scantily clad is scantily clad. Whether on the beach, on the field, on a magazine cover or in a concert.
Frankly, the sexual moves in a Beyonce concert are a LOT more sexual (basically simulating sex) than cheerleaders.
Not apples and oranges at all. Your assertion is not a contention. You say scantily clad women are acting like sluts. Your words.
I say men like to see them. Evolution may say that men’s atavistic response is from a desire to reproduce but Real Men know that and can control themselves.
I have to assume you are not one of those men and thus need to have the temptation removed.
Again: the gear and activities have not changed for 40 years. That is a fact.
We're talking about NFL cheerleaders here, grown women. They can choose to do what they like and don't need a permission slip signed by their moms. Well, they can unless lefty SJWs suddenly deem that job undesirable, then they have to find a different dream.
Lefties still seem to think stripping and porn are okay so those are approved career paths still, though my sense is that the NFL cheerleaders are beautiful and outgoing but not trampy so they probably don't want those jobs. So if's off to McDonalds to flip birgers I guess. At least they won't be "demeaned" anymore by dancing on a football field.
Because you disagree with the poster, the OlLine Rebel, who was upholding morality, as real men are to men do, vs licentiousness.Thus in responding to him i also pinged you to "Actually Kaslin argues as if something is wrong with you, like liberals do," but as i mistook kaslin for the author, so in correcting that I also pinged you. That's how you got looped.
Meanwhile the burka argument is a false, eitheer/or dichotomy, as explained .
It’s an absurd strawman argument.
Western civ was NEVER as restrictive as Moslem terrorists. But just because they like to be modest does not make ANYONE ELSE who wants modesty a Moslem terrorist. It’s been common in every real civilization.
I am against TASTELESS TRASH that trivializes women and turns them into objects of lust. I wear bikinis, etc. I will NOT wear a thong type showing all the booty - NEVER would, even at my most gorgeous self. That is disgusting overt sexuality. So yeah, I’m not big on the “swimsuit” (Playboy) issue. If it shouldn’t be seen by kids, it shouldn’t be in public, period.
BTW, I’m a woman.
So yeah, one might say I’m a bit prejudiced. But then, we often assume men will be biased.
Not you. Good for you.
It’s more respectable than trying to titillate men.
Which generally libs are all about. They are obsessed with sex and drugs. Anything that leads to ruin.
No — it is a question of degree and NOT a false dichotomy.
Maybe not burkas per se but coverings as dictated by someone.
Burkas are his argument, merely taken the the only logical extreme.
“as dictated by someone.”
Who said there would be laws?
That is the false premise of liberals - like WE always make laws. THEY do that.
This is nothing to do about laws. It’s about societal norms and common decency. There used to be lots of that. Expectations. So what if our opinion is it is immoral and lewd? We have every right to express that, and try to change how things are done. But it has nothing to do with forcing anything by government.
That is the same kind of false premise liberals use - as if conservatives, e.g., are always making laws about morality. Rarely, do we. We make lots of statements and noise, but not laws.
bump
Oh Please.
Never believed Cheerleading was a sport. Now I do. Competetive Cheerleading is intense.
High school and college sport cheerleading is athletic.
The attire is fine, imo. None of my kids were cheerleaders, they played sports, but cheerleading is a sport now.
We women snarl and cringe?
Not all of us.
Nothing wrong with cheerleaders and especially now with how athletically competitively they are.
OMG I hope this is a facetious post.
If not, no words.
So “hookers” are ok in high school?
WTFever.
HA!
I bet I’m more Conservative than you.
And being a Conservative and/or Christian doesn’t give one carte blanche to cram their myopic sense of morality down other people’s throats because by doing so they’re no better than the taliban or the liberals for that matter.
Abortions of convenience (other than medical, rape or incest) should be illegal, the board of directors of planned parenthood and the politicians who support them should be brought up on charges of genocide.
Children should be able to pray in school as they so choose. The Pledge of Allegiance should once again be recited along with having a moment of silence.
Government should be out of everyone’s homes and businesses. Some politician or government bureaucrat should never have any right to tell a parent how to raise their kid or tell a business owner who they have to hire (affirmative action), or provide service for (baking a cake).
Do away with “hate crimes” laws since these are rarely if ever equally applied.
Do away with anti-discrimination laws for the above stated reason.
Do away with affirmative action laws. Everyone should be hired for a job or selected to attend a school based on their character, education, or other skills instead of race or gender.
Eliminate motor-voter laws in federal elections, and enforce 100% ID check in such elections.
As far as the federal government, 85% of it can be reduced in scope/reach or eliminated outright.
End baseline budgeting, and roll the budget back 30 years.
End all government employee unions. Fire and/or prosecute those employees who steal from the taxpayers.
Military veterans with an honorable discharge regardless of time in service should be issued a rifle and magazines for said rifle upon discharge.
Secure the border, and end all immigration for 25 years. No H1 or other visas for employment purposes allowed either. Anyone and everyone here in this country illegally will be given 30 days to pack up everything lock, stock, and barrel and return to their home countries and never return. If they do try to return, they are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and must repay 100% of all social services they previously used.
Repeal the XVII Amendment, and replace it with one that returns the selection of Senators to the individual state’s legislatures. Also imposes term limits on the house and senate, ban family members from running for the same seat once a term has expired. And a lifetime ban for outgoing congressmen/senators and their families from lobbying. They will also be prevented from seeking another seat in another chamber (house to senate or senate to house), district or state.
There should also be tort reform.
That’s just for starters.
Excellent post!
You don’t get to decide.
Yeah I know.
A comedy genius such as Mel Brooks would be thrown in prison for doing a movie such as Blazing Saddles these days.
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.