For the past few months, female UFC fighter Ronda Rousey has been all over the news. Her record is impressive: She holds an Olympic medal in Judo, was the first female fighter to sign with UFC and is currently ranked first in UFC women’s bantamweight. Even with her recent loss to fellow UFC fighter Holly Holm, there’s no doubt Rousey’s achievements are noteworthy.
Sadly, as is often the case for female athletes, Rousey’s looks seem to garner almost as much attention as her fighting, if not more. With dishwater-blonde hair and delicate facial features, Rousey is as attractive as she is skilled, and the media have taken notice. One of the first links yielded from a Google search of Rousey’s name is a Sports Illustrated photoshoot of her posing topless on the beach, all the while striking UFC power poses in a barely-there bikini. While the photoshoot alone is harmless, it seems a little ridiculous that it’s one of the top news items associated with her name.
Rousey isn’t the first. Tennis star Anna Kournikova is the most formidable example of a female athlete who received more attention for her beauty than her abilities. Of course, Kournikova differs from Rousey in that her career was relatively short-lived and not as illustrious in comparison to other women in her division. Regardless, her good looks brought her significant press coverage and merchandising opportunities. In fact, Kournikova only made $3.5 million in prize money throughout her time on the WTA tour, as compared to $10 million a year in endorsements for brands like Adidas, Omega and Berlei.
What bothers me most is there seems to be a specific type of recognition reserved only for conventionally attractive female athletes. There’s a subtle but distinct subtext to the interviews and headlines when a beautiful woman excels at sports. It’s something along the lines of, “So-and-so accomplished this incredible feat, AND she did it all while still being hot enough to be relevant!” It’s degrading and patronizing, and it denigrates the significance of what the athlete has actually done.
Even more baffling is when a female athlete is criticized for her appearance. Serena Williams, who holds 21 Grand Slam titles in singles tennis, is often the source of immense ridicule due to her strong physique. Most of the ridicule comes in the form of nasty tweets from the public, with people shaming her body, hair and even skin tone. However, even the media sometimes fails to practice sensitivity in its coverage of Williams. The New York Times published an article analyzing her “muscular frame” and noted that most female athletes tend to keep “ladylike” figures.
Rousey, too, has been subject to negative reviews on social media about her muscle tone and seemingly “masculine” body type. To those critics, Rousey says, “Just because my body was developed for a purpose doesn’t mean it’s masculine.”
While Rousey’s response was positive and resilient, I hope there comes a time when athletes like her are no longer scrutinized for their looks. All things willing, the media and society at large will progress to a point where a woman can be recognized merely for the things she did, not for how she looked while doing them.
Namwan Leavell is a UF economics senior. Her column appears on Fridays.
