But really, it's similar. Maybe they are not telling a story with cheerleading, but the costumes serve a purpose. They are there to make the members look like a cohesive group, to accentuate certain body movements to the judges so they appear more clearly, to make the performance pop. I really don't agree in the slightest bit that it is objectifying girls, except in the most extreme cases, or perhaps 30 years ago. What would your ideal solution be?
<< But are they quite so closely linked to the boys' self-presentation? Do they have to lose 10 lbs., wear their hair a certain way, and practice the art of make-up in order to succeed or even to participate?>>
Guess you've never heard of boys trying to make weight in wrestling (losing weight) or trying to gain weight to be bigger in football. Or taking steroids so their arms can be buff. Or having to prove to others how many pounds they can bench press. Or how many girls they can have sex with to earn enough "points" to be considered manly enough to hang with the rest of the team.
Well, honestly, it's a little of both. I would call any sport that requires both skill and athleticism and artistic interpretation a little of both. Perhaps ballet leans more towards art and less towards sport than cheerleading. But they are both a little of both. I don't recall ever saying they were the same thing, just similar in some ways. I don't know what you mean by "not at the same level." (I have a guess, but I'm not sure I like the implication.)
Ahhh.. it's because ballet is considered more high-brow. Women dancing around in tight costumes and revealing clothing is OK as long as it's done in the name of Art. (And apparently if they are paid enough?)
Ok, see if I can get this straight... your problem with cheerleading is that part of its purpose is to promote a sports team?
The same could be said about soccer, but for some reason I doubt you would balk at putting it in the same category as cheerleading. (Or gymnastics, or figure skating, since all you have disagreed with equally applies to all three.)
Pages
Sabina
Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
But really, it's similar. Maybe they are not telling a story with cheerleading, but the costumes serve a purpose. They are there to make the members look like a cohesive group, to accentuate certain body movements to the judges so they appear more clearly, to make the performance pop. I really don't agree in the slightest bit that it is objectifying girls, except in the most extreme cases, or perhaps 30 years ago. What would your ideal solution be?
Edited 11/20/2006 7:33 pm ET by lindamom3kidlets
<< But are they quite so closely linked to the boys' self-presentation? Do they have to lose 10 lbs., wear their hair a certain way, and practice the art of make-up in order to succeed or even to participate?>>
Guess you've never heard of boys trying to make weight in wrestling (losing weight) or trying to gain weight to be bigger in football. Or taking steroids so their arms can be buff. Or having to prove to others how many pounds they can bench press. Or how many girls they can have sex with to earn enough "points" to be considered manly enough to hang with the rest of the team.
Sabina
Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
I really dislike discussing cheerleading in the same context as ballet.
Sabina
Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
Sabina
Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
Sabina
Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
Ahhh.. it's because ballet is considered more high-brow. Women dancing around in tight costumes and revealing clothing is OK as long as it's done in the name of Art. (And apparently if they are paid enough?)
Ok, see if I can get this straight... your problem with cheerleading is that part of its purpose is to promote a sports team?
Pages