#strongisbeautiful

I didn't say they were ugly. I'm talking about the motivation behind it. Decided by men for men.

What serious sportswoman wants to prance around in "sexy" lingerie to please
the male gaze? Let me think... a male one...

A sportswoman wants to be respected for her achievements in her sport.

How often do you wear your Lycra gym kit under your outfit when you’re on a third date? Most women want their sexual and romantic partners to be attracted to them, and young women aren’t any exception to that – I think it’s disingenuous to get into arguments about teaching young women not to care a single jot about their looks, because we’re never going to stop people of any age or either sex caring about their looks and wanting to look attractive - yet the only bodies women see in the media and are consistently told look attractive usually aren’t synonymous with being fit and strong and eating well, but with limiting food intake, getting cosmetic surgery, and undergoing procedures. If the only time women see strong, muscular female bodies is when they’re out on a rugby pitch in gym kit and sportswear, the association between being strong and muscular and also that being a body type to aspire to if you don’t plan to spend your life on a rugby pitch in gym kit and sportswear is never going to be made. And if women don’t aspire to muscular bodies, or associate strong and muscular with attractive, they’re going to continue to eschew and avoid engaging in sports and keeping themselves healthy in favour of the only type of body they’re told can look good in a bikini.

I take a lot of the points made here, plenty are absolutely valid, and I agree – I think it’s fairly shit underwear! Which I suppose is par for the course with many products that aren’t targeted at me. I lift weights, I box, I run distance. I’m not a waifish model, and you’d break your fist on my abs. I spend a lot of time in gym kit and I’m incredibly confident in the way I look – but it’s taken a long time to get to that, and I’m under no illusions that we’re going to get young women confident about building and having a body which doesn’t fit the airbrushed Insta norm by simply telling them they shouldn’t care and to just wear their gym kit. I also have a 13-year-old goddaughter, and because I’m not her mum and am therefore a bit cool, I get the privilege of hearing what goes on inside her head quite a bit. I could tell her until I was blue in the face that she shouldn’t care about looking attractive or what boys think, and it wouldn’t make a bit of difference: what is making a difference is being the person who models strong being attractive, and being attractive in a bikini or a backless wedding dress or a halter dress as well as in leggings whilst squatting 100kg.

The last thing most parents of teen girls want is for blokes to be stood on the sidelines trying to imagine what underwear the kids are wearing!

The advert got the company lots and lots of publicity, though not in a good way.

Oddballs, on the other hand, have the right approach.

Those poor ladies. I hope they weren't bullied into modelling.

FFS

If the message is 'strong is beautiful', then show them being strong, ie being good at their sport. Not looking vulnerable in their underwear. No one should have to worry about what they look like when they're doing sport / anything. Fecking annoying that everything has to come back to looks.

Sexist bollocks indeed. Why do women always have to be seen as beautiful anyway? This is the opposite of empowering. It would be far more beautiful to just do whatever you enjoy, in appropriate clothing for that activity, and not give a crap about how you look. Women and girls can look however they goddamn please, and men can stuff their male gaze where the sun don’t shine.

i lingerie company paid some rugby players to model for them - that is one thing.

To try and wrap this all up as empowering and a way to get women/girls into sports is another - its a huge misstep.

The whole things is hidieous.

The male gaze & male sexuality is promoted above everything else - this is bad for us all, but especially bad for women and girls.

I bet the lingerie company will flog more of their tat, so they won't care one bit. The models would have been paid - not sure why they are looking so miserable in the pics.

The overall message for women and girls is the same old sexist bollocks repackaged.

The women look great. The underwear looks shit, uncomfortable, cheap, ill-fitting, not sexy. Advertising fail.

(PS male rugby players prance around in their pants all the bloody time - they'll strip at the drop of a hat and get a lot of promotional work based on that, so it's not the underwear I'd necessarily object to, just this stuff is nasty.)

They look even more cold and uncomfortable than your average underwear advert.

I've never seen an equestrian catalogue advertise riding knickers with a picture of a horsey woman striding across a muddy field in boots and scanties.

Sweet Baby Inc has had quite the influence on how women are depicted in video games and I don’t think they’ve done us any favours by taking things to the opposite extreme. There’s got to be a middle path between jiggly mega-boobs and some of what’s being promoted today as female character design.

As for thus utter nonsense.

No. They are not ugly and they look nothing like men.

Feminism 101: women do not have to fit within the narrow confines of the current western ideal for underwear models.

I just don’t like it. My teenage sporty self would have hated it too.Show me strong capable sportswomen in their sport wear, or if it has to be, sport underwear that keeps you comfortable whilst playing.

But this is supposedly normal sports underwear.

No, it's not meant to be that.

I wonder if this campaign has come out of the idea that female rugby players aren't sexy,

Again - this is advertising underwear. It is not advertising rugby.

Isn't one of the joys of rugby that you AREN'T sexualised FOR MEN?

The women are strong and who gives a fuck if they're beautiful? Their prowess on the pitch has nothing to do with their facial proportions, waist to hip ratio and hair.

Strong is feminine. Strong is powerful. Both messages that would be suitable. But "play rugby because you'll look sexy for your man in uncomfortable lingerie" is, well, surely redundant.

I wonder if this campaign has come out of the idea that female rugby players aren't sexy, they're all overweight, short-haired lesbians and who would want to be part of that "club"? So either players who feel "left out", or a marketing team focussed on patriarchal ideas of sexual attractiveness - or the two combined - have made this out of a sense of "joining in".

Would have been amazing if they did something along the lines of "girls can" (for women!) showing what these woman can actually DO.

I agree OP it seems to send a mixed message - strong is beautiful, but only if trussed up in lingerie and on display. It's the same old shite really.

It's sexualised because it's a fetish for males.

I think it's something else entirely. it's to pave the way for trans males.

Like how the video game creator Naughty Dog made "ugly" female characters to appease trans males, NOT to empower women.

Im not bothered really by any of this in the sense of sports people doing lingerie co deals, so far so normal. Doesnt make any difference to me or any young girls I know in terms of encouraging or normalising or whatever guff anyone claims, its just a sponsorship/advertising deal.

However, what i do have an issue with it the relentless fetishification of bloody everything! Those bras clearly come from bondage wear, fine, whatever, look incredibly uncomfortable but ok, but people were always able to buy that gear if they wanted to. But this is supposedly normal sports underwear. What message does it send ro young girls? You need to be trussed up and restricted and agree to whatever S&M inspired porn and choking practice blokes are into in order to be considered attractive and sexually desirable?

Or are they just shit bras that look terrible? Dunno, certainly don't look comfortable or supportive enough to play rugby in and i bet none of those player wear that gear in matches.

There are 2 elements to this.

Firstly, the campaign itself. It's not 'to get teenage girls into sport' - and I agree it would be a terrible way to do that. It's an underwear company campaign to sell underwear (that's been running for quite some time and featured women from lots of different sports). So from that point of view, selling sexy underwear using a wide variety of bodies is better than selling sexy underwear using only airbrushed models.

The other side is GB rugby's involvement - and that of the other sports teams who've taken part. I have a suspicion that the contract for any national team involves a clause along the lines of 'take part in team publicity as required'. And I have a problem with that including underwear shoots. Especially as it's very unlikely there's a similar one for the men's team. If individual women want to do it (and get a nice fat fee, like Beckham presumably did when he was the 'face' of an underwear brand) that's very different from it being expected or compelled as a team directive. Sports teams shouldn't be sexualising their players.

Awful. 😞

Is strong not beautiful when women are wearing sports clothes too?

Are they only beautiful once they've stripped down to their bras and knickers?

Weird.

Not particularly empowering.

Quite, the cynic in me thinks it has more 'know your place' vibes.

This campaign definitely feels more like a 'look guys, even though these girls play rugby, they're still hot - yes, even though they've got bigger muscles than you'

This girl can was much much better - women in action

Why do we have to be beautiful?

If we're not beautiful are we not women? If we have facial difference of scarring are we unwomen?

Strong is great, slim is great, bodies of all shape, sizes and abilities are great.

Encouraging girls to get into all sports and activity is great.

But I cannot say that getting athletes to put on a particular type of underwear (let's face it - they're not wearing this when they compete) so that they can be photographed and presented as 'a beautiful woman' - that's not good for me.

I want to see them on the pitch, running fast, tackling, celebrating, working together as a team - being active.

That's what I want to show girls/young women - that sport and being active is exhilarating, challenging, exhausting and ultimately a satisfying and enjoyable thing to do.

They can do that in lycra sports gear, though.