Kay Bailey Hutchison Gets It (Better Late Than Never)

473px-Kay_Bailey_Hutchison,_official_photo_2Retiring Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison recently opined on how her party (the Republicans) really blew it with women voters:

“When we talk about women’s issues and the social issues, people have to stop acting like the woman is a throw-away here,” the Texas senator, who is retiring, said on CNN’s “Starting Point.” “We’ve got to talk to women about the issues they care about.”

[Emphasis added.] I noticed something during the campaign when certain Republican candidates discussed issues pertaining to anyone who did not fit the affluent white Christian male demographic. It seemed to me like they tended to talk about people in those groups (e.g. women, people of color, LGBT people), but they rarely if ever talked to them. I’m not just referring to the more abhorrent of the Republican field, a la Todd Akin. Even Mitt Romney had a tendency, when addressing women’s issues, to speak as though he were discussing abstract concepts, rather than deeply-held concerns that affect the lives of more than half of the people in this country.

I don’t see how the Republican party can stop being the party of old, rich, white, Christian men, and those who aspire to belong to their club, without more soul-searching and compromise than is possible. Then again, people sang dirges to the demise of the Republican Party in 2006 and 2008, and the same was said of the Democratic Party in 2004 and 2010. It is impossible to say what will happen to the two parties with which we are stuck, but it is fun to guess.

I’m just glad to see that there is at least one Republican senator – albeit a retiring one – who is getting a clue.

Photo credit: “Kay Bailey Hutchison, official photo 2” by United States Congress. (http://hutchison.senate.gov/resources/presskit.zip) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons.

Share

Hell hath no fury

Presented not for myself, but on behalf of people I care about.

Hell Hath No Fury, graphic by sarahlee310

November 6, 2012: Get your ass out there and vote.

Photo credit: Hell Hath No Fury by sarahlee310

Share

Admit it, this does not contribute to the game itself in any way

Sports viewers, by and large, tend to be male. Statistical support or no, that is the conventional wisdom.

Male television viewers, by and large, tend to like certain things. These things are also part of conventional wisdom, statistical support or no: violence, beer, boobs. (This is not an exhaustive list, by the way.)

So how do marketers get more people (i.e. guys) to watch the Olympics?

Violence: there’s only so much you can do to make Olympic sports more violent, and the potential cost in international relations probably outweighs any benefit to ratings.

Beer: even the most hardcore boozehound would probably agree that the middle of a mountain biking run or a swim meet is not the best time to down a few.

Boobs: Hmmmmm…tell me more……

(h/t to Ragen) Let’s face it, there is no athletic advantage to wearing skimpy outfits, unless the knowledge that lots of people are staring at your bum improves your game. As Aussie blogger Lauredhel said in preparation for the 2008 Olympics:

No. It’s not about faster, higher, stronger. Women in sports are promoted as sexualised bodies for ogling; men are promoted as performers.

She offered a side-by-side comparison of male and female athletic outfits for the Australian teams, such as:

Here are a few side-by-side comparisons of what Aussie contenders are put into

In case you can’t see the image, on the left is a male beach volleyball player in a comfortably-baggy jersey and shorts that reach at least halfway down his thighs. On the right are two female players with remarkable abs. We know this because we can see all of them, and can offer a clinic description of the muscle tone in their thighs.

Not quite a year ago, the Badminton World Federation, trying to combat the problem of no one ever watching badminton, tried to mandate that female players wear skirts. They quickly ditched that rule in the face of massive criticism. They need to either find a different way to drum up interest in the sport, or just admit that few people enjoy watching a sport with a game piece called a shuttlecock.

Now, it would not add anything to my experience of watching the Olympics to put male athletes into similarly-revealing uniforms, nor would it add anything to the actual performance of the Games themselves.

But neither would it take away from my experience of watching the Olympics (or their performance) to put female athletes into uniforms that make a bit more athletic sense. Plus, it’s not about me. There is some evidence that all this sexifying is turning girls away from getting involved in sports at all, and that’s bad in and of itself.

If I want to see beautiful ripped women in skimpy clothes in various states of sweatiness, Rule 34 dictates that it is available to me at any time on the internet. If I want to see world-class displays of athletic prowess, that only happens a few times a decade.

Consider this an example of my point and/or eye candy. Here’s Croatian high jumper Blanka Vlašić in Greece in 2009. She probably could have performed just as well with a bit more clothes on and still done a sexy dance:

All of this said, I am sure I will still watch beach volleyball this summer.

Share