Is it sexist to obsess over a female TV reporter's beauty?

[Stormy Daniels]

You know what this thread is showing me? That some people on the right, as rabidly anti-left as they are, and eager to whine about how bad liberals are at every possible opportunity, see physical beauty--or more specifically, the lack thereof--to be a bigger flaw than liberal politics.

I mean, I really would have expected all the righties to talk about how liberals are hypocrites and objectify women on a day-to-day basis while pointing the finger at others. But clearly I was wrong. Instead, actually want to pretend that these women aren't even attractive.

We've really seen priorities on display, here.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

People get preference for lots of reasons. Basketball players are obscenely tall. Many football players are short, fat, and dumpy.

The difference here is that those physical traits go hand in hand with the aptitude to do the actual work, while with TV news reporters physical traits don't contribute to an aptitude to do the work and they take precedence over ability to do the actual work.

Nobody understands better than me that sometimes the job is to look hot. But that's not the case when it comes to delivering the news. Is it?

Are you saying that looking hot is part of the job? So, if that's the case, is it sexist to ogle over a female news reporter's physical beauty?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

By "obsess" I mean to reduce woman to her physical appearance and attractiveness and define her based on that, to the exclusion of her other traits. You know, what liberals would normally say is sexist, but appears to be okay when their favorite news outlets do it.

As per usual, you need a dictionary.

 

[Indeependent]

You know what this thread is showing me? That some people on the right, as rabidly anti-left as they are, and eager to whine about how bad liberals are at every possible opportunity, see physical beauty--or more specifically, the lack thereof--to be a bigger flaw than liberal politics.

I mean, I really would have expected all the righties to talk about how liberals are hypocrites and objectify women on a day-to-day basis while pointing the finger at others. But clearly I was wrong. Instead, actually want to pretend that these women aren't even attractive.

We've really seen priorities on display, here.

How ugly are you?

 

[whitehall]

I like watching Mexican weather reports...........

View attachment 638009

Wow, it's hot in Acapulco

 

[monkrules]

The difference here is that those physical traits go hand in hand with the aptitude to do the actual work, while with TV news reporters physical traits don't contribute to an aptitude to do the work and they take precedence over ability to do the actual work.

Nobody understands better than me that sometimes the job is to look hot. But that's not the case when it comes to delivering the news. Is it?

Are you saying that looking hot is part of the job? So, if that's the case, is it sexist to ogle over a female news reporter's physical beauty?

Reading headlines off a teleprompter is not rocket surgery. A 150 IQ isn't needed to do the job.


But television broadcasting IS a visual medium. So it makes sense to put visually attractive people in front of the camera.

I make absolutely no apology for preferring beautiful women on my TV screen. If I'm going to spend 30 to 60 minutes each morning watching national news, I'd absolutely prefer to spend that time with an anchor woman I find attractive.

Why some networks have Maxine Waters look-alikes delivering their news is beyond me. I thought the idea was to share important news events, NOT to make viewers lose their breakfast.

What's the point of owning an expensive high definition television set if all you're going to do is torture yourself looking at the likes of Maxine Waters.

Thankfully, we each get to make that choice for ourselves.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

But television broadcasting IS a visual medium. So it makes sense to put visually attractive people in front of the camera.

And that's why newspapers have been printed on god ugly paper for over a hundred years, right?

It's hilarious watching you liberals scramble to try justifying your misogyny.

 

[Indeependent]

And that's why newspapers have been printed on god ugly paper for over a hundred years, right?

It's hilarious watching you liberals scramble to try justifying your misogyny.

Darn…how ugly are you?

 

[monkrules]

And that's why newspapers have been printed on god ugly paper for over a hundred years, right?

It's hilarious watching you liberals scramble to try justifying your misogyny.

Please don't post to me again. You're a total waste of time.

1) I'm NOT a liberal.
2) There's nothing misogynistic about appreciating a lovely woman (you ought to try it some time).
3) You're a moron who can't tell the difference between a conservative and a liberal - or a man from a woman.

Have a nice day. Enjoy your delusions.

 

[AMart]

By "obsess" I mean to reduce woman to her physical appearance and attractiveness and define her based on that, to the exclusion of her other traits. You know, what liberals would normally say is sexist, but appears to be okay when their favorite news outlets do it.

Who fucking cares. Women do this with men as well. 99% of women love the attention as long as it is positive.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Who fucking cares. Women do this with men as well. 99% of women love the attention as long as it is positive.

Yes, but liberals don't pretend to be warriors for men's equality and empowerment.

 

[AMart]

Yes, but liberals don't pretend to be warriors for men's equality and empowerment.

If they are gay fake trans they do.