She was not a hypocrite. Being a hypocrite would entail that she would go out and perform wanton sexual acts with random men while espousing her "Virginity" to the press. Her actions (posing for sexy photos for crying out loud) does not mean she is no longer a virgin or that she does not hold her original views of waiting for the "right person" to lose her virginty. If we would put aside the pathetically ancient puritanical argument that virgins (and women in general) should behave in certain way (especially in regards to their looks) you'll see that this is nothing more then a hit piece by journalist with a agenda.
So, let me get this straight. Lolo Jones puts her
CHRISTIAN beliefs out there, using her virginity as an example of her devotion to her faith, and then poses nude and semi-nude for magazines, but it's everyone else that has misguided views about the "place" of women in our society. No one has espoused that people never play on their sexuality. It's not mentioned once that sexuality cannot be used. In fact, let's see what the author states instead of what you seemingly wish his article stated:
And she [Lolo Jones] has denounced a double standard that celebrates male athletes as sex symbols but derides women. She has a point. No one is complaining that Ryan Lochte is athletic eye candy.
Of course, Lochte is also appreciated for his haul of Olympic swimming medals. Victory alone is often not enough for women.
So, here we have an author that not only does not see a problem with a person who is noticed for their sexuality, but, and I am saddened that this has to be reemphasized for you to comprehend, when we're dealing with the Olympics and not Miss Universe, the author puts forth the proposition that maybe an athlete should let their athletic accomplishments speak for themselves instead of using your sexuality to garner attention from the media when your athletic performance at the subject sporting event is lackluster.
And that is not the fault of Lolo. The fault lays with media itself who controls the agenda over who gets press and who doesn't get any press at these events. Furthermore she is not the only person in the Olympics who received positive press based on their physical looks so I don't see how this argument can even hold water when the author of the article is attempting to single her out for retribution.
First, read the quote above. The author fully acknowledges that athletes who are more attractive get more attention. He writes, plain as day, that Lochte has gotten an extraordinary amount of attention due to his sexuality, but he backs up that aspect of his image with winning medals at the Olympics. Once again, since this seems to be so hard for many to understand, the Olympics is a sporting event. And while I agree that the media is also fully to blame for picking and choosing athletes that have the most sex appeal to follow (realistically, they choose the athletes with the most compelling stories to follow around, which includes sex appeal), it does not mean we do not have the capacity to realize that there can be blame on more than one person.
For every media outlet that wants to focus on an athlete's sexuality, there is the subject athlete that has every ability to disregard attention based upon their sexuality. No one is proclaiming that these men or women never use their sexuality but merely that sexuality should come second to athletic achievement.
Do you even know the meaning of the word?
Edit: Furthermore if you peal back another layer of this journalist's argument you see a subtle but present hint of him insinuating that she is a slut behind this accusation of her being a "hypocrite".
Let me quote Merriam Webster for you along with what you wrote in a previous post:
Definition of MISOGYNY
: a hatred of women
And your quote from post # 50:
Is she supposed to wear a Burka and walk 10 paces behind a man because she chooses to remain a virgin until she finds the "right guy"??
You apparently think that the author carries a fundamentalist attitude about the position women should hold in society, thus the author must hate women who don't fit that model. Nowhere in the article, and I ask you to find me a quote since you claim that if you peel the article's outer layer, you find that the author believes Jones is a slut, does it even hint that there's anything wrong with Lolo Jones being a devout Christian or a virgin. Instead, he points out that it is hypocritical (see argument above) to point to your faith and your piety and yet pose nude. Hell, that's not even the main point of the article as it's evidence used to support the author's main point that sexuality should not be the focus of reporting at the Olympics.
I patiently await your rebuttal.