So I thought this article was going to talk about how the presence of female athletes in the SI swimsuit issue which can out last week diminishes the accomplishments and skills of female athletes. But it only seems to allude to the presence of female athletes in the swimsuit issue while praising female athletes for not being swimsuit models:
Marantz (a sportswriter) believes women athletes appeal to men because they work hard. They combine form with function. On the other hand, he thinks swimsuit models appeal to men because they appear never to work, they have no function other than to shill.
He believes men who find women athletes sexy are more apt to accept women in all their dimensions.
"Athletic women sweat; they blow snot from their noses, spit, grunt and lose their temper."
But the way this piece positions "women athletes" (note that no one ever writes "men athletes") it is as if they are there solely for the benefit of men. Some men like athletes, some men like models. Good thing there are different types of women out there to please all those men with differing tastes. Also this Marantz guy seems to think that women's sports appeal to men because men can relate to their skill level. As in "oh, I can do that" versus men's professional sports where mere mortal men cannot possibly hope to accomplish those feats. Because, you know, I am sure most men watching at home can run up and down a soccer field and head balls just like Abby Wambach.
And then Marantz thinks that some men like women who know and do sports so they can take these women to sports bars on a Sunday afternoon.
Good thing there are female athletes out there for those men who are interested.