The Sanctuary: Olympic ideal

Like the rest of the planet, I have hardly noticed (read: been ogling) the fine physical specimens strutting their stuff in my home city in the last week or so.
:-)

Um, I still maintain I am not at all visual. My hamster insists this is the case and I am going along with it :-)

But nonetheless I admire the hours of dedication and discipline that these athletes have put into their sport of choice. It cannot be easy to have to watch your diet, be in bed at a certain time, train for a certain number of hours everyday no matter what the circumstances or the weather and have a certain 'tunnel vision' that enables you to win an Olympic medal.

I applaud these people.
Whether or not they win a medal, their hard work alone deserves applause.

But...as ever, I have a question.
And it is related to the SMP, as usual.

I thought I knew the answer to this question, but now I have doubts. A recent trend has thrown me a curveball that I feel unable to negotiate in my head.

Physical prowess is a nice quality in a man, especially in a young man. I don't think anyone doubts that. Although it is not essential for his attractiveness to a woman especially the older he is, it is nonetheless a source of 'bonus points' especially for a younger woman and perhaps for the would-be 'cougar', the numbers of which are rising at an alarmingly exponential rate.

But I am not sure these pictures help or hinder the feminine experience. Ishall let you decide for yourself, and if you feel like sharing your personal view on this, ladies, I shall be interested to know what you think :)

Is this nice or nasty to you, ladies?

But cyclists' thighs aside, what about physical prowess in a woman?
I have no issue with physical fitness per se.
I think it is a good thing.
Most advisors of women would indeed advise that they keep fit and trim.
Helen Andelin as far back as the 1950s was advocating this, long before it was even fashionable.

A regularly-encountered grudge against 'Western Woman' is that she is too fat, and that she is unfit.
There may be several reasons for this, of course...
She eats too much, she lives a sedentary life, she doesn't exercise enough (and this includes ordinary activities such as walking), and she is just plain too lazy.
Fair or foul?
Especially as we are all getting fatter, men and women. But since men are more visual...

And then we have the other end of the extreme...
The Eastern European female weightlifter from the 80s...
No-one pictures her when they think of a foreign woman worth leaving The West for.

But a funny thing has happened the last few years!

We don't see these women anymore!
Even the really butch types seem to have toned it down a notch (no pun intended).

Sure, there are still some scarily masculine types about, but there aren't the numbers that had everyone believing that 'sport is just plain bad for your image if you are a woman' these days.

It's a good thing, no?

How weird that in the general population of women, where femininity is being lost little by little everyday, there appears to be a concerted effort to revive the seemingly 'dead and buried 'in the realm of competitive sports, of all things!

How bizarre!

What is the explanation for this?

Is this a necssary step for these women because they have been poked fun at for all these years and they are finally listening to reason?

Is it that they have simply stopped taking steroids? (Quite a few of those butch women were found to have rather high levels of testosterone in their bodies, at levels in fact that one wouldn't normally expect to find in a woman...).

Is it the water? (Um, I am starting to clutch at straws here, lol, scratching my head ;).

Is it that modern competitively-sporty women are simply more aware that they need their femininity more than ever to counterbalance their apparent masculinity?

Which is it?

Am I in fact right to be impressed by this new breed of female athlete?
Or do the men remain nonplussed and will pick the more feminine-looking woman anyday, even if she is 'slightly plump'?

How far is too far?

Or...and this thought just occurred to me...
Is it nothing to do with how she looks?
Is it more to do with the fact that she is competitive in a physical manner?

If she trained everyday for 4 hours 'just for fun' without competing in the Olmpic Games, does that make her more 'attractive' to a man than a 3-time gold medal winner?

Is it competition that might kill it for a man?

Should a woman even care about these things?

In other words, if I have a daughter one day and she wats to be 800m champion one day, shall I encourage her in her endeavour or shall I pull her to one side and say, with a sharp intake of breath, 'Honey we have to talk...'

I know of course that I shall have no such concerns if we were talking about my future son.

Am I sexist?
If so, why?
If not, why not?

In the meantime, I am still trying to work out how it is humanly possible for anyone to run 100m in 9.63 seconds...

1986 javelin thrower...