In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Ross Shimabuku is a word that starts with A, and it’s not “awesome.”

Caperton

Danica Patrick made her Daytona 500 debut on Monday, wrapping up a disappointingly crash-filled week with a wreck in the second lap that had her–after 62 laps’ worth of repairs–finishing 38th after starting at 29. While certainly not one of the top drivers on the NASCAR circuit, she’s at least a solid average, and improving as she becomes more accustomed to stock cars after years on the Indy circuit. Patrick was the third woman ever to start the Daytona 500 (after total badass Janet Guthrie and Shawna Robinson)

But more important, she’s a “pretty girl,” “sexy and she knows it,” and a b… something. A b-something, says Fox5 San Diego sports anchor Ross Shimabuku, who for some reason thought it was perfectly acceptable to pretty much call a woman a bitch on the air.

ROSS SHIMABUKU. All right, Danica Patrick is a… pretty girl, and she makes lots of money in sponsorships because of it. But what’s not attractive is that she’s sexy and she knows it.

DANICA PATRICK (in clip). I don’t quite understand why when you’re referring to a girl, a female athlete in particular, that you have to use the word “sexy.” Is there any other word that you can use to describe me?

SHIMABUKU. Oh, I got a few words. Starts with a B. And it’s not “beautiful.” Danica will be making her Spring Cup debut this Sunday, the Daytona 500, a race that you can see right here on Fox5 as Patrick will be making her transition from IndyCar to NASCAR. She always has a chip on her shoulder, trying to prove something, but…

KATHLEEN BADE. Well, she’s a woman trying to break in in a man’s world. That cannot be easy. Being a pioneer is never easy.

SHIMABUKU. She has to have that edge, which is good for her, and so hopefully–Jimmie Johnson actually gotta get back on track, too, because he had his five cup–Spring Cup championship streak slapped. Plus, he got caught for cheating this weekend. A little part of his car was altered. So his crew chief, Chad Knaus, probably will be getting a suspension.

LOREN NANCARROW. Hey, back to Danica Patrick for a second. If she’s trying to lose the sexy image, the GoDaddy commercials don’t exactly further that cause.

SHIMABUKU. [laughing] What she says and what she does, two totally different things.

He’s been suspended for a week and has apologized on air.

Right off the top: I wish I could defend all those GoDaddy ads, because I like Danica Patrick, but I can’t. They’re objectifying and creatively lazy, and I wish she wasn’t in them. I wish she had a sponsor who didn’t explicitly include nekkidness at the top of their marketing strategy. I also wish I had a pony.

I have no idea why Ross Shimabuku chose that particular clip to include on the show that night; I guess he saw it and found it mockable and wanted to proudly flaunt his douchebaggery. But here’s another quote on the subject from that same press conference:

It’s like if there is a pretty girl, they don’t know how to describe a pretty girl other than being sexy, and it has such a negative connotation to it. You don’t say those kinds of things to frame it like that for a guy, or even sometimes talk about it. But it seems like with female athletes if they are pretty, they only know how to describe them in a sexual way. I don’t care, but I just wonder why we can’t talk about it in a different way. Why can’t there be other words for it? Why does it have to be somewhat negatively twisted?

It’s a perfectly reasonable comment and one that she’s generalizing to all female athletes, whether they choose to wear GoDaddy catsuits or not. But God forbid she should call into question sports media’s sexist coverage of female athletes–that makes her a bitch. (Or a b-something.) In the context of her GoDaddy ads, yes, she’s presented as sexy, in a leather suit and a big Breck Girl blowout. In the context of her races, she’s in neck-to-toes Nomex and a ponytail. Now, this isn’t to say that no one would see that as sexy, but it’s incidental to her job as an athlete, just as Serena Williams’s miniskirt is about tennis rather than sex appeal.

This year, Patrick’s usual sexy Super Bowl ad was accompanied by an equally (if not more) sexy ad featuring David Beckham, David Beckham’s tattoos, and not much else. Conventional wisdom is that he’s a handsome man, and he’s certainly referred to that way–in the gossip press. ESPN manages to cover him without calling him a sexpot or a stud. In that vein, when Patrick is wearing stilettos and painting logos on a naked woman, mentioning her sexiness would be understandable–and when she’s walking out to her car, unless you’re also going to comment on how perky Juan Pablo Montoya’s butt looks in that fire suit (answer: very), commenting on her appearance would be out of place.

But because she wants to be taken seriously on the track–regardless of how she’s perceived off the track–she’s just a pretty girl and sexy (and she knows it) and a bitch. And she has a chip on her shoulder and feels like she has something to prove. Golly, wonder why?

(If you’re in the mood, the Bleacher Report has a cursory overview of some of the women in auto racing who aren’t Danica Patrick.)

64 thoughts on Ross Shimabuku is a word that starts with A, and it’s not “awesome.”

  1. Minor correction to your wonderful post I want to submit, Caperton: Danica Patrick made her first Daytona 500 start on Monday night.

    [Gah. Never did learn my days of the week. Thx. – C]

  2. I’m not clear on why she’s referred to as “trying to break in in a man’s world” after she’s placed third in the Indy 500. She’s unquestionably in the world. Kathleen Bade has something to apologize for in that conversation as well.

    Each one of them does. Where does Patrick say she’s trying to “lose the sexy image?” You can be perceived as sexy and still be respected for other qualities. It really is possible!

    What pisses me off in that back and forth is not only Shimbaku’s commentary, but also the way in which the Overton Window is shifted, so that less aggressively provocative forms of sexism are made to appear reasonable. When in fact, they really are not so much!

  4. I don’t like the way that has essentially been framed: she can either be a respected athlete or she can be sexy but she can’t be both on her terms. Her entire career is not about those GoDaddy.com commercials, just as Tiger Woods career isn’t about Buick, Ellen’s career isn’t about Covergirl, Laila Ali’s career sn’t about Ambi. It’s ok for her to be presented as a sexy woman in a commercial for the sake of advertising and still demand that in her professonal world, as an athlete that she not be limited to her work in those commercials. No one proclaims Ellen to be all about makeup, Tiger Woods to be all about cars, Laila to be all about being a mommy worried about stretchmarks.

    The douchebag who called her a bitch should have faced more than a week’s worth of reprimand and Danicka Patrick is right, the double standard has to go. Who complains about Chad Ochocinco “knowing” he’s sexy and calling him a bitch for that? Exactly.

  5. Sports and sports journalism is the last domain of casual misogyny. Many men in the field are being told to be more gender inclusive, this by their bosses. Several, predictably, are resisting. Some men believe that this is their last safe haven from emasculation or effeminacy.

    In my estimation, this is more of a fight right now among men than among women.

    Much like The Alamo, a few hold-outs will fight to the last man. Sports is a microcosm of masculinity, but it’s also considered very macho. Men are supposed to model themselves in accordance with sports heroes, this in accordance with gendered expectations. That’s why the pushback has been so intense. With time, I think the final barrier will fall, but it will take longer here.

  7. “Sports and sports journalism is the last domain of casual misogyny”

    Right. Except for everywhere else.

  8. Please don’t misunderstand. Offensive behavior as described in this post is worst in sports. Yes, it does exist elsewhere, but efforts to level the playing field have been in place for much longer.

    Would you give me the benefit of the doubt once? What good does your anger really do? Does it change the situation? If so, tell me how.

    This is exactly what I dislike about this website. Being civil and respectful DOES NOT mean giving up the agency to speak your mind.

  10. Kudos to Kathleen Bade speaking up in a civil way (granted there are a lot more things that could have been said to him, that would have lost her her job). She was really on her feet with putting in a comment that was still news-friendly/non-confrontational but still challenged him.

    It’s clear that she must have been sitting there seething, and she was incredibly controlled.

  11. Comrade Kevin: I get what you’re saying, but you’re missing the part where Shimabuku is not an athlete. He’s a FOX news reporter. Misogyny in sports is easy for me to avoid if I don’t play mixed gender sports. Misogyny is a lot harder to dodge when I turn on the evening news and some maggot is whining that Patrick is a bitch for acknowledging what all the men are saying about her.

    [plus, this is just lousy journalism. Jeff Gordon rode the Sexy Train from almost Day 1 of his career.]

  12. Would you give me the benefit of the doubt once? What good does your anger really do? Does it change the situation? If so, tell me how.

    This is exactly what I dislike about this website. Being civil and respectful DOES NOT mean giving up the agency to speak your mind.

    Mother jesus. All she said was “Right. Except for everywhere else.” how it that ‘anger’, really?

    Anyway being civil and respectful is some boring ass bullshit.

  13. I wish I could defend all those GoDaddy ads, because I like Danica Patrick, but I can’t. They’re objectifying and creatively lazy, and I wish she wasn’t in them.

    This reads as vaguely slut-shaming, which I think is what Azalea was getting at in her comment. Like Danica Patrick is allowed to be sexy, but only in pre-approved ways. I don’t care for the GoDaddy ads (or any other misogynistic ad) either, but i would never hold it against the actress.

  14. Elena, she gets kudos for “speaking up in a civil way,” because calling a spade a spade would be uncivil? And there’s no mandate that she go work for Fox News. It’s incredibly enabling to misogyny to assume that it’s more uncivil to call out misogyny than to promote it

  15. This reads as vaguely slut-shaming, which I think is what Azalea was getting at in her comment.

    I apologize if I came across as slut-shaming. I was just saying that I like her and I don’t like the ads, and I wish she (someone I like) wasn’t in the ads (something I don’t like). Much as I’d feel if she wore high-waist jeans or appeared on Celebrity Apprentice, albeit to different degrees. She’s still great.

  16. Moreover, it’s incredibly sexist/racist/ableist etc. to treat ‘civility’ and the underlying nebulae of man/woman, rational/emotional, White/black, scientific/social as something desirable. I look outside my window at ‘civilization’, and it is not good.

    Civility is has very long history of being utilized to neutralize legitimate dissent – it is not proper to have hairy legs or for WoC to be ‘uppity’.

    Another example is in rape trials. The testimony of the victim is discounted because it is too emotional – however if the testimony is not emotional enough, it is ‘clearly’ disingenuous and likewise discarded.

    Anyway being civil and respectful is some boring ass bullshit.

    +1

  17. PrettyAmiable:

    This reads as vaguely slut-shaming, which I think is what Azalea was getting at in her comment. Like Danica Patrick is allowed to be sexy, but only in pre-approved ways. I don’t care for the GoDaddy ads (or any other misogynistic ad) either, but i would never hold it against the actress.

    I wasn’t quite calling the comment slut-shaming rather “uselessly apolegetic.” There’s no reason to defend the GoDaddy.com ads because there isn’t anything to defend. Oftentimes we make the mistake of “caving in” so to speak to certain rhetoric or expectations of women and think an action is indefensible or that it is something that would even need to be defended. In other words, best response to mentioning her GoDaddy.com ads, in my not so humble opinion, would be “so fucking what!?” (directed at the person bringing it up, not directed towards you)

  18. *note to self* pressing the “post comment” button twice, getting the error message and then pressing the “back” button makes both the original and duplicate comment disappear. 🙁

  19. I wasn’t quite calling the comment slut-shaming rather “uselessly apolegetic.” There’s no reason to defend the GoDaddy.com ads because there isn’t anything to defend.

    I actually agree. When writing a blog post, there’s a certain amount of trying to predict what objections will be made and head them off at the pass. We’ve mentioned the GoDaddy ads enough on Feministe that I had a feeling it would pop up on this post regardless, but yes, absolutely: Whether she does those ads because she feels obliged to her sponsor or because she feels sexy in high heels, it’s her call.

  20. I’m not clear on why she’s referred to as “trying to break in in a man’s world” after she’s placed third in the Indy 500. She’s unquestionably in the world. Kathleen Bade has something to apologize for in that conversation as well.

    She had certainly broken into the world of IndyCar racing, but that is a different animal than NASCAR. She’s won a race in IndyCar, contended multiple times in the Indy 500 and was certainly considered a quality driver.

    In NASCAR, none of that matters. Her entire top-level NASCAR experience is one race where she was involved in a crash before she got any chance to show what she was capable of doing. She’s performed quite well in limited second-tier experience, but she’s hasn’t done enough to prove herself in the world of stock-car racing. That has nothing to do with her gender or looks – it is the same thing that happens to every talented open-wheel driver that moves to NASCAR.

    Also, NASCAR is more of a man’s world than open-car racing. While Patrick is the most successful female driver in IndyCar, she’s far from alone. There are women every year in the Indy 500, and these days, there are usually more than one.

    In NASCAR, female drivers at the Sprint Cup level have been a novelty. There’s never been one who has raced on a regular basis – even Patrick won’t do that until next season – and she’s the only woman with a regular ride in the second-tier Nationwide Series. Jennifer Jo Cobb is trying to break into the series, but hasn’t gotten a competitive car.

    So I think Kathleen Bade had a reasonable point. Patrick has won respect for her open-wheel achievements, but she’s now trying to break into a new world. And, unfortunately, it’s a more male-dominated sport than the one she left.

  21. Mr Shimabuku should have learned from Mrs Bush – never reveal the initial letter. Always leave oneself a rhyming out.

    I tend to think rather like Ms Caperton about people one likes vs things one doesn’t like. Just out of curiosity, would CA be worse than GD? I can’t really decide. It’s more contained, but probably vastly more unpleasant.

  22. But obviously it’s clear that’s it’s stupid for her to complain about the sexualization of women in sports when she does that herself.

    Although that Shimabuku guy looks like a slimy git.

  23. Chiara:

    But obviously it’s clear that’s it’s stupid for her to complain about the sexualization of women in sports when she does that herself.

    You were being sarcastic right?

  24. No, I wasn’t.

    Don’t treat her like a baby, she has a choice about whether she does these things. So if she chooses to sexualize herself in whatever advertisement, then duh, men are just going to call her sexy instead of focusing on her sporting achievements.

  25. Sure. Exactly the way that if I wear a mini-skirt and knee-high boots, I can’t complain when men harass me.

    And the way sportscasters were always talking about how hot David Beckham was after he started doing commercials. Same with Derek Jeter. Oh, I forgot. If you’re sexy to the ladies, that doesn’t affect how you’re spoken about professionally at all. Funny, that. I wonder if sexism has anything to do with it?

  26. Well the example you give there is a little different. But if she doesn’t want to be talked about in sexual terms, why exactly is she doing sexual adverts?

    Also why would the sportscasters talk about how hot David Beckham is. They’re guys.

  27. But if she doesn’t want to be talked about in sexual terms, why exactly is she doing sexual adverts?

    Money. Do you honestly think she wouldn’t be sexually objectified if she weren’t doing those commercials? Why shouldn’t she cash in on it?

    I really don’t see how the examples are different. Women can present themselves as sexually appealing without condoning or approving of all the variety of ways other people choose to respond.

    Also why would the sportscasters talk about how hot David Beckham is. They’re guys.

    First of all, they’re not all guys. Yankees games on the radio are called by John Sterling and Suzyn Waldman, and I’ve never once heard her remark on the sex appeal of any of the players. Second,that is the point. They feel that it is appropriate for them to remark on her sex appeal, and then call her a bitch when she wishes they wouldn’t. That is the problem. That’s what sexist.

  28. First of all, they’re not all guys. Yankees games on the radio are called by John Sterling and Suzyn Waldman, and I’ve never once heard her remark on the sex appeal of any of the players. Second,that is the point. They feel that it is appropriate for them to remark on her sex appeal, and then call her a bitch when she wishes they wouldn’t. That is the problem. That’s what sexist.

    Yeah actually I think that was totally out of line for him to call her a bitch.

    Would you not agree though that the number of women who do sexualizing things is much greater than the number of men? So that kind of creates an atmosphere where women are there to be sexual. And the men are there to get stuff done.

    Also, I would argue that sexualized David Beckham is there more to say, ‘hey, men wouldn’t you like to look like this?’ Not to say ‘hey, women, check my sexy bod’. If those ads are seen as sexualized it’s probably more to the gay men rather than hetero women.

  29. Would you not agree though that the number of women who do sexualizing things is much greater than the number of men? So that kind of creates an atmosphere where women are there to be sexual. And the men are there to get stuff done.

    You’ve got the causality wrong. More women than men sexualize themselves because we’ve got a misogynist culture that enforces the idea that women’s true worth lies in their ability to be sexually appealing to men. And then women do their best to capitalize on the situation they’re given.

    Also, I would argue that sexualized David Beckham is there more to say, ‘hey, men wouldn’t you like to look like this?’ Not to say ‘hey, women, check my sexy bod’. If those ads are seen as sexualized it’s probably more to the gay men rather than hetero women.

    That’s only because our culture erases women’s sexuality. Regardless of intent, plenty of women find Beckham hot, and I think every woman in NYC who wasn’t only into other women or a Mets fan would’ve given Jeter a tumble about ten years ago (obviously there’s nothing wrong with being gay, but being a Mets fan is just sick). I was at Yankee Stadium. I saw all the girls wearing Jeter jerseys. And yeah, he’s a great shortstop. But Brosius was a magical third baseman, and I didn’t see lots of girls sporting his t-shirt or hanging over the edges of the seats when he was in the on-deck circle.

  30. You’ve got the causality wrong. More women than men sexualize themselves because we’ve got a misogynist culture that enforces the idea that women’s true worth lies in their ability to be sexually appealing to men. And then women do their best to capitalize on the situation they’re given.

    Ah. When you put it like that it makes sense yes. But don’t you think someone has to break the cycle sometime? And that someone is going to be women don’t you think?

    That’s only because our culture erases women’s sexuality. Regardless of intent, plenty of women find Beckham hot, and I think every woman in NYC who wasn’t only into other women or a Mets fan would’ve given Jeter a tumble about ten years ago (obviously there’s nothing wrong with being gay, but being a Mets fan is just sick). I was at Yankee Stadium. I saw all the girls wearing Jeter jerseys. And yeah, he’s a great shortstop. But Brosius was a magical third baseman, and I didn’t see lots of girls sporting his t-shirt or hanging over the edges of the seats when he was in the on-deck circle.

    Fair enough, as they say. Personally I don’t really know about baseball. Just seems like a weird version of rounders to be honest. But I’m personally more attracted to a guy’s facial appearance rather than his body. And facial appearance isn’t exactly sexual in the same way as bodily appearance?

  32. But don’t you think someone has to break the cycle sometime? And that someone is going to be women don’t you think?

    So she deserves it because she’s not a good enough woman?

  33. It’s not like she’s a pro wrestler with some contrived persona to uphold as part of her professional image. If she came out onto the track to a Van Halen soundtrack wearing stilettos with her fire suit unzipped to her navel and a guy in a tux announcing “Danica.. The Sexpot.. Patriiick!” that would be one thing. But NASCAR isn’t pro wrestling. In (some of) her free time, she wears a leather catsuit and big hair; at work, she wears a Nomex jumpsuit and a ponytail. If a coworker called me “sexy” at the office because he saw me in a low-cut top at a bar on a Saturday night, that would be inappropriate. And the answer there isn’t for me to cover up in my free time–it’s for the coworker to behave professionally at the office.

  34. What good does your anger really do? Does it change the situation?

    Right, ’cause I heard we got the vote through baking cookies.

  35. would’ve given Jeter a tumble about ten years ago

    So that’s no longer true? Poor guy; not only is he on the downside as a ballplayer, but he’s over the hill as a sex object at 36.

  36. As I understand it, race car drivers need sponsors, or they won’t be able to compete. Patrick made a decision to use her sex appeal to attract sponsors. That’s neither good nor bad, IMO, and she certainly doesn’t need my or anyone else’s approval to do so.

  37. Chiara:

    But I’m personally more attracted to a guy’s facial appearance rather than his body. And facial appearance isn’t exactly sexual in the same way as bodily appearance?

    Don’t you think that’s selling yourself short? If you find it sexually attractive, isn’t it sexual?

    Donna:

    So that’s no longer true? Poor guy; not only is he on the downside as a ballplayer, but he’s over the hill as a sex object at 36.

    Well, if it’s any consolation to poor DJ, my, um, doors are always open to him!

  38. I’ve been a fan of Danica since before her first Indy ride. And she’s a “competetive personality,” which is the polite way of saying “asshole.” And that’s okay. It’s sports. Roger Clemens is an asshole. Randy Johnson is an asshole, people couldn’t even talk to him on days he pitched. Jacques Villeveuve was is an asshole and you could cut Bode Miller with five parts water to one part Bode and he’d still be an asshole. She’s wound too tight and has an explosive temper and she doesn’t like losing at anything, not even Chutes & Ladders. That’s well within the parameters of normal for top racing drivers.

    I haaaaate seeing the way she is presented for sexualized consumption. She always looks like she’s gritting her teeth to get through it because that’s the sponsorship available to her, and I hate that. Look at the shit she has to put up with! Indycar in the US is really in the long shadow of NASCAR; if she had wanted to move up to the bigtime in open wheels, she would have had to go to F1; but Bernie Ecclestone has already compared her to a kitchen appliance (yeah, really. It was a bizarre nonsequitur and there’s no reading of it that can make it anything but a consciously and viciously misogynist remark.) And that’s what people in the F1 world say in public!

    NASCAR should have gotten over its equality growing pains almost forty years ago with Janet Guthrie, who before Danica was the best woman finisher at Indy and I believe still has the most top-level races of any woman in NASCAR. She was obviously and indisputably talented and that should have settled that. Danica’s entry into NASCAR ought to be treated more of less like Juan Pablo Montoya’s; as a conversion from open wheels to stock cars by an obviously talented driver.

  39. The problem is that you can’t really construct a certain public persona (in this case, sexiness) and then get upset when people reference that persona in public interviews. Calling her a bitch on the air for it was clearly unprofessional and there’s obviously misogynistic baggage attached to that particular word, so no defense of that jerk sportscaster here, but I do agree with the sentiment that her behavior in the initial interview was both rude and unjustifiably self-righteous.

  40. What other personae are famous young women allowed to construct and make money of off? And how is “sexy” even a persona?

  41. Persona, characteristic, image, p.r. angle…whatever. The point is the same – if you deliberately encourage a certain public perception of yourself, it’s not very fair to then complain about the public having and referencing that perception. That’s like planting pumpkin seeds and then complaining when you get pumpkins.

  43. The problem is that you can’t really construct a certain public persona (in this case, sexiness) and then get upset when people reference that persona in public interviews. Calling her a bitch on the air for it was clearly unprofessional and there’s obviously misogynistic baggage attached to that particular word, so no defense of that jerk sportscaster here, but I do agree with the sentiment that her behavior in the initial interview was both rude and unjustifiably self-righteous.

    But she could have been talking also about the treatment of other female sports peeps who haven’t done a sex ad for Daddy or whatever.

  44. It’s not possible to neatly compartmentalize people like that though. For example, I can’t be a jerk to someone in the context of the office and then expect them to just shrug it off in our personal life.

    This is actually a pretty common problem when it comes to celebrity athletes who derive a significant chunk of their celebrity from their image rather than their skill. Patrick is a good driver, but the amount of attention she gets exceeds that of comparable drivers in part because of her sexy image. Agassi (in the early days) was a good tennis player, but much of the coverage he got was due to his rebellious image. Ditto for Rodman in basketball. Tebow’s a good QB, but if not for the Christian thing, he’d get much less coverage than he does. And so on.

    I think what happens in these cases, is that the good-but-not-yet-great athlete deliberately adopts a public image (sexy, rebel, devout, whatever) that benefits their career in the early days, but after a while they get sick of that image and start to chafe at the continuing media references to it, particularly once their skills have developed to the point that they would warrant all the attention on that basis alone. Then we get this awkward transition period when the public image of the athlete has to catch up with that athlete’s new self-image.

  45. It’s actually like planting pumpkin seeds in your pumpkin patch and complaining when you also get pumpkins in your herb garden.

    Or like being given a handful of pumpkin seeds–and only pumpkin seeds–and denied access to any other seeds, while a large variety of seeds are being given to male gardeners, and pointing out that that sucks. And then being told that you just shouldn’t have grown pumpkins then.

  46. There are plenty of successful female athletes who don’t choose to go the sexy advertising route, EG. Patrick chose to capitalize on her looks to make far more money than her good-but-not-great driving skills would normally provide. And hey, congrats to her for her success! Let’s not erase her agency to make a point about sexism in sports.

    If we want to point out the sexist impediments to women building successful and lucrative careers in sports, Patrick is simply the wrong poster girl for it. Instead, we should be highlighting the many, many incredibly skilled, but not so conventionally attractive athletes who get 1/10th the attention of folks like Patrick.

  47. There are plenty of successful female athletes who don’t choose to go the sexy advertising route, EG. Patrick chose to capitalize on her looks to make far more money than her good-but-not-great driving skills would normally provide….we should be highlighting the many, many incredibly skilled, but not so conventionally attractive athletes who get 1/10th the attention of folks like Patrick.

    Pay attention to what you just wrote. Let’s see…plenty of successful female athletes do not go the sexy advertising route (I notice you name no names–why not?)…but in order to make far more money that she otherwise would, Patrick did….and interestingly, many, many incredibly skilled but not so sexy athletes get 1/10th the attention.

    What might that mean? It means that going the sexy route is surest way to success, fame, and money for a female athelete. It means that incredible skills won’t get you half the success that being sexy will. It means that this is the shrewdest way for a female athlete to attain success. It means that sexist objectification is what determines female athletic success.

    It means that if somebody gives you a shitload of pumpkin seeds, and one peach pit, and you are aware that your peaches will sell for 1/5th the price of men’s peaches, of course you’re going to grow pumpkins.

    Women make their choices, but not in circumstances of their own choosing, and they have every right to call out those circumstances as sexist bullshit.

    1. It means that going the sexy route is surest way to success, fame, and money for a female athelete. It means that incredible skills won’t get you half the success that being sexy will. It means that this is the shrewdest way for a female athlete to attain success. It means that sexist objectification is what determines female athletic success.

      No, actually sexist objectification has almost nothing to do with female athletic success. It has a lot to do with female commercial success. Let’s not get the two mixed up. There are many, many successful female athletes who aren’t “hot” or who don’t use sex to sell themselves.

      When the US women’s soccer team went to last summer’s World Cup, there were three players who became breakout stars – Hope Solo, Alex Morgan and the best player of the three, Abby Wambach. Their looks had nothing to do with their success. That came from athletic ability and incredible amounts of hard work.

      There is, however, a big difference in what has happened to them since the tournament ended. Hope Solo, a beautiful woman by conventional standards, ended up on Dancing With The Stars. Alex Morgan was in the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue, covered in body paint. Abby Wambach, who doesn’t fit into the pretty, uber-feminine stereotype, hasn’t had any commercial success at all.

      Solo and Morgan (and certainly Patrick) have more endorsement money than Wambach, but I don’t think any of the four would agree that she hasn’t been the most successful of them.

  48. You’re splitting hairs. The point is that female athletes’ opportunities for making money off their abilities are vastly curtailed, and that the very best way to go is to take advantage of one’s sex appeal. That does not undercut Patrick’s right to point out that the curtailment of her money-making opportunities and potential personae is some sexist bullshit right there.

  49. Patrick chose to capitalize on her looks to make far more money than her good-but-not-great driving skills would normally provide.

    I can’t speak for Danica’s performance in Indy because I don’t know enough about the series to make that assessment, but we don’t know what her NASCAR skill level will be yet. I think we should give it a bit more time before we make that diagnosis. Both Dale Earnhardt Jr. and Tony Stewart hired her because they see talent in her and that says something to me at least (Jr. alone has a pretty good track record in this department.)

    I’m a huge NASCAR fan, but to be honest every week the field is filled with good-but-not-great drivers, and alot of them have gotten their seat for reasons that have nothing to do with talent. There’s also a huge disparity between the big name teams like Hendrick and other teams who field drivers with far less resources, which makes for a less than even playing field as well.

    There also haven’t been that many drivers who have successfully transitioned from open wheel to stock car (Tony seems to be the exception to the rule), it seems to be the downfall of many with Dario Franchitti being the latest to come and go pretty fast), so even if Danica doesn’t live up to the hype, there’s just alot of variables here and I think some people are not being fair in assessing Danica’s current talent level or her future potential.

    One last thing, I saw a recent interview with Danica where she said how much she likes doing the Go Daddy commercials and expressing her sexy side. But she leaves that behind when she gets on the track. It’s much the same way Michael Waltrip loves to be a goofball in those NAPA commercials, but when he gets in car he’s serious and focused (at least I hope so). So I’m not sure its even fair to say she’s doing them solely for the money, I’m sure she enjoys the money the same way all NASCAR drivers do, but it may not be her primary motivation.

  50. It doesn’t undercut her right to complain, but it does undercut her credibility and persuasiveness in making that complaint. I just don’t believe she felt trapped and/or pushed into marketing herself based on sex appeal; nor do I believe she’s particularly indignant about the larger societal issues you highlight. Rather, as I said before, I think she’s probably like many other good-but-not-great athletes who construct and cash in on an image and then get annoyed when they tire of it before the media does.

  51. it does undercut her credibility and persuasiveness in making that complaint.

    You haven’t actually demonstrated how. I disagree. I don’t think it undercuts either her credibility or her persuasiveness. I suspect it means she knows whereof she speaks.

    I think she’s probably like many other good-but-not-great athletes who construct and cash in on an image and then get annoyed when they tire of it before the media does.

    You cannot separate her out from the larger context of sexual objectification and limited options in which women operate. It’s not like some other male athlete constructing and cashing in on an image because of the larger context of sexism.

    nor do I believe she’s particularly indignant about the larger societal issues you highlight.

    Her comments indicate otherwise. She may not have a fully thought-out analysis of them, but seems reasonably indignant.

  52. You haven’t actually demonstrated how. I disagree. I don’t think it undercuts either her credibility or her persuasiveness. I suspect it means she knows whereof she speaks.

    You don’t think people who practice what they preach are more credible and persuasive on the subject they’re preaching about? For example, I think Newt Gingrich’s credibility when bloviating about “family values” and “Washington insiders” is massively undermined by his history of infidelity and lobbying.

    You cannot separate her out from the larger context of sexual objectification and limited options in which women operate. It’s not like some other male athlete constructing and cashing in on an image because of the larger context of sexism

    Sure, but it’s also wrong to erase her individual agency and assume the underlying cultural narrative defines her personal experience. It can be true that female athletes’ available options are limited while simultaneously being true that Patrick enthusiastically embraced one of those options of her own free will. I haven’t seen anything in Patrick’s actions that suggests she was/is a reluctant participant in the construction of her sexy image, which is why I think her complaint is likely more about compartmentalization and a disconnect between her growing self-image as a pro driver and her public image as a sex symbol rather than a generalized sense of being pushed into the sexy advertising.

    Her comments indicate otherwise. She may not have a fully thought-out analysis of them, but seems reasonably indignant

    What is she indignant about, though? Taken in context, her complaint seemed to be more just an annoyed reaction to personally being referred to as sexy in a situation where she was focused on her on-track performance rather than a complaint about the limited sponsorship options for female athletes. Again, that’s just the compartmentalization / self-image vs. public image thing I’ve been talking about.

  53. Sorry for following up with a second post, but thinking about my last point there, it occurs to me that her response reminds me exactly of a video clip I saw some years ago of Bill Murray snapping at a fan. Murray was having dinner with some friends and/or family, and a fan interrupted to ask for an autograph. Murray snapped at him that he was eating dinner and it was incredibly rude for the guy to interrupt like that. In short, there are times when Bill Murray puts on the character of “Bill Murray, Hollywood star” and is prepared to interact with the public on those terms, and there are other times when Bill Murray is just being “Bill Murray, regular guy trying to eat a burger”, and it’s annoying to him when people don’t get that.

    So that’s what I think this Patrick thing is really about. The reporter who described her as sexy in that initial interview was simply being rude by injecting her advertising persona into a forum that was supposed to be about her driving, so Patrick got annoyed. The faux-indignation over sexual objectification of female athletes, however, seemed disingenuous, largely because that wasn’t really the issue at hand in her case.

  54. Taken in context, her complaint seemed to be more just an annoyed reaction to personally being referred to as sexy in a situation where she was focused on her on-track performance rather than a complaint about the limited sponsorship options for female athletes.

    Actually, taken in context, she’s talking about female athletes in general in addition to herself. I’m guessing Shimabuku picked that one quote because he thought it was mockable, but there was more from that same press conference, which I quoted in the original post to add, y’know, context.

    You keep saying she’s intentionally cultivating a “sexy” image. Do you have any evidence that that’s the case, that she’s consciously making an effort for “sexy” to be the first thing that comes to people’s minds? She did a few bikini shoots early in her career (because she said they were fun), she turned down an opportunity to appear in Playboy, and now she does Super Bowl ads for the sponsor that makes it possible for her to drive a functioning car on a track. She’s also made numerous non-sexy appearances, and when she shows up at the track, she does it in jeans and a sponsor t-shirt. If she were trying for a sexy image, don’t you think she’d avoid the Kids Choice Awards and push the girls up and wear makeup for her interviews at the track? Or is possible that, like so many other women, she enjoys occasionally feeling sexy but overall wants to be appreciated for other attributes?

    I think a lot of this goes back to the (generally male) assumption that when a woman dresses attractively, it’s always for the benefit of a man. Sometimes a woman just likes to look attractive, and you happen to be within range.

  55. It’s not possible to neatly compartmentalize people like that though. For example, I can’t be a jerk to someone in the context of the office and then expect them to just shrug it off in our personal life.

    No, but if someone is a jerk to you in your personal life, you’re absolutely expected to behave professionally at the office. It’s the same with my example about running into coworkers at a bar: They might like the boobs. (They probably will, actually. The boobs are really something special.) Every time they see me, they might be mentally unbuttoning my blouse. But if that’s the case, their job is to keep it to themselves at the office, because we’re at the office and one acts professionally at the office. Just because Patrick’s office happens to be covered by sports media doesn’t mean professionalism isn’t called for.

  56. You don’t think people who practice what they preach are more credible and persuasive on the subject they’re preaching about?

    She’s talking about how other people and sportscasters talk about female athletes; she’s not talking about female athletes construct their own images. So she’s not indulging in Gingrich-like hypocrisy at all.

  57. You know, I don’t see people getting on the so-called NASCAR “young guns”. The new set of younger drivers making their names in NASCAR have done multiple commercials with the point being “Aren’t these young men adorable and sexy? Hey ladies, look at these cute young men. WATCH NASCAR BUY LEVI’S” So…where is the interview calling Jr. sexy and complimenting his ass?

  58. The new set of younger drivers making their names in NASCAR have done multiple commercials with the point being “Aren’t these young men adorable and sexy?

    Seriously. NASCAR driver Kasey Kahne had a whole set of obnoxious commercials like this one and never once was he questioned about his commitment to the sport or whether he was cashing in on his looks.

  59. Kasey Kahne!!

    Gah, thanks for that. I’ve been trying to remember his name. They all look the same to me, kinda cookie cutter adorable.

  61. samanthab “Elena, she gets kudos for “speaking up in a civil way,” because calling a spade a spade would be uncivil? And there’s no mandate that she go work for Fox News. It’s incredibly enabling to misogyny to assume that it’s more uncivil to call out misogyny than to promote it”

    Whooooaaa there tiger. You might be a little too trigger happy on digging for fault in my statements. I’m just saying that it was really impressive considering this was live television and she had her job on the line, and she did a damn good job of keeping her cool while calling him out.

    Complimenting her response isn’t enabling misogyny, it’s complimenting her on her cool-head and quick thinking reaction. Why the need to jump down my throat.

  62. Pingback: More Than Sex Appeal « thefeministblogproject

  63. Those who think Danica Patrick’s opportunities in auto racing have been “vastly curtailed” might find the 2010 Indycar season illuminating. Danica drove for Andretti Autosport, a team which was probably the 3rd best in Indycar. Ganassi and Penske were the best teams. Danica’s teammate Tony Kanaan finished 6th in the final drivers standings, beaten only by Ganassi and Penske drivers. Danica was 10th. In 8 years with Andretti, Kanaan had been consistently their best driver. So who was released at the end of the 2010 season? Tony Kanaan. Why? Because his primary sponsor 7-Eleven had dropped him, and he could not get a good replacement. Danica Patrick has consistently had a ride with a decent team while other drivers of equal and greater skill have had trouble getting a ride at all. Such is the nature of auto racing; the ability to bring sponsorship and media attention is vital to getting an opportunity to drive. Being an attractive woman has been a great advantage to her. She has maximized that advantage by doing sexy commercials and photo shoots for magazines. Good for her, it’s all fair. But she has no cause for complaint.

    It’s worth noting that in her transition to NASCAR Danica Patrick has attracted much attention, being described as an “Indycar star.” I don’t imagine she objects to that description. And it is accurate in that she was certainly THE STAR of Indycar. That stardom is clearly not based on her on-track performance, however.

    Should she reject being described as an Indycar star?

Comments are currently closed.