Quote:
Originally Posted by jammies
Well, one is criticizing a physical skill directly related to his performance as a pro hockey player, and the other is applying impossible standards of beauty to a woman - a pervasive meme which affects impressionable girls with poor self-image and feelings of inadequacy. I think not only are they different questions, but wildly different, and a borderline offensive question in the latter instance.
And before we go down that road, of course I make conscious and unconscious evaluations of attractiveness, but there's another profound difference between judgement, and petty snipes, and between what one should say in public, or think in private. This isn't TMZ, or some celebrity gossip site, and doesn't need to devolve that way.
|
An NHLers ability to perform is heavily reliant on the physical gifts they were born with. You can criticize a players skating ability all day, but their musculature and bone structure is going to put a hard limit on what they can achieve and it's perfectly acceptable to criticize either of those things. Micheal Phelps is the best swimmer of all time largely because every bit of his physique was highly conductive to being a swimmer, effort only gets you so far.
She voluntarily chose to build a career on her beauty, knowing that every aspect of her appearance would be evaluated and dissected. She's doing it at an extremely high level and is going to get a level of criticism appropriate to that level.