I googled Cirstea, and she's pretty enough, but I always thought lots of guys think Serena is hot.

= hotness

Yeah, that other girl is very pretty, but Serena is both an amazing player AND and amazing physical specimen. Granted, I wouldn't have the first clue what to do with her, but I'd choose her over the other 10 out of 10.

Oh, wait, are we supposed to be expressing outrage over looks mattering? Oops

This post begs two questions:

1. who is the one deciding on the "attractiveness" of the women players?

and

2. when do the men start getting ranked the same way?

Somehow the author of this article managed to leave out the fact that Sorana Cirstea (who is indeed ranked number 28) was playing against number 8 ranked Victoria Azarenka, while Serena was playing against an unranked player. Apparently, if a "star" player is in a match then that match should get center court no matter how likely it is that the match will be a total blowout. Gee, otherwise it must be some kind of looks based sexism, huh?

Honestly, it took me all of 30 seconds to gather this data on the web - you would think a good reporter would include it. It would be nice if Salon reporters tried to pass on a little unbiased information instead of mindlessly helping to stir whatever tempest in a teapot is the latest meme among the terminally offended.

2. when do the men start getting ranked the same way?

When women start watching televised sports in sufficient numbers to justify doing so.

Until then, what men want to see pretty much controls televised sports.

Center court isn't always the best player, male or female. It's usually the best match for ratings.

Watching Serena blow out some unseeded Italian lacks the drama and ratings of watching a match between the 8th and 28th World ranked players. While Serena is a very beautiful women, the match itself isn't that important.

If there are two matches one between the 7th ranked and 27th ranked, and one between the 8th and 28th ranked, and the latter has two players who are more attractive, they'll likely get center court over the others, because more people will watch.

This happens in all kinds of sports, and happens to men just as frequently. Look at the relative popularity between Ricky Hatton and Floyd Mayweather. Floyd is a better boxer, better looking, but Hatton made all kinds of money because people just loved watching him. No, he wasn't the best, but that doesn't matter, he had a following.

The Williams sister's still have a big following, but it's not as big as it once was, simply because they have been at the top of the game for so long that we've become used to it.

Even they were aided by the fact they are both beautiful women and people enjoyed watching them for that reason alone. They've brought people into the sport of tennis would otherwise wouldn't be there.

People watched the Williams sisters play because they are attractive Black players, and now some of those people are into tennis.

That's part of the goal of tennis matches, to draw in new viewers. This means that sometimes new and comparatively less talented and less known players get a spotlight.

Tennis is boring enough without having to be subjected to the Williams sisters and their terrible sportmanship on the court. If eye candy is the deciding factor then unfortunately they will always be relegated to the back of the line. When I use the term Ugly American to refer to these two (and their Svengali Father) it is not in reference to their looks...

Serena is not hot. I do not want to participate in the patriarchal objectification of women.

All the female tennis players are equally plain, and should be judged solely on their performances.

1. who is the one deciding on the "attractiveness" of the women players?

I know we are all attractive snow flakes and all that matters is what is on blah blah blah. And there is someone that will find just about anyone attractive. But, lets live in the real world for a moment, there are people that are just more visually appealing than other people. Brad Pitt is hotter than Dick Cheney to the vast majority of people. Candice Parker hotter than Rebeca Lobo to the vast majority of people. Believing otherwise is taking political correctness to unseen levels.

2. when do the men start getting ranked the same way?

Brad Pitt makes more money and stars in more movies than Paul Giamatti. Will Smith makes more money than Luis Guzman. The Backstreet Boys sold more than Tom Petty. Just some quick examples.

I would never suspect the networks/event organizes go for ratings in their sports telecasts. I mean when Tiger Woods is out of contention the networks would just never cut away from him immediately and go to cover the journeyman in the lead. The British coverage of F1 would never ignore Vettal and instead focus on Button and Hamilton. The German coverage would never ignore Button and focus on Vettal. The networks much rather have Jacksonville on primetime than the Bears or Cowboys. The Devil Rays dominated fox's game of the week last season not the Yankees, Cubs, Dodgers and Red Sox.

That's what I called the final match in one of the interminable tennis grand slams a few years ago. It was Serena vs. Sharapova and holy shit did I get crucified on-line for it. Who decided that either of the Williams sisters was physically attractive? Probably the same women that bring your wives the tabloid fodder that is on display in grocery store check-out lanes and afternoon chat shows everywhere. It reminds me of an episode from my high school days. Two of this fat girl's attractive friends were trying to convince my skeptical (and aghast) buddy to take their ogre-ish girlfriend on a date - "But she has really pretty eyes..." Bottom line, saying something is beautiful just don't make it so...

that Wimbledon is the only slam that doesn't offer equal prize money for the male and female champions.