Calendar controversy

Michael Habermen / Columnist

Before the 2006 Olympic Games, it was a fairly safe to make the assumption that many people neither knew about nor had any interest in the sport of curling.

And then, with the help of curler/photographer Ana Arce, a 12-month calendar was put out in which the top women's curlers were shown in either very little or no clothing at all.

While people may take offense to the graphic content portrayed in the calendar, it was, in actuality, a tasteful publication that was designed to increase awareness and revenue for the sport of curling.

The Olympic Games are a tradition in which a person is competing in their respective sport and has a responsibility to themselves, their country and the history of the Olympics as a whole, to uphold an image that bestows both respect and dignity to all.

That being said, wouldn't it be likely to label this calendar as a sign of disrespecting the Olympic Games and the  countries that these women are representing?

The plain and simple truth in reference to this question is that these women are not disgracing their country or the Olympics at all, but rather expanding the general principles for which we have come to accept as right and wrong.

So often in female athletics, we are presented with the message that we should stray from exuding any sort of admiration for the physical appearance of the athlete, therefore causing us only to concentrate on their performance in their respective sport.

When Anna Kournikova became popular because of her attractiveness, certain sectors of the general public began to loathe her because she was getting so much attention for her appearance and not for her performance.

For society to show such naivety as to shy away from the beauty of female athletes and stray from allowing them to use that beauty to market themselves or their sport is taking away a valuable asset to the sports industry.

Unlike Kournikova, who is a mediocre player at best, the women featured in the calendar were indeed among the best in the world at the sport in which they compete.

Their use of expression through their beauty and creative marketing techniques for a sport that is not well-known throughout the world should be seen as a sign of ingenuity, not a lack of class.

Just because something has not been done before does not mean that it is something that should not be done in the future.

It is actually quite admirable that these athletes were willing to risk their reputation to do something that would benefit their sport in the long run.

With tasteful pictures and informative captions that describe who they are, the calendar will allow the curling industry to become a more recognized sport.

If we continue to ignore the aspect of beauty in our appreciation of athletes, then we will do nothing but cripple the athlete.

We will also be crippling the sport they participate in from capitalizing on a market that is vital to the generation of revenue that the particular sport or athlete has the potential to earn. The public should learn to accept it.

Contact Michael Habermen at pendulum@elon.edu or 278-7247