Is the Miesha Tate and Ronda Rousey Promo on Showtime Sexist?
Miesha Tate and Ronda Rousey are both in the main event of the Strikeforce card on Saturday and it's easy to see why after watching the Showtime promo that has run on YouTube.
Both Tate and Rousey are attractive. While fans could argue that Tate has had a great career as well, it isn't the kind of thing that makes her main-event material. She has beaten decent opponents like Marloes Coenen, but that shouldn't overshadow a card with fights that include Paul Daley or Ronaldo "Jacare" Souza.
Rousey has even less of a claim to a main event having only four professional fights and having defeated no opponent of note. She got the opportunity because of her ability on the mic and her above average looks.
This fight will hold women's MMA back because of its central focus.
It even appears on the promo that is in the sidebar or can be found by clicking here.
The first half of the clip has nothing to do with fighting in general and is only meant to show off the women for their appearance. While the ad does finally show some of their fights, the flashes are quick and shy away from anything that could be considered bloody or unattractive.
The announcer even mentions that "it's not just looks that can kill." Everything in the commercial and how it is structured comes back to looks with fighting as a backdrop for it.
The match was made for less then stellar reasons and the buildup for it reinforces that. No matter who wins, women's MMA won't progress with fighters who are just being used for their looks to get ratings.
Even if Tate and Rousey have a great match, the winner will still be someone who is predominantly used for her looks.
Looks first and then fighting ability. That is how Showtime is selling the fight and the women who are in it and that is what they are telling the consumer is important.
Until that changes, nothing in women's MMA is going to be taken seriously.
Especially not when the powers that be sell a fight like this.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?