|View single post by srossi|
|Posted: Fri Aug 12th, 2016 12:22 am||
|A much sillier level of douchiness than the normal murder, but being that it has it's own thread now and everything, listen to a retired NYC detective talk about makeup and female Olympic athletes. It's as cringe-worthy as you would think. Only the best and brightest for NY's Finest.
Thanks to the folks at Fox News, the world has been provided with another round of idle, misinformed musings about the way women should look. Sports Court tapped Bo Dietl and Mark Simone to air their opinions on whether or not female athletes should feel empowered by wearing makeup, and the conversation was as cringeworthy as you could imagine.
Simone, a radio and TV personality (Donald Trump is a big fan) argued that women should wear makeup in order to get sponsorships from makeup brands. This reasoning is fine, once you forget that there are a few other sponsorships available to athletes as a result of winning at the Olympics — not just from cosmetic companies.
Following Simone’s somewhat questionable commentary, Dietl, a former New York City Police Department detective and media personality (which obviously makes him very qualified to weigh in on the topic) took the conversation to a new level of ignorance. “When you see an athlete, why should I have to look at some chick’s zits or some guy’s zits on his face? Why not a little blush on her lips, and cover those zits?” he said to host Tamara Holder. “I like to see a person who wins that gold medal go up there and look beautiful.”
A man who seems confused about where blush typically goes should probably keep quiet about how much makeup a woman should or shouldn’t wear. “A little lipstick, a little something doesn’t hurt the track stars, doesn’t hurt the people that are competing.” Interesting he would mention that considering the opposite also doesn’t actually hurt the viewers. But whatever!
Dietl, in the name of feminism, opined that he believes men should also wear a bit of makeup to look more presentable on camera, saying that Michael Phelps could use a little “blushitation” — his words, y’all — to collect his medals. “Don’t look like a white rat,” he said of the swimmer’s appearance. Dietl also noted that he himself had no makeup on for the segment, subjecting us to the same agony he feels every time he sees a pimple on an athlete.
“Would you put money behind a gal that won the gold medal and looks liked a washed-out rag?” Dietl asked, sounding more like a tanning bed victim than an expert with any credibility. “No. If she looked beautiful, and looked a little happy-looking, then you’d support her.” Perhaps we’d do the same if Dietl took some of his own advice. Or just stopped talking altogether — either one.
Bottom line: These athletes are some of the most physically fit human beings in the world and have worked and trained hard to accomplish their goals.
Appearance is important, but that’s not going to win you a gold medal. If female athletes — or male athletes, for that matter — feel empowered wearing makeup, then they should do what makes them feel good. If they would prefer to leave the highlight and contour to the beauty bloggers, that’s also acceptable.
And if Dietl has any more dumb opinions on this subject, perhaps he should take a good look at how he presents himself before opening his mouth to criticize an Olympian.
Last edited on Fri Aug 12th, 2016 12:22 am by srossi
This thread was great before AA ruined it.