The NYT recently
updated its story about cheerleaders for the NFL Washington Redskins; the
initial piece focused on a 2013 calendar shoot in Costa Rica. There’s no NFL team based there, but that
didn’t stop the cameras from clicking or certain entitled fans—all male, I’d
bet—from tagging along and making a nuisance of themselves. The team investigated and has instituted
changes, among them slightly less revealing uniforms to be worn at games.
A few other
teams have followed suit in having their cheerleaders show less skin this
season, and two teams, the Rams and Saints, have added male cheerleaders. I’m sure there was a real call for that from
fans. Guys, after all, are natural rams
and saints.
Football is a
game of action-fueled emotion; when the action turns violent, so can emotions,
whether coming from players or fans. Add
women hardly dressed to copious amounts of alcohol, and you’ve got yourself a
man cave for 60,000-100,000 people.
According to the
Times’ story, the Jets have adopted an outfit reminiscent of the ones worn by
high school cheerleaders. And that would
make a difference why, exactly? Back in
the Middle Ages at St. Laurence, our cheerleaders came from the girls’ Catholic
high school across the street. Those
Jets-like uniforms they wore did not keep young Vikings from having unchaste
thoughts. If cheerleaders excited sexual
fantasies then, they excite those very same fantasies now. Either retire this antiquated routine, or
substitute all men for women.
Wouldn’t that be
something?
No comments:
Post a Comment