I am not impressed with Esmonde’s fixation on a certain demographic of hockey fans. If there is anything I’ve learned this semester it’s that ignorance surrounds us and that everyone has their own unique opinion. Each needs to be taken with a grain of salt. I don’t think anything is wrong with the use of the term “puck bunny.” It defines a clear demographic. Let’s call a spade a spade.
These women exist, it’s part of the sport’s culture. I don’t see the difference between “puck bunny,” “gold digger,” or “future Mrs. Bieber” being printed on a shirt. All allude to females objectifying themselves. I can only hope that the women who wear these shirts read them before they dress, they know what it means, know what they’re endorsing. In this case they are proudly displaying their support. If she’s watching, having fun, feeding the industry, why do you care what she’s wearing? If her intent is to interact with the players after the game, whose business is that? I don’t think she’s setting a worse example than the fans yelling obscenities at the opposing players. I am willing to bet that the percentage of fans wearing “bunny” shirts against the ones wearing team jerseys is insignificant. Who are we to judge someone’s motivation? Women do not need to prove anything in order to be a fan: as long as the enthusiasm is there, why get so worked up about what we’re wearing? If anyone is using the term in a derogatory manner it’s simply an exposure of their own ignorance and does not deserve attention.
Kathleen Michaels
U2 Biology
Received March 8