Some Absolute Idiot Is Saying Sam Ponder's Twitter Feed Proves Her Point That Guys Who Objectify Women Don't Have The Right To Complain About Beating Women Or Something

Awful Announcing – She makes an excellent point about the objectification of women happening all around us (hello, WEEI in Boston) and while not equating the two, the whole notion that “women are things” is a real issue that needs addressed. Of course, the endless array of slideshows ranking the hottest women in sports, sexiest sideline reporters, and you name it are done for a simple reason – pageviews. And in the business of online content, that’s the right of those websites to do so. However, as someone who has probably been in more than enough of those slideshows herself, it’s Ponder’s right to ask where the line is as far as admiring versus objectifying women goes. All too often, women in sports don’t get a say in this discussion and their voice isn’t heard. Unfortunately, Ponder’s Twitter mentions proved her point for her as it devolved into personal attack after personal attack against her from the worst of the social media cesspool and mouthbreathers who think women are just meant to look at. Some of these tweets are NSFW, many of them are vile, all of them prove the point that there is a troubling element of the online sports culture that is exactly what Ponder was talking about…

Love this dude. Let’s hope he’s just trying to impress some chick by being sentimental and sappy and doesn’t actually believe what he wrote. Or maybe he hopes Sam Ponder will favorite it and then he can jerk off to it at night. Because I refuse to believe anybody could actually be this stupid.  First of all Ponder’s tweet wasn’t just about objectifying women in sports.  She implied that guys who objectify girls also condone beating them.  That she was confused how you could say a girl was hot but then say Ray Rice knocking his girlfriend unconscious was wrong.  That’s why people freaked out so this guy’s entire thesis is wrong.  It wasn’t just about objectifying women.  It was that objectifying women somehow makes you a criminal scumbag.

But let’s give this moron the benefit of the doubt.  He seems to be saying Sam Ponder has the right to complain about blogs and social media objectifying female sideline reporters.   I say no she doesn’t.  Sam Ponder has a job because she’s hot. Is she good at it? Can she think on her feet? Does she know sports? Probably but she doesn’t even get in the door for an interview at ESPN if she doesn’t look like she does. It’s requirement #1 for female sideline reports. They are hired to be objectified. The networks want guys like me posting their photos and social media buzzing about them. Those are just the facts. Just like models are hired to be objectified both male and female. Just like actors and actresses are hired to be objectified. It would be no different than Candice Swanepoel or Jennifer Lawerence complaining that guys objectify them. Why doesn’t Sam Ponder or this moron get that? That’s what you signed up for honey. Don’t complain about it and play dumb after the fact.

Furthermore finding girls sexy and posting their pictures isn’t a “pageview” thing. It’s not a internet thing. It’s been around forever. Guys will gawk at pretty girls. What’s so fucking hard to understand about that? It doesn’t mean we think it’s okay to beat women. It doesn’t mean we can’t take them seriously. It means we think you’re hot and want to have sex with you. That’s it. To draw any comparisons beyond that like what Sam Ponder did is absurd. That’s why she was getting killed on twitter last night. Because she’s a disgenious fraud that is complaining about the very thing that made her famous in the first place. She basically connected the dots that if you say a chick is hot that means you condone beating a woman. It’s absurd and idiotic and that’s why she got crucified and she deserved every ounce of it. Sure some people said shit that was probably overboard, but it’s twitter. Welcome to planet earth. But yeah let’s keep pulling random tweets to prove our point. Loser.