John P/onemansblog.com via Flickr
The first ever time I read about LFL, I thought it stood for Ladies Football League. I pictured women in shoulder pads and helmets and you know, football. Well, I was right about all of that except for the “Ladies” part, and from the title, I’m sure you know what is coming.
Yes, LFL stands for Lingerie Football League, and it is, as the name suggests, women playing football in their lingerie.
Attractive women in lingerie playing football? It probably does not take wild imagination to realize why it attracts a primarily male audience.
Judging from the highlights, the football part is real and it is definitely not just a strip show designed to appeal to men’s pleasure. In fact, judging from everything I’ve been reading, the women players love it—many of them have actually been playing for free.
But this just does not seem quite right to me. I think it is awesome that there is a league that supports women football players, and I most definitely understand the need to distinguish from NFL and drive in profit, but dressed in that? Does that really help promote women’s football? And what kind of message is it sending out to society?
This reminds me of Eddie’s post on “PETA porn” and my other post on, well, “news porn.”
So now that we are also throwing “football porn” into the mix, is this really what we want from our society? If not, how do we ensure that the “market pull” does not turn everything we know into something like that? (I personally don’t think high school teachers in bikinis teaching trigonometry is a good idea.)
And if you agree with me that LFL is not that great of a concept (and if you disagree with me, I would love to hear your point), how do we also approach the fact that the women players seem to have zero problems doing this? Even if a less scantily clad version of women’s football exists, I am guessing that many of the players would rather play in lingerie and be watched than play in an empty gym.
(On a more unrelated note of the day, should little kids play football like this?)
I knew that the L in LFL stood for lingerie before reading the article. However, I had never watched the girls play, half naked, and tackle each other. After watching the video provided by this article, not only do I feel a bit degraded as a woman, but it appears to me that being tackled half naked, even if it is by another 130 pound female, could pose some severe damages to the body. Maybe I do not know enough about football, but if regular players need equipment and apparel that covers their whole entire bodies so that they do not get injured, why is it permitted for women to play with more than seventy five percent of their skin exposed? I completely agree with what Chad is saying. Just like many immoral messages in the media depicted by misusing women, the LFL sends a completely wrong message. By airing it on national television and creating a widespread audience, even if it is primarily men, it is condoning women on top of each other half naked. Although porn is much more malevolent, it still evokes an audience for the complete wrong reasons. So why is it that porn is frowned upon, but we can allow this and deem it as acceptable? It also perpetuates the idea of the pressures cast upon girls of all ages to be socially accepted by looking the part and staying thin. If we are going to bring up that issue, and frown upon a league of women who run around half naked and tackle each other, we should also point the finger at companies like Victoria’s Secret who broadcast women on national television half naked as well. But not only do they receive praise because they are perfectly skinny and gorgeous, they are deemed ‘angels.’ If this does not put the pressure on girls to feel that they cannot be anything less than a size zero, because that is what the image of ‘angels’ looks like, then I do not know what does. Besides the Lingerie Football League and Victoria’s Secret models promoting a very degrading message that all women are good for is the size of their boobs and their butts, they makes young girls suffer from self esteem issues. Young teen girls already feel pressured to fit in and look a certain way, and organizations like Victoria’s Secret and LFL only heighten the pressure. We should embrace women who are making positive changes to our country and our world instead of frowning upon them. We have a government that is completely underrepresented by females. Maybe if more women decided to run for office instead of running around in bikinis and bras, girs, women, and men would have something more substantial to look at.
It seems rather discouraging that in order for these female athletes to be recognized, they play in their underwear. I think one of the major underlying issues here is just an overall lack of respect for women, especially in male-dominated areas like sports. Why is it that society can’t appreciate these athletes for their talent and obvious love for football rather than objectifying them on national television? Although their continuing to play seems to be supporting this idea of female empowerment, I don’t blame these women for wanting to. It seems as if society has set up a structure in which playing football in your underwear as a woman is the only way to get noticed. Only when that is changed can we fully appreciate women as talented, productive members of society.
So I think we can all agree that the LFL objectifies women, and objectifies them in a very different way than the NFL makes objects of its players. I’m interested in whether people think this is so one-sided that it’s irredeemable, or are the players in some respects in control? Nancy Bauer has a piece in the New York Times in which she argues that Lady Gaga is using the typical objectification of female pop stars in ways that give her some of the power. Obviously, Lady Gaga isn’t playing in the LFL, but it’s easy to be dismissive of someone else’s choices to participate in something like this. I’m not sure that helps us understand the players’ rationale any better. Or maybe it’s much more simple than I’m making it out to be. Thoughts?