And I’m offended by the notion that you seem to think that, just because I’m male, I think it’s all right ;). Prime grade A misandrist here.
To clarify : I don’t think it’s OK. I don’t think it should be done, or accepted, or tolerated. And like you say, the same sort of unemotional groupthink leads to horrible excesses.
But I don’t think it’s *about *the lone woman either, nor the way she dresses or talks or whatever detail you could think of. A purty girl could dress in grandma’s pullover and Army khakis and get the same treatment, is what I’m saying. When I say “don’t take it personal” it means “it’s really, really not your fault. It has nothing to do with you whatsoever.”. It doesn’t mean “that situation gets a pass” or “if you complain about it you’re a cunt”. It just means it’s not, well, personal. It’s not about you specifically.
OTOH, and in response to FreudianSlit, in general society if you do dress in some aesthetically appealing manner, then yes, you should absolutely expect individuals to get aesthetically appealed. That’s just, I don’t know, the whole fookin’ point.
I know I don’t wear fishnet tank tops over my oiled, well-defined abs in any single- female heavy context. And that has nothing to do with the fact that I actually have a pot belly and the kind of face people throw rocks at. Nothing at all, sirree !
Actually, the law treats men and women differently in this regard. At least in prison settings, which is where is commonly comes up.
And apparently women are protected both ways here. Women guards have right to strip search male prisoners or otherwise supervise them while naked, and women prisoners have a right to not be strip searched by male guards or be otherwise supervised while naked. Banning female guards from strip searching men would interfere with their rights to be employed as prison guards, while allowing male guards to do the same for female inmates would interfere with the female prisoners’ rights to be free of that type of thing.
I can’t swear that the following is current, but it’s what I read in an article in the NYT about 25 years ago, and I think it’s still current. That article described the rationale for the distinction, based on a judicial decision on the subject.
The decision said that male nudity had different connontations than female, and that a lot of men were ambivalent or actually pleased to be nude around women. While for women, being seen by men was traumatic.
No doubt there’s some element of truth to that, on an aggregate basis, but there’s certainly a lot of variation by individual.
So, female reporters want access to the players “in the heat” after the game/practice, hoping that they will be more honest and less guarded and make some stupid, poorly-considered comment that leads to a huge story?
If that’s the case, they have no right to complain if some of those stupid, poorly-considered comments are directed at them. Especially if they’re dressed like Inez Sainz did.
No, all sports reporters want access to the locker room because that is where sports reporting happens. The way the business is set up today, that’s pretty much the definition of sports reporting.
