Women’s sports have been on the rise in the face of the media. Arguably men’s sports attract higher levels and amounts of viewership and investment. In recent years, women’s sports have undeniably been rising in popularity and coverage and support in the media. Despite the general positive feedback from audiences and a growing fanbase, there are still disparities embedded in its structure that differ from the men’s. There is an unescapable culture of misogyny that is structurally embedded into women’s sports. Women’s sports have repeatedly fallen victim to being a target for misogyny. There are still people who believe that physical strength and power are traits which are only ascribed to men. The reality of women being empowered in these typically masculine roles continuously generates hostile reactions.
A recent advert for the sports betting company Novig, featuring actress Sydney Sweeney, who has been the centre of backlash from previous adverts where she was involved in an American Eagle campaign that has been criticised for portraying eugenics in a positive way.
The Novig advert felt detached from reality in which women have place in sports and always will do and there is no reason to include women in sports through sexualising them to only exploit the male gaze. Women are allowed to exist and succeed in sports in which their gender is not a barrier and a trait that deems them inferior from their male counterparts.
This brings forth the question of whether influencers and celebrities deserve to have this platform to promote businesses and their products. There is potentially a distortion in the commercialisation of products because celebrities are far from their customers who are the everyday people. In the campaign Sweeney is using sports equipment and uniform to cover parts of her body; this is contradictory to traditional usage because sports uniform and equipment is not deliberately sexual when used in their correct means. Sweeney herself is not an athlete and it undermines women in sports because the equipment and uniform she used are merely props to appeal to the male gaze instead of showcasing how uniform and correct equipment could empower women in their respected sports. This particular representation of women and association to sport undermines the professionalism of women and their place in the traditionally male dominated space and environment. This advert is arguably poorly timed (although there is no right time to release it). The campaign takes the female body out of context and sexualises it for branding and marketing. The commodification and objectification of women’s bodies ultimately contributes to misogyny. Female athletes are still trying to have their appearances separate from their athletic abilities- a woman’s looks should not interfere with her professional career where it has no place to intrude and infiltrate.
It is important to note that sexual displays and empowering women’s bodies are not the same and women should not have to hide their bodies to be respected. The issue is why campaigns are so eager to display their bodies in a sexualised manner in a sports context where it is not necessary. This ultimately undermines female athletes attempts to persevere in an already male dominated environment to dispute misogynistic remarks which correlate their performance to their physical looks and attributes. These campaigns perpetuate a false narrative; which athletes have been working hard to disassociate and alleviate themselves from.