When we look at the relationship between the 73 -year -old legendary football coach, Bill Belichick, and his girlfriend and a trading partner, Jordon Hudson, 24, it is difficult to know exactly what we see. Two adults in love with forging a dynamic commercial partnership? The mistreatment of the elderly, as some have been very speculated? Or is it, like the vitriol comments in Hudson’s social networks on the social networks, good old golden excavations?
The golden excavation is a misogynist and retro term, but this scandal is retro. It is a bizarre, slightly off -putting mystery that fits remarkably well in our current age of newly regressive gender policy.
Hudson and Belichick, the former NFL coach, winner of the Super Bowl, met on a flight in 2021 and made their relationships public last December. Although their age gap of almost 50 years has raised the eyebrows in the midst of observers, the scandal only increased by Hudson played an increasingly central role in the professional world of Belichick.
It is a bizarre, slightly off -putting mystery that fits remarkably well in our current age of newly regressive gender policy.
But speculations around the relationship have reached a fever when Hudson interrupted during the interview with Belichick on CBS Sunday morning in April. “How did you meet?” Host Tony Dokoupil asked Belichick, referring to Hudson. “We are not talking about this,” cut Hudson from the camera outside camera. “Jordon was a constant presence during our interview,” informs Dokoupil of Voice Off viewers, in a moment that launched a thousand Tiktok reaction videos.
In the midst of this controversy, the couple made content on social networks on their relationship which is not alarming as much as it is slightly strange, especially given the famous brutal public character of Belichick. On the Instagram account of Hudson, she published photos by the sea of herself in athletic balance on the tense legs of Belichick, and Belichick, disguised as a fisherman, in shock in a Hudson with a mermaid from the surf. (“Ouucchhhh !!!” Go the legend on that one.)
Some defended the relationship between Belichick and Hudson. The personality of the sports media Colin Cowherd said that Hudson’s choice to go to Belichick’s interview was normal for public relations directors, if “a kind of creaky thing”. Right Sports Sports Outket The Outkick rallied alongside Hudson on the ground that she triggers the Libs, saying: “If Jordon wants to spend her weekends at Bill in Nantucket, enjoy the sun and enjoy Cisco Brewery on Bill’s dimensions, I say.”
But the most common reaction to the show of the relationship of Hudson and Belichick is that described by the personality of the Katie Nolan sports media on a podcast in February: it’s weird and seems to have sinister nuances.
“We are already going to:” Are you younger than him? ” And then you present yourself in an advertisement. Said Nolan. “It seems that you could enjoy the guy. And he obviously benefits from the girl. ”
In particular, he does not seem to be a big headboard why a powerful septuagenarian would choose to be with a recent graduate of the university and candidate for the competition. But the harmful reason involved on the reason why Hudson wants to be with Belichick is the one that people are misogynist and freely launching: Gold Digger.
The resurgence of the golden digger
I don’t know anything about Hudson and Belichick’s private relationship, and most likely you either. I do not want to make a complaint on who uses who or what their privacy looks like. But as a feminist critic of pop culture, I am interested in seeing the term “Digger d’or” swim again from collective unconsciousness, ready and willing to go to work.
There is something almost out of date on this subject. The last time “Gold Digger” was so thrown into pop culture is that the teenager Courtney Stodden has skyrocketed in 2011 after their marriage at the age of 16 to 51, Doug Hutchison, aged 51. Stodden will describe their marriage later as characterized by grooming and sexual assault.
Before that, the great gold culture of pop culture was Anna Nicole Smith, the model transformed the obsession of Paparazzi who married the oil magnate J. Howard Marshall II in 1994. Since the premature death of Smith in 2007, she found a place in the pantheon of erroneous women of the 1990s, someone we believed in the past decade tour as a golden digger.
“It’s a bit provincial to watch her nose on a woman who wants something of a man and give a pass to a man who would probably never have given her a second glance if she had not been a beautiful blonde playmate,” said the essayist and activist of sex work Laura Lemoon in 2023, writing on Smith at Salon. “Rather than distinguishing and condemning Anna Nicole Smith, we should point our fingers on the inequalities and systemic failures that put people like me and Smith in positions where getting money and men’s resources, directly or indirectly, is our best option for survival.”
“Gold Digger” is an understatement that allows us to talk about these systemic failures. It is a way of making fun of women when they take seriously the idea that their financial well-being should depend on their relations with men. It is therefore strange to see the term become so popular during a time when popular culture has become rather passionate about the idea that life is the most pleasant, simple and simple when the finances of women TO DO depend on romantic relationships with men.
Tiktok is full of tradwives explaining how their life has improved once they got out of the 9 to 5 grinds to do cereals from zero for their children and let their husbands make the bra. (The fact that Tradwife’s most successful influencers are in fact the main family supporters at home is an irony that the influencers themselves rarely discuss.) Or there are household girlfriends covering how the care of their boyfriend without even the financial security net of a marriage contract was their ticket for the sweet life.
The Gold Digger is the tradwife, seen through a funhouse mirror: a woman living in her ability to attract a man, only here, Crew.
Meanwhile, some of President Donald Trump’s most vocal supporters argue that his prices will force women to leave the labor market and make them financially dependent on men, either through marriage, or through sex work, life paths that these men treat as equivalent. Trump’s call for the dream of an American manufacturing economy lost is nostalgic. It is an attractive fantasy for some of its most Incédian fans: that in this economy, the sexes will return to an older and allegedly more natural economic relationship, in which women exchange their sexuality and their capacities for setting children in exchange for financial security.
Gold Digger is the tradwife seen through a funhouse mirror: a woman living in her ability to attract a man, only here, without the love spectacle to soften the raw edges of the transaction. The golden digger is simply a figure that we can blame for the way this dynamic makes us feel uncomfortable, without having to think about what is so uncomfortable on this subject.
So, if we are angry with Jordon Hudson, is it worth asking the question: are we angry with her, or with the fact that powerful people want gold again digs one of the most viable career paths of a woman?
