Female Athletes as a Marketing Ploy

Before reading “Build to Win,” by Julie Foudy, I thought that all of the progress to promote positive attitudes towards female athletes was positive and making great contributions to the feminist cause. But, after reading it, I was skeptical of all of the advertisements and and promotional magazine covers for female athletes. What I thought were positive gains in the publicity for female athletes, might just be a  marketing scheme for sporting goods companies. Could it be possible that companies like Nike, or magazines like Sports Illustrated are simply exploiting the female athlete to sell more running shoes and magazines? According to Julie Foudy, yes. She says that “the image of the female athlete {is a} marketing ploy that has some positive dimensions,” (Built To Win pg. 13).

     Because “the athletic body has become an ideal for both sexes,” (Built To Win pg. 81) it is easy to market products ranging from Gatorade to gym socks to all people, not just men. By making the female athlete popular and more accepted, companies have a larger market in which to sell their products. It is logical and economical, but demeaning to female athletes. It also puts female athletes in a difficult position. For example, in order to gain visibility and attention as an athlete, they are forced to increase their sex appeal. People will not want to watch them compete if they are not good looking while they perform. For example, Nicole Bobeck World Champion figure skater said in an interview with Metro Magazine, “I have shed my clothes in a bid to raise the profile of my sport and attract a sponsor.” This demonstrates the problem that female athletes cannot gain sponsors without sex appeal. So not only are female athletes exploited to sell products, they have to exploit themselves in order to be successful as an athlete. Another example of female athletes needing to use sex appeal to be successful is Maria Sharapova. She is the highest paid female athlete, but is only the 3rd best tennis player in the world. Why is she the highest paid female athlete if she isn’t the best tennis player? Because she poses sexually for sports magazines and sporting good companies like Nike.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRoAGcbmz2k 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b6Wuq_-dLE

These YouTube videos show that female athletes are being exploited and that sex really does sell. shows that people are more concerned with how the athlete looks rather than how she preforms in her sport. Sex is selling the magazines and products, not appreciation for sport or athletic abilities. 
ESPN, Sports Illustrated and other sports magazines sexualize women to sell their magazines. Female athletes are posed in sexual positions, with minimal clothing in order to attract an audience, or both males and females. People are attracted to both the athleticism and sexiness of her body. Males fantasize about her, and females envy her. It’s a win-win for the companies. Because of this sexualization and exploitation, magazines are able to capitalize on female athletes. 
One magazine spread featured Anna Kournikova, posing sensually in a dress says: “She won’t win the French Open, but who cares? Anna Kournikova is living proof that even in this age of supposed enlightenment, a hot body can count as much as a good backhand.” Commenting on this spread, Hanno Edgar, CEO of International Sports-management,  said, “Not because she was a good tennis player, because she was really good looking.” This is an unfortunate depiction of how female athletes are exploited and not recognized for their true athletic ability. Athletes like Maria Sharapova and Anna Kournikova have to pose either nude or in highly sexualized poses in order to be publicized. Without posing this way, they will gain no recognition for their athletic ability. 
They are being used for capital gain in ways that men are never subjected too. Male athletes do not have to pose nude in order to be popular or national recognized; they are recognized for their athletic accomplishments-as they should be. So, unfortunately, I think that the movement to increase awareness of female athletes was made mostly as a way to make a profit. While Foudy says that the Nike advertisements were inspirational to some women and encouraged them to embrace being an athlete. But, that same year, Nike profits increased by billions because the market was expanded and opened up to women. I do not think that this was a coincidence. Once women were able to be accepted into the athletic culture, sales and advertisements for women’s athletic products boomed. Foudy says, “We were a demographic waiting to be tapped, and that tapping involved the creation of a new ideal image for women that relied on a clever mixture of liberal feminist and American individualist ideas,” (Built To Win pg. 3). This statement proves that the female athlete demographic could easily be tapped into and manipulated in order to capitalize off of it. Melisse R. Lafrance says, “Nike is seductive precisely because it allows up do disavow our material realities in favor of a cozier truth wherein structural relations of domination and subordination can be overcome by equipping oneself with a great looking pair of shoes,” (Built To Win pg. 3). Moreover, women can be convinced easily into buying a pair of shoes if the women in the advertisement was depicted in a toned, sexual way. Playing off of women’s insecurities is extremely profitable. Women want to embody those qualities, and they will buy a new pair of running shoes in order to do so.