figure skating outfits(83 Posts)
Am currently watching the figure skating on BBC2, all amazing so far so good.
But noticed that all the mens outfits cover them from neck to toe and all the women show legs, cleavage, shoulders and arms. Anyone know why this should be?
I did get my feminist hat on a little, it obviously can't be because some outfits hinder movement otherwise the men would surely have skimpy outfits on too?
Very interested to hear opinions.
Subtle, does, subtle.
Thank goodness for elegant graceful women skaters with great legs in short skirts.
Is it ok if I continue to believe the world would be much blander without punctuation?
theamall judges are not allowed to judge on costume or appearence only on the technical side and have to point out or write why a deduction is given. For instance if you land a jump and place your hand on the ice ots a .5 deduction the same for a two foot landing, a fall is a point deduction off that move. Every move has a mark, your programme both short and long have a list of elements they must do to reach standard. The presentation mark is made up by how you hold yourself, arm momements and smiling so forth. At no point is your costume or makeup marked. A woman I often compete against does so with no make up on and plain all block colour dresses, sometimes she scores higher than me sometimes lower than me all depends on how we skate.
I coach a Tom boy she lives it and skates a catsuit, its all personal choice.
Sorry, I'm confused.
You said that 'Men also wear some revealing costumes some appear topless but have the mesh on them. Attention is generally directed towards the female in a pair, she has more presentation than the man, and can up the presentation marks (note the costume has nothing to do with the score) however the more eye catching her costume you will look at her more.'
I thought you were saying that women get looked at more for their costumes, and though marks can't be explicitly awarded for costume, you thought that the a woman's 'costume' will make you 'look at her more'.
Did you not mean what I thought there?
But you did say the more eye catching the outfit, the more the judges will notice you.
Which is just an interesting comment to make - it's obviously going to be true but it's just more stuff to put in the dissertation. Probably a thesis by now.
We should write it, kim.
You can always ask a referee about your marks and they can be re evaluated.
The only thing costume wise a judge can comment on is of your costume poses a risk to you or other skaters. Costumes with feathers are not allowed as the feathers could fall off causing you to trip or the next skater. If something falls off your costume you get a deduction.
The commentary directly references her outfit and the rule change. It's also interesting how they describe her skating in relation to the sort of image she is portraying on the ice.
In the 1994 Olympics Katarina Witt did a Robin Hood routine in the green jerkin, white shirt and leggings. Pushing the boundaries of what was acceptable for female skaters
Earlier in her career she forced a change in the rules about costume because she wore a blue skirtless feather trimmed outfit which was deemed too revealing.
This was it
There will never be a happy solution, and the skaters do, I hope, get a say in what they wear.
Does your smile get judged?
Or is that synchronised swimming?
Oh, I see ... so people don't actually like the judges to be paying attention to their costumes, and this is something that they check up on?
That sounds quite sad. Sensible about feathers, of course.
So are you saying you feel it's the judges who are to blame, because they look at women's dresses but are not meant to do so?
I should say I'm shocked but I'm not really. It must feel shit.
secret - oh, that's fascinating ... because that is cross dressing (among other things), the Robin Hood outfit. Is that coincidence or something to do with it?
Her other outfit looks quite tame to me now, but I guess standards have changed?
Why look at the woman more? In a lift you look at her she is smiling look at them man he looks like he is about to shit a brick sometimes, women are elegant and graceful and the skirt helps this. Men can be elegant and graceful but in a pair they are generally there for strength and to throw. In a throw jump you want to/need to be looking at her, her landing will get you the marks.
The same could be said for ballroom, he is in a black tux she is in a flamboyant feathery dress its just how it goes.
Why does a skirt help women to be elegant and graceful, then?
It's not true to say 'its just how it goes' - because at points in history, men have dressed flamboyantly. Besides which, I think quite a lot of women find men in tuxes very appealing - I know this may seem strange if you are naturally looking at the woman, but some women find men attractive. It's quite normal IMO.
Its a costume, its part of the performance. A good judge won't care what you have on as long as its regulation standard dress.
Its a performance sport, the costume adds to the enjoyment of it for both skaters and spectators.
Ohhhh I've been in skate world all my life! Wonders who MOB cld be!!!! Me and my family love the dresses and customising them to suit the wearer! Never have I heard a wearer complain and if they did they can wear the catsuit. Which I stink is more revealing than a dress!
She looked great in the Robin Hood outfit, it was elegant. I'm so pissed off with what it considered OK outfits for men and women. I can't understand why you'd want rigid rules for what the sexes can wear when it comes to art and performances.
So if your bank manager turned up in a shift dress and a pair of heels you wouldn't look twice? His choice he can do, they just don't.
This is all about status. Most of us are conditioned to believe that women have lower status to men. A man wearing a dress is lowering his status to that of a woman - and he therefore looks ridiculous. This idea of status seems to be subconscious - even when you're aware of it (and are an ardent feminist), the thought of your DP wandering around in a dress just because he wants to remains deeply disturbing.
Most of us challenge the status quo by ensuring that our daughters can do anything they want to do - however "masculine" society perceives it to be. Of course we do, not least because subconsciously they're raising their status by doing so. Hardly any of us do the same for our sons - and so the whole idea of status is reinforced in both directions.
So the costume does matter and is part of the performance? Come on ... it's one thing or the other! Let's be honest.
pretzel - I can see it would be fun, too. I would have liked to see it.
IMO, rigid rules tend to be sexist, and crap for creativity. No matter what the context.
Its a sport nothing to do with attraction! If you like watching men in a tux that's up to you, if a woman feels confident in a dress she has designed and a man happens to find her attractive is that different?
I don't see why attraction comes in to a sport. I've had enough Lycra glad penises thrust in my face during a routine im not attracted to them?
Interesting point about what men used to wear. Go to a black tie event (look at the name) and the men are all in tuxedos. Identical. But the women have more choice - or is it more pressure?
<Considers asking LRD when she wants to start writing our book as far too much material for a mere thesis>
Its part of the performance not part of the marks, there is a difference. You can't be marked on it but you can look good doing it, and feel confident wearing whatever dress you want. Top competions are broadcast and skaters what their routines and costumes to amaze the spectators but they want the judges to mark their skating. Its rather a simple set up really.
And yes the catsuits are worse you get a mega camel toe
mab - I thought you were saying men in tuxes weren't the normative focus of attention, and judges look more at women?
If that's true, then, yes, it's different ... how could it not be?
If you're not attracted to men, or penises, that's entirely your business. Equally if you're not attracted to women or vaginas. But you are describing a gendered distinction and insisting it is both 'the way it is' and somehow not amenable to discussion ... so I am curious as to why that is, and sexual attraction seems obvious since it is one of the basic differences in the way individuals see men and women, isn't it?
I am getting confused about whether you think it's wrong for men and women to end up dressing differently, or not? Half your posts are suggesting it is and half not.
kim - we need to publish the MN Little Book asap!
Mind you, though, I always wonder because apparently men in tuxes aren't identical and clever people will immediately see the difference. My uncle, who is very pretentious and into judging people's appearances, will immediately know if someone is wearing a posh brand or not (and he doesn't consider this remotely unfeminine though to be interested in fashioin otherwise, is).
Maybe we're just forced to concentrate harder to place men on a social spectrum?
It may be "the way it is", but that doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss it and work out why it is.
My personal opinion is that the more variation in how people express themselves through their appearance, the better. Things aren't usually either/or: you could skate in dance pants and a spangly leotard together if you wanted to, to use a skating example. It's the same for the "men in tuxes" thing: we talk as if there is a choice between a boring identikit dinner jacket and women's clothing, when there's a sizeable grey area of interestingly coloured/cut/fabric'ed suits and variations on menswear.
Join the discussion
Please login first.