Don't See the Irony

Half of you will notice that there's a big white square somewhere in this photo.  It's a new ad campaign started by the UK's top female beach volleyball athletes.  It uses a QR Code, usually encoding a website or similar URL.

Of the half who notice the ad, there's a small percentage who are outraged.  "Are they walking advertising billboards?", feminist Ms Sian Norris asks.  I don't see mention as to whether the clothing itself is problematic, or just the ad.

Speaking of double standards, the rules governing approved dress for women are debatably very weighted toward giving a bit of a show:  FIVB dictates a 'form-fitting top' and a bottom with 'no more than 6cm' of material at the hip.  Given those regulations, though (the outfit in the pic is typical), there's just not a lot of real estate available for promoters to sell to advertisers willing to bankroll pros who train full-time.  That's the reality of the situation, and given the common hunched squatty stance of a receiving volleyball player and what the public sees, I think Betfair’s Andy Lulham is near the mark when he says, "We’ve put them on the place likely to get photographed most.”

Where's the double-standard, you ask?  I'd like to direct attention to the picture at right.  It's not that these players are doing anything novel, as it seems to be common in the sport (see the pic), but it's entirely discriminatory to suggest that women, alone, may not advertise on their bodies but men can, and that's a side of Ms Norris' argument - and a part of televised competition - that should not be overlooked.

I think some people need to think carefully before suggesting a woman cannot wear 1/10th the adverts on her clothing as a man can without becoming objectified.  I wonder how Danica Patrick would feel being so labeled.