Why do women athletes compete in clothing so skimpy it could be underwear?

Another thing I wonder about is their hair. While most women tie it back, some have masses of hair flopping about while they are running, and in the sprint where the timings are in hundredths of seconds I think it would make a difference,

Jessica Ennis-Hill comments

www.telegraph.co.uk/olympics/2021/07/30/lived-fear-wardrobe-malfunction-athletes-should-able-wear/

The women's revealing kit is chosen by men and is written down in the official rules (IHF Rules of the Games). (page 90 for lovely pictures)
There is no official choice for the women (skirts or knickers). The refs can CHOOSE to ignore the rule as long as oppo don't complain so you would be OK as long as you don't win.

Michael Wiederer is the European chairman with a "Board" of 88% male and a 12% Chairwoman.
My DD is not impressed which is one reason she does not like to play sports (The boys kit is so much better).

The alternative is everybody plays in the same kit (men and women).

I thought you would be pleased that we aren't all bashing the bishop every time we see a bit of bare flesh. Some of us can resist the urge.>Now this place is full of discussions on PIV sex, genital shaving, vaginal swabs, anal sex, prostitution and written guides to underage sex, so if a couple of my colloquialisms upset you I am sorry, but I don't think they are that out of line with the rest of this board.

They certainly have changed women's clothes to be skimpier over the years even in things like tennis. I don't think female athletes would wear clothes which made their sport worse. Ignoring the top part and showing tummies (as women have breasts), compare male and female runners' shorts. Women's are very close fitting. Men's are loose. Is that because there is a penis to be housed?

Some of the male divers' trunks sat very low on their hips, and quite a few of them had to pull them up, or even back on properly, when they swam out of the pool.

In terms of being able to assess body positioning, you can do that in any skin-tight clothing. Rhythmic gymnasts, for example, are allowed long-sleeved and full-legged catsuits for competition, if they want them.

I think the difference is in the fact that women's sport is still in the stage of establishing itself. While one might get a bit hot under the collar at the sight of the divers' well toned pecks, no one for one minute thinks that's all male sport is about, or doubts the strength, skill or merit of male sport in general.

On the other hand, women's sport is still in the stage of fighting to be recognised for its merit and as something that has a reason to exist beyond its sex appeal. Of course it has made huge progress (and has had huge support from some male sporting icons) but is still beleaguered by stupid assholes such as Blatter who believe that the main attraction of women's sports should be its sex appeal to men.

Fingers crossed that this Olympics has made a difference to those perceptions.

What is wrong with seeing healthy young women's (and men's!!!) bodies FFS?

And for real skimpy, was anyone watching the male diving last night :o

Heavens, i never impled that did I? And I was being so careful not to say! I have, of course, instictively been training my eye for straight legs and twisty back muscles.

Would I still be a member of the oppressive patriarchy if I said, I quite liked looking at the female athletes' toned bodies too? With both sexes, I think it's an appreciation of youth and how beautiful the human body can be. In an age where we seem so obsessed with the artificial ways of making our bodies look a certain way - clothing/ make-up/ dieting/ photoshopping/ plastic surgery etc etc, isn't it ok to appreciate some bodies that look good through natural, healthy sport etc? I think it's part of admiring how fast they run/ swim/ dive or whatever. Don't forget, the ancient Olympians didn't wear any clothes at all. The Olympics is about admiring what the human body is physically capable of and that, to an extent, includes what it looks like too.

rosabud as is the case with female gymnastics, i believe the skimpy suits are out of necessity to allow the judges/athletes to evaluate leg/body position (eg. how straight the legs are during the dive) for the purposes of scoring (although if someone more knowledgeable in diving can correct me on this i'll be happy to be corrected.)

As an aside though you should remember that this is a feminist board and implying that looking at well toned body is enjoyable make you a chauvanist and part of patriarchy ("Whether I would find the men's diving quite so entertaining to watch if that were the case, I wouldn't like to say")

I haven't read all 8 pages of this but am currently watching the men's diving and can't help noticing that the men's trunks are somewhat on the skimpy side. Now, I'm sure some sports officiando more knowledgeable than I will appear to point out that it's all to do with areodynamics etc although, surely the argument for that would mean they ought to be in lycra longjohns similar to those worn by the cyclists? Whether I would find the men's diving quite so entertaining to watch if that were the case, I wouldn't like to say.

Honesty is always welcome, though lack of caring is a pity. Ah well, perhaps you'll feel better in the morning.

I do think you have been misunderstanding, rather than experiecing any word twisting, however.

Hmmm.... I don't really know much about athletics/time saving/special socks etc. but I can give a gymnast's perspective as someone who spent most of their childhood and teens doing gymnastics and ballet.

Growing up it seems like I spent half my life wearing pretty much wearing just a leotard (and yes no knickers for competitions or displays lest they stick out and spoil the line of the leotard!).
You know what, I never minded. I like that leotards/dance costumes are skimpy because apart from giving you room to move they show all the beautiful/powerful things the body can do.
Bare legs are good to show how much someone is extending their leg etc. I feel much more sluggish when I exercise in tracksuit bottoms etc. because I can't see whether my body is doing what I want it to or not. Incidentally, I think the main reason men can wear those long john type things is that mens gymnastics is more about acrobatics/strength as opposed to the dance elements which rely a lot on flexibility.

Slight tangent but I think spending all that time in a leotard has made me grow up to be very relaxed about my body as an adult - you lose all sense of self consciousness when you've had to strip off backstage (thinking about dancing now) in about 30 seconds in front of whoever else is there.

I am certainly confused, so I will leave. I am beginning to care less and less about what goes on in here, to be honest. The twisting of words and double-standards are depressing. Goodnight.

I think SQ is making sense - what are you not following?

And what did you mean?

Sounds as if we are both getting confused!

SQ, I did have you down as someone I could have a sensible discussion with. Due to the limitations of chat boards, it is possible to interpret a post in a number of ways. If that is how you wish to interpret my post, then I will leave you to it, and go back to reading my 'How to be King of the World' manual.

And LRD, you missed it because it was not what I meant.

Male sporting fashions have definitely changed for the worse.

Please get rid of bulging Lycra running suits and bring back Boris Becker's properly short shorts.

The former show far to much, the latter were just right.

I do think that a man talking about his wanking habits on this part of MN is absolutely different to women talking about sex and prostitution from the POV of feminism, amongst themselves.

I would have thought that was obvious but again, we live and learn

Incidentally I was in john lewis the other day and saw the following:

Advert for 3D TV -"get closer to the action than you imagined possible" and the image stuck on the TV screen was a man's legs sticking out as if he was sat on the floor, and a female beach volleyball player in a bikini plunging face first towards his lap.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Amd benny hill.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Oh. How did I miss that.

That's just horrible, SQ.

Oh, no danger of that! I've read bits over people's shoulders and it makes me unreasonably sniggery.

I suppose the difference is that she, poor woman, thinks she's being sexy.

Sorry to leap in, I just figured we were chatting on a chat forum.

I'm not bothered by colloquialisms if you're not! Sometimes they just seem to apply or spring to mind better than anything else, I certainly have experience of that!

namechangeguy

"And as far as beach volleyball players are concerned, I have not seen one participant showing off her huge surgically enhanced buttocks or tits. They look like what they are - hard-bodied athletes, not page 3 girls. There is nothing to perve over. "

I read that as being all about you and your personal preferences. Rather than a contribution to the debate. So you don't fancy beach volleyball players (what any of them, blimey) and you feel the need to tell us that here on a feminism thread. You need artificially inflated breasts to be able to knock one out.

Thank you so much for sharing.

And I meant to say, apology accepted.

Lengthy and graphic? Deary me. Don't pick up Fifty Shades...., whatever you do.

I was trying to have a discussion with SQ. I was genuinely interested in what she had to say, but she isn't here right now.

And then you leapt in. Now this place is full of discussions on PIV sex, genital shaving, vaginal swabs, anal sex, prostitution and written guides to underage sex, so if a couple of my colloquialisms upset you I am sorry, but I don't think they are that out of line with the rest of this board.