Warbler said:
I'm not understanding the comparison between Football and WWE. Football is neither campy nor homoerotic. Football players have been wearing the same kind of uniform for years. I do not believe the uniforms were chosen to get women and gays to watch football.
It wasn't but consider the design and nature of the uniform.
American Football has it's origins in earlier forms of football like Rugby where no or very little protection is worn.
The uniform is stylised armor.
The shoulder pads, the helmet and the tights create a deliberately über-masculine shape (much like Tudor male dress) :
It's as much about the look as the function.
The effect is intended to not only protect the players but to make them look more masculine and martial (though it's so extreme it also looks rather camp).
WWE is theatrical (wrestlers are genuinely athletic and their injuries are testament to the serious effort they put into their art but you are deluding yourself if you believe the storylines and can't see the slight of hand).
If you can't see how the wrestlers are costumed and their personas are designed to be comic exaggerations of masculinity you really need to get your eyes tested.
You could hold screen shots from WWE matches side by side with gaypride floats and celebrations and you wouldn't be able to spot the difference.
I mentioned those two entertainments not as illustrations of alternate examples of male sexualisation in popular culture (not they they couldn't be drawn as such) but to point out how some people are blind to the visual language used to display gender ideals.
Your post seems to illustrate my point.