In other words, there’s the way things are supposed to be, a world in which male and female athletes are genderless machines, and the only thing that matters is how fast, how strong, and how skilled they are. And then there’s the way things really are, a world in which most people who watch sports are dudes with paunches and six-packs of beer. They appreciate girls who can shoot three-pointers, but really, they like girls in bikinis making mindless videos—OnlyFans with a dollop of “wellness.”

As Victoria Jackson, the former professional runner, told The Free Press, everyone knows “sexiness and attractiveness” are critical to scoring NIL deals, and it is “unfair.” It reminded her of her running days. “You would notice that somebody would get a big deal when she was middling, at best, and happened to be good-looking, and a woman who was making Olympic teams and winning national championships was having a hard time getting shoe deals.”

[Meh. This has been going on for years in professional tennis, golf, and other women’s sports. Some players win more endorsements through looks than tournaments through skill. So what? The NCAA should spend more time contemplating its women-erasure problem than attractive athletes marketing their looks for income. This entire issue appears to be based on the idea of redistributing attraction, and that’s nonsense. — Ed]