Don't Knock the Hustle

I have a confession to make. I, like much of the country, do not watch women’s sports. In such a crowded landscape, I just don’t have enough time to pay them any mind. Do I feel a little guilty about it? Sometimes, but not nearly enough to spend any time perusing WNBA scores.

I’m like the typical male sports fan in that respect. But in spite of this widespread apathy, there are some female athletes who have achieved fame and great financial success. Women like Maria Sharapova, Mia Hamm, and Danica Patrick have all become marketing icons, far outshining their peers—in some cases, peers who are actually better players. They, along with others like Anna Kournikova, have used more than just their athletic ability to gain this fame: They’ve also used their looks.

It’s here where we touch upon a thorny issue in the world of female athletics. The use of beauty, by athletes anyway, as a tool to get ahead in the world has drawn the ire of many a commentator, both male and female. Such was the case with Amanda Beard, who bared all in the July issue of Playboy. Many claimed that she was demeaning herself as a person, not to mention sending the wrong message about her sport. However, I’d venture to guess that Beard was pretty content with her choice: “It’s just a business decision, a career decision,” she said. Since then, she’s taken the 15 minutes of fame that she might never have received, even as an Olympic gold medalist, and turned herself into a million-dollar brand.

And yet Beard and other women are lambasted for such acts. Contrary to male athletes who are lauded for their marketability (see: Beckham, David), when female athletes venture outside the immediate realm of athletic competition, they are criticized for diverting attention from the substance of their respective sports. Female athletes are simultaneously acclaimed and derided for their good looks, as was the case with Kournikova. Her appealing physique was largely responsible for making her so popular, but it led to a backlash from people who hated that she was famous for it. Instead of anyone suggesting that the people who drooled over her in the first place were in the wrong, Kournikova was the one chastised for profiting from it. It was essentially a cop-out to blame women for the fact that men often evaluate them based on looks rather than merit.

Women, however, should take every opportunity to capitalize on this flaw in the system. The world is not equitable or merit-based in any sense of the word, but it is the responsibility of the propagators of such inequities—not the objects—to correct them. And as long as these problems exist, one might as well milk them. Sports fans, instead of buying into the stigmas attached to attractive athletes, should applaud those who have seized their opportunities. And the same goes for the working world. This is not to say women don’t have the talent to be at the top—that would be a ludicrous assertion. But many tend to gripe about this or that women getting ahead because of a pretty face. Whether or not this is true in any particular case should be irrelevant—the fact that women are moving up is a good thing, regardless of the reason.

However, capitalizing on an inequity—whether it’s superior looks, affirmative action, or your boss’s love for blondes—presents the problem of casting doubt over one’s true merit or skill. But we must remember that these situations present opportunities to smash the stigma of doubt through your performance. If someone wants to believe you don’t deserve that job, that fame, or that money, you can prove them wrong by being nothing short of impeccable at what you do. Of course, some will still hold onto their perceptions—they are often a result of deeply held confirmation biases—but taking care of your end is all you can really do. Etching out your existence as a successful person is far more critical than worrying about the attitudes of others.

These same truths apply in the athletic world. The primary goal of professional sports is to make money. Because success is defined in monetary terms, bringing eyes to the sport must be done by any means necessary. Heck, learn from the NHL: They let their players exchange blows every game to keep their fans excited. So, in the case of women athletes, if showing a little skin or promoting the aesthetic pleasures of the game will bring more people to the games and put more money in these women’s pockets, then they should do it—and laugh at the criticism all the way to the bank. But what’s more is that once people start showing up—whatever their reasons—they will inevitably come to appreciate the work ethic, the passion, the skill that embodies the sport, just as they do with the men. It’s all a matter of getting the eyes there. And the best thing is that everyone wins. Fans may be tuning in to see Sharapova, but they’ll learn something about Justine Henin in the process.



Aparicio J. Davis ’10 is an economics concentrator in Leverett House. His column appears on alternate Thursdays.