snail wrote:
CalamityJane88 wrote:
I feel like this thread has really explored people's thoughts on the podium girls (or mine, anyway. Thanks for reading.), including people's issues with it.
I have heard quite a few people express the idea that they are uncomfortable with sexy women who appear to have limited responsibilities at the awards ceremony for this male cycling event.
Obviously, each of us has our own comfort level for sexiness on display, and we have our own ideas of where and when its appropriate.
I think we should have understanding and compassion for those people, like Dev, who experience an adverse feeling from the podium girls. Dev's not a prude. But he has a different sensibility than us.
Have you ever seen just too much? It makes you feel, "ewwgh." One of favorite secretaries always wore revealing shirts at work. She was the best secretary, but every shirt was a scoop neck and her breasts were proudly put out there for us. I didn't really want to have to see them, but there they were. Forever just sitting there.
Maybe that example won't mean much to you. But I'm sure there's been a time when you wanted to un-see somebody's sexy display.
How do we reconcile our differences?
It doesn't have anything to do with sexiness - I haven't seen anyone complain about this and these girls are modestly dressed. In any case, we've all had an ear-bashing now and can probably come to the conclusion that we will have to agree to disagree. :)
^^^What snail said.
It seems to me that Calamity keeps arguing against a point that no-one is making and is missing the real objection.
I have re-stated my objection more than once in this thread because the point is being consistently missed by many. I think it's fair to say that most of those who want rid of the podium girls have a similar view to myself and it has nothing to do with whether or not the podium girls themselves like their job, gain from their job, have other roles, or feel exploited. Those are routine issues and no more or less important than for any other employee.
The provision of "eye-candy" appears to endorse the legitimacy of viewing women as objects. Whether you agree that endorsement exists or not, surely you must realise how this will be understood by society as a whole and how it reflects and is re-absorbed by society as a whole. I think Calamity argued earlier that if men were objectifying women that was their problem and it wasn't the women's responsibility to address it. That's a massive and inaccurate over-simplification. The people reflect the culture. If we plaster idealised female images all over the place, it contributes to society thinking that's the ideal woman. Make her mute and subservient and that's what society will subconciously tend to believe is normal or acceptable. Obviously there are competing images and ideals. It's not black and white, but it's hard to see how these displays of objectified women are not contributing to the wrong side of the equation (at least if you believe as I do that women deserve the same respect as men).
That's why I don't want podium girls. So Calamity, please don't imagine it has anything to do with sexual insecurity or comfort. That's utterly irrelevant for me, and probably everyone else making a similar point. You're just fooling yourself if you've decided that's the issue. It's really about awareness of the bigger picture. It's about realising how people's brains, and culture itself, works. It's not the way Calamity has suggested. That's a pretend version of reality to be used in action films and children's stories. You say men need to have conversations with their sons and teach them to respect women. You think that's the solution do you? Does that completely negate the influences of the society they grow up in? You're being willfully ignorant in my opinion.
I'll do my very best to teach my son decency, awareness, consideration, responsibility, integrity and compassion. A big part of this will be encouraging him to see what's really there, not just what he wants to see. Having girls acting like objects (i.e. models) undermines the truth. It does so on purpose. Pretend otherwise if you wish, but I believe that's dishonest. Now, I can point out that the existence of those women is in conflict with what I teach him, and I'm sure he'll understand that. But how can I teach him the things I list above and a simultaneously approve of women posed as eye-candy? No. I do not approve. It is in conflict with what most people say they believe in - respect and equality regardless of sex or ethnicity.
