Feminism

This clip is from an exhibition match between two experienced wrestlers: Lauren, aka roguexkitty6, then 18 years old and 115 lb, and a 140 lb 28-year-old male. It lasts about four minutes:



You'll notice that Lauren used not only skill to defeat her opponent, she outmuscled him as well. She was the better, stronger athlete that day. This is not something we're used to seeing. Of course, competition between male and female athletes is still rare, too rare according to Playing With the Boys: Why Separate is Not Equal in Sports.

Intra-gender athletic competition and strength training are making a huge difference: female athletes are getting bigger, faster, stronger by the day. Moreover, I see no reason right now to think there is an identifiable limit to what women can achieve relative to men. Eventually, though, inter-gender athletic competition will become necessary. Competition is a potent mechanism for development, one that can't be ignored.

More so now than at any other time in history, women are able to explore their physical potential unfettered by simplistic notions about gender roles. Thus, it's perfectly reasonable to expect that we'll soon be seeing even more instances of women competing successfully against men on the wrestling mat.

Well, Playboy has posted their response to the brouhaha over their February cover. Since much of the criticism was misguided to begin with, their riposte is, for the most part, immaterial. So make of it what you will.

I did, however, run across one snippet, something Playboy got essentially correct, that is worth repeating here:

Is Wonder Woman a feminist icon? If you say so. Is she a sex symbol? Without a doubt. Are the two mutually exclusive? Creator William Moulton Marston would have found the question laughable. The false dichotomy that separates female sex appeal from female intellect and strength of character hobbles feminism, and that’s been Playboy’s view for over 50 years.

Indeed, feminism's worst enemy may well be the sexual puritans who masquerade as feminists.

I should say something about the February 2008 Playboy cover, which features a nude Tiffany Fallon recast as Wonder Woman with the help of some body paint (NSFW link). Much has been said about it already, but the view presented here is often missed, and thus merits repeating.

There is, namely, nothing wrong with seeing Wonder Woman as a sex symbol—so long as her role as a symbol of strength isn't forgotten in the process. She can happily be both. The two things, in fact, are inextricably joined together.

So the question becomes, What qualifies Ms. Fallon to be Wonder Woman? Put another way, Where are the muscles? the athletic accomplishments? the fighting skills? Alas, they are not to be found; Tiffany Fallon is no Amazon: beautiful yes, perhaps a good person too, but not a symbol of strength, not by any stretch of the imagination.

That's where Playboy got it wrong, and where the outrage, if any, should lie.