Women their own worst enemy?

Women will never have to worry about being their own worst enemy as long as there are men around. :wink:
Lois

Wow you guys are dishonest.
If you're focusing on women athletes, it must depend upon where you live. I live in Indiana and I don't have cable TV. I've been watching the Women's World Cup Soccer games (when on Telemundo or Fox), and honestly have not noticed any teams with Victoria's Secret type uniforms. Locally we have the various Notre Dame women's teams, but still, nothing shocking or provocative there either. Are you talking Beach Volleyball?
You're right, definitely not all women's sports. I was specifically talking about Track and Field.
And guys, please don't lie to us here and say when you see a female runner dressed in a bikini, your first thought is one of respect.
WHOA! Back up a minute. Are you implying that to acknowledge that someone is a cutie, or hottie, that it immediately means disrespect; or lascivious; or disgusting; or predatory thoughts? I'm saying the first thought in your head is NOT one of respect. It's one of a sexual nature that does NOT include respect. And I'm particularly talking about a certain level of "lack" of clothing here. We're talking degrees.
Women will never have to worry about being their own worst enemy as long as there are men around. ;) Lois
Actually you missed my point entirely. Women will ALWAYS have to worry about it as long as in their actions they cater to the base (though natural) sexual nature of men. If you dress like a prostitute, do not in the next sentence ask for respect. And that's the message these women athletes (the ones that wear bikinis to a track and field meet) send...see me as an object first, an athlete second. And if you think dressing in a tiny bikini ISN'T objectifying women then you're lying to yourself. That's why strippers wear that typeof clothes, to arouse men. (And btw, there's nothing wrong with that...in the context of a strip club.) This argument really could be applied to any group. Take MLK. What would your advice to him have been if at every rally he spoke to he wore an outrageous blue wig, a big red clown nose, and huge floppy white shoes, i.e. he dressed like Bozo the clown? You'd say dude, if you want to be taken seriously, don't dress like that. (And some of the posters here would reply - hey, he can wear whatever he likes. I don't judge people that way. ...And you'd be lying to yourself, just like here and now.)
Actually you missed my point entirely. Women will ALWAYS have to worry about it as long as in their actions they cater to the base (though natural) sexual nature of men. If you dress like a prostitute, do not in the next sentence ask for respect. And that’s the message these women athletes (the ones that wear bikinis to a track and field meet) send…see me as an object first, an athlete second. And if you think dressing in a tiny bikini ISN’T objectifying women then you’re lying to yourself. That’s why strippers wear that typeof clothes, to arouse men. (And btw, there’s nothing wrong with that…in the context of a strip club.) This argument really could be applied to any group. Take MLK. What would your advice to him have been if at every rally he spoke to he wore an outrageous blue wig, a big red clown nose, and huge floppy white shoes, i.e. he dressed like Bozo the clown? You’d say dude, if you want to be taken seriously, don’t dress like that. (And some of the posters here would reply - hey, he can wear whatever he likes. I don’t judge people that way. ...And you’d be lying to yourself, just like here and now.)
Please show the audience here pictures of women in bikinis competing in a high school or college track and field event. And why do you objectify men's sexual nature as "base"? What's the problem with heterosexual males being naturally drawn to women? This concept sounds straight out of a Bronze Age text we all know and love. Also, Sect. 3 Article 1 of the official NCAA rules for uniforms require a competitor's top to fall below the waistband of the shorts and the shorts must be of a length to clearly show the competitor's number. Nothing said about a bikini or prostitutes competing in the long jump. In fact the only bikini clad women are those who play beach volleyball, once again so what? If an athlete wants to show off her body on the beach, what's the harm? Man, don't ever visit a nude beach in Europe or the Caribbean; you might have a stroke. And what does MLK wearing a blue wig have to do with treating him as a sex object? That analogy doesn't fly in this case. What does athletic prowess and a toned body have to do with the Civil Rights movement? Cap't Jack
Wow you guys are dishonest. My point wasn't about women's right to wear whatever they want. Of course they can and the more in my age group who wear less and less the better. My point was that if women want to gain respect, in my example in the area of athletics, then they should act respectable. And that means dressing appropriately. There's a reason women in strip clubs dress like they do. And guys, please don't lie to us here and say when you see a female runner dressed in a bikini, your first thought is one of respect. (And yes I used the word 'appropriately', so please don't go into a knee-jerk debate about what's appropriate. You know exactly what appropriate means...appropriate in the current social context.)
Oh I agree with you in principle. But it IS a question of what's "appropriate". A couple of months ago I saw a news item where Kim Kardashian had given a press conference totally nude (to promote the new season of her cable TV show). She was standing in front of a screen, and she was carefully posed so that everything was covered, but reporters where there taking pictures of her. Now I would say this was totally inappropriate. On any reasonable planet, she would have been arrested for indecent exposure, her show would have been cancelled, and she would have been laughed out of show business entirely. But this was Hollywood, so none of that happened. (I also have to add that there was no danger of my respect for her diminishing in any way, because I was already sick and tired of hearing about the Kardashians.) I haven't seen the track uniforms you're talking about, so I can't really judge.
And guys, please don't lie to us here and say when you see a female runner dressed in a bikini, your first thought is one of respect.
WHOA! Back up a minute. Are you implying that to acknowledge that someone is a cutie, or hottie, that it immediately means disrespect; or lascivious; or disgusting; or predatory thoughts? I'm saying the first thought in your head is NOT one of respect. It's one of a sexual nature that does NOT include respect. And I'm particularly talking about a certain level of "lack" of clothing here. We're talking degrees. Why would recognizing people as sexual beings be disrespectful? What degrees? Do you think sex is "dirty" and that beautiful bodies are supposed to be held in contempt? Your attitude makes no sense to me.
Kardashians.
That's the advantage of not being plugged into Hollyworld I hear the name tossed around plenty but couldn't tell you who she was or what see looks like, and I do know from the context - that I'm not even interested in looking her up. Exploitation for profit - is way different than pride in one's own body and appreciation of others.
Women will never have to worry about being their own worst enemy as long as there are men around. ;) Lois
:lol: :lol: :lol:

I’m still not sure I buy the argument, even regarding Track & Field.
As I understand it, in the “Original Olympics” (Ancient Greece), all the contestants ran nude. I tend to think the modern Olympians, male and female tend to wear what they wear not to expose body parts but to optimize their chances of winning. Should they be wearing baggy shorts or sweat pants for the sake of modesty in the 100m dash? Should men and women wear bathing suits circa 1900 in the swimming competitions?
I am still not persuaded that women are hurting their chances of being taken seriously by the way they currently dress, at least when talking about athletes. Hollywood? That’s a topic unto itself.

Here: https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/girls-inspired-by-world-cup-win-despite-fifas-123483340817.html
A story about how at the celebration of the US Women’s Soccer team many were offended that the ceremony featured a bunch a women in skin tight black mini dresses…which was called sexism. It’s nice to see most people agree with me that that kind of thing takes AWAY from women’s efforts to be seen as more than sexual objects. What worse, and this was my point, is when it’s women themselves doing it as in the case of the track event I cited.

Actually you missed my point entirely. Women will ALWAYS have to worry about it as long as in their actions they cater to the base (though natural) sexual nature of men. If you dress like a prostitute, do not in the next sentence ask for respect. And that’s the message these women athletes (the ones that wear bikinis to a track and field meet) send…see me as an object first, an athlete second. And if you think dressing in a tiny bikini ISN’T objectifying women then you’re lying to yourself. That’s why strippers wear that typeof clothes, to arouse men. (And btw, there’s nothing wrong with that…in the context of a strip club.) This argument really could be applied to any group. Take MLK. What would your advice to him have been if at every rally he spoke to he wore an outrageous blue wig, a big red clown nose, and huge floppy white shoes, i.e. he dressed like Bozo the clown? You’d say dude, if you want to be taken seriously, don’t dress like that. (And some of the posters here would reply - hey, he can wear whatever he likes. I don’t judge people that way. ...And you’d be lying to yourself, just like here and now.)
Please show the audience here pictures of women in bikinis competing in a high school or college track and field event. And why do you objectify men's sexual nature as "base"? What's the problem with heterosexual males being naturally drawn to women? This concept sounds straight out of a Bronze Age text we all know and love. Also, Sect. 3 Article 1 of the official NCAA rules for uniforms require a competitor's top to fall below the waistband of the shorts and the shorts must be of a length to clearly show the competitor's number. Nothing said about a bikini or prostitutes competing in the long jump. In fact the only bikini clad women are those who play beach volleyball, once again so what? If an athlete wants to show off her body on the beach, what's the harm? Man, don't ever visit a nude beach in Europe or the Caribbean; you might have a stroke. And what does MLK wearing a blue wig have to do with treating him as a sex object? That analogy doesn't fly in this case. What does athletic prowess and a toned body have to do with the Civil Rights movement? Cap't Jack
Wow, your lack of understanding is so incredible. And you're such a liar too. Sexual nature is base, as in primal, primitive. Nothing wrong with that, but compared to say an appreciation of art, music, friendship, humans as humans, etc it IS base. And a women showing off her body on the beach is wonderful...UNLESS she's a women who also wants to be respected as an athlete first, female sexual being second. And again, it has nothing to do with being naked. It's all in the context. And OMG you totally missed the point about MLK. Had nothing to do with sex, it was being taken seriously depending on how one presents oneself. If he dressed like a clown no one would take him seriously. BUT half the posted here would seriously argue "gee what's wrong with dressing like a clown, I like clowns". Again...context! AND HERE'S AN EXAMPLE: http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/lapt1x01xss/2008+Olympic+Team+Trials+Track+Field+Day+6/dqhDp8PY1VN/Tiffany+McWilliams And that's a pretty timid example. Just google Women's Track and Field, then do Images. Or google with images: Susen Tiedtke
Wow, your lack of understanding is so incredible. And you’re such a liar too. Sexual nature is base, as in primal, primitive. Nothing wrong with that, but compared to say an appreciation of art, music, friendship, humans as humans, etc it IS base. And a women showing off her body on the beach is wonderful…UNLESS she’s a women who also wants to be respected as an athlete first, female sexual being second. And again, it has nothing to do with being naked. It’s all in the context. And OMG you totally missed the point about MLK. Had nothing to do with sex, it was being taken seriously depending on how one presents oneself. If he dressed like a clown no one would take him seriously. BUT half the posted here would seriously argue “gee what’s wrong with dressing like a clown, I like clowns". Again…context!
Oh my God! Women competing in skimpy outfits! Uncle Peter, my smelling salts! What the hell are you prattling about Man? Your post is perfect example of the objectification of females. Get your head out of your Victorian butt for heaven's sakes! It's the 21st Century and ankles may now be seen. Sexual nature is base? Primal? Primitive? You just ripped a page out of The Ladies Book of Etiquette and politeness (published in 1860). No comparison to art? Damn those pornographic Athenians and their statues, not to mention that horn dog Michelangelo from the Renaissance. And I'll just bet Botticelli's "The Birth of Venus" really makes you puke! The word prude comes to mind here. So, what context? There's uniforms for volleyball, beach bikinis, running, soccer you name it. Each is different and designed for each sport. If you object then avert your eyes in order to prevent carnal thoughts. Once again, your analogy of MLK is totally misplaced. You're aiming your invective at what you deem as skimpy female attire and then liking it to lampooning a Civil Rights leader. A non sequitur sir! Your analogy has absolutely nothing to do with the attire of female athletes, or male ones for that matter. And it's ok now to respect an athlete no matter how their dressed. Cap't Jack
Here: https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/girls-inspired-by-world-cup-win-despite-fifas-123483340817.html A story about how at the celebration of the US Women's Soccer team many were offended that the ceremony featured a bunch a women in skin tight black mini dresses...which was called sexism. It's nice to see most people agree with me that that kind of thing takes AWAY from women's efforts to be seen as more than sexual objects. What worse, and this was my point, is when it's women themselves doing it as in the case of the track event I cited.
If I understood correctly, it wasn't the athletes, it was some models who had been brought on stage during the award ceremony. I agree that seems a bit tacky.
AND HERE'S AN EXAMPLE: http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/lapt1x01xss/2008+Olympic+Team+Trials+Track+Field+Day+6/dqhDp8PY1VN/Tiffany+McWilliams And that's a pretty timid example. Just google Women's Track and Field, then do Images. Or google with images: Susen Tiedtke
But these outfits? I see nothing wrong with them.
A story about how at the celebration of the US Women’s Soccer team many were offended that the ceremony featured a bunch a women in skin tight black mini dresses…which was called sexism. It’s nice to see most people agree with me that that kind of thing takes AWAY from women’s efforts...
Except that your point was that women athletes are the culprits (own worst enemy). I doubt that the soccer players had anything to do with the costumes on the women hired for the ceremony. I'll go out on a limb and suggest it was some male who made the decision about attire. In other words, this does not support the point you were trying to make.
A story about how at the celebration of the US Women’s Soccer team many were offended that the ceremony featured a bunch a women in skin tight black mini dresses…which was called sexism. It’s nice to see most people agree with me that that kind of thing takes AWAY from women’s efforts...
Except that your point was that women athletes are the culprits (own worst enemy). I doubt that the soccer players had anything to do with the costumes on the women hired for the ceremony. I'll go out on a limb and suggest it was some male who made the decision about attire. In other words, this does not support the point you were trying to make.
That and they weren't mini dresses. Tight and black, yes, but not mini. I just got back from Denmark, where the women like to wear tight, black pants. I didn't notice the men disrespecting the women because of that. Admiring them, yes, but not disrespecting. Sexual violence is rare in Denmark. The problem isn't what women wear, it is in the mind of the beholder. If you can't look at a women dressed in what you consider a provocative outfit without losing respect for her you may want to consider counseling, or at least thinking about why you have this mental confusion and what you can do about it.

Oh but for the good ol days

scandalous

Next they’ll want to vote. :ahhh:

Your mother is a woman always remember it. When you seat for to write this type of topics to remember her face.

Wow you guys are dense. In that link to the news story about women’s soccer, why were people complaining about the way some of the women were dressed? Because it portrayed women as sex objects. Again and again…it has nothing to do with the way women dress but rather the context. Is that too complex a thought to think? It has to do with the fact that in the context of a celebration of women as athletes, having other women dressed sexily, is an insult to women. And if you cant see the analogy with MLK, well I’m thinking you’re a simpleton. In the context of a civil rights speech, had MLK dressed like a clown, no one would take him seriously. Ok I’m through with this. Obviously some in this thread are just arguing to argue and lying to themselves. Reminds me of the olden days trying to discuss Ayn Rand with a bunch of her followers. They were fabulous at mouthing the standard responses they knew were “correct” according to their doctrine, but were incapable of actually thinking outside that narrow box. Geesh.

A story about how at the celebration of the US Women’s Soccer team many were offended that the ceremony featured a bunch a women in skin tight black mini dresses…which was called sexism. It’s nice to see most people agree with me that that kind of thing takes AWAY from women’s efforts...
Except that your point was that women athletes are the culprits (own worst enemy). I doubt that the soccer players had anything to do with the costumes on the women hired for the ceremony. I'll go out on a limb and suggest it was some male who made the decision about attire. In other words, this does not support the point you were trying to make.
Thanks for injecting some actual rationality into this thread. I agree it probably was some dumb white guy with power who came up with the idea (actually i think it was mentioned that it was in fact the now outed jerk who was running the organization.)