Friday, November 11, 2022




New Endorsements for College Athletes Resurface an Old Concern: Sex Sells

Female college athletes are making millions thanks to their large social media followings. But some who have fought for equity in women’s sports worry that their brand building is regressive.

Olivia Dunne, a gymnast at Louisiana State, earns over $1 million annually in endorsements. “That is something I’m proud of,” she said, adding that most female athletes will not advance to a pro league after college.Credit...Annie Flanagan for The New York Times

She was an all-American in her freshman year and made the Southeastern Conference’s honor roll as a sophomore majoring in interdisciplinary studies.

Ahead of the start of her junior season, Dunne is also at the leading edge of a movement shaking the old foundations of college sports: a female student athlete raking in cash thanks to the passage in 2021 of new rules allowing college athletes to sign name, image and likeness, or N.I.L., deals.

Dunne, 20, won’t give specifics on her earnings, which at least one industry analyst projects will top $2 million over the next year.

“Seven figures,” she said. “That is something I’m proud of. Especially since I’m a woman in college sports.” She added: “There are no professional leagues for most women’s sports after college.”

Dunne, a petite blonde with a bright smile and a gymnast’s toned physique, earns a staggering amount by posting to her eight-million strong internet following on Instagram and TikTok, platforms on which she intersperses sponsored content modeling American Eagle Outfitters jeans and Vuori activewear alongside videos of her lip syncing popular songs or performing trending dances.

To Dunne, and many other athletes of her generation, being candid and flirty and showing off their bodies in ways that emphasize traditional notions of female beauty on social media are all empowering.

“It’s just about showing as much or as little as you want,” Dunne said of her online persona.

The athlete compensation and endorsement rules have been a game-changer for collegiate women, particularly those who compete in what are known as nonrevenue sports, such as gymnastics.

Sure, male football players have garnered about half of the overall compensation estimated to be worth at least $500 million, fueled by collectives formed by wealthy supporters who pay male athletes for everything from jersey sales to public appearances.

Women are more than holding their own as earners thanks largely to leveraging their social media popularity. Along with Dunne, other female student athletes have been minted millionaires by the N.I.L. rules, including Haley and Hanna Cavinder, twins who play college basketball at Miami; Sunisa Lee, the Auburn gymnast and Olympic gold medalist at the Tokyo Games; and Paige Bueckers and Azzi Fudd, basketball stars at Connecticut.

But the new flood of money — and the way many female athletes are attaining it — troubles some who have fought for equitable treatment in women’s sports and say that it rewards traditional feminine desirability over athletic excellence.

And while the female athletes I spoke to said they were consciously deciding whether to play up or down their sexuality, some observers say that the market is dictating that choice.

Andrea Geurin, a researcher of sports business at Loughborough University in England, studied female athletes trying to make the Rio Olympics in 2016, many of them American collegians. “One of the big themes that came out is the pressure that they felt to post suggestive or sexy photos of themselves” on social media, Geurin said.

She noted that some of the athletes had decided that making public such imagery wasn’t worth it while others had found it was one of the primary ways to increase their online popularity and earning power.

Scroll through the social media posts from female college athletes across the United States and you will find that a significant through line on many of the women’s accounts is the well-trod and well-proven notion that sexiness sells. Posts catering to traditional ideals about what makes women appealing to men do well, and the market backs that up.

*************************************************

The Root Cause of America's Moral Decay Lies in the Public Schools

Rashad Gibson

I recently came across a study by the Barna Group called “How Concerned Are Christian Parents About Their Children’s Faith Formation?” I must say, the data grieved me.

One of the questions posed was, “As a parent, how concerned are you about your child’s/children’s spiritual development?” Of practicing Christians, 51 percent were very concerned, 33 percent somewhat concerned, 9 percent not very, and 7 percent not at all.

Ponder this: Only half of practicing Christian parents are very concerned about their children’s spiritual growth. This finding alone speaks volumes.

If a good portion of practicing Christian parents is only somewhat interested or apathetic toward their children’s spiritual development, they probably have the same cavalier attitude regarding their own spiritual health.

Do these Christian parents truly understand the importance of regeneration, our fallen nature, the Word of God, intimacy with Christ through prayer, repentance, or how our relationship with Christ plays out in society? Does this finding reflect a lack of value the church places on the spiritual development of adults and children?

The article reveals the dire need for our youth to be discipled to grow in spiritual maturity in Christ. Likewise, although not directly mentioned, it underscores the imperative need for adults to cultivate their relationship with Christ, so the next generation will take their faith in Christ seriously.

Currently, I am planning to start a Christian school in New England with the hopes of planting schools throughout the region. Scripture teaches that parents are primarily responsible for their children’s moral and spiritual development (Deuteronomy 6:4-8, Psalm 78:1-8). The church and Christian schools are supplements that facilitate our children’s spiritual maturity.

Unfortunately, our children face many hurdles and, dare I say, fiery darts aimed at them very early by Satan (Ephesians 6:16). One of which is the public school system.

Let me be very clear: The public school system is designed to undermine Christianity in exchange for the religion of humanism.

In 1930, C.E. Potter, a signer of the “Humanist Manifesto” and an associate of John Dewey (considered the father of progressive education), wrote in “Humanism: A New Religion,” the following:

“Education is thus a most powerful ally of Humanism, and every American public school is a school of Humanism. What can the theistic Sunday schools, meeting for an hour once a week, and teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day program of humanistic teaching. … So very humanistic is modern education that no religion has a future unless it be Humanism. The religion of tomorrow in America and of the day after tomorrow in all the world may not be in all respects identical with the religious Humanism we are advocating in this book, but it will be mightily like it and of the same spirit.”

Potter’s prophetic vision has led to much bad fruit (the sexual revolution, feminism, the LGBT movement, etc.). Many Christians have acquiesced and underestimated the ongoing push of humanism and how it is forced on our children today.

As a result, the Christian faith has been pushed to the margins, and every godless contention has been placed in the mainstream and educational system over the last century.

If Christian parents are not engaged in discipling their children, and Christian leaders do not stand up and stem the tide of humanism by declaring the glorious gospel and the Word of God, Christian influence will remain on the margins. Furthermore, humanism will continue to thrive, and our nation will continue its downward spiral into a tyrannical state.

**************************************************

Mother-of-three claims four-year-old daughter's pre-school is teaching her that 'girls marry girls and boys marry boys

A mother has claimed her four-year-old daughter is being taught 'girls marry girls and boys marry boys' at her kindergarten.

Sarah Game, who is a member of the South Australian upper house, claimed her daughter's pre-school was teaching children same-sex marriage as 'the norm'.

Ms Game, from One Nation, made the claim on Instagram after controversy erupted in the federal Senate over drag queen Courtney Act appearing on the ABC's Play School.

After the debate, Ms Game posted a comment on Instagram saying her four-year-old had returned from pre-school to say ''girls marry girls and boys marry boys'. Her post was then shared by prominent NSW One Nation leader Mark Latham.

'When I challenged her, she pointed to a poster she made in class with pictures and it was clear to me that she wasn't aware of the more mainstream side of the story,' she said in the post.

Ms Game, who is a mother of three, wouldn't share the poster with Daily Mail Australia and said she hadn't contacted the school about her concerns.

However, she said it wasn't appropriate for the school to be teaching young children about marriage mores.

'Kids this young shouldn't be taught such concepts at school. Leave it up to parents - who know best - to decide,' she said.

'I believe parents should be front and centre of teaching children moral and ethical issues, not teachers,' she said.

'Primary school children need to be taught love and acceptance of others, which is enough detail for their age.'

Education department guidelines issued to all South Australian schools and pre-schools state that 'diversity is valued' and they must provide 'an inclusive learning environment where intersex and gender diverse children and young people know they belong'.

The department says schools must support children and young people who 'might want to affirm a gender identity that is different from their assigned gender at birth'.

Ms Game told South Australian parliament on Tuesday that she had met with multiple parents 'who have a child on this journey' of gender reassignment and had been left 'distressed'.

'They feel excluded from investigating anything other than an affirmation pathway,' she said.

In the 'Gender diverse and intersex children and young people support procedure' guidelines it states decisions around supporting a child's 'gender affirmation' are to be made by 'site leaders'

A 'site leader' is a principal, preschool director, care setting manager or co-ordinator, or their delegate.

The document states there will be situations where a parent and child disagree about their 'gender affirmation' and when this occurs, the site leader must determine what is in the 'young person's best interest'.

If the site leader decides a different gender affirmation is in the child's interests, even against the wishes of the parent, they are told to 'make support arrangements for them'.

Site leaders also determine whether parents should be told of what their children are doing based on the child or young person's capacity to 'make an informed decision and their gender affirmation and the consequences of their actions'.

***********************************

My other blogs: Main ones below

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

No comments: